Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2019 18:17:34 GMT 1
No idea if thats on the level but if so. Well, let me answer that with a question to you, are you for open borders? Everyone can enter any country they like in any numbers? Classic deflection.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 9, 2019 18:48:50 GMT 1
No idea if thats on the level but if so. Well, let me answer that with a question to you, are you for open borders? Everyone can enter any country they like in any numbers? Classic deflection. Eh? I gather you've realized where this is going looking to that empty response. Can you simply answer the question? Do you believe in open borders where anyone can go anywhere? And do not see any issues in allowing that to happen? Perhaps on services, infrastructure, housing etc? Do you believe nation states should open their border to anyone who wishes to live within them and that nation states are in a position to absorb any number of people who wish to live within them (again, when looking to services, infrastructure, housing etc.)? Other than that where is this going? Are you saying I'm xenophobic? That I never leave my house here in this wonderful city of Stuttgart in this wonderful country of Germany?!?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2019 19:41:10 GMT 1
It's a short step from blaming migrants for the state of our country and xenophobia. We see and hear it on a daily basis if people really want to listen.
As someone who lived in Hong Kong for a few years, I was on the receiving end of xenophobia. I have been of the receiving end of xenophobia in this country due to my heritage.
It's unpleasant and always unnecessary. There are lots of different ways to look at this and it's not about certain countries immigration records or policies.
This country has a proud history of centuries of immigration, including my own family. Open borders I say.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2019 19:50:59 GMT 1
Eh? I gather you've realized where this is going looking to that empty response. Can you simply answer the question? Do you believe in open borders where anyone can go anywhere? And do not see any issues in allowing that to happen? Perhaps on services, infrastructure, housing etc? Do you believe nation states should open their border to anyone who wishes to live within them and that nation states are in a position to absorb any number of people who wish to live within them (again, when looking to services, infrastructure, housing etc.)? Other than that where is this going? Are you saying I'm xenophobic? That I never leave my house here in this wonderful city of Stuttgart in this wonderful country of Germany?!? I'm not saying anything stutty. You made a remark about quantities I merely asked you to qualify it.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 9, 2019 20:23:14 GMT 1
Eh? I gather you've realized where this is going looking to that empty response. Can you simply answer the question? Do you believe in open borders where anyone can go anywhere? And do not see any issues in allowing that to happen? Perhaps on services, infrastructure, housing etc? Do you believe nation states should open their border to anyone who wishes to live within them and that nation states are in a position to absorb any number of people who wish to live within them (again, when looking to services, infrastructure, housing etc.)? Other than that where is this going? Are you saying I'm xenophobic? That I never leave my house here in this wonderful city of Stuttgart in this wonderful country of Germany?!? I'm not saying anything stutty. You made a remark about quantities I merely asked you to qualify it. OK, cool. I think there comes a point when nations can start to struggle to cope with the numbers entering the country because of the strain in can place on the host nation. That is when the numbers can be seen to be undesirable and unsustainable. My comment regarding Japan was just first impressions looking to the foreign born population compared to the population as a whole, when looking to the UK in comparison. The UK has a long history of immigration and for the most part that has been deemed more than acceptable and more than welcomed however, since the 90's the numbers involved have changed dramatically. At the start of Blair's stint in number 10 the net migration numbers were at 47,000. A week before the referendum it had reached 333,000. In between that time in was between 140,000 and 313,000, a massive increase. I always said that I don't think immigration per se is what the vast majority of people in the UK have an issue with, I just think the unprecedented numbers over a long period of time (and no indication it was going to change any time soon) is the concern. It is that what has changed opinion on immigration in the UK and directly led to Brexit. Even the EU now hint they overlooked this. Countries can not simply absorb unending numbers of people entering a country without there being an impact on services, infrastructure, jobs, housing etc. It's not about blaming anyone, its simply looking to the obvious impact that an increased population year on year will have... And I said 'that's not too many', I could have said 'that's not a lot'. That is what I was getting at...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2019 20:42:21 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by tvor on Apr 9, 2019 20:47:01 GMT 1
