Post-Brexit Thread

Originally Posted by ianch99

The foreign secretary made no mention, as far as I can see, of controlling Polish immigration numbers when he was in Poland.

Originally Posted by ianch99

OK, let's see then. Please post again when we get the official Government policy that controls and caps Polish immgration ..

Originally Posted by ianch99

I am afraid that is exactly what the 37% of the electorate who voted us out of the EU are expecting. Controlled immigration means exactly that: a cap on people who are able to move here from foreign countries which would include Poland.

Originally Posted by ianch99

Seems a contradiction to me (or maybe its just a wind up). Ok, I'll run with it: controlled or capped immigration is just that. Or are you suggested that we have different quota applied to different countries? I assume Poland having no quota applied ..

Maybe that's why Boris didn't mention it

Your the one suggesting that in all of these posts starting with Boris welcoming Polish immigrants and not singing from the same hymn sheet

[ntluser]

Originally Posted by Hugh

But we didn't make the mistakes you said we made, and we are now making different ones..

The bad planning still exists and we are still paying ourselves too much especially at the top.

The only lesson we have learned is to get our deficit down but this government has done it at the expense of the poor.

---------- Post added at 07:28 ---------- Previous post was at 07:07 ----------

Originally Posted by ianch99

Seems a contradiction to me (or maybe its just a wind up). Ok, I'll run with it: controlled or capped immigration is just that. Or are you suggested that we have different quota applied to different countries? I assume Poland having no quota applied ..

Maybe that's why Boris didn't mention it

Boris wouldn't mention it because Boris was not the person who determines policy.

The government know that they must get immigration down but it has to be done in a practical way. If all EU immigrants were expelled many of our public services and businesses would go under with adverse effects on the lifestyles of UK citizens involved.

The government need a quick, simple method of controlling immigration that does not have negative erffects and it has to be applied fairly to all immigrants.

This means that as they reduce the number of EU immigrants some unemployed people have to be willing and able to take their jobs so that normality can be maintained.

At present the infrastructure to do that does not exist. Some people will need to be retrained and that takes time.

Boris saw the points system as one method of control. Theresa May saw not having a job to go to as another. The Americans use the visa system.The method of reducing immigrants has not been decided yet. Once they have decided which method to use and have applied it numbers will fall.

While this is happening the government will also have to ensure that UK nationals in areas where there are high numbers of immigrants are able to find a home, send their children to the school of their choice, have easy access to doctors and dentists, get a job etc because those are the things they are complaining about.

We'll just have to wait to see how the goverment decide to do all this.

[Ignitionnet]

Doesn't the points system simply set some criteria to qualify for a visa?

In the case of Canada a Permanent Residency card is issued, which may be revoked.

An issue I ran into when, years ago, contemplating a move to Canada is that the points based system is not flexible enough. Due to my not having completed an undergraduate degree I did not qualify, despite a company wanting to employ me.

Canada has taken in a bunch of immigrants who are academically educated but nowhere near Canadian standards, and do not have the skills necessary to secure reasonable employment. It was until relatively recently possible to achieve the required score and gain PR status without being able to speak either of Canada's languages.

[ntluser]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Doesn't the points system simply set some criteria to qualify for a visa?

In the case of Canada a Permanent Residency card is issued, which may be revoked.

An issue I ran into when, years ago, contemplating a move to Canada is that the points based system is not flexible enough. Due to my not having completed an undergraduate degree I did not qualify, despite a company wanting to employ me.

Canada has taken in a bunch of immigrants who are academically educated but nowhere near Canadian standards, and do not have the skills necessary to secure reasonable employment. It was until relatively recently possible to achieve the required score and gain PR status without being able to speak either of Canada's languages.

I suspect that the unsatisfactoriness of the points system is why Theresa May knocked it back.

We need to look at our employment situation and identify shortage areas. In that way we can start training up our suitable unemployed to meet the vancancies available in those areas. We can then top up any shortages from suitably qualified immigrants as we are doing now. This maintains the services while immigration numbers are being reduced.

The problem is that this all takes time and the people want instant answers i.e. instant reductions in immigrants which isn't going to happen immediately.

Like the deficit we will see a reduction but over a period so we are heading in the right direction but not at a speed people would like.

Would that mean that if Brexit not fast enough this government could lose the next election?

[techguyone]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Would that mean that if Brexit not fast enough this government could lose the next election?

Until there's a credible opposition they'll never lose anything ever.

So there's a chance that however much they screw up Brexit they stay in power?

[ntluser]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Would that mean that if Brexit not fast enough this government could lose the next election?

It's about people being patient. The government is in talks with other countries re trade deals and won't be activating Article 50 until next year at the earliest.

By then they will have worked out the strategy for dealing with the EU.

What matters is not the speed of the Brexit but the quality of the deal with the EU and the deals with other countries who want to trade with us.

By 2020, when the next election comes, we should have a better idea what Brexit means and which party is best placed and prepared to run the country efficiently and effectively. Hopefully, by then the Labour party will have sorted out who their leader will be and what policies they want to offer.

[techguyone]

Agreed I don't know why so many people want it done *now* if it's rushed it'll be farked up, lets not forget this is uncharted territory, no other EU country has done this.

Take it slow, get it right.

---------- Post added at 13:13 ---------- Previous post was at 13:11 ----------

Originally Posted by Maggy J

So there's a chance that however much they screw up Brexit they stay in power?

If there's no credible opposition (and lets face it, there just isn't at the moment) they could swing naked from the chandeliers at Chequers and nothing will change.

Instead of harping on about Brexit, concentrate on a credible opposition, because there's just no way the public will vote for Corby or anyone like him.

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by techguyone

Agreed I don't know why so many people want it done *now* if it's rushed it'll be farked up, lets not forget this is uncharted territory, no other EU country has done this.

Take it slow, get it right.

Quite right but not so slowly that it's only part done and the opposition if they got into power ( God help us) could reverse it.

If there's no credible opposition (and lets face it, there just isn't at the moment) they could swing naked from the chandeliers at Chequers and nothing will change.

Instead of harping on about Brexit, concentrate on a credible opposition, because there's just no way the public will vote for Corby or anyone like him.

For which we should be truely thankful.

[ntluser]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

Quite right but not so slowly that it's only part done and the opposition if they got into power ( God help us) could reverse it.



For which we should be truely thankful.

Theresa May will activate Article 50 in 2017. Then we have 2 years of negotiation taking us to roughly the end of 2019. There will be a general election in May 2020 when people can reflect on progress so far and decide if they want to stick with the Conservatives or switch to another party.

Given that we will have activated Brexit in 2017 there will be no going back. There are no second chances, which is why it is crucial that we get our strategy right.

Theresa May has said that she is not going to give a running commentary on progress as that would compromise discussions with the EU.

Bear in mind too that the German people have given the German government a bit of a sideswipe with Merkel losing seats to the opposition Anti-EU party and during the next few years France will be having elections when I expect something similar to happen.

This may get the UK a far more sympathetic hearing as the EU was warned that if it did not reform anti-EU sentiment would increase with a subsequent loss of seats.

By the time the negotiations are completed we may have a completely different version of the EU perhaps one we could live with but we'll all have to be patient and wait and see.

I'm too old to be patient..

Funnily enough, it's the more rabid Brexiteers who are clamouring for a rapid result...

[techguyone]

I'm a brexiteer rather than a remoaner, I'm happy to wait, what is the rush?

[Ramrod]

Indeed. We get one chance at this, let's do it right!
......and I do wish that the remoaners would stop trying to undermine things. You lost! Deal with it! Move on FFS!