EU referendum deal (title edited)

  • Thread starter Thread starter mat
  • Start date Start date
Gelsons Dad said:
Not sure why you are using this argument. It was debunked weeks ago as utter nonsense.
The french cannot choose to export their camp of illegal immigrants across the channel whether or not we are in the EU. Those same illegal immigrants are currently refusing to move into purpose built accommodation as they don't want to break up their "community". The French have failed to deal with it and they will fail to deal with it in the future but as these people are in France, if they try to illegally enter the UK we can simply deport them back to France.

France know this which is why they are happy for us to pay for the policing of their border rather than have to deal with a constant flow of returning illegal immigrants.
Click to expand...

Don't you think the French would like their police to do more important jobs than crowd control!

Maybe the French authorities would like their security forces to be focussed on the security of their population!

Likewise, have we got sufficient border control forces to be deporting crowds of economic migrants on a daily basis? I can't see that as a better use of possible savings on our EU membership fee.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
Don't you think the French would like their police to do more important jobs than crowd control!

Maybe the French authorities would like their security forces to be focussed on the security of their population!

Likewise, have we got sufficient border control forces to be deporting crowds of economic migrants on a daily basis? I can't see that as a better use of possible savings on our EU membership fee.
Click to expand...

Yes we do it already.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
The benefits issue is largely for an internal Conservative party debate. It will be important to some voters though!

I won't go over all the benefits of Membership that I and others have listed by 70 years of peace in Europe is a decent start.
Click to expand...
70 years of peace in Europe has got nothing whatsoever to do with the Common Market/EU.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
Don't you think the French would like their police to do more important jobs than crowd control!

Maybe the French authorities would like their security forces to be focussed on the security of their population!

Likewise, have we got sufficient border control forces to be deporting crowds of economic migrants on a daily basis? I can't see that as a better use of possible savings on our EU membership fee.
Click to expand...

one simply point you miss
We would no longer be an eu member so all refugees would have to claim asylum in the first safe country ie in the EU as per International law
we could just send then straight back to France as they would be an EU problem

And as everyone is predicting we will not be allowed to trade with the EU, the tunnel will be obsolete so we can just brick it up problem solved!
 
whp.blue said:
one simply point you miss
We would no longer be an eu member so all refugees would have to claim asylum in the first safe country ie in the EU as per International law
we could just send then straight back to France as they would be an EU problem
Click to expand...

That international law is supposed to happen now! Otherwise people are much more likely to be economic migrants than refugees!
 
Tim of the Oak said:
It will get very interesting if the European Parliament vote against the deal.

Yes Cameron didn't get all that he wanted and in some ways it would have been counter productive if he had. We don't want Poles who have come here to work to feel like second or third class citizens (not to be confused with season car holders). We have enough problems with divided communities already.

This deal was supposed to address the piss takers re. Benefits and to some extent it does that!

That said, we have home grown people who abuse the benefits system as well.
Click to expand...
It hardly touches the issue of benefits. A four year graduated reduction of in work benefits over a one off seven year period (emergency brake) and then after this we can't apply these reductions again( I'm still not sure whether we have to get permission from the other member states for the emergency brake).
The impact on the numbers of migrant workers will be minimal and it will save about 2s/6d.
 
Ancient Citizen said:
70 years of peace in Europe has got nothing whatsoever to do with the Common Market/EU.
Click to expand...
To say its got 'nothing' to do with the EU, merely demonstrates an inability on your part to think objectively about the subject matter, AC.

It could be said its role was partial, minor or even nugatory (I'd disagree with all three) but to say that a union of nations, created with the express and enduring intention of closer co-operation, that has survived intact for over 60 years, in a period of unprecedented peace for our continent that is broadly concurrent with those 60 years, are completely unconnected, is absurd and as ridiculous as suggesting NATO played no role in that peace either.
 
Len Rum said:
It hardly touches the issue of benefits. A four year graduated reduction of in work benefits over a one off seven year period (emergency brake) and then after this we can't apply these reductions again( I'm still not sure whether we have to get permission from the other member states for the emergency brake).
The impact on the numbers of migrant workers will be minimal and it will save about 2s/6d.
Click to expand...

