Current Affairs EU In or Out

[SNova]

Speaks volumes.

How does it?

 

[Joey66]

Do you realise that the whole purpose of negotiations is for both sides to set out their goal, and then for a compromise to be reached?

Thank God you're not our negotiator.

Thank god our present leader is not giving a running commentary on Brexit have you bothered to read the article by any chance ?

 

[tsubaki]

So you'd be happy committing economic hari-kari for a government to then say we'll have more migrants coming in please?

Would you be happy remaining as part of an EU that had threatened to do that, and do significant harm to its own constituent economies, in order to preserve the status quo?

 

[SNova]

So you'd be happy committing economic hari-kari for a government to then say we'll have more migrants coming in please?

No, I don't vote for mass immigration parties. But if people elect a government on the promise of reducing immigration they should be allowed to do that. If they are elected on the promise of increasing immigration they should be allowed to do that.

 

[bring the ghost on]

Thank god our present leader is not giving a running commentary on Brexit have you bothered to read the article by any chance ?

I don't know which article you're referring to, but I've been reading on the topic, yes.

It comes as absolutely no surprise that the EU stance is "you can't have access to the single market without free movement", but the question is - what is the compromise, is it suitable, how damaging will it be. Why would you not want Parliament to be consulted on that?

 

[Tubey]

We don't.

Erm... we do. Indeed, most of our immigration comes from outside the EU, which we have full control over.

Isn't it telling that despite having that "full" control, it's still higher than EU immigration? What does that tell you? Do you think having the same controls on EU immigration will drop that to zero or something?

It doesn't work like putting up a giant wall mate.

 

[roydo]

No, I don't vote for mass immigration parties. But if people elect a government on the promise of reducing immigration they should be allowed to do that. If they are elected on the promise of increasing immigration they should be allowed to do that.

So immigration trumps economic health then?

 

[Pienaar's gloves]

If we eventually leave the EU freedom of movement will be controlled by a visa style system May has stated it's her preferred position on control of our borders!

The point clearly being that wasn't necessarily what was voted for.

You may have noticed that May become Prime Minister AFTER the vote.

 

[joey_macmo]

Here's Ashtonian, demonstrating that he had no clue that the free movement of people and access to the single market were completely entwined.

https://www.grandoldteam.com/forum/threads/eu-in-or-out.89343/page-231#post-4621352

It's that level of fundamental lack of knowledge, and just voting on nonsense hearsay rather than actual evidence. It's the politics of the gutter, and the Trump election combined with Brexit shows just how low the collective IQ of our society really is.

When statements like Goves regarding experts wins more votes than it loses then you've really got to worry

 

[SNova]

Erm... we do. Indeed, most of our immigration comes from outside the EU, which we have full control over.

Isn't it telling that despite having that "full" control, it's still higher than EU immigration? What does that tell you? Do you think having the same controls on EU immigration will drop that to zero or something?

It doesn't work like putting up a giant wall mate.

It tells me Conservative voters are easily fooled If they believe the conservatives will cut immigration.

So immigration trumps economic health then?

Sovereignty does. I wouldn't vote for golden handcuffs.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Would you be happy remaining as part of an EU that had threatened to do that, and do significant harm to its own constituent economies, in order to preserve the status quo?

Immigration doesn't harm economies though. Quite the opposite, it benefits both the source country and the destination country.

 

[Joey66]

The point clearly being that wasn't necessarily what was voted for.

You may have noticed that May become Prime Minister AFTER the vote.

So what? the vote was for OUT !
Do you think Labour would get in?
If she wanted to be vindictive she could word a document for no confidence the YOU would have a Labour wipe out!

 

[tsubaki]

Immigration doesn't harm economies though. Quite the opposite, it benefits both the source country and the destination country.

I wasn't talking about immigration; I was talking about what Schauble and his ilk are threatening to do.

 

[roydo]

Sovereignty does. I wouldn't vote for golden handcuffs.

Flip flopping all over the shop here mate.

You want control over our borders. We have. (We are just crap at it)

You want a Sovereign State. We are, but you dont trust our Parliament to vote on all this.

Wouldnt vote for a mass immigration party. Like who?

 

[Joey66]

I don't know which article you're referring to, but I've been reading on the topic, yes.

It comes as absolutely no surprise that the EU stance is "you can't have access to the single market without free movement", but the question is - what is the compromise, is it suitable, how damaging will it be. Why would you not want Parliament to be consulted on that?

Consulted on when negotiations commence YES!