UK to end freedom of movement for EU citizens on day one of Brexit, under new plan
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Fullofsurprises
The Irish government spokesman stated clearly on R4 news the other morning that they (the Irish government) have no intention of implementing a hard border, come what may, including a Hard Brexit. So unless the EU plan to airdrop border installations in against the will of the Irish government, the whole thing does indeed have an element of farce to it. Since Dublin won't be implementing a hard border, it's difficult to see what on earth the DUP are so bothered about, for one thing, and quite why the Backstop is such an issue.
True. So the next logical solution is to cut Ireland off. That will be interesting. But there can't be no border and indeed we don't want that if immigration is an issue.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
The Irish government spokesman stated clearly on R4 news the other morning that they (the Irish government) have no intention of implementing a hard border, come what may, including a Hard Brexit. So unless the EU plan to airdrop border installations in against the will of the Irish government, the whole thing does indeed have an element of farce to it. Since Dublin won't be implementing a hard border, it's difficult to see what on earth the DUP are so bothered about, for one thing, and quite why the Backstop is such an issue.
Is the penny starting to drop mate? As I said about 3 months ago the Irish boarder problem is a make believe issue
Original post by ColinDent
Me too, but that's the card the EU and remainers are playing.
Personally I see no reason and more importantly no desire on either side ( France excepted) to put up a hard border in Ireland, Macron can kick and scream as much as he likes but it ain't gonna happen.
Personally I see no reason and more importantly no desire on either side ( France excepted) to put up a hard border in Ireland, Macron can kick and scream as much as he likes but it ain't gonna happen.
As I said above and several times previously remainers are acting machiavellian to get the result that they want, the Irish boarder is the queen to the remainers chess game
Original post by ByEeek
Do you mean like the 1.4 million British expats who have taken advantage of freedom of movement and now live in Europe?
Or the millions of tourists who holiday in Europe every year. You only need to travel to the US to realise how good we have it.
Or the millions of tourists who holiday in Europe every year. You only need to travel to the US to realise how good we have it.
Most of which live in Ireland a country we will still have free movement with and Spain a country who’s entire swathes of some areas of land are completely dependant on people retiring there?
Original post by Burton Bridge
We joined in 1973 a secret document was penned to shield the public from the truth about what EEC membership would mean, in 1992 we were signed to further control of the EU with no say.
The britsh public have never and will never give a mandate for Brussels being a superior political power to Westminster. The British public have a mandate for a trading block and that's the only mandate they have.
The britsh public have never and will never give a mandate for Brussels being a superior political power to Westminster. The British public have a mandate for a trading block and that's the only mandate they have.
Have you read the White Paper published by Heath in 1971?
It clearly sets out the ambitions of the EEC.
Original post by nulli tertius
Have you read the White Paper published by Heath in 1971?
It clearly sets out the ambitions of the EEC.
It clearly sets out the ambitions of the EEC.
Yet it also states this
"Sovereign governments are represented around the table. On a question where a government considers that vital national interests are involved, it is established that the decision should be unanimous. …There is no question of any erosion of essential national sovereignty"
It was also on the assumption that the six members were of a similar size economy and wages were also at a similar level within the member states.
Original post by ColinDent
Yet it also states this
"Sovereign governments are represented around the table. On a question where a government considers that vital national interests are involved, it is established that the decision should be unanimous. …There is no question of any erosion of essential national sovereignty"
It was also on the assumption that the six members were of a similar size economy and wages were also at a similar level within the member states.
"Sovereign governments are represented around the table. On a question where a government considers that vital national interests are involved, it is established that the decision should be unanimous. …There is no question of any erosion of essential national sovereignty"
It was also on the assumption that the six members were of a similar size economy and wages were also at a similar level within the member states.
Britain has never even, so far as is known, tried to invoke the Luxembourg Compromise so your quotation is irrelevant.
Anybody who assumed that the size of the Luxembourg economy was similar to that of Germany needed to be carted off to the funny farm.
