Quite refreshing to read that a country has laws and enforces them. My impression from my recent trip "home" was that the UK has become almost lawless and people seem to do whatever they want with no prospect of being apprehended. In fact in six weeks I counted only 2 police cars on the road. I encountered numerous people driving on the phone, people turning right at roundabouts, approaching from the left lane etc, I won't even bother talking about my experiences with the healthcare system on behalf of my elderly mother who has been treated absolutely appallingly for 4 years. It has become a mad house and I was so pleased to get out of it, I really think I'd lose the will to live very quickly if I still had to live there.
The fuckers! How dare they! Everyone in the civilised world knows Australians only EVER turn left at roundabouts from the correct lane. Britain could learn a lot from you QA.
I hate to be confrontational, but that is such a lot of rose tinted ex-pat bullshit, your two examples of traffic infringements do not constitute an almost lawless society.
Now if they bought in a law making exaggeration and hyperbole a criminal offence...
Well I consider dangerous driving as being very serious and it can cost lives. But there are no police anywhere to pull them over, same with using the mobile phone whilst driving. Virtually no police cars on the roads and even fewer on the beat. In contrast here in Qld I was pulled over 4 times just last year for routine breathalysers. Police stand outside many schools with hand held radar and there is generally a strong police presence on the roads stopping dangerous drivers and testing them for drink and drugs. No suspect is identified for 50 % of all crimes committed in the Uk now and police stations are being shut down left right and centre. The police are overrun to such an extent that most minor crimes now no longer even get investigated. This was not just my experience but was also the view of family, friends (one of whom works at Scotland Yard) and cab drivers that I met during my stay, who were all quick to tell me how lucky I was to have moved to Australia and how the local area (Romford) had gone to pot in recent years. I did not go into further details about other lawlessness in my last post as I did not want to detract from Praque's post which was about Norway. I heard other horrible stories, one from a local landowner who was paranoid about walkers going near his lake because his Swans were being shot and taken for food. Same from my brother who lives in a beautiful little village near Stanstead. The local herd of Dear, some of whom would venture into his garden, had recently been wiped out illegally by people hunting for food. These things may all seem trivial to you, but to me and the people I spoke to, they signalled an erosion of the quality of life that they had become accustomed to until only a short time ago. I did find your post needlessly confrontational BTW, I'm not telling lies, I'm merely speaking of my recent experience and the importance of people adhering to laws in order for a society to function effectively and pleasantly for the majority.
I get lots of people telling me how lucky I am to live in Portugal, but I don't pretend all is rosy here, I put them straight on a few facts that people wouldn't even consider when they have not actually lived there. I wonder how many of the "grass is greener" brigade you spoke to have lived in Aus? The random police harassment (as I call it) sounds very similar to here actually! I didn't say you were telling lies, just exaggerating a huge amount to put the UK down, and I think you still do so - the local landowner pretending he is worried about "his" swans (they are not his, they are probably the Queen's, if not they are wild animals) to harass walkers, not exactly Armageddon is it, even if it is sad and annoying?
And as for quoting cab drivers? Oh come on QA, do me a favour. They ALL have the same opportunity that you and I had, they just choose to moan about what they know (and the papers tell them) rather than change things themselves.
My view is different, probably because I am coming at it from a more open minded angle. Yes I had a few conversations with people who don't look at the wider view and just see the bad about the UK, but I thoroughly enjoy my visits, I see no more "lawlessness" than I did 12 years ago when I left. I find people dealing with the public generally much more helpful and polite than I find them here. For entertainment it's like the difference between black and white cathode ray and full screen curved HD TV. I am sure that Aus has a great deal going for it, mates who have lived there love it. Personally I would rather take my chances with Jason Boyracer cutting me up on the hanger lane gyratory than a spider that can make my leg drop off if it bites me...
And if we leave we can choose skilled immigrants from where we like - unlike the current system which discriminates based upon where you live.
Lawyer from Australia? Sorry pal, we're taking in this unemployed Bulgarian.
-EU, 2016
Errm u wot m8? Have you had a look at immigration figures in detail?
