Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
hilts said:
More encouragement you mean? I would personally do it in France with their co operation and if the claims were proven valid then travel could be arranged.

Although those turned down would then give money to traffickers and make the hazardous trip anyhow.

And then posters on here would be complaining again.

How are they settling in at your place by the way?
Click to expand...


Really needs a separate thread but your spot on Hilts. As i have pointed out in previous posts what we should have done is to

Allow applications for asylum in the UK to be made at Embassies abroad.

Register the asylum seeker on the Eu database as per the requirements of the Dublin Agreement. This means that if their application for Asylum in the UK failed they could then apply in the country of registration (we lose the benefit of that agreement tho at the end of this year)

Go through the screening process and either accept or not.

If they then attempt entry into the UK by crossing the channel our assumption would be that they are not asylum seekers but economic migrants and therefore do not have rights of protection under the Refugee Convention of 1951.

On the face of it ... its a fairly simple solution and one we used to operate. Why then did the Tories stop applications being made in Embassies?

Surely it's not to get their base wound up? IMG_3869.jpeg
 
Ifwecouldjust....... said:
Really needs a separate thread but your spot on Hilts. As i have pointed out in previous posts what we should have done is to

Allow applications for asylum in the UK to be made at Embassies abroad.

Register the asylum seeker on the Eu database as per the requirements of the Dublin Agreement. This means that if their application for Asylum in the UK failed they could then apply in the country of registration (we lose the benefit of that agreement tho at the end of this year)

Go through the screening process and either accept or not.

If they then attempt entry into the UK by crossing the channel our assumption would be that they are not asylum seekers but economic migrants and therefore do not have rights of protection under the Refugee Convention of 1951.

On the face of it ... its a fairly simple solution and one we used to operate. Why then did the Tories stop applications being made in Embassies?

Surely it's not to get their base wound up? View attachment 6686
Click to expand...
It's no mean feat, but the Express is even more odious than the Mail.
 
Ifwecouldjust....... said:
Really needs a separate thread but your spot on Hilts. As i have pointed out in previous posts what we should have done is to

Allow applications for asylum in the UK to be made at Embassies abroad.

Register the asylum seeker on the Eu database as per the requirements of the Dublin Agreement. This means that if their application for Asylum in the UK failed they could then apply in the country of registration (we lose the benefit of that agreement tho at the end of this year)

Go through the screening process and either accept or not.

If they then attempt entry into the UK by crossing the channel our assumption would be that they are not asylum seekers but economic migrants and therefore do not have rights of protection under the Refugee Convention of 1951.

On the face of it ... its a fairly simple solution and one we used to operate. Why then did the Tories stop applications being made in Embassies?

Surely it's not to get their base wound up? View attachment 6686
Click to expand...

The Tories and the Express are cunts, the difference between migrants and asylum seekers isn’t stated clearly enough mind. As you say for another thread although it’s been done to death.
 
BobKowalski said:
You think you will have better luck making coherent points on Brexit? God loves a trier I guess.
Click to expand...

There are no longer any points to be made on Brexit until a decision is finally made. You and your fellow europhiles could maybe post some more articles or twitter posts from remainers to keep us all entertained.
 
hilts said:
There are no longer any points to be made on Brexit until a decision is finally made. You and your fellow europhiles could maybe post some more articles or twitter posts from remainers to keep us all entertained.
Click to expand...

There will never be a final decision. There will always be negotiations. We will be forever managing our relationship with the EU. Brexit is a never ending process, not a destination.

Brexit and this thread will never die, it will adapt, mutate, but never stop. It is remorseless, cannot be reasoned with, it is a monster conceived by charlatans and birthed in lies.
 
Vic said:
Why quote Remainers when the Leaver Ultras are so entertaining?

www.express.co.uk

IDS fury over Brussels' demands as Boris travels in bid to save deal

BREXITEER Sir Iain Duncan Smith lashed out at the EU's reluctance to compromise in the Brexit talks as Boris Johnson travels to Brussels in a bid to save negotiations from collapsing.
www.express.co.uk www.express.co.uk
Click to expand...

My guess is that because of these nut jobs in his own party Johnson is talking the clock down so he can get his paper thin deal in front of Parliament with the shortest possible time to debate it and get it voted through - he will put up with the angry voices next year calling out the deal for what it actually will be but what he can't afford is the ERG having time to belittle the deal pre-vote
 
mcfc1632 said:
The reason that it was not seems quite obvious from the comments does it not? - and there seems to be common theme which I have pointed out by bolding.

That is has been left to the 11th hour is because the EU has not been willing to move their positions previously - and you know that this yet further evidence that "We will only see movement from the EU.........."

"The EU has dropped its insistence on a 'ratchet clause' which would have formalised the principle both sides should keep up with each other's standards. It's now ready to cater for divergence in the future so long as there are strong safeguards to rebalance unfair competition."

"This is a shift from the EU, which previously rejected managed divergence as too messy and risky for its economies. They worried it would create constant uncertainty for them. It thus represents a fair departure from the EU's opening position on LPF."

"There is a difference between having a commitment to match standards hard-wired into the deal, failure to comply with which would be a breach of the agreement, and a mechanism written into the text catering for a decision to diverge and accept rebalancing measures in return."

