Brexit (Old)

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Having said this, the Mail is known for over-hyping its stories

You mean similar to the myriad of articles on EU migration, etc.?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by ianch99

You mean similar to the myriad of articles on EU migration, etc.?

I think we can safely believe that must be what he is referring to.

[Sephiroth]

Sadly, the WTO compliant border assessment is correct.

https://www.ft.com/content/1ce27838-...a-d9c0a5c8d5c9

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Sadly, the WTO compliant border assessment is correct.

https://www.ft.com/content/1ce27838-...a-d9c0a5c8d5c9

There is no point providing links to The Times and Financial Times articles like this because you can only open them if you have a subscription

Better to copy and paste.

---------- Post added at 07:46 ---------- Previous post was at 07:37 ----------

Originally Posted by ianch99

You mean similar to the myriad of articles on EU migration, etc.?

I assume from that you don't think we have an immigration problem.

Try telling that to the homeless, those who can't get a job at a decent salary because they are being undercut by EU migrants, those who cannot get places at the school of their choice, those who are unwell and can't get appointments at their doctor's surgeries for weeks or have long waits at A&E........

We are just a small island, and emigration has to be balanced with immigration if we want to provide decent services to the population. We can't just keep taking more and more people in, that is madness.

As we are already over-populated, we should be taking in only those with the skills we need, not every Tom, Dick and Harry looking for a job over here.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

There is no point providing links to The Times and Financial Times articles like this because you can only open them if you have a subscription
[SEPH]: Too kind, OB. I have no FT subscription and the article came up OK. What happened when you tried it?

Better to copy and paste.

---------- Post added at 07:46 ---------- Previous post was at 07:37 ----------



<SNIP>.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Sadly, the WTO compliant border assessment is correct.

https://www.ft.com/content/1ce27838-...a-d9c0a5c8d5c9

Link came up for me ok and I'm a non-subscriber. Anyone can read two articles a week from The Times by registration.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Link came up for me ok and I'm a non-subscriber. Anyone can read two articles a week from The Times by registration.

Well, I just got an invitation to subscribe, which always happens.

I have not registered, though, which might explain that.

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I assume from that you don't think we have an immigration problem.

Try telling that to the homeless, those who can't get a job at a decent salary because they are being undercut by EU migrants, those who cannot get places at the school of their choice, those who are unwell and can't get appointments at their doctor's surgeries for weeks or have long waits at A&E........

We are just a small island, and emigration has to be balanced with immigration if we want to provide decent services to the population. We can't just keep taking more and more people in, that is madness.

As we are already over-populated, we should be taking in only those with the skills we need, not every Tom, Dick and Harry looking for a job over here.

But EEA migration has a small if any impact on these according to this government report - https://assets.publishing.service.go...EEA_report.PDF Non-EEA migration we can control anyway

What will be interesting is what we will do in the low skill, low pay roles that many EEA migrants have filled such as hospitality, care and agriculture. If we keep current minimum qualification and pay caps, these roles will not be filled by migration as no visas will be issued

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

What will be interesting is what we will do in the low skill, low pay roles that many EEA migrants have filled such as hospitality, care and agriculture. If we keep current minimum qualification and pay caps, these roles will not be filled by migration as no visas will be issued

I think immigration should be permitted to those:

1. Who have the high level skills that we need as a country.

2. Who are prepared to carry out low level tasks that are in short supply in this country and have the offer of employment by employers who have been granted permission to recruit from overseas, having first shown that efforts to recruit fro within the UK have been unsuccessful.

3. Students who have offers of places at recognised British universities.

No other people should be allowed in until such time that emigration balances or exceeds immigration.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, I just got an invitation to subscribe, which always happens.

I have not registered, though, which might explain that.

They must think you're minted so cut out the two-free-articles stage.

---------- Post added at 20:47 ---------- Previous post was at 20:45 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I think immigration should be permitted to those:

1. Who have the high level skills that we need as a country.

2. Who are prepared to carry out low level tasks that are in short supply in this country and have the offer of employment by employers who have been granted permission to recruit from overseas, having first shown that efforts to recruit fro within the UK have been unsuccessful.

3. Students who have offers of places at recognised British universities.

No other people should be allowed in until such time that emigration balances or exceeds immigration.

I think it's always hard defining 1) - whatever your intentions, you invariably drown in red tape and drive business up the wall or out of the country. Businesses I know see it as a tad Corbynesque.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

They must think you're minted so cut out the two-free-articles stage.

---------- Post added at 20:47 ---------- Previous post was at 20:45 ----------


I think it's always hard defining 1) - whatever your intentions, you invariably drown in red tape and drive business up the wall or out of the country. Businesses I know see it as a tad Corbynesque.

It is capable of working just fine and a lot of bureaucracy is not necessary.

That's not to say we won't get just that, though, unfortunately.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

It is capable of working just fine and a lot of bureaucracy is not necessary.

That's not to say we won't get just that, though, unfortunately.

Exactly, mking British business less competitive. But we know what BoJo thinks of the opinions of business F___ business" is his view.
Appears to me the Conservative Party is no longer the party of business.

[jonbxx]

How about an immigration system where you can come here if you have a job. If you do not have a job, you must be wholly self supporting including comprehensive health insurance?

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

How about an immigration system where you can come here if you have a job. If you do not have a job, you must be wholly self supporting including comprehensive health insurance?

How quickly would the job disappear after entry into the country ? followed by the person disappearing into the population never to be found.

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

How quickly would the job disappear after entry into the country ? followed by the person disappearing into the population never to be found.

We could register all immigrants on proof of either their employment status, education course or comprehensive health insurance or the means to cover health and living costs with appropriate penalties if not done