Point us in the direction of these figures in detail then? Because as far as I'm aware the EU does permit unskilled mass immigration.
What this means is that we are clearly granting work permits to a lot of people from outside the EU and in all likelihood they are either students, skilled workers, workers required to fill a labour shortage in a particular industry or the rich.
You don't need a work permit to immigrate from inside the EU. Or a Student visa.
Anybody and everybody can set up home here, with or without a job, with or without entering further education, with or with out English as a language skill and with or without any intention of doing anything about it.
Naysayers will also point out that major developed countries outside of the EU seem to manage absolutely fine.
European "major developed countries" or are you referring to countries that are either in or closely associated with other trading blocks ? Name a couple.
Large, developed countries such as the US, S.Korea, Canada, Japan, China might be part of a trading bloc but it doesn't act as a barrier to purchasing European goods, does it!
Naysayers will also point out that major developed countries outside of the EU seem to manage absolutely fine.
European "major developed countries" or are you referring to countries that are either in or closely associated with other trading blocks ? Name a couple.
Isn't that part of the problem, though? The EU was initially sold as being a trading block. It's morphed in to something else completely, with trade as a relative side issue. If we actually pay the alleged £50M a day for the privilege of exporting more goods to other EU countries than we import, then surely it's a counterproductive outlay?
I could be wrong but I believe there is something in the agreement between members that mentions something along the lines of 'ever closer union'. That was never, as far as I'm aware, disclosed when we voted to join in the first place.
OK, thank you to @ForeverAddickted and @BR7_addick who I think both have stated that they would like all non-British citizens to require a visa to visit/live in the UK.
Do you accept that it will be the same for UK citizens wishing to visit/live in other European countries? Obviously this would be the case if they go to Australia or the US, but it's not currently the case for people who want to visit Spain or Sweden.
I think a large part of the original concept was (and still is) to help keep Europe war-free, following half a century of chaos and destruction. By and large it has been very successful in that aim. For me, that reason alone trumps any concerns about how well it is or isn't run and is reason enough to stay in. Let's face it, in or out of Europe, if we voted in our level of confidence for our politicians and civil servants to make a good job of things, they might get as high as 2%.
OK, thank you to @ForeverAddickted and @BR7_addick who I think both have stated that they would like all non-British citizens to require a visa to visit/live in the UK.
Do you accept that it will be the same for UK citizens wishing to visit/live in other European countries? Obviously this would be the case if they go to Australia or the US, but it's not currently the case for people who want to visit Spain or Sweden.
Yes? So. if you qualify for a visa you can go live elsewhere. Hasn't stopped people living in Australia or America has it?
OK, thank you to @ForeverAddicktedand @BR7_addick who I think both have stated that they would like all non-British citizens to require a visa to visit/live in the UK.
Do you accept that it will be the same for UK citizens wishing to visit/live in other European countries? Obviously this would be the case if they go to Australia or the US, but it's not currently the case for people who want to visit Spain or Sweden.
Naysayers will also point out that major developed countries outside of the EU seem to manage absolutely fine.
European "major developed countries" or are you referring to countries that are either in or closely associated with other trading blocks ? Name a couple.
Isn't that part of the problem, though? The EU was initially sold as being a trading block. It's morphed in to something else completely, with trade as a relative side issue. If we actually pay the alleged £50M a day for the privilege of exporting more goods to other EU countries than we import, then surely it's a counterproductive outlay?
I could be wrong but I believe there is something in the agreement between members that mentions something along the lines of 'ever closer political union'. That was never, as far as I'm aware, disclosed when we voted to join in the first place.
I cannot remember the detail, it being discussed in a university course in the mid-1980s, but I am fairly certain that the ever closer political union was a key element of the organisation, prior to the UK and Irish accession to the then EEC. In any event, the history of its development in the 1950s-1970s, to me, clearly demonstrates an organisation that had been constantly evolving into closer and more integrated grouping.