I'm not saying anything stutty. You made a remark about quantities I merely asked you to qualify it. OK, cool. I think there comes a point when nations can start to struggle to cope with the numbers entering the country because of the strain in can place on the host nation. That is when the numbers can be seen to be undesirable and unsustainable. My comment regarding Japan was just first impressions looking to the foreign born population compared to the population as a whole, when looking to the UK in comparison. The UK has a long history of immigration and for the most part that has been deemed more than acceptable and more than welcomed however, since the 90's the numbers involved have changed dramatically. At the start of Blair's stint in number 10 the net migration numbers were at 47,000. A week before the referendum it had reached 333,000. In between that time in was between 140,000 and 313,000, a massive increase. I always said that I don't think immigration per se is what the vast majority of people in the UK have an issue with, I just think the unprecedented numbers over a long period of time (and no indication it was going to change any time soon) that is the concern. It is that what has changed opinion on immigration in the UK and directly led to Brexit. Even the EU now hint they overlooked this. Countries can not simply absorb unending numbers of people entering a country without there being an impact on services, infrastructure, jobs, housing etc. It's not about blaming anyone, its simply looking to the obvious impact that an increased population year on year will have... And I said 'that's not too many', I could have said 'that's not a lot'. That is what I was getting at... Even at the height of the net immigration you refer to the best available analysis showed that immigrants were still net contributors to the UK economy. You can refer to strains on services but you also have to recognise the increased tax income from net contributing immigrants to balance that out. Immigration is an easy thing to blame for the problems in our society since 2010. The real reasons behind most of these problems is Government policy, i.e. austerity and an ideologically based running down of the services provided by the state.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2019 20:58:20 GMT 1
OK, cool. I think there comes a point when nations can start to struggle to cope with the numbers entering the country because of the strain in can place on the host nation. That is when the numbers can be seen to be undesirable and unsustainable. My comment regarding Japan was just first impressions looking to the foreign born population compared to the population as a whole, when looking to the UK in comparison. The UK has a long history of immigration and for the most part that has been deemed more than acceptable and more than welcomed however, since the 90's the numbers involved have changed dramatically. At the start of Blair's stint in number 10 the net migration numbers were at 47,000. A week before the referendum it had reached 333,000. In between that time in was between 140,000 and 313,000, a massive increase. I always said that I don't think immigration per se is what the vast majority of people in the UK have an issue with, I just think the unprecedented numbers over a long period of time (and no indication it was going to change any time soon) that is the concern. It is that what has changed opinion on immigration in the UK and directly led to Brexit. Even the EU now hint they overlooked this. Countries can not simply absorb unending numbers of people entering a country without there being an impact on services, infrastructure, jobs, housing etc. It's not about blaming anyone, its simply looking to the obvious impact that an increased population year on year will have... And I said 'that's not too many', I could have said 'that's not a lot'. That is what I was getting at... Even at the height of the net immigration you refer to the best available analysis showed that immigrants were still net contributors to the UK economy. You can refer to strains on services but you also have to recognise the increased tax income from net contributing immigrants to balance that out. Immigration is an easy thing to blame for the problems in our society since 2010. The real reasons behind most of these problems is Government policy, i.e. austerity and an ideological based running down of the services provided by the state. Spot on. There's no doubt that migrants contribute to the NHS in a positive way. Has for housing, the real issue is the number of empty homes, or second homes that exacerbate the lack of new builds in some areas. Added to this is the expense of renting and the scandal of the tax payer subsiding private landlords. These are the real issues, but blaming migrants deflects the this. Easy targets for racists, bigots and xenophobes from the narrative of government and media.
