A straightforward question
Agreed: The UK is an attractive destination for East European EU migrants
There are thousands already here.
Agreed: Its possible to argue that the UK is already overcrowded
with EU migrants putting great strain on our overstretched resources
(The counter-arguments are irrelevant here)
If there is any hint of a deadline, beyond which UK borders will be closed
then its reasonable to suppose there will be an influx of such migrants
into the UK leading up to that deadline ; such to make the hostile response
in some quarters to the arrival 27,000 Ugandan Asians in 1972 look like a
stroll in park.
This won't have been what the outers thought they were voting for.
Then there is the subsequent problem of deporting them all, both adults and
children. Presumably at the point of a gun, or in handcuffs if necessary.
Apparently the US wants us to stay in the EU. Now at the time of Suez the
US got upset simply because Ike had an election coming up, and the State
Dept. wanted to save Nasser for later, and so threatened to pull the plug
on Sterling. So the UK had to suffer the humiliation of having to back down.
So how exactly does anyone think these mass deportations are going to
play on TV with our closest (by necessity) ally ? Never mind World Opinion.
On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 09:35:49 +0100, "michael adams"
Your question is full of assumptions. Here's another for you. If the
out vote wins, the government will immediately impose an embargo on
all immigration, so the situation you describe will never arise, and
your question becomes irrelevant.
Sadly there probably are a lot of people who actually believe if leave
wins, the government will do that.
Now why would they believe such a thing? Could there be a certain amount
of porkies being implied?
Well unless there is a change of government, and the treaty is
A law passed to simply say 'We the undersigned hereby declare that her
majesties sovereign nation, considers itself no longer bound by the
treaties signed by her majesties government etc etc on the grounds that
the signing of them was ultra vires, and they therefore never had
legally binding status'
Which is in fact the case. According to some legal experts.
At which point we recall all the MEPS, give them a ex gratia payment out
of this weeks EU cheque, and tell them to find a proper job, and stop
paying the EU anything, and tell them that's where we stand, and what
are they going to do about it anyway?
And invite any other nation that feels like it, to come and have a chat
about setting up bilateral trade agreements, and some sort of pan
European understanding, that has nothing to do with the EU.
We would probably start with Iceland, Irish republic, Norway.
Then we reinstate free trade with the Commonwealth. And do a deal with
This is all possible. We don't have to abide by EU due process if we are
on the way out.
Indeed there are grounds for not so doing, on the basis that it sets a
bad precedent. We thereby accept that the treaties WERE binding, implicitly.
No, I think we should make a strong declaration WITHOUT PREJUDICE that
we no longer consider ourselves bound by EU treaties, although we will
continue to honour them pro tem.
Microsoft : the best reason to go to Linux that ever existed.
On 18/06/2016 10:37, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
This all kind of presupposes that the government of the day actually has
the balls to do it.
Thatcher, perhaps... the current lot?
I suspect it will be more a case of "ok chaps, we need to leave, now
lets cook up a deal where we do it pretty much in name only - so we can
carry on business as usual"
No, but if we brexit it aint gonna be the current lot is it?
Cameron, Osborne, May - their political careers are on the line.
Boris, Gove, Patel, IDS...these are the boys and girls who have put
their money on brexit.
And if UKIP has any say, oh yet they damned well would.,
I am sure we would start by invoking whatever article is appropriate,
BUT I see no reason why we could not state for the record, that this is
in fact 'ex gratia' and we consider the treaties signed were 'ultra
vires' of UK law, and we hope we never have to test that position in court.
That sends a shot across the bows of those in the EU who would suddenly
pass a law saying that after all article 51 or whatever it is doesn't
actually apply to Britain, and therefore we cannot actually leave even
if we wanted to, followed by 15 years of warbling in the EU courts.
And if you think they wouldn't do that, just look at the last few days.
And that is why you can thank your lucky stars you have Nigel and the boys.
To tell you when you are being stitched up.
In the end its down to the electorate. If they think they are being
taken for a ride, the whole thing was a sham, and a waste of time, well
there will be UKIP boxed to tick in elections all across the country.
You may not like UKIP, but they remain the only thing standing between
you and being utterly shafted by the political elite.
They are there, to keep the rest honest.
Use them. You don't have to like them, believe in their integrity, or
agree with many of their policies. But if you want out and the Tories
wont deliver it, then use UKIP.
"I guess a rattlesnake ain't risponsible fer bein' a rattlesnake, but ah
puts mah heel on um jess the same if'n I catches him around mah chillun".
Even if they decide to call a snap election, I can't see that corbyn's
lot stand any chance (or would do a better job of disentanglement even
The lib dems have all but vanished, and ukip would seem like an
irrelevance to many of their more moderate supporters who just wanted
out of the eu, and are now quite happy to distance themselves from the
more rabbid BNPesque membership that also gravitates toward them.
I would be surprise if it does have any say...
They can invoke the break clause, but I expect they will then pussyfoot
for a while, trying not to rock the boat too much.
Possibly... chances are its going to get messy whether we stay or go.
I think the electorate expect a stitch up as a matter of course!
So you are in effect saying the incumbents will need to stage manage
everything very carefully. I doubt that is news to them.