I think a large part of the original concept was (and still is) to help keep Europe war-free, following half a century of chaos and destruction. By and large it has been very successful in that aim. For me, that reason alone trumps any concerns about how well it is or isn't run and is reason enough to stay in. Let's face it, in or out of Europe, if we voted in our level of confidence for our politicians and civil servants to make a good job of things, they might get as high as 2%.
You cannot seriously tell me that if we leave the EU, we're more likely to end up in a war? Besides it was NATO that brought all the countries together post war.
If anything, the EU has fanned the flames in the Ukraine/Russia fiasco
OK, thank you to @ForeverAddickted and @BR7_addick who I think both have stated that they would like all non-British citizens to require a visa to visit/live in the UK.
Do you accept that it will be the same for UK citizens wishing to visit/live in other European countries? Obviously this would be the case if they go to Australia or the US, but it's not currently the case for people who want to visit Spain or Sweden.
I totally agree with them too.
I'm not sure why anyone would not want a country to control their own borders.
Naysayers will also point out that major developed countries outside of the EU seem to manage absolutely fine.
European "major developed countries" or are you referring to countries that are either in or closely associated with other trading blocks ? Name a couple.
Isn't that part of the problem, though? The EU was initially sold as being a trading block. It's morphed in to something else completely, with trade as a relative side issue. If we actually pay the alleged £50M a day for the privilege of exporting more goods to other EU countries than we import, then surely it's a counterproductive outlay?
I could be wrong but I believe there is something in the agreement between members that mentions something along the lines of 'ever closer political union'. That was never, as far as I'm aware, disclosed when we voted to join in the first place.
I cannot remember the detail, it being discussed in a university course in the mid-1980s, but I am fairly certain that the ever closer political union was a key element of the organisation, prior to the UK and Irish accession to the then EEC. In any event, the history of its development in the 1950s-1970s, to me, clearly demonstrates an organisation that had been constantly evolving into closer and more integrated grouping.
How many of the voting public were on that course?
As with everything I could be wrong but I don't think the general population were aware of that part of the treaty at the time. Happy to be put in my place about any disclosure of it and it's accessibility to the masses.
OK, thank you to @ForeverAddickted and @BR7_addick who I think both have stated that they would like all non-British citizens to require a visa to visit/live in the UK.
Do you accept that it will be the same for UK citizens wishing to visit/live in other European countries? Obviously this would be the case if they go to Australia or the US, but it's not currently the case for people who want to visit Spain or Sweden.
Yeah thats fine... I've completed forms online for when I've wanted to go to the US and Australia, its taken minutes to complete the application and I've known within seconds whether I've been successful or not so can easily copy these tried and tested designs.
Or we can take the New Zealand approach... They have a list of countries where you don't need a Visa to visit their country, you can stay in NZ for three months yet its purely for holiday reasons as you cannot work.
That's your response is it? Come out with some sarcastic remark without putting forward a single argument?
Tbh why bother? Whatever I write will be instantly dismissed by you because you've made up your mind on this matter.
However, It's interesting that in a thread about warning against using Norway as an example for leaving the EU, the first to bring up the immigration angle are the Euro sceptics. Perhaps ignoring the fact that Norway take in a lot of migrants from the EU. Now, I don't know much about Norwegian politics or policy but that would seem to suggest they are filling areas in need with cheap labour. Polish born people living in Norway jumped from around 6,000 to over 90,000 between 2001 and 2014.
So that means using the "Norway model" as one method for exiting the EU, not only would we still be contributing to the EU with no say on what goes on, we would be paying import and export tariffs to the EU and immigration figure probably won't be affected. Looking forward to your response Nick.
I think a large part of the original concept was (and still is) to help keep Europe war-free, following half a century of chaos and destruction. By and large it has been very successful in that aim. For me, that reason alone trumps any concerns about how well it is or isn't run and is reason enough to stay in. Let's face it, in or out of Europe, if we voted in our level of confidence for our politicians and civil servants to make a good job of things, they might get as high as 2%.
You cannot seriously tell me that if we leave the EU, we're more likely to end up in a war? Besides it was NATO that brought all the countries together post war.