|
|
|
Post by tvor on Apr 9, 2019 21:02:44 GMT 1
This is one of the saddest things about Brexit for me. Ordinary working people have been sold a dud, given false hope that there is some sort of simple panacea to their problems when, without the necessary sustained additional investment from Government, nothing will improve.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 9, 2019 21:06:55 GMT 1
OK, cool. I think there comes a point when nations can start to struggle to cope with the numbers entering the country because of the strain in can place on the host nation. That is when the numbers can be seen to be undesirable and unsustainable. My comment regarding Japan was just first impressions looking to the foreign born population compared to the population as a whole, when looking to the UK in comparison. The UK has a long history of immigration and for the most part that has been deemed more than acceptable and more than welcomed however, since the 90's the numbers involved have changed dramatically. At the start of Blair's stint in number 10 the net migration numbers were at 47,000. A week before the referendum it had reached 333,000. In between that time in was between 140,000 and 313,000, a massive increase. I always said that I don't think immigration per se is what the vast majority of people in the UK have an issue with, I just think the unprecedented numbers over a long period of time (and no indication it was going to change any time soon) that is the concern. It is that what has changed opinion on immigration in the UK and directly led to Brexit. Even the EU now hint they overlooked this. Countries can not simply absorb unending numbers of people entering a country without there being an impact on services, infrastructure, jobs, housing etc. It's not about blaming anyone, its simply looking to the obvious impact that an increased population year on year will have... And I said 'that's not too many', I could have said 'that's not a lot'. That is what I was getting at... Even at the height of the net immigration you refer to the best available analysis showed that immigrants were still net contributors to the UK economy. You can refer to strains on services but you also have to recognise the increased tax income from net contributing immigrants to balance that out. Immigration is an easy thing to blame for the problems in our society since 2010. The real reasons behind most of these problems is Government policy, i.e. austerity and an ideologically based running down of the services provided by the state. I don't think using the term 'blame' helps. Its not about blame. As for the best available analysis, net contributions and balancing things out, isn't that still very much up for debate... 20 Bogus Arguments for Mass Immigration
|
|
|
Post by tvor on Apr 9, 2019 22:07:48 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by shrewinjapan on Apr 10, 2019 1:35:19 GMT 1
I'll just say that, regarding immigration, yes Stutty, my opinion is influenced by my life experience in the UK & Japan. As a Generation Xer, I grew up in the UK when school and hospital closures/mergers were myriad and classes were shrinking or disappearing due to rapid decrease of the birthrate (my secondary school went from 5 or 6 classes per year to only 3 within a decade). Aging of the population due to increased average life expectancy at the same time as as lowering birthrate was putting ever increasing pressure on taxation and the social care system. The same thing, as with a lot of societal trends, occurred here in Japan a few years to a decade later. Japan has not yet addressed these problems - the tax and health service burden of an aging population, pressure on the state pension system, shortages of labour leading to businesses closing (especially during holiday seasons), a skills deficit in tech/specialist industries, rural depopulation and fields laying fallow from lack of agricultural workers, millions of homes left derelict and uninhabited. But Japan is slowly awakening to the need for increased immigration. The UK has conversely arrested the population decline and avoided the associated problems seen here in Japan mainly through immigration from the EU (but not solely the EU of course). There is so much benefit from immigration of healthy working age people prepared to work hard and contribute to society and the economy, and as a hard working immigrant myself I feel empathy and support for others doing similar, and feel our contribution to our host society is important and undervalued. I am an strong advocate of immigration and am surprised that you don't feel the same way. I get the impression that in the case of the UK, a hostile attitude to immigration has been created by the government (Mrs May in particular) and especially by mainstream media such as The Sun & The Mail, and no case has been made for the benefits of immigration (a severe failing of the media and the Remain campaign during the referendum, though in their case understandable because immigration had become a toxic issue). This is compounded by the government's dereliction of it's duties to plan for necessary & beneficial immigration and invest in infrastructure accordingly, and it's inefficacy in applying powers to control immigration in a sensible manner that it already possesses (i.e. almost absolute power of control over non-EU immigration, and the 3-month rule regarding EU immigration).