I'd imagine it will actually cost a fortune when the minimum wage rises to a living wage, assuming cost of living will rise and welfare payments will rise accordingly.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
Not true!
Click to expand...
Peace and security in Western Europe has ensued because of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, all military decisions,
all major purchases, every military exercise, has been within the remit of that organisation. There is no separate group
within the EU cooperating on defence, to my knowledge, and even if there were it would not overule any NATO directives.
Whether we're in or out of the EU, our security has nothing to do with it.
 
For all the deluded outers who think there is a raft of countries desperately lining up to do business with good old Blighty.
A reality check.

This Op Ed by Gareth Evans (Foreign Minister of Australia from 1988 to 1996)

https://www.project-syndicate.org/co...JDJLPv6sbFu.99

kicks off in fine style:

"One of the most bizarre arguments made by the people who support Britain’s exit from the European Union is the notion that a self-exiled UK will find a new global relevance, and indeed leadership role, as the center of the “Anglosphere.”
(...)
"Perhaps I am just a jaundiced colonial, but let me count the ways this all seems to me to be a fantasy. The basic problem for Anglosphere advocates is that none of the candidates for membership of this new club are likely to have the slightest interest – geostrategic, economic or political – in joining it."

and finishes strong:

"Probably the hardest truth that Britain’s Anglosphere dreamers must confront is that there is just no mood politically, in any of the candidate countries of which I’m aware, to build some new global association of the linguistically and culturally righteous. We just don’t particularly think of ourselves as Anglo any more."
 
CityStu said:
I'd imagine it will actually cost a fortune when the minimum wage rises to a living wage, assuming cost of living will rise and welfare payments will rise accordingly.
Click to expand...
Ok, 3s/6d,and for a one off seven years only, subject to agreement by other member states(?), and then only if there's an 'r ' in the month.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
To say its got 'nothing' to do with the EU, merely demonstrates an inability on your part to think objectively about the subject matter, AC.

It could be said its role was partial, minor or even nugatory (I'd disagree with all three) but to say that a union of nations, created with the express and enduring intention of closer co-operation, that has survived intact for over 60 years, in a period of unprecedented peace for our continent that is broadly concurrent with those 60 years, are completely unconnected, is absurd and as ridiculous as suggesting NATO played no role in that peace either.
Click to expand...
Morning Gord, let's just say bollox to the FA cup, before this chat.
Partial, minor or nugatory, of those three adjectives, I'd say that the last one is the only one I'd concede. At no stage during the inception
of the common market was defence ever a basis for closer economic cooperation, as NATO had already covered the eventuality of aggression against
Europe. What you seem to assume, and I can understand why, is that if we're all holding hands and cooperating economically with each other, then the threat
of fighting amongst ourselves is less likely. This is true, but at the first sign of aggression from Russia re the Ukraine, or the migration
crisis, this so called safety has been blown apart, as borders are erected by EU members, and squabbling is still continuing.
Do you honestly believe that this country will be less safe because we've decided to quit a Europe dominated by a federalist Germany?
I don't, our membership of NATO continues, the EU has no defence strategy, and is irrelevant concerning defence.
 
Ancient Citizen said:
Morning Gord, let's just say bollox to the FA cup, before this chat.
Partial, minor or nugatory, of those three adjectives, I'd say that the last one is the only one I'd concede. At no stage during the inception
of the common market was defence ever a basis for closer economic cooperation, as NATO had already covered the eventuality of aggression against
Europe. What you seem to assume, and I can understand why, is that if we're all holding hands and cooperating economically with each other, then the threat
of fighting amongst ourselves is less likely. This is true, but at the first sign of aggression from Russia re the Ukraine, or the migration
crisis, this so called safety has been blown apart, as borders are erected by EU members, and squabbling is still continuing.
Do you honestly believe that this country will be less safe because we've decided to quit a Europe dominated by a federalist Germany?
I don't, our membership of NATO continues, the EU has no defence strategy, and is irrelevant concerning defence.
Click to expand...
Morning AC; yes bollocks to the FA Cup :-)

Securing peace is about a combination of dialogue and co-operation with military force. You seem to feel its merely down to the latter. 'Jaw jaw' can be just as effective as the threat of 'war-war'.

My answer to your question is ultimately, yes, as it will make Europe less stable and secure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top