"What the sides are now trying to thrash out is how unfair competition would be defined, the process for triggering rebalancing measures, and how extensive they'd be. The EU originally wanted the Commission to have the unilateral right to apply them - hence 'lightning tariffs'."

"That demand angered the UK, and has now been diluted by Brussels which accepts there needs to be due process based on evidence. One EU proposal is for a 'distortion test' that could be triggered by either side. They're also open to setting up an independent arbitrage system."

The EU would have had the UK locked in regulatory chains for decades had May/Robbins incompetence still been what they were facing - take a bow Mr Frost.
Click to expand...
'ckin Ada mate if you're happy for us to move into the EU's orbit of trading rules I think we can all agree there's room for optimism.
 
BobKowalski said:
There will never be a final decision. There will always be negotiations. We will be forever managing our relationship with the EU. Brexit is a never ending process, not a destination.

Brexit and this thread will never die, it will adapt, mutate, but never stop. It is remorseless, cannot be reasoned with, it is a monster conceived by charlatans and birthed in lies.
Click to expand...

As opposed the EU itself which is a never ending process although I suppose we know the destination, well some do.
 
blueparrot said:
Doesn't bother me but would think that will be a very difficult sell for Johnson to bring back.
Click to expand...
I don’t think as a British citizen we should be worried about our government having to keep up with EU working conditions or environmental policies.

If anything, it’s a safety net for any potentially malevolent government.

I wouldn’t lose a wink of sleep over it.
 
Ban-jani said:
I don’t think as a British citizen we should be worried about our government having to keep up with EU working conditions or environmental policies.

If anything, it’s a safety net for any potentially malevolent government.

I wouldn’t lose a wink of sleep over it.
Click to expand...


Lol ... Deluded..... all the TORIES have ever done is to attempt to / or removed the rights of the working class.

Please let me have an act passed by the Conservatives that has benefited the average man since 1956.

I'll wait.
 
Ok. I know this will probably have the two sides in here going at each other again, but a genuine question.
Apart from vagueness like taking back control, Sovereignty, borders etc. (I didn’t say immigration)
Have any of you actually heard what the economic plan is for life in Britain after deal or no deal.

Is it not the conservatives looking for a deregulated financial sector?

Singapore on Thames etc etc.
Is that their model for job creation.

If so, why have they never just come out and said that and been upfront about it. (Honest)

Would they have won a referendum if they had said that.

If that isn’t the model they are looking at, then has anyone else heard what they actually want.
 
Ifwecouldjust....... said:
Lol ... Deluded..... all the TORIES have ever done is to attempt to / or removed the rights of the working class.

Please let me have an act passed by the Conservatives that has benefited the average man since 1956.

I'll wait.
Click to expand...
Are you a little hard of thinking?

My exact point is the same as the one you’re making and you’ve called me deluded?

The point of Johnson bottling the Ratchet Clause is that it’ll stop future Tory governments from screwing worker rights.
 
Ban-jani said:
Are you a little hard of thinking?

My exact point is the same as the one you’re making and you’ve called me deluded?

The point of Johnson bottling the Ratchet Clause is that it’ll stop future Tory governments from screwing worker rights.
Click to expand...


if thats what they intended to do ... they would've baked it into the legislation ... but they didnt...


watch what they do .... not what they say.
 
Ifwecouldjust....... said:
if thats what they intended to do ... they would've baked it into the legislation ... but they didnt...


watch what they do .... not what they say.
Click to expand...
Again, you’re struggling to understand basic sentences.

The EU are wanting a clause that states the UK aren’t only not allowed to regress rights, but also both parties have to keep up with each other’s so neither can undercut them with cheaper labour.

The government has said no up to now over sovereignty claims but the rumours are Johnson has bottled it and accepted it.

I am saying if these rumours are true, it’s a good thing because it stops the Tories getting away with not improving worker’s rights.

Is that clear now?

I hope it is, I really do.
 
Ban-jani said:
Again, you’re struggling to understand basic sentences.

The EU are wanting a clause that states the UK aren’t only not allowed to regress rights, but also both parties have to keep up with each other’s so neither can undercut them with cheaper labour.

The government has said no up to now over sovereignty claims but the rumours are Johnson has bottled it and accepted it.

I am saying if these rumours are true, it’s a good thing because it stops the Tories getting away with not improving worker’s rights.

Is that clear now?

I hope it is, I really do.
Click to expand...


As i said .... the Tories had an opportunity to do that in legislation .. but chose not to . So you really think they will honour this?
 
mancity2012_eamo said:
Ok. I know this will probably have the two sides in here going at each other again, but a genuine question.
Apart from vagueness like taking back control, Sovereignty, borders etc. (I didn’t say immigration)
Have any of you actually heard what the economic plan is for life in Britain after deal or no deal.

Is it not the conservatives looking for a deregulated financial sector?

Singapore on Thames etc etc.
Is that their model for job creation.

If so, why have they never just come out and said that and been upfront about it. (Honest)

Would they have won a referendum if they had said that.

If that isn’t the model they are looking at, then has anyone else heard what they actually want.
Click to expand...

Vagueness is the plan. We have no industrial or economic strategy. None.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top