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 10, 2019 6:27:45 GMT 1
No, I still don't think 'blame' is an appropriate term to use. I understand why it is used by some but I don't think it is appropriate. And like I say, it's all very much up for debate... Studies consistently find that the net fiscal contribution of the current population of EU-15 migrants (those from the older EU member states) is positive, while that of non-EEA migrants is negative. In contrast, the fiscal contribution of EU10 migrants (from post-2004 EU accession states) is contested, with some assumptions giving positive results and others negative results.Election 2015 Briefing – Fiscal Impacts of Migration to the UKThe Fiscal Impact of Immigration in the UK
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 10, 2019 7:40:14 GMT 1
I am an strong advocate of immigration and am surprised that you don't feel the same way. Don't get that at all. I'm all for immigration; I'm an immigrant myself (although I prefer to use expat as I do mean to return to the UK), as are many of my colleagues, as are many of my friends (as you do tend to gravitate to those who are also new to a place because we are all in the same boat, not knowing anyone etc.). I'd very much like to think that immigration can bring about positive contributions to a host nation because that's the very situation I find myself in; I'm living here, working here, contributing here. That goes for huge numbers of immigrants around the world. So when looking to employment say, immigration has been great for me and my family. But does that mean is has been great for everyone? Are we saying that immigration has no negative impact? For example, I work in the IT industry, my only fear is my job moving to some other location, someplace cheaper. Is that the same for everyone in the workforce? My pay and working conditions haven't been impacted by immigration, by the movement of labour, have yours? You think that's the same for everyone else out there? I mean here in Germany we have a huge housing shortage, rents have gone through the roof as supply and demand is out of kliter. Rents are mad, crazy and only going up. You speak to refugees who have come to Stuttgart and are exasperated because they are still housed in temporary accommodation, yet it has to be explained to them that even the locals are in desperate need of accommodation themselves. If immigration will only add to that (and I see no reason why it wouldn't) then I would hope this would be taken into consideration when looking to those who are able to come to live and work here in Germany. If not, then what impact might that well have? I mean, if you think the homeless numbers in the UK are high you should see them here in Germany. Why do you think Germany has done all it can to make sure it doesn't experience anything like it did in 2015 again? It simply would not be able to cope. I'm an advocate for immigration but certainly not irresponsible immigration (open borders). You really think that any host nation can and should simply absorb an unlimited number of people entering the country year on year? So with that said, some people within the UK clearly now think that immigration at the current levels are unsustainable and undesirable. They now think that with the numbers as they now are, it is having unwanted consequences. I'm more than happy to listen to what they have to say. What I can't subscribe to however, is the lazy assumption that anyone who questions immigration is driven by racism, bigotry, xenophobia etc. I can't be doing with that, I don't understand that view at all. Just to add, I think its clear that immigration played a huge part in the EU referendum result. A few weeks before the day of the referendum it reached a record 333,000 on the year. Do I think it would have played such a role if it was around the 50,000 mark (as it was before the increases started)? I don't think so. If the Blair government hadn't underestimated the draw of the UK in 2004 and decided against transitional controls? I don't think so. It was the levels of immigration that played a part in the EU referendum. Ând with the noises now coming out of the EU it seems they are now starting to wake up to this too...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2019 8:58:41 GMT 1
Ex-pats in the UK make up 24% of the UK population. The vast proportion are in the economic power house of the South East and London, then the Midlands. migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migrants-in-the-uk-an-overview/Some of these will be seasonal, some will stay, some will train, some will go to university, some will be refugees, whatever. The whole debate though was about 'migrants' without a thought to nuance. Yes, the needs to be a debate, but it needs to be an honest one. That debate includes racists, xenophobes and bigots. Two of which I had to deal with this week. It also includes government policy, rhetoric, and the media, particularly social media.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2019 14:32:18 GMT 1