The trick will be for them to "deliver" for certain values of deliver.
Given the whole exercise was designed to take the ground out from under
UKIP et al, I expect there is a fair amount of planning going into how
that will be done.
What you will have seen all over the media, has been nothing to do with
the truth of remaining, or leaving, but a carefully orchestrated
campaign of fear and hate speech stirred up by people who such a deep
contempt for the electorate, that they think that all that matters is
how much emotion can be attached to the issue, and how they can ensure
that the most negative emotion attaches to the outcome they want to prevent.
Depending on what side you are on, you will think it has all been done
by the other side, and your side is justified in telling the odd porky,
because the outcome is so important.
This of course is Blair times 1000. Dr Kelly, please shut up. It's
important we go to war, and if we sexed up a dossier, so what? It was
necessary to ensure the correct results.
Oh Is Dr Kelly dead? My thoughts go out to his family. The stress you
know, the strain of being wrong when we all know there are WMD in Iraq.
Of course we, the government, were not lying to you.
That is unthinkable.
We paid someone else to do our lying for us.
What we have seen, and are seeing and will continue to see, is what
lives under the political stones. Of just how deep are the vested
interests in the status quo, and how far they are prepared to go to keep it.
And conversely just how strongly many people are feeling that they have
gone altogether too far, and if that is what the status quo consist of,
then escaping it at any prices seems preferable.
This isn't a referendum about Britain. This is a rag taggle bunch of
people who have gained enough support from British people to take on the
EU, and have the power to destroy it.
That's what the EU elite know, and that's why the knives are out and
anything goes. If Britain leaves the EU, its finished. And it may spell
if not the end, certainly a huge reduction in influence, of the
It may well be finished anyway - its been kicking the economic can down
the road for a decade, and its made a complete pigs ear of its migration
policy, and nations are starting to act independently in defiance of it
And once a nation realises it can 'do a Geldof' to the EU,. and get away
with it, its but a short step to ignoring all the EU directives, and
especially if its a net contributors, simply failing to write the cheques.
There are only two times I have been really really scared by events that
have coincidentally occurred with serious government and political events.
The first was when Dr Kelly died, and a camera showed a close up of Tony
Bliar's face, with the blood drained out of it.
And the second was when the Left, and the media, in concert all across
Europe, started to blame 'far right influences' for Jo Cox's death HOURS
before any evidence of anything had been forwarded to the Guardian.
Or did they already have the 'evidence' before it happened?
Dr Kelly's death was extremely convenient for the government of the day.
T Bliar subsequently converted to Catholicism. Jo Cox's death has been
extremely convenient for the 'remainer' campaign.
I sincerely hope I am wrong. In my inferences.
Maybe it was simply unseemly haste in making political capital out of a
random tragic event.
But the evidence of political capital being made, is there for all to see.
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign,
that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
Except as things stand, there's no way that would get through the
Any deadline at all will see an influx - crowded stations and airports,
infrastructure unable to cope, all sorts.
Then the problem of what to do with them all once they're here.
If migrants know that post Brexit there's no chance of entry
then they'll try and beat the deadline. Basically these people
are like mice etc. they're usually a lot smarter than people
give them credit for.
so the situation you describe will never arise, and
That really would be pulling up the drawbridge. Against all international
Even the most ardent politicians in support of BREXIT admit it will take
quite some time to unhitch ourselves from the EU.
The problem is there are lots of the public who think that a vote for out
will result in all immigrants being sent home the next day or whatever.
Do you really think imposing an immediate ban on EU immigration is the way
to negotiate a half decent trade agreement with the EU if we do leave?
*If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?
Dave Plowman firstname.lastname@example.org London SW
Only temporarily to avoid those wanting to migrate while they could.
There is no international law that has anything to say about what
a country can choose to do about MIGRANTS. Japan chooses
to allow almost no MIGRANTS and that is perfectly legal.
That is with other stuff, particularly a trade agreement with the EU
if the EU isnt completely mindlessly bloody minded and is actually
stupid enough to insist that there will be no trade agreement with
Britain that doesn’t include the complete freedom of movement of
EU citizens and paying the same amount to the EU that Britain
currently pays. If the EU is actually stupid enough to go that route
to discourage others from leaving, whoever is involved in those
negotiations will just make an obscene gesture in the general
direction of the EU and Britain will continue to trade with the EU under
the WTO rules, just like the US currently does very successfully indeed.
Yes, that will certainly be a problem for those involved in agricultural
exports from Britain to the EU, but will only involve a relatively low
tariff level that plenty of other places managed fine when they trade
with the EU with no trade agreement between them.
But will see the exit from the EU happen very quickly indeed.
Irrelevant, they will discover that it doesn’t and there is fuck all
that they can do about that when they discover that it doesn’t.
ONLY so that there isnt a massive surge of immigrants that
try to get to Britain before Britain has a more selective
immigration policy with EU citizens, the same as it has
had with commonwealth countrys for decades now.
Britain doesn’t need one. The US doesn’t have one
with the EU and does fine without one. Same with
Canada, Australia, India, China, Japan, etc etc etc.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.