If anything, the EU has fanned the flames in the Ukraine/Russia fiasco
I just look at the history of Europe pre and post the EU and think that if Europe reverts to pre then evidentially it is more likely, yes.
You make a fair point about NATO, it's fair to say it would have looked very different without them, in particular without the Americans.
I think a large part of the original concept was (and still is) to help keep Europe war-free, following half a century of chaos and destruction. By and large it has been very successful in that aim. For me, that reason alone trumps any concerns about how well it is or isn't run and is reason enough to stay in. Let's face it, in or out of Europe, if we voted in our level of confidence for our politicians and civil servants to make a good job of things, they might get as high as 2%.
You cannot seriously tell me that if we leave the EU, we're more likely to end up in a war? Besides it was NATO that brought all the countries together post war.
If anything, the EU has fanned the flames in the Ukraine/Russia fiasco
I just look at the history of Europe pre and post the EU and think that if Europe reverts to pre then evidentially it is more likely, yes.
You make a fair point about NATO, it's fair to say it would have looked very different without them, in particular without the Americans.
I'm not sure allowing Turkey into the EU will do us much good and Mr Cameron is pushing for it.
OK, thank you to @ForeverAddicktedand @BR7_addick who I think both have stated that they would like all non-British citizens to require a visa to visit/live in the UK.
Do you accept that it will be the same for UK citizens wishing to visit/live in other European countries? Obviously this would be the case if they go to Australia or the US, but it's not currently the case for people who want to visit Spain or Sweden.
Think again silly, not said that anywhere.
Here you go. 'Controlling immigration' is the same thing as 'having a visa process'
Net immigration of 380k was it for 2015, can't control that till we are out, that's enough for me.
USA and Australia are both a long distance from the UK. It's not really the same as a weekend in Barcelona. And yes, people do move to Australia or USA, but the visa process is a very big part of the move and whether they actually go ahead with it - there was a recent thread on here about visa requirements to Canada. But in any case, as long as people are aware that any future agreement with the EU will be balanced - ie the UK will not give greater rights to EU citizens than what UK citizens get in Europe, and vice versa - then that's OK. I expect that would change things greatly for British expats currently living in Europe or intending to travel there. It might be good for British holiday destinations though.
OK, thank you to @ForeverAddicktedand @BR7_addick who I think both have stated that they would like all non-British citizens to require a visa to visit/live in the UK.
Do you accept that it will be the same for UK citizens wishing to visit/live in other European countries? Obviously this would be the case if they go to Australia or the US, but it's not currently the case for people who want to visit Spain or Sweden.
Think again silly, not said that anywhere.
Here you go. 'Controlling immigration' is the same thing as 'having a visa process'
Net immigration of 380k was it for 2015, can't control that till we are out, that's enough for me.
USA and Australia are both a long distance from the UK. It's not really the same as a weekend in Barcelona. And yes, people do move to Australia or USA, but the visa process is a very big part of the move and whether they actually go ahead with it - there was a recent thread on here about visa requirements to Canada. But in any case, as long as people are aware that any future agreement with the EU will be balanced - ie the UK will not give greater rights to EU citizens than what UK citizens get in Europe, and vice versa - then that's OK. I expect that would change things greatly for British expats currently living in Europe or intending to travel there. It might be good for British holiday destinations though.
Okay if you put it like that, then yes Visa process is good with me, why on earth wouldn't you want immigration controlled?
That's your response is it? Come out with some sarcastic remark without putting forward a single argument?
Tbh why bother? Whatever I write will be instantly dismissed by you because you've made up your mind on this matter.
However, It's interesting that in a thread about warning against using Norway as an example for leaving the EU, the first to bring up the immigration angle are the Euro sceptics. Perhaps ignoring the fact that Norway take in a lot of migrants from the EU. Now, I don't know much about Norwegian politics or policy but that would seem to suggest they are filling areas in need with cheap labour. Polish born people living in Norway jumped from around 6,000 to over 90,000 between 2001 and 2014.
So that means using the "Norway model" as one method for exiting the EU, not only would we still be contributing to the EU with no say on what goes on, we would be paying import and export tariffs to the EU and immigration figure probably won't be affected. Looking forward to your response Nick.