I am an strong advocate of immigration and am surprised that you don't feel the same way. Don't get that at all. I'm all for immigration; I'm an immigrant myself (although I prefer to use expat as I do mean to return to the UK), as are many of my colleagues, as are many of my friends (as you do tend to gravitate to those who are also new to a place because we are all in the same boat, not knowing anyone etc.). I'd very much like to think that immigration can bring about positive contributions to a host nation because that's the very situation I find myself in; I'm living here, working here, contributing here. That goes for huge numbers of immigrants around the world. So when looking to employment say, immigration has been great for me and my family. But does that mean is has been great for everyone? Are we saying that immigration has no negative impact? For example, I work in the IT industry, my only fear is my job moving to some other location, someplace cheaper. Is that the same for everyone in the workforce? My pay and working conditions haven't been impacted by immigration, by the movement of labour, have yours? You think that's the same for everyone else out there? I mean here in Germany we have a huge housing shortage, rents have gone through the roof as supply and demand is out of kliter. Rents are mad, crazy and only going up. You speak to refugees who have come to Stuttgart and are exasperated because they are still housed in temporary accommodation, yet it has to be explained to them that even the locals are in desperate need of accommodation themselves. If immigration will only add to that (and I see no reason why it wouldn't) then I would hope this would be taken into consideration when looking to those who are able to come to live and work here in Germany. If not, then what impact might that well have? I mean, if you think the homeless numbers in the UK are high you should see them here in Germany. Why do you think Germany has done all it can to make sure it doesn't experience anything like it did in 2015 again? It simply would not be able to cope. I'm an advocate for immigration but certainly not irresponsible immigration (open borders). You really think that any host nation can and should simply absorb an unlimited number of people entering the country year on year? So with that said, some people within the UK clearly now think that immigration at the current levels are unsustainable and undesirable. They now think that with the numbers as they now are, it is having unwanted consequences. I'm more than happy to listen to what they have to say. What I can't subscribe to however, is the lazy assumption that anyone who questions immigration is driven by racism, bigotry, xenophobia etc. I can't be doing with that, I don't understand that view at all. Just to add, I think its clear that immigration played a huge part in the EU referendum result. A few weeks before the day of the referendum it reached a record 333,000 on the year. Do I think it would have played such a role if it was around the 50,000 mark (as it was before the increases started)? I don't think so. If the Blair government hadn't underestimated the draw of the UK in 2004 and decided against transitional controls? I don't think so. It was the levels of immigration that played a part in the EU referendum. Ând with the noises now coming out of the EU it seems they are now starting to wake up to this too... Do you ever get abused for being an immigrant? Do you believe you are contributing towards the housing crisis in Germany? 👍
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 10, 2019 15:43:50 GMT 1
Don't get that at all. I'm all for immigration; I'm an immigrant myself (although I prefer to use expat as I do mean to return to the UK), as are many of my colleagues, as are many of my friends (as you do tend to gravitate to those who are also new to a place because we are all in the same boat, not knowing anyone etc.). I'd very much like to think that immigration can bring about positive contributions to a host nation because that's the very situation I find myself in; I'm living here, working here, contributing here. That goes for huge numbers of immigrants around the world. So when looking to employment say, immigration has been great for me and my family. But does that mean is has been great for everyone? Are we saying that immigration has no negative impact? For example, I work in the IT industry, my only fear is my job moving to some other location, someplace cheaper. Is that the same for everyone in the workforce? My pay and working conditions haven't been impacted by immigration, by the movement of labour, have yours? You think that's the same for everyone else out there? I mean here in Germany we have a huge housing shortage, rents have gone through the roof as supply and demand is out of kliter. Rents are mad, crazy and only going up. You speak to refugees who have come to Stuttgart and are exasperated because they are still housed in temporary accommodation, yet it has to be explained to them that even the locals are in desperate need of accommodation themselves. If immigration will only add to that (and I see no reason why it wouldn't) then I would hope this would be taken into consideration when looking to those who are able to come to live and work here in Germany. If not, then what impact might that well have? I mean, if you think the homeless numbers in the UK are high you should see them here in Germany. Why do you think Germany has done all it can to make sure it doesn't experience anything like it did in 2015 again? It simply would not be able to cope. I'm an advocate for immigration but certainly not irresponsible immigration (open borders). You really think that any host nation can and should simply absorb an unlimited number of people entering the country year on year? So with that said, some people within the UK clearly now think that immigration at the current levels are unsustainable and undesirable. They now think that with the numbers as they now are, it is