Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
"Things Can Only Get Better"
Britain can reverse Brexit and rejoin the EU any time it likes says .
Michael Barnier former Brexit negotiator.Speaking on ITV. Peston.
The door is always open, and the UK know how to rejoin, and what the conditions are.
...Come on then ,,lets have a referendum , and the UK could be back in the,
...." Sunny Uplands" by this time next year .
Michael Barnier former Brexit negotiator.Speaking on ITV. Peston.
The door is always open, and the UK know how to rejoin, and what the conditions are.
...Come on then ,,lets have a referendum , and the UK could be back in the,
...." Sunny Uplands" by this time next year .
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by gulliver1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"Webbo 11.24 Kindly obey Site Rules and use the correct user name .. You have been told about this malpractice before,"
ah bless, hes a stickler for rules...only a loser would worry about what they are called on a web site...
"I might want to return some day"...lets hope not eh
ah bless, hes a stickler for rules...only a loser would worry about what they are called on a web site...
"I might want to return some day"...lets hope not eh
-- answer removed --
Now might be a good time to mention another Brexiteer lie (perpetuated by NJ no less); that as a member of the EU, all citizens (within the EU) had the right to come and live in the UK.
Article 7 of the EU citizens rights states that in order to come here without a job (for more than 3 months), they would need sufficient resources not to become a burden on the social assistance system of the host country, and have comprehensive medical insurance – otherwise we could chuck them out.
So there is no way that many millions of EU citizens could just roll up in the UK, as claimed by the xenophobic/racist Brexiteers.
So in reality, the EU’s free movement of people allows free movement to any member State for up to three months, and to work in any member State – but they cannot become a burden on another host country.
Who could possibly object to such a sensible arrangement, allowing such freedoms to their citizens?
Article 7 of the EU citizens rights states that in order to come here without a job (for more than 3 months), they would need sufficient resources not to become a burden on the social assistance system of the host country, and have comprehensive medical insurance – otherwise we could chuck them out.
So there is no way that many millions of EU citizens could just roll up in the UK, as claimed by the xenophobic/racist Brexiteers.
So in reality, the EU’s free movement of people allows free movement to any member State for up to three months, and to work in any member State – but they cannot become a burden on another host country.
Who could possibly object to such a sensible arrangement, allowing such freedoms to their citizens?
//So in reality, the EU’s free movement of people allows free movement to any member State for up to three months, and to work in any member State//
Absolute hogwash.
I'm well aware of the passage you quoted. You should be aware that whenever I've mentioned that right, I've always referred to it as the right to "work and settle" here. But that is of little importance.
In practice, whilst we were EU members, the UK had no right to deny entry to EU citizens. They could not be questioned at the border (even if the resources to do so were available) and all had the unfettered right of entry (bar one or two very exceptional circumstances where those convicted of serious criminal offences were concerned).
Once here, there was no way on Earth that the UK authorities could check whether or not they had complied with the conditions you quote. Do you think it was practical for the Immigration people to pop round to every one of them and ask them if they've managed to get a job? Bear in mind that when the permanent settlement scheme for EU citizens was set up post Brexit, some 5.5m applied for residency. Do you think the resources are available to check on that number of people? If any were found to be staying contrary to the rights you have quoted, do you think the UK would deport them promptly? If you're going to debate these matters you need to separate theory from practice (i.e. get real).
// – but they cannot become a burden on another host country..//
I've never mentioned anything about them becoming a burden. That isn't the issue (see below).
//Who could possibly object to such a sensible arrangement, allowing such freedoms to their citizens?//
Anybody who bothers to ponder how accommodation and public services are to be provided for such a large influx. This country is desperately short of housing and its public services - healthcare and education in particular - are creaking at the seams. There is nothing sensible about allowing such an arrangement.
//So there is no way that many millions of EU citizens could just roll up in the UK, as claimed by the xenophobic/racist Brexiteers.//
As above, there most certainly is. And I would thank you not to label people - in particular me - who voted to leave as racist or xenophobic. I am neither, but I do think things through, whilst it is quite evident that you do not.
Absolute hogwash.
I'm well aware of the passage you quoted. You should be aware that whenever I've mentioned that right, I've always referred to it as the right to "work and settle" here. But that is of little importance.
