You can say goodbye to the Eurostar terminals at Paris and Brussels too
Really ???? And why would that be ? Is it because the French and Belgiums won't want any tourists and businessmen spending any money in their capitals after Brexit and they'd rather parts of their local economies were shut down ? Or is it because the French will want to write off their huge investment in Eurostar ?
Indeed. The Eurostar is a joint UK-French business venture. Shutting its main link (UK to Europe) would be business suicide and likely subject to lengthy and costly legal wrangling. If the holding company took the French government to court over this, they would not have a leg to stand on:
"Why did your government decide to destroy this business?" "Er because we were a bit annoyed that the UK democratically left a political union."
Isn't that what you said the EU was good for in a previous post Prague? Allowing citizens and businesses to take governments to court if they make incredibly stupid decisions that could cause far-reaching damage?
For pity's sake. I referred to the Eurostar TERMINAL. Or more specifically the " UK Border" sitting inside the Brussels and Paris terminals. Where I have stood in a ridiculous queue whole some muppet from UK immigration asks inane questions of obviously innocent people. They will cancel that in a heartbeat. This is already why if you come back in the new Eurostar "direct" service from Marseilles, you have to get out, go through UK border and security checks, and then get back in after an hour delay. It will indeed be the slow death of Eurostar. I bet Michael O'leary is lining up A huge donation to Vote Leave as we speak.
Any conjecture to suggest it would be comes off as baseless fearmongering.
It's about all the Pro lobby have left to offer.
A Brexit will eventually lead to a slow break up of the EU, I'm fairly sure. The anti EU movement appears to be getting stronger, mainly because Pierre, Pedro, Mario, Eric and Johann really don't want some small former Iron Curtain nation with a dubious election processes dictating what they can or cannot do in their own Country.
I see this thread has continued without one of the Europhiles answering the question asked a few pages back.
Why would you not want our boarders controlled?
I would imagine that no one answered because everyone does want or border controlled.
I travelled home from Brussels yesterday and had to navigate UK border control twice (once in another country !) so I can't quite understand your point.
Point is very simple, in the EU, uncontrolled mass immigration from Europe, out of it, controlled immigration from Europe. Why wouldn't you want to control this?
You asked if we want our "borders controlled" and I answered that they are, with a practical example of how they are.
Did you instead mean to ask "why would you not want immigration from specific other countries controlled ?
Quite different questions, and probably why I was the first person on many pages of debate to bother answering.
You can word it how you like mate, it's quite clear what I mean.
Okay let me put it to you this way. Net immigration at 380k I believe, give or take a few 1000, around half of which from the EU, made up skilled/unskilled people, why wouldn't you want a government that can control this, what with our run down and overcrowded public services?
As a dangerous lefty, I am just going to quietly mention that the fault for having "run down and overcrowded public services" rests with the self-same parties of government (from the 1970s I can see no appreciable difference) that have led to that circumstance, having decided that it is much more important to prioritise tax bribes, protection of multinational corporations and fat cats in the financial services sector (I appreciate that there are many hard-working ordinary decent people there as well), and welcoming in the world's super rich, amongst other things.
Personally speaking, I have little doubt that, were there to be a Brexit, all monies that would no longer be paid to the EU (if any) would be frittered away on the government's best mates, with the occasional crumb from the high table for the electorate to keep them voting for their parties. I cannot imagine a situation where those massive companies, currently paying only a proportion of the tax that normal businesses do, will not end up paying in less, as part of the government attempts to keep them in the UK.
Increasing our population by approximately a million every three years is unsustainable -we just don't have the infrastructure to cope with it.
Whilst we are in the EU we can do nothing to stop as many Europeans as want, to come here. If Turkey also joins the EU, even more will come here. The only way we can control the numbers coming here, is if we are out of the EU and for that reason, I will be voting to exit.
I cannot see any good from the current rate of population increase. More and more countryside is being lost to housing and once gone, we will never get green spaces back. Our roads cannot cope with the amount of traffic now using them. Schools, hospitals, doctors surgeries cannot cope with number of people needing their services.
Being in the EU also drives down wages. My husband works in the hospitality industry and hasn't had a pay rise for 4 years. He was earning well above the minimum wage four years ago, but now earns only a small amount above that level. In that time more and more Romanians have started work and are happy with the lower wages, so there is no incentive for his employer to increase wages. When one Romanian leaves there is always another relative or friend to take their place.
The cost of remediating brownfield sites is huge. Also they are never located locally and often have poor transport links.
The number of homes owned by landlords that are subsequently rented out is huge now. They often rent out rooms to make it affordable.
I can't take anyone seriously that believes 350,000 net migrants a year has no impact on housing/rental prices. That even assumes those leaving the UK sell their homes.
Not quite, but I seriously believe that 350,000 net economic EU immigrants (which is specifically what we are talking about, after all) have very, very little impact for the reasons I have already given, and Mickle has expanded upon Nick.
I will repeat, the major reason that there are so many landlords renting out property is due to UK government policy, decided in the UK parliament, by UK MPs, with no input from the EU, Strasborg, Brussels, Angela Merkel, Norway, Batman, the Cheese Ranger, Nobby Stiles, the king of Jordan or anyone else people might choose to blame...