having unwanted consequences. I'm more than happy to listen to what they have to say. What I can't subscribe to however, is the lazy assumption that anyone who questions immigration is driven by racism, bigotry, xenophobia etc. I can't be doing with that, I don't understand that view at all. Just to add, I think its clear that immigration played a huge part in the EU referendum result. A few weeks before the day of the referendum it reached a record 333,000 on the year. Do I think it would have played such a role if it was around the 50,000 mark (as it was before the increases started)? I don't think so. If the Blair government hadn't underestimated the draw of the UK in 2004 and decided against transitional controls? I don't think so. It was the levels of immigration that played a part in the EU referendum. Ând with the noises now coming out of the EU it seems they are now starting to wake up to this too... Do you ever get abused for being an immigrant? Do you believe you are contributing towards the housing crisis in Germany? 👍 Feels as though I'm not but then I guess I am. I say that because I have been here near on 20 years and it wasn't like that when we first came over. When we came over we had the choice of flats to choose from and all were reasonably priced. Now its becoming ever more clear that we have to move out of Stuttgart and look to someplace out of town. Yet even that is expensive to what it was and there is the added problems of getting around. Its a nightmare at the minute. So not sure what to answer to that one... We did used to get a shed load of abuse from one women over the road but I think she has either moved or passed on. She used to come out and complain about the kids playing and she would be calling us all sorts of things (auslander this, auslander that). Thankfully the kids don't get to encounter that anymore. All a bit weird that was to be honest, her coming out on the street and giving us both barrels. Other than that there was some times way back when we were on nights out. But very, very few and far between. Stuttgart is an incredibility international city, you hear all sorts of languages each and every day. That adds to the enjoyment of living here and it certainly helps make you feel more comfortable here too (and why I'm a little reluctant to head out to the sticks).
|
|
|
Post by LetchworthShrew on Apr 11, 2019 2:35:49 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by franthetownfan on Apr 11, 2019 4:48:47 GMT 1
Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t she say she wouldn’t remain PM if something like this happened?
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 11, 2019 6:25:37 GMT 1
So yet another new date for the diary... I must admit that's flummoxed me a bit that, I thought we'd be looking at a year or two year delay. Especially if we are now getting geared up to hold EU elections.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2019 7:19:00 GMT 1
Brexit on Halloween. Irony not lost here.
|
|
|
Post by harmerhillshrew on Apr 11, 2019 8:18:14 GMT 1
Brexit on Halloween. Irony not lost here. I have 2 weeks leave booked from November 1st. Was planning a couple of weeks on the Algarve. Think it might be a non EU country now. I just don't trust this incompetent bunch of shambles organisers. I hate to think what travel will be like into the EU a day after that or am I over complicating things in my head?
|
|
|
Post by frankwellshrews on Apr 11, 2019 8:33:12 GMT 1
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47879777Interesting. As regards the extension, I have to question whether any side knows what they're doing now, the EU included. Have they not heard of Parkinson's Law? Agreeing an extension like that with no solid guarantees on a second referendum or a general election is a terrible move. It's just enough time fir the Euro elections, MPs to have their summer recess (because they're exhausted and need the break etc) then we're back to squate one again with a few weeks of bickering. The ERG were cracking; if they'd have kept the pressure on we'd have got a resolution. Instead 6 months gives the remsining hardliners an excuse to kerp digging their heels in. Makes you wonder what the EU's agenda in all this is to be honest.
|
|
|
Post by percy on Apr 11, 2019 8:55:41 GMT 1
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47879777Interesting. As regards the extension, I have to question whether any side knows what they're doing now, the EU included. Have they not heard of Parkinson's Law? Agreeing an extension like that with no solid guarantees on a second referendum or a general election is a terrible move. It's just enough time fir the Euro elections, MPs to have their summer recess (because they're exhausted and need the break etc) then we're back to squate one again with a few weeks of bickering. The ERG were cracking; if they'd have kept the pressure on we'd have got a resolution. Instead 6 months gives the remsining hardliners an excuse to kerp digging their heels in. Makes you wonder what the EU's agenda in all this is to be honest. Aside from the ERG part - I completely agree. You can see this whole thing just shifting to after the summer when it will be the same mess but with sun tanned MPs. I think that she should pass this back to the people with two simple questions: 1) a) Leave or b) Remain 2) If we leave a) No deal or b) the negotiated deal that is on the table. If she proposed this way forward it would sail through the House of Commons. I always thought that the Swiss were sensible people.