As for wages, we are talking about Palermo and Stuttgart.
Original post by paul514
Most of which live in Ireland a country we will still have free movement with and Spain a country who’s entire swathes of some areas of land are completely dependant on people retiring there?
Most? Really?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_diaspora
I don't think British expats in Ireland are likely to present a problem unless there is a border.
Original post by nulli tertius
Have you read the White Paper published by Heath in 1971?
It clearly sets out the ambitions of the EEC.
It clearly sets out the ambitions of the EEC.
No I haven't as always I'm going to be honest.
Why does that prove a mandate from the EU being anything else than a trading block? Regardless of whatever was in that paper in 71, I don't see how that's related to the fact you took exception too.
I written 'dispite not having not having a mandate for being anything more than a trading block British` this is true and correct, the public have never (and will never) vote for transfer of powers to Brussels.
The EEC was a different beast to the EU back then, it may of been a possibility to of got a mandate from electorate for a full-on political Union, but they never got tried, they choose to lie.
Funny enough membership of the common market alone is appealing to many soft brexiteers. So afraid there was never a mandate given so remaining in the EU as it currently is in 2019, which always makes me smile when people state there's no mandate for No Deal!
Original post by nulli tertius
Britain has never even, so far as is known, tried to invoke the Luxembourg Compromise so your quotation is irrelevant.
Anybody who assumed that the size of the Luxembourg economy was similar to that of Germany needed to be carted off to the funny farm.
As for wages, we are talking about Palermo and Stuttgart.
Anybody who assumed that the size of the Luxembourg economy was similar to that of Germany needed to be carted off to the funny farm.
As for wages, we are talking about Palermo and Stuttgart.
The wages in Palermo and Stuttgart were like fortunes compared to those in the eastern bloc countries when they joined.
Original post by iiilly
What will happen to EU students in the uk after brexit? Sorry but I'm so confused about it
No problem for those who are here or coming for the first time in 2019. Unclear what rights to stay they will have after finishing their courses. Unclear what will happen to those wanting to come in 2020 or after.
Original post by Burton Bridge
No I haven't as always I'm going to be honest.
Why does that prove a mandate from the EU being anything else than a trading block? Regardless of whatever was in that paper in 71, I don't see how that's related to the fact you took exception too.
I written 'dispite not having not having a mandate for being anything more than a trading block British` this is true and correct, the public have never (and will never) vote for transfer of powers to Brussels.
The EEC was a different beast to the EU back then, it may of been a possibility to of got a mandate from electorate for a full-on political Union, but they never got tried, they choose to lie.
Funny enough membership of the common market alone is appealing to many soft brexiteers. So afraid there was never a mandate given so remaining in the EU as it currently is in 2019, which always makes me smile when people state there's no mandate for No Deal!
Why does that prove a mandate from the EU being anything else than a trading block? Regardless of whatever was in that paper in 71, I don't see how that's related to the fact you took exception too.
I written 'dispite not having not having a mandate for being anything more than a trading block British` this is true and correct, the public have never (and will never) vote for transfer of powers to Brussels.
The EEC was a different beast to the EU back then, it may of been a possibility to of got a mandate from electorate for a full-on political Union, but they never got tried, they choose to lie.
Funny enough membership of the common market alone is appealing to many soft brexiteers. So afraid there was never a mandate given so remaining in the EU as it currently is in 2019, which always makes me smile when people state there's no mandate for No Deal!
You are making two different points.
Firstly you are saying the public were lied to that this was only a trading block. It was never was and the truth about that was published at the time.
Secondly you are saying that there was no mandate for the way in which the EU has evolved. What you actually mean is that there was no referendum. However, the referendum to stay in, in 1975, was a constitutional novelty. It did not create any precedent about future changes in Europe. Margaret Thatcher opposed the referendum and never considered that one was needed for the Single European Act. Every government was elected on its manifesto and nothing that any government signed up to in Europe was a breach of its manifesto.
Original post by nulli tertius
You are making two different points.