Nice easy one for me, cheers.
1) The UK to date has attempted to vote down 55 EU proposals. We've successfully stopped 0 becoming EU law. Wow, some influence. The way that voting works in the EU actually means that Malta has more influence per head in the EU than the UK does.
2) To suggest that the EU will arbitrarily reduce demand for their exports by hiking up tariff prices for UK citizens is laughable.
3) Norway is part of the schengen agreement. The UK is not. If we left, we would not have open doors like Norway does.
That's your response is it? Come out with some sarcastic remark without putting forward a single argument?
Tbh why bother? Whatever I write will be instantly dismissed by you because you've made up your mind on this matter.
However, It's interesting that in a thread about warning against using Norway as an example for leaving the EU, the first to bring up the immigration angle are the Euro sceptics. Perhaps ignoring the fact that Norway take in a lot of migrants from the EU. Now, I don't know much about Norwegian politics or policy but that would seem to suggest they are filling areas in need with cheap labour. Polish born people living in Norway jumped from around 6,000 to over 90,000 between 2001 and 2014.
So that means using the "Norway model" as one method for exiting the EU, not only would we still be contributing to the EU with no say on what goes on, we would be paying import and export tariffs to the EU and immigration figure probably won't be affected. Looking forward to your response Nick.
Nice easy one for me, cheers.
1) The UK to date has attempted to vote down 55 EU proposals. We've successfully stopped 0 becoming EU law. Wow, some influence. The way that voting works in the EU actually means that Malta has more influence per head in the EU than the UK does.
2) To suggest that the EU will arbitrarily reduce demand for their exports by hiking up tariff prices for UK citizens is laughable.
3) Norway is part of the schengen agreement. The UK is not. If we left, we would not have open doors like Norway does.
Got a link to these proposals we've tried to stop?
Is it laughable? I think it's quite a possibility. To be expected to leave the single market and still be able to trade freely with the rest of Europe, that's laughable.
The point about immigration was using the "Norway model", which as you've rightly said is part of the Schengen agreement. An agreement that clearly they want to be a part of as it is beneficial to do so.
That's your response is it? Come out with some sarcastic remark without putting forward a single argument?
Tbh why bother? Whatever I write will be instantly dismissed by you because you've made up your mind on this matter.
However, It's interesting that in a thread about warning against using Norway as an example for leaving the EU, the first to bring up the immigration angle are the Euro sceptics. Perhaps ignoring the fact that Norway take in a lot of migrants from the EU. Now, I don't know much about Norwegian politics or policy but that would seem to suggest they are filling areas in need with cheap labour. Polish born people living in Norway jumped from around 6,000 to over 90,000 between 2001 and 2014.
So that means using the "Norway model" as one method for exiting the EU, not only would we still be contributing to the EU with no say on what goes on, we would be paying import and export tariffs to the EU and immigration figure probably won't be affected. Looking forward to your response Nick.
Nice easy one for me, cheers.
1) The UK to date has attempted to vote down 55 EU proposals. We've successfully stopped 0 becoming EU law. Wow, some influence. The way that voting works in the EU actually means that Malta has more influence per head in the EU than the UK does.
2) To suggest that the EU will arbitrarily reduce demand for their exports by hiking up tariff prices for UK citizens is laughable.
3) Norway is part of the schengen agreement. The UK is not. If we left, we would not have open doors like Norway does.
Got a link to these proposals we've tried to stop?
Just look at England when we go to Major Tournaments in Football... When hosted in Europe, everyone prays that we qualify because our fans attend in numbers, we spend money and we help boost the economy for that country (Just look at Austria / Switzerland when we didnt)
Reckon it'll be no difference if we leave the EU... We're one of the biggest importers on the continent, yes we might not be able to trade freely with the rest of Europe, but the rest of Europe will lose out on our cash too
That's your response is it? Come out with some sarcastic remark without putting forward a single argument?
Tbh why bother? Whatever I write will be instantly dismissed by you because you've made up your mind on this matter.
