Thought I'd start a new thread as this is going to be a major talking point this year...have not made up my mind yet...(unlike bucksfizz)....but thinking of voting for an exit as Europe is not doing Britain any good at all it seems....

Fred
You need to practice more of what you were taught, atm there is very little evidence of you looking at both sides.

You see : none of this Brexit (if I can call it like that) would have happened if the EU had dealt with illegal immigration and those undesirables crossing the med !.....they just don't get it : WE DON'T WANT THEM.....but no....and here we are....all the politburo moaning about the UK leaving .....illegal immigration was top of the agenda for the undecided voters (myself included)....and that's what made the difference in the end.....the thing is is to make sure that those in power respect the wish of the majority.....but I fear that those in charge just want it to be brexit without the exit.....

And how exactly is Brexit going to stop illegal immigration???

Some will have to queue up at the border to escapes through customs.

I think everybody should be returned to their country of genetic origin.

It wasn't 'illegal immigration' for our household:

1.The EU isn't democratic organisation.

2. We surely ought to be able to put a limit on the number of immigrants allowed to come into our country. The EU told us we couldn't.

Here it is in a bit more detail:

Cost. The costs of EU membership to the UK is £15bn gross (0.06% of GDP) – or £6.883 billion net. The ONS has estimated a net contribution cost of £7.1 bn.

Inefficient policies. A large percentage (40%) of EU spending goes on the Common Agricultural Policy. For many years this distorted agricultural markets by placing minimum prices on food. This lead to higher prices for consumers and encouraging over-supply.

Problems of the Euro. Membership of the EU hasn’t necessarily meant membership of the Euro. However, the EU has placed great emphasis on the single currency. Euro membership has proved to have many problems and contributed to low rates of economic growth and high unemployment across the EU. Witness countries like Greece, Spain, Italy

Pressure towards austerity. Since 2008, many southern European countries have faced pressure from the EU to pursue austerity – spending cuts to meet budget deficit targets, but in the middle of a recession these austerity measures have contributed to prolonged economic stagnation. In particular, Greece was forced by its creditors to accept austerity when some economists have argued this was counter-productive.

Net migration. Free movement of labour has caused problems of overcrowding in some UK cities. The UK’s population is set to rise to 70 million over the next decade, partly due to immigration (of which 50% is from EU and 50% from non-EU). Immigration has helped to push up house prices and led to congestion on roads. The concern is that in the EU, the UK is powerless to place a limit on immigration from Eastern Europe because free movement of labour is a cornerstone of the EU.

More bureaucracy less democracy. It is argued that the EU has created extra layers of bureaucracy while taking away the decision-making process further from local communities. For example, the British Chambers of Commerce has estimated that the annual cost to the UK of EU regulation is £7.4bn (ie. our net contribution). The introduction of Qualified majority voting (QMV) means that on many decisions votes can be taken against the public interest of a particular country.

All in all, the EU is run in a way which is just not democratic.

Exec,


1.The EU isn't democratic organisation.

2. We surely ought to be able to put a limit on the number of immigrants allowed to come into our country. The EU told us we couldn't.


Do you consider the UK to be a perfect democracy?

Shorthand.

(The majority of the press and media controlled by the right wing, money is allowed to buy power and influences, that much of the in "ruling" establishment is "hand downs" from other "elites" and hereditary "placements".

If there is discontentment within the EU bureaucracy and administration, argue for changes, get other countries to support you, not storm out like adolescents picking up their ball and running home and bolting the doors.

I would like to see a coherent system of laws and government throughout the EU, but that does not mean I don't wish to have "local" government representation which presents and argue "problem" cases.

-=-=-=-=

I think it not unreasonable to have controls on immigration and rapid large influx from the EU or the world, in general, can be problematic.

What I don't like is scapegoating a faction in a society for the problems of that society.

(The problem with drawing up fair rules for immigration is difficult and one member of my family has been working in this area for years.)