In practice, whilst we were EU members, the UK had no right to deny entry to EU citizens. They could not be questioned at the border (even if the resources to do so were available) and all had the unfettered right of entry (bar one or two very exceptional circumstances where those convicted of serious criminal offences were concerned).
Once here, there was no way on Earth that the UK authorities could check whether or not they had complied with the conditions you quote. Do you think it was practical for the Immigration people to pop round to every one of them and ask them if they've managed to get a job? Bear in mind that when the permanent settlement scheme for EU citizens was set up post Brexit, some 5.5m applied for residency. Do you think the resources are available to check on that number of people? If any were found to be staying contrary to the rights you have quoted, do you think the UK would deport them promptly? If you're going to debate these matters you need to separate theory from practice (i.e. get real).
// – but they cannot become a burden on another host country..//
I've never mentioned anything about them becoming a burden. That isn't the issue (see below).
//Who could possibly object to such a sensible arrangement, allowing such freedoms to their citizens?//
Anybody who bothers to ponder how accommodation and public services are to be provided for such a large influx. This country is desperately short of housing and its public services - healthcare and education in particular - are creaking at the seams. There is nothing sensible about allowing such an arrangement.
//So there is no way that many millions of EU citizens could just roll up in the UK, as claimed by the xenophobic/racist Brexiteers.//
As above, there most certainly is. And I would thank you not to label people - in particular me - who voted to leave as racist or xenophobic. I am neither, but I do think things through, whilst it is quite evident that you do not.
Bazwillrun@18:14
\\"Webbo 11.24 Kindly obey Site Rules and use the correct user name .. You have been told about this malpractice before//
I haven't been told before and I'm doing to prove a point that Gulliver can post a link but refuses to do so, even an Ed posted one for him/her.
\\"Webbo 11.24 Kindly obey Site Rules and use the correct user name .. You have been told about this malpractice before//
I haven't been told before and I'm doing to prove a point that Gulliver can post a link but refuses to do so, even an Ed posted one for him/her.
oh - I thought Baz' insults and epithets ( = more insults) were allowed, so I have been using the very same to describe AB darlings.
message recd
I'll put it here
Times chortling about precipiting Nadine ( Nuh-deen) Forries resignation.
dring dring - Nadine jumps and then regally lifts the handset
ND for it is she: Palais d'orrise ! c'est la chatelaine qui parle, cheri
Hack - Is that er Lady Dorris?
ND it is - or will be - no, it IS - ladyship or majesty is suitable for proles and hacks
Hack /prole: well you are not
ND her ladyship does not quet understand 'well one isn't'
posh accent see goes wiv a ladyship
Hack - you are not on the list
ND and which list may this be, pray ?
Hack: political honours - youre not on the list. You have been conned by the man who conned us all.
ND screaming in shock: conned by the most honest man in England. honest and true. More honest even, if it can be, than the King of England?
Nuh deen slams down phone and resigns
Times article as interpreted by P Ped esq
message recd
I'll put it here
Times chortling about precipiting Nadine ( Nuh-deen) Forries resignation.
dring dring - Nadine jumps and then regally lifts the handset
ND for it is she: Palais d'orrise ! c'est la chatelaine qui parle, cheri
Hack - Is that er Lady Dorris?
ND it is - or will be - no, it IS - ladyship or majesty is suitable for proles and hacks
Hack /prole: well you are not
ND her ladyship does not quet understand 'well one isn't'
posh accent see goes wiv a ladyship
Hack - you are not on the list
ND and which list may this be, pray ?
Hack: political honours - youre not on the list. You have been conned by the man who conned us all.
ND screaming in shock: conned by the most honest man in England. honest and true. More honest even, if it can be, than the King of England?
Nuh deen slams down phone and resigns
Times article as interpreted by P Ped esq
While i fully realise the message on the bus was merely a suggestion, to some of a gullible nature (and, no Gully, i'm not misusing your username in this instance) it did read as once out of the EU, that's what would happen. The main problem with that, and something i tried to point out to some of these 'gullibles', was that those who came up with the idea had no power whatsoever to do what it said on the bus. Cameron was still PM.