However, It's interesting that in a thread about warning against using Norway as an example for leaving the EU, the first to bring up the immigration angle are the Euro sceptics. Perhaps ignoring the fact that Norway take in a lot of migrants from the EU. Now, I don't know much about Norwegian politics or policy but that would seem to suggest they are filling areas in need with cheap labour. Polish born people living in Norway jumped from around 6,000 to over 90,000 between 2001 and 2014.
So that means using the "Norway model" as one method for exiting the EU, not only would we still be contributing to the EU with no say on what goes on, we would be paying import and export tariffs to the EU and immigration figure probably won't be affected. Looking forward to your response Nick.
Nice easy one for me, cheers.
1) The UK to date has attempted to vote down 55 EU proposals. We've successfully stopped 0 becoming EU law. Wow, some influence. The way that voting works in the EU actually means that Malta has more influence per head in the EU than the UK does.
2) To suggest that the EU will arbitrarily reduce demand for their exports by hiking up tariff prices for UK citizens is laughable.
3) Norway is part of the schengen agreement. The UK is not. If we left, we would not have open doors like Norway does.
Got a link to these proposals we've tried to stop?
Is it laughable? I think it's quite a possibility. To be expected to leave the single market and still be able to trade freely with the rest of Europe, that's laughable.
The point about immigration was using the "Norway model", which as you've rightly said is part of the Schengen agreement. An agreement that clearly they want to be a part of as it is beneficial to do so.
Naysayers will also point out that major developed countries outside of the EU seem to manage absolutely fine.
European "major developed countries" or are you referring to countries that are either in or closely associated with other trading blocks ? Name a couple.
Isn't that part of the problem, though? The EU was initially sold as being a trading block. It's morphed in to something else completely, with trade as a relative side issue. If we actually pay the alleged £50M a day for the privilege of exporting more goods to other EU countries than we import, then surely it's a counterproductive outlay?
I could be wrong but I believe there is something in the agreement between members that mentions something along the lines of 'ever closer union'. That was never, as far as I'm aware, disclosed when we voted to join in the first place.
I am now an old git, and was younger and admittedly pretty idealistic when i voted in the original referendum. However at the time I had scant knowledge regarding the trading issues, but I was happy to vote for what could be termed the 'ever closer union' issues even though they were not formally stated as far as I remember. The debate at that time was both about trading stuff, but also in the air was stuff about getting closer, trying to ensure a peaceful continent after the ravages that had taken place thirty years earlier, being co-operative and collaborative...and in terms of things like environmental issues, that stuff appealed to me. In those days we (well some of us) worried about pollution of the seas, and also realised that if a French Nuclear power station on their North Coast went haywire it would be our problem too. I think their remains more than one strand to this debate, a difficult issue that it is, and the trading/economic part is not the only consideration.
That's your response is it? Come out with some sarcastic remark without putting forward a single argument?
Tbh why bother? Whatever I write will be instantly dismissed by you because you've made up your mind on this matter.
However, It's interesting that in a thread about warning against using Norway as an example for leaving the EU, the first to bring up the immigration angle are the Euro sceptics. Perhaps ignoring the fact that Norway take in a lot of migrants from the EU. Now, I don't know much about Norwegian politics or policy but that would seem to suggest they are filling areas in need with cheap labour. Polish born people living in Norway jumped from around 6,000 to over 90,000 between 2001 and 2014.
So that means using the "Norway model" as one method for exiting the EU, not only would we still be contributing to the EU with no say on what goes on, we would be paying import and export tariffs to the EU and immigration figure probably won't be affected. Looking forward to your response Nick.
Nice easy one for me, cheers.
1) The UK to date has attempted to vote down 55 EU proposals. We've successfully stopped 0 becoming EU law. Wow, some influence. The way that voting works in the EU actually means that Malta has more influence per head in the EU than the UK does.
2) To suggest that the EU will arbitrarily reduce demand for their exports by hiking up tariff prices for UK citizens is laughable.
3) Norway is part of the schengen agreement. The UK is not. If we left, we would not have open doors like Norway does.
Got a link to these proposals we've tried to stop?