The problem with rules and regulations being implemented is covering the difficulties and the possible "twists" and "turns" without the going into the minutiae. Especially when dealing with the slightly different cultures and expectancies.

==-=-=-=-=-=

I wrote 5years ago that I thought the "austerity" path chosen by Osborne and Cameron 6years ago was wrong.

I thought "borrowing" at low-interest rates could have been used to "invest" in housing, infrastructure etc. in order to stimulate the economy. (Not against cutting out wastage and crazy PFI contracts.)

But I think some are in cloud cuckoo land if they think "escaping" from the EU will help the UK to overcome its present economic problems. I hope there isn't a recession and ongoing depression.

The way that the UK is leaving the EU will leave a bad taste in the Europeans mouths and a feeling that the UK is an untrustworthy partner and they will prefer to deal with those they think they can trust more.

In the longterm Brexit will be beneficial to the UK.....Britain will get better trade deals and immigration can be better monitored than it is to day....there are no border controls between the EU countries....except for customs trying to catch drug dealers and a few others...it's crazy as it is....it's difficult to set up all these new terms that Davis and Boris are going through but eventually it will have been all worthwhile doing....

Hear Hear!! rf. What a miserable doom mongering, plastic lefty above, Keep the red flag flying Freda :0)

required field,

The UK aren't in the Schengen zone, and have always had total control of their own borders while they've been in the UK.

If they haven't been able to secure their borders up until now, what makes you think anything is going to change after they leave?

And what makes you think a trade deal with the US to buy their crappy Chryslers, and a trade deal with China to buy crap plastic toys, will be better than a trade deal with the EU to buy their Mercs and Grand Cru?

Here's a Schengen border. Look, no queues.

Spot the difference?

Yes, one is going where no-one wants to go: the other is going where everyone wants to.

Well neither picture is of people wanting to get into the UK, iturama. And you might be surprised to learn that the number of people passing through both borders each year isn't too dissimilar.

I agree that most of the problems we have now are entirely home made and will likely continue long after we have left the EU. Despite being a small island in the North Atlantic, it is amazing how many Chinese, Vietnamese and 'Stanalese have decided this is actually their true home. That apart, what is your point Hilary?

The 'point', iturama, is that the UK needs young, working immigration who pay taxes and help fund the welfare of an ageing population. When those young tax payers get old, they'll also need support, but, hey, that'll be somebody else's problem.

And yet, despite needing immigration, you close your borders in a futile attempt to keep undesirables out instead of changing your system such that it stops them wanting to come in the first place.

Somehow, I think some Brexiters are going to be mightily disappointed when they discover what they get from Brexit isn't what they thought they were voting for...

It and 251

Have a look at :

"We shouldn’t even be contemplating leaving the single market"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/19/wishful-brexit-thinking-will-not-create-jobs-or-fund-public-services


-=-==-=-=

and another quick look at "Britains Economy in Five Charts" which is included on the Business page.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/18/chancellor-hammond-budget-big-five

Well, I welcome most immigrants into the UK but I do want to see control on the numbers - as against 'no control' and theoretically unlimited numbers.

Isn't that what Farage wanted? I seem to think it is. He got into trouble by specifically mentioning Romanians. Then lots of his political opponents called him 'a rascist'.

IMHO, scruffy Romanian young men do most closely seem to resemble scruffy members of the 'travelling community' and these latter do seem to have a high criminal element in their numbers, albeit mostly with 'civil' matters. Illegal immigrants would seem to theoretically align easily with people of 'no fixed abode' too.

Perhaps Farage had similar feelings? Hence he is famous for making the general statement, "You would feel concerned if a group of Romanians moved in next door."

Perhaps he should have simply said, "immigrant criminals moved in next door" without mentioning any particular country?

See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27459923

Absolutely, Doc.

I'd feel concerned if a group of Romanians moved in next door. Fortunately, they can't afford to. :o)

:-)