OT: A straightforward question for outers

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)
However
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.
michael adams
...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
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.
--

Chris

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/06/2016 09:41, Chris Hogg wrote:

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?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/06/2016 09:47, Clive George wrote:

Even if there is a leave vote, we'll still be part of the EU for the next two years.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/06/16 10:02, GB wrote:

Well unless there is a change of government, and the treaty is unilaterally revoked.
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. Switzerland,...
Then we reinstate free trade with the Commonwealth. And do a deal with India.
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.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
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"
--
Cheers,

John.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/06/16 12:25, John Rumm wrote:

Indeed.

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".
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

True, but who is it going to be...?

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 if elected).
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.
--
Cheers,

John.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Rumm wrote:

I fear you may be right.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/06/2016 16:41, Capitol wrote:

If today's switch about in the polls are right, then it might be a moot point anyway.
--
Cheers,

John.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I have said for some time that the remain aggreement we got was watered down so that a new one can pop up when we say we will leave. I'ts what I'd have done to save my face. Brian
--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, 18 June 2016 12:25:09 UTC+1, John Rumm wrote:

That is indeed a big danger.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Http://www.admiraltylawguide.com/conven/lawoftreaties1969.html
I will confess to a "harry" here - I haven't read it all.
--
bert

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not if Britain chooses to make and obscene gesture in the general direction of the EU and does what it likes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/06/16 09:47, Clive George wrote:

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 Eurosocialist Left.
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 anyway.
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."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Except as things stand, there's no way that would get through the HOC.
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.
michael adams
...
so the situation you describe will never arise, and

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

There is no HOC that matters.

There is no deadline except in your pathetic little drug crazed fantasy world.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.
>> so the situation you describe will never arise,

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That really would be pulling up the drawbridge. Against all international law.
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 snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk London SW
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

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.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/06/16 09:35, michael adams wrote:

Are you seriously suggesting we stay in a union whose citizens disobey the law?
Another Dave
--
Change nospam to gmx

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

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.