Is it laughable? I think it's quite a possibility. To be expected to leave the single market and still be able to trade freely with the rest of Europe, that's laughable.
The point about immigration was using the "Norway model", which as you've rightly said is part of the Schengen agreement. An agreement that clearly they want to be a part of as it is beneficial to do so.
If we need certaint ypes of immigration, we'll allow work permits. This is not a difficult concept for you to understand. Come on.
Ha ha my work has blocked access to that site as it is an "advocacy group". Any non biased links?
I know it's not difficult to understand hence why I've said earlier that I don't think the actual numbers will change that much if we were to leave the EU. The demand for cheap labour and skilled workers will still be there regardless of leaving or not but thanks for your condescending tone.
That's your response is it? Come out with some sarcastic remark without putting forward a single argument?
Tbh why bother? Whatever I write will be instantly dismissed by you because you've made up your mind on this matter.
However, It's interesting that in a thread about warning against using Norway as an example for leaving the EU, the first to bring up the immigration angle are the Euro sceptics. Perhaps ignoring the fact that Norway take in a lot of migrants from the EU. Now, I don't know much about Norwegian politics or policy but that would seem to suggest they are filling areas in need with cheap labour. Polish born people living in Norway jumped from around 6,000 to over 90,000 between 2001 and 2014.
So that means using the "Norway model" as one method for exiting the EU, not only would we still be contributing to the EU with no say on what goes on, we would be paying import and export tariffs to the EU and immigration figure probably won't be affected. Looking forward to your response Nick.
Nice easy one for me, cheers.
1) The UK to date has attempted to vote down 55 EU proposals. We've successfully stopped 0 becoming EU law. Wow, some influence. The way that voting works in the EU actually means that Malta has more influence per head in the EU than the UK does.
2) To suggest that the EU will arbitrarily reduce demand for their exports by hiking up tariff prices for UK citizens is laughable.
3) Norway is part of the schengen agreement. The UK is not. If we left, we would not have open doors like Norway does.
Got a link to these proposals we've tried to stop?
Is it laughable? I think it's quite a possibility. To be expected to leave the single market and still be able to trade freely with the rest of Europe, that's laughable.
The point about immigration was using the "Norway model", which as you've rightly said is part of the Schengen agreement. An agreement that clearly they want to be a part of as it is beneficial to do so.
If we need certaint ypes of immigration, we'll allow work permits. This is not a difficult concept for you to understand. Come on.
Ha ha my work has blocked access to that site as it is an "advocacy group". Any non biased links?
I know it's not difficult to understand hence why I've said earlier that I don't think the actual numbers will change that much if we were to leave the EU. The demand for cheap labour and skilled workers will still be there regardless of leaving or not but thanks for your condescending tone.
It was just a table. I can't see why that's been blocked. I'm at a place of work where everything is blocked and it is fine for me.
Comments
And as for quoting cab drivers? Oh come on QA, do me a favour. They ALL have the same opportunity that you and I had, they just choose to moan about what they know (and the papers tell them) rather than change things themselves.
My view is different, probably because I am coming at it from a more open minded angle. Yes I had a few conversations with people who don't look at the wider view and just see the bad about the UK, but I thoroughly enjoy my visits, I see no more "lawlessness" than I did 12 years ago when I left. I find people dealing with the public generally much more helpful and polite than I find them here. For entertainment it's like the difference between black and white cathode ray and full screen curved HD TV. I am sure that Aus has a great deal going for it, mates who have lived there love it. Personally I would rather take my chances with Jason Boyracer cutting me up on the hanger lane gyratory than a spider that can make my leg drop off if it bites me...
I could be wrong but I believe there is something in the agreement between members that mentions something along the lines of 'ever closer union'. That was never, as far as I'm aware, disclosed when we voted to join in the first place.
Do you accept that it will be the same for UK citizens wishing to visit/live in other European countries? Obviously this would be the case if they go to Australia or the US, but it's not currently the case for people who want to visit Spain or Sweden.
By and large it has been very successful in that aim.