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Apr 11, 2019 9:25:48 GMT 1
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47879777Interesting. As regards the extension, I have to question whether any side knows what they're doing now, the EU included. Have they not heard of Parkinson's Law? Agreeing an extension like that with no solid guarantees on a second referendum or a general election is a terrible move. It's just enough time fir the Euro elections, MPs to have their summer recess (because they're exhausted and need the break etc) then we're back to squate one again with a few weeks of bickering. The ERG were cracking; if they'd have kept the pressure on we'd have got a resolution. Instead 6 months gives the remsining hardliners an excuse to kerp digging their heels in. Makes you wonder what the EU's agenda in all this is to be honest. Aside from the ERG part - I completely agree. You can see this whole thing just shifting to after the summer when it will be the same mess but with sun tanned MPs. I think that she should pass this back to the people with two simple questions: 1) a) Leave or b) Remain2) If we leave a) No deal or b) the negotiated deal that is on the table. If she proposed this way forward it would sail through the House of Commons. I always thought that the Swiss were sensible people. We need to just ask question 2 though, as we asked question 1 in 2016?
In case you missed it, the result favoured option a) 52/48, 17.4m voted to leave, more people voting for something than ever before in this country.
|
|
|
Post by salop27 on Apr 11, 2019 9:57:27 GMT 1
The brexit fightback starts now! Farage is launching The Brexit Party tomorrow. This appears to be a mainstream party with no association to the far right that ukip has. The European elections will serve as a reminder to the political establishment. Theresa May could well be forced to stand down in the next week leading to a new PM who will be more supportive of the referendum result. Meanwhile mps will continue to flounce around parliament and not come to any majority over anything.
|
|
|
Post by frankwellshrews on Apr 11, 2019 10:39:30 GMT 1
The brexit fightback starts now! Farage is launching The Brexit Party tomorrow. This appears to be a mainstream party with no association to the far right that ukip has. The European elections will serve as a reminder to the political establishment. Theresa May could well be forced to stand down in the next week leading to a new PM who will be more supportive of the referendum result. Meanwhile mps will continue to flounce around parliament and not come to any majority over anything. Of course Farage is going to start another party and help himself to another €70k or so at least and another year's worth of pension contributions for doing **** all (after he's already made himself rich from shirting the pound) and of course you people are going to enable him. What's it going to take for you to realise the man is a con artist of the highest order?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2019 10:43:03 GMT 1
The brexit fightback starts now! Farage is launching The Brexit Party tomorrow. This appears to be a mainstream party with no association to the far right that ukip has. The European elections will serve as a reminder to the political establishment. Theresa May could well be forced to stand down in the next week leading to a new PM who will be more supportive of the referendum result. Meanwhile mps will continue to flounce around parliament and not come to any majority over anything. Is Nigel (man of the people) Farage still helping himself to the European gravy train?
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Apr 11, 2019 10:46:15 GMT 1
Brexit on Halloween. Irony not lost here. I have 2 weeks leave booked from November 1st. Was planning a couple of weeks on the Algarve. Think it might be a non EU country now. I just don't trust this incompetent bunch of shambles organisers. I hate to think what travel will be like into the EU a day after that or am I over complicating things in my head? Book your holiday we’ll still be in the EU well beyond 31st October this year
|
|
|
Post by percy on Apr 11, 2019 11:05:31 GMT 1
Aside from the ERG part - I completely agree. You can see this whole thing just shifting to after the summer when it will be the same mess but with sun tanned MPs. I think that she should pass this back to the people with two simple questions: 1) a) Leave or b) Remain2) If we leave a) No deal or b) the negotiated deal that is on the table. If she proposed this way forward it would sail through the House of Commons. I always thought that the Swiss were sensible people. We need to just ask question 2 though, as we asked question 1 in 2016?
In case you missed it, the result favoured option a) 52/48, 17.4m voted to leave, more people voting for something than ever before in this country. What is the harm in asking question 1 given that a lot has changed - surely this would give weight to the democratic argument for leaving ? Or are you not confident that Leave will win now that the facts are clearer and the remainers more incented to vote ?
|
|