Firstly you are saying the public were lied to that this was only a trading block. It was never was and the truth about that was published at the time.
Secondly you are saying that there was no mandate for the way in which the EU has evolved. What you actually mean is that there was no referendum. However, the referendum to stay in, in 1975, was a constitutional novelty. It did not create any precedent about future changes in Europe. Margaret Thatcher opposed the referendum and never considered that one was needed for the Single European Act. Every government was elected on its manifesto and nothing that any government signed up to in Europe was a breach of its manifesto.
Firstly you are saying the public were lied to that this was only a trading block. It was never was and the truth about that was published at the time.
Secondly you are saying that there was no mandate for the way in which the EU has evolved. What you actually mean is that there was no referendum. However, the referendum to stay in, in 1975, was a constitutional novelty. It did not create any precedent about future changes in Europe. Margaret Thatcher opposed the referendum and never considered that one was needed for the Single European Act. Every government was elected on its manifesto and nothing that any government signed up to in Europe was a breach of its manifesto.
Firstly on point one, secret documents don't get drafted and kept secret for 30 years for nothing. The public voted to stay in the common market, never was a political union spoken about.
Not leaving now would be against the manifesto of both major parties.
Secondly, do you admit that the British electorate has never given a mandate for desolving powers to Brussels?
Original post by Burton Bridge
No I haven't as always I'm going to be honest.
Why does that prove a mandate from the EU being anything else than a trading block? Regardless of whatever was in that paper in 71, I don't see how that's related to the fact you took exception too.
I written 'dispite not having not having a mandate for being anything more than a trading block British` this is true and correct, the public have never (and will never) vote for transfer of powers to Brussels.
The EEC was a different beast to the EU back then, it may of been a possibility to of got a mandate from electorate for a full-on political Union, but they never got tried, they choose to lie.
Funny enough membership of the common market alone is appealing to many soft brexiteers. So afraid there was never a mandate given so remaining in the EU as it currently is in 2019, which always makes me smile when people state there's no mandate for No Deal!
Why does that prove a mandate from the EU being anything else than a trading block? Regardless of whatever was in that paper in 71, I don't see how that's related to the fact you took exception too.
I written 'dispite not having not having a mandate for being anything more than a trading block British` this is true and correct, the public have never (and will never) vote for transfer of powers to Brussels.
The EEC was a different beast to the EU back then, it may of been a possibility to of got a mandate from electorate for a full-on political Union, but they never got tried, they choose to lie.
Funny enough membership of the common market alone is appealing to many soft brexiteers. So afraid there was never a mandate given so remaining in the EU as it currently is in 2019, which always makes me smile when people state there's no mandate for No Deal!
In not having read the white paper, you would have been in good company. Most voters have neither the time nor the inclination to read lengthy and abstract discussion documents. They rely (quite reasonably) on the verbal statements of leaders. Ted Heath didn't lie about the future plans of the EU, but he didn't address them in public either and they were generally known only to intellectuals, readers of the Times and the Guardian and a smattering of political nerds. The public voted overwhelmingly in the first referendum on the description of the Common Market as a trading arrangement and nothing more.
Original post by Burton Bridge
Is the penny starting to drop mate? As I said about 3 months ago the Irish boarder problem is a make believe issue
I've often said on TSR that I thought the border issue was exaggerated, but yes, I have somewhat changed my opinions recently on what is actually happening. The EU are definitely using the Irish border as a pretext, but so was Mrs May. This had an element of congame to it and that wasn't a good thing. Conning the public usually involves some measure of being bitten back later on.
Even now, the backstop question could easily be put to bed by simply stating that the UK would stay in the CU for 5 years whilst technical solutions are evolved. The fact that neither side are suggesting this speaks volumes.
