[Update] The UK votes to leave the EU

[Big Brian]

Originally Posted by Osem

That's of course your prerogative. What we've seen over the years is that the EU has, in one way or another, always grabbed more powers. My belief is that leopards don't change their spots and there is precisely no evidence that the EU has any intention of reforming itself or changing course.

Do you really think the things you cited are cast in stone because I don't. We've had bugger all influence in the EU throughout the time we've been in the club and that's a fact.

I see the B of E is a fully paid up member of project fear now, quelle surprise...

Anyone with any sense will see that it has nothing to do with the EU. The world economies are slowing down and we are not the only one where growth is slowing or going down. Whether we are in or out of the EU it is going to happen. The B of E are only talking about the short term - a kind of mini recession if you like. We knew this was likely should we vote to leave but it isn't permanent and will only last about 6 months.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Damien

No because it's just a symbolic phrase. I think that's what some Eurocrats want but they'll continue to face resistance from the member states and their leaders. Few of whom want that. Our change to the treaty which says 'Britain is exempt from ever closer union' is just as worthwhile as a stated aim.

It's not a symbolic phrase. It's their number one aim! They will not rest until we are completely subsumed by them.

[Big Brian]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

It's not a symbolic phrase. It's their number one aim! They will not rest until we are completely subsumed by them.

Number One Aim Indeed. Whilst researching the history of the EU, it has always been their aim. I'm sure I read somewhere that plans were afoot in 1952 for a closer Political and Fiscal Union. It was all kept from us in 1975 but there is no need for it to be kept from us now given the power of the internet.

[Ignitionnet]

Bad choice to say this, Ms Lagarde.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrNK9Hq-OYE

It's about this story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36284200

IMF saying Brexit would have bad economic consequences.

What I find odd is that this morning, the Government sneaked out the results of that FOI request about the number of NI numbers handed out to immigrants - 2.2 million between 2010 and 2015, as it turns out, despite official immigration figures over the same period being under one million - yet the BBC is totally ignoring it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...uth-is-as-wid/

Originally Posted by Chris

What I find odd is that this morning, the Government sneaked out the results of that FOI request about the number of NI numbers handed out to immigrants - 2.2 million between 2010 and 2015, as it turns out, despite official immigration figures over the same period being under one million - yet the BBC is totally ignoring it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...uth-is-as-wid/

That came out yesterday morning: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...endum-36271390

According to the ONS the difference is because these are people that stay less than a year. https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-...e-number-data/

No ‘extra’ immigration to the UK from the EU has been proven today, as headlines like these imply. We already knew about some of these extra 1.3 or 1.5 million people, as they were published separately as ‘short-term immigrants’ by the ONS. The rest were estimated in today’s analysis as recent figures aren’t yet available.

This is largely what people were saying previous to this report as the reason for the discrepancy: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...endum-35959949

More importantly, though, the ONS figures only aim to measure long-term migration. They use the UN's definition of a long-term migrant as someone who moves country for a year or more.
When it comes to National Insurance numbers, on the other hand, there is no minimum stay in the UK. Everyone who wants to work in the UK must have a National Insurance number, even if they're only working in the country for a few weeks.

This one is a bit more of an editoral but still worth a read on why these figures aren't the disaster some papers are claiming: https://next.ft.com/content/0110d2a4...7-a4af20d5575e

The ONS could not have been clearer. The “missing millions” of EU migrants were a myth. They had been here but they had gone home. While Jonathan Portes of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research made reasoned arguments why the ONS might have been incorrectly reluctant to admit its data still had problems, the Vote Leave side ignored the ONS findings and changed the subject.

So they were not groundbreaking figures released yesterday, even if The Telegraph is trying to make it seem like there was been double the amount of EU migration, and the story was overshadowed by the BBC charter renewal, the Vote Leave debate argument and the Tory expenses.

[Big Brian]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Bad choice to say this, Ms Lagarde.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrNK9Hq-OYE

Will it help leave though?

Originally Posted by Damien

No because it's just a symbolic phrase. .

Where does it say that in any EU documentation?
If joe bloggs decided to do a bit of research so he could make his mind up about which way to vote would his research on the EUs purpose and future plans contain an addendum stating that "the bit about ever closer fiscal and political union is just a symbolic phrase and doesn't really mean anything" or will he take the written word as fact ?

[Osem]

In reality they haven't got a clue who's coming here or how long they actually stay. The figures are based on questions asked of a small sample of people entering the country. The authorities have no idea whether the people answering their questions are being totally honest or not, they have even less idea how many people who may have come here only intending to stay for a short while yet never returned for whatever reason.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/surveys/infor...engersurveyips

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19646459

Anyone would think HMG doesn't really want accurate immigration figures...

Originally Posted by martyh

Where does it say that in any EU documentation?
If joe bloggs decided to do a bit of research so he could make his mind up about which way to vote would his research on the EUs purpose and future plans contain an addendum stating that "the bit about ever closer fiscal and political union is just a symbolic phrase and doesn't really mean anything" or will he take the written word as fact ?

I don't know, up to Joe Bloggs I guess.

---------- Post added at 16:40 ---------- Previous post was at 16:23 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

In reality they haven't got a clue who's coming here or how long they actually stay. The figures are based on questions asked of a small sample of people entering the country. The authorities have no idea whether the people answering their questions are being totally honest or not, they have even less idea how many people who may have come here only intending to stay for a short while yet never returned for whatever reason.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/surveys/infor...engersurveyips

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19646459

Anyone would think HMG doesn't really want accurate immigration figures...

Well they know who are assigned NI numbers and the discrepancy between those numbers and the 'official' figures was what the story was referencing.

Originally Posted by Damien

I don't know, up to Joe Bloggs I guess.[COLOR="Silver"]

Your the one who said it was just a "symbolic phrase" i would be interested where you get that idea from,i assume there is some official EU statement to that effect to set our minds at rest and the last 40 yrs of continuing political and fiscal union and our continuing subjugation to the European parliament has just been "symbolic"

This article from the Economist may help...

http://www.economist.com/blogs/econo...st-explains-20

Originally Posted by Hugh

This article from the Economist may help...

http://www.economist.com/blogs/econo...st-explains-20

Euro-enthusiasts hope that, over time, the commitment to “ever-closer union” written into the EU's founding treaty will bring less United Nations and more United States.

so definitely not a "symbolic phrase" then ,more of a " it's going to happen because that's the whole point" sort of thing

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Damien

I don't know, up to Joe Bloggs I guess.

---------- Post added at 16:40 ---------- Previous post was at 16:23 ----------



Well they know who are assigned NI numbers and the discrepancy between those numbers and the 'official' figures was what the story was referencing.

... and 'that story' amounts to one tiny piece of the whole in/out argument. None of that alters the fact that we don't have a clue how many people are here, legally or otherwise, and as long as we remain in the EU will be unable to stop migration from within the EU, whether it be from existing member states (including those who may be forced to claim asylum elsewhere then decide to come here) or the new entrants the EU seems intent on courting in spite of the problems we're currently witnessing. Cameron's so called 'negotiation' about free movement lasted about 10 nanoseconds from what I can see, which leads me to believe he had no real desire to tackle the problem but had to go through the motions having failed so miserably to achieve the immigration target he set himself.

---------- Post added at 17:27 ---------- Previous post was at 17:21 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

so definitely not a "symbolic phrase" then ,more of a " it's going to happen because that's the whole point" sort of thing

... and the UK clearly isn't going to be able to prevent it from happening.

The only thing which has a chance of stopping this ugly EU behemoth is the UK leaving and a number of other countries then following suit but it's a big ask of net beneficiaries to bite the hand which feeds them.