For me, that reason alone trumps any concerns about how well it is or isn't run and is reason enough to stay in.
Let's face it, in or out of Europe, if we voted in our level of confidence for our politicians and civil servants to make a good job of things, they might get as high as 2%.
If anything, the EU has fanned the flames in the Ukraine/Russia fiasco
I'm not sure why anyone would not want a country to control their own borders.
How many of the voting public were on that course?
As with everything I could be wrong but I don't think the general population were aware of that part of the treaty at the time. Happy to be put in my place about any disclosure of it and it's accessibility to the masses.
Or we can take the New Zealand approach... They have a list of countries where you don't need a Visa to visit their country, you can stay in NZ for three months yet its purely for holiday reasons as you cannot work.
However, It's interesting that in a thread about warning against using Norway as an example for leaving the EU, the first to bring up the immigration angle are the Euro sceptics. Perhaps ignoring the fact that Norway take in a lot of migrants from the EU. Now, I don't know much about Norwegian politics or policy but that would seem to suggest they are filling areas in need with cheap labour. Polish born people living in Norway jumped from around 6,000 to over 90,000 between 2001 and 2014.
So that means using the "Norway model" as one method for exiting the EU, not only would we still be contributing to the EU with no say on what goes on, we would be paying import and export tariffs to the EU and immigration figure probably won't be affected. Looking forward to your response Nick.
You make a fair point about NATO, it's fair to say it would have looked very different without them, in particular without the Americans.
USA and Australia are both a long distance from the UK. It's not really the same as a weekend in Barcelona. And yes, people do move to Australia or USA, but the visa process is a very big part of the move and whether they actually go ahead with it - there was a recent thread on here about visa requirements to Canada. But in any case, as long as people are aware that any future agreement with the EU will be balanced - ie the UK will not give greater rights to EU citizens than what UK citizens get in Europe, and vice versa - then that's OK. I expect that would change things greatly for British expats currently living in Europe or intending to travel there. It might be good for British holiday destinations though.
1) The UK to date has attempted to vote down 55 EU proposals. We've successfully stopped 0 becoming EU law. Wow, some influence. The way that voting works in the EU actually means that Malta has more influence per head in the EU than the UK does.
2) To suggest that the EU will arbitrarily reduce demand for their exports by hiking up tariff prices for UK citizens is laughable.
3) Norway is part of the schengen agreement. The UK is not. If we left, we would not have open doors like Norway does.
Is it laughable? I think it's quite a possibility. To be expected to leave the single market and still be able to trade freely with the rest of Europe, that's laughable.
The point about immigration was using the "Norway model", which as you've rightly said is part of the Schengen agreement. An agreement that clearly they want to be a part of as it is beneficial to do so.
http://businessforbritain.org/2014/03/26/eu-voting-records-informal-power-and-the-eu-military-hq/
Reckon it'll be no difference if we leave the EU... We're one of the biggest importers on the continent, yes we might not be able to trade freely with the rest of Europe, but the rest of Europe will lose out on our cash too
If we need certaint ypes of immigration, we'll allow work permits. This is not a difficult concept for you to understand. Come on.
The debate at that time was both about trading stuff, but also in the air was stuff about getting closer, trying to ensure a peaceful continent after the ravages that had taken place thirty years earlier, being co-operative and collaborative...and in terms of things like environmental issues, that stuff appealed to me. In those days we (well some of us) worried about pollution of the seas, and also realised that if a French Nuclear power station on their North Coast went haywire it would be our problem too.
I think their remains more than one strand to this debate, a difficult issue that it is, and the trading/economic part is not the only consideration.
I know it's not difficult to understand hence why I've said earlier that I don't think the actual numbers will change that much if we were to leave the EU. The demand for cheap labour and skilled workers will still be there regardless of leaving or not but thanks for your condescending tone.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2588764/Britain-lost-EVERY-attempt-stop-draconian-new-laws-Brussels.html
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/466737/REVEALED-The-55-failures-that-show-the-UK-has-little-influence-on-the-EU
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/5528246/Britain-over-ruled-55-times-on-barmy-Brussels-red-tape.html