None of the above means that I am against us staying in the EU - we should be in both the SM and the CU, not because of the Irish border, but because it will do a lot of damage to our economy (and incidentally that of both Irelands) when we leave them.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
In not having read the white paper, you would have been in good company. Most voters have neither the time nor the inclination to read lengthy and abstract discussion documents. They rely (quite reasonably) on the verbal statements of leaders. Ted Heath didn't lie about the future plans of the EU, but he didn't address them in public either and they were generally known only to intellectuals, readers of the Times and the Guardian and a smattering of political nerds. The public voted overwhelmingly in the first referendum on the description of the Common Market as a trading arrangement and nothing more.
I'm not so sure about you're last line mate but I'm certain you are correct about you're first part.
I'm one of the political nerds but that paper is before my time and one I've not read, but I have read many papers that the average people are unaware even exist.
In fact I bet if you stopped 10 people on the street tomorrow they would not know what the Irish back stop is, in real terms.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
I've often said on TSR that I thought the border issue was exaggerated, but yes, I have somewhat changed my opinions recently on what is actually happening. The EU are definitely using the Irish border as a pretext, but so was Mrs May. This had an element of congame to it and that wasn't a good thing. Conning the public usually involves some measure of being bitten back later on.
Even now, the backstop question could easily be put to bed by simply stating that the UK would stay in the CU for 5 years whilst technical solutions are evolved. The fact that neither side are suggesting this speaks volumes.
None of the above means that I am against us staying in the EU - we should be in both the SM and the CU, not because of the Irish border, but because it will do a lot of damage to our economy (and incidentally that of both Irelands) when we leave them.
Even now, the backstop question could easily be put to bed by simply stating that the UK would stay in the CU for 5 years whilst technical solutions are evolved. The fact that neither side are suggesting this speaks volumes.
None of the above means that I am against us staying in the EU - we should be in both the SM and the CU, not because of the Irish border, but because it will do a lot of damage to our economy (and incidentally that of both Irelands) when we leave them.
It did our economy harm when we joined them mate, nothing Thatcher did was beneficial to the working classes.
Anyway you are right that the Irish border issue is a phantom issue which remainer parliamentarians have created for their own benefits. If Labour remainers was honest and genuine we would be locked in the SM and CU now indefinitely while being outside the EU and able to control EU immigration. That's would of appeasedany leave voters and remain voters alike but..... They and other remainer parliamentarians didn't and that's why we are now facing a harder more real Brexit.
(edited 4 years ago)
Original post by Burton Bridge
It did our economy harm when we joined them mate, nothing Thatcher did was beneficial to the working classes.
It did our economy harm when we joined them mate, nothing Thatcher did was beneficial to the working classes.
Are you kidding or do you really believe this? The vast majority of the population benefited no end. And considering the lower classes make up, what, maybe a 1/10th of the population it would still seem to be coming up trumps for the nation. Never mind the fact you can hardly blame thatcher for the collapse of British industry. Shoddy quality, over priced and a, to paraphrase one of our current ministers 'fundamentally lazy and indolent workforce'.
This is Awesome. We have the Labour party trying to keep freedom of movement, dangering jobs and keeping wages low for the working class. And then we have the Conservatives cutting off the cheap labour for the elites and strengthing the worker unions. It's clear they should have opposite stances but are trying to appeal to the common people, who ever they think the common people are.
(edited 4 years ago)
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Who regrets the outcome of Brexit??
- Can immigration actually been controlled?
- Is the UK's future in peril?
- British passport holder, British citizen, Live in EU. Need student loan for home fees
- Is there a reason why the government has failed to control its borders?
- Spanish Student Visa Application
- International Student Loan Providers
- UK graduate student finding job
- Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The Guardian
- Is it time for change - is the status quo about to end challenged?
- Rethinking the nation state - what a Labour Government could do
- home fees
- No Uk passport but I’ve lived here my whole life
- Masters Loan - UK national returning from working visa.
- Student Finance
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 2 (9PL0 02) 7th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Msc Data Science (UCL) 2024/25
- UCAS Form Residency Status - Brexit
- What do I need - I've a UK passport but live in EU
- A theoretical question about the UK and Australia
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 2 weeks ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 2 weeks ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