You can say goodbye to the Eurostar terminals at Paris and Brussels too
Really ???? And why would that be ? Is it because the French and Belgiums won't want any tourists and businessmen spending any money in their capitals after Brexit and they'd rather parts of their local economies were shut down ? Or is it because the French will want to write off their huge investment in Eurostar ?
Indeed. The Eurostar is a joint UK-French business venture. Shutting its main link (UK to Europe) would be business suicide and likely subject to lengthy and costly legal wrangling. If the holding company took the French government to court over this, they would not have a leg to stand on:
"Why did your government decide to destroy this business?" "Er because we were a bit annoyed that the UK democratically left a political union."
Isn't that what you said the EU was good for in a previous post Prague? Allowing citizens and businesses to take governments to court if they make incredibly stupid decisions that could cause far-reaching damage?
For pity's sake. I referred to the Eurostar TERMINAL. Or more specifically the " UK Border" sitting inside the Brussels and Paris terminals. Where I have stood in a ridiculous queue whole some muppet from UK immigration asks inane questions of obviously innocent people. They will cancel that in a heartbeat. This is already why if you come back in the new Eurostar "direct" service from Marseilles, you have to get out, go through UK border and security checks, and then get back in after an hour delay. It will indeed be the slow death of Eurostar. I bet Michael O'leary is lining up A huge donation to Vote Leave as we speak.
I'm still not convinced, what evidence do you have that this could happen? Eurostar already has a hard enough time competing with airlines, all this would do is make it even less competitive. As a joint French-UK interest there is no possible reason that the French or anyone else would take such action purely out of spite.
As the UK lies outside of Schengen I have yet to see any compelling reason that crossing borders would be any more difficult as a UK citizen than it currently is. Any conjecture to suggest it would be comes off as baseless fearmongering.
Plenty of evidence. The reason for the current fiasco at Lille is that the Brits wanted to put up " UK Border" buildings inside the stations at Marseille and Avignon, and the French said "enough already". Similarly the delays to Eurostar direct services to Amsterdam, and DB's direct services to Cologne and Frankfurt are delayed because the Dutch and Germans are similarly unwilling to make corners of their fine stations outposts of the British Empire. Not least because the British had the temerity to suggest they, and not us, had to pay for the damn things.
Eurostar is dong just fine against the airlines at present, revenue up 11% last year AFAIR. And no wonder. Live in Eltham, business in Brussels? Eurostar can get you there less than three hours after you left your house. Now work out how long that would take if you flew. But if you have to stop at Ashford, get out, faff around for an hour, when you could have been eating sleeping or working, get back in again, bang goes your advantage.
When was the last time you actually used Eurostar, Fishy?
Again, what specifically about any of this is dependent on our membership of the EU? You have not made this clear.
I used the Eurostar a couple of years ago, London to Paris return trip.
The cost of remediating brownfield sites is huge. Also they are never located locally and often have poor transport links.
The number of homes owned by landlords that are subsequently rented out is huge now. They often rent out rooms to make it affordable.
I can't take anyone seriously that believes 350,000 net migrants a year has no impact on housing/rental prices. That even assumes those leaving the UK sell their homes.
Not quite, but I seriously believe that 350,000 net economic EU immigrants (which is specifically what we are talking about, after all) have very, very little impact for the reasons I have already given, and Mickle has expanded upon Nick.
I will repeat, the major reason that there are so many landlords renting out property is due to UK government policy, decided in the UK parliament, by UK MPs, with no input from the EU, Strasborg, Brussels, Angela Merkel, Norway, Batman, the Cheese Ranger, Nobby Stiles, the king of Jordan or anyone else people might choose to blame...
I don't think that in the main EU immigrants are coming over here with the money to buy houses and if it's true that they are content with working for less then they won't be earning the money to buy houses either. I also don't think that it's down to the EU migrants that rents are so high - I mean, sky high house prices are going to mean sky high rents as otherwise there would be no incentive for these property investors to buy to let.
There was an interesting article in the Standard last year that suggested that London could end up as some kind of giant theme park for the wealthy because of the current housing trends.
What I found ironic was the government have this idea that people earning over £30K should pay the full private market rate on a council house because they are earning an "above average" wage, yet I am on the mailing list for Fulham and Hammersmith Councils' "affordable homes" as I work in the borough, and I see required salaries of £60K-£80K on the housing authority homes for sale to purchase an "affordable home" from the council. How is £30K being branded a good wage if a local authority affordable housing scheme mail outs usually quote figures between £60K and £80K to be eligible for their implementation of Government affordable home buying schemes?
You can say goodbye to the Eurostar terminals at Paris and Brussels too
Really ???? And why would that be ? Is it because the French and Belgiums won't want any tourists and businessmen spending any money in their capitals after Brexit and they'd rather parts of their local economies were shut down ? Or is it because the French will want to write off their huge investment in Eurostar ?
Indeed. The Eurostar is a joint UK-French business venture. Shutting its main link (UK to Europe) would be business suicide and likely subject to lengthy and costly legal wrangling. If the holding company took the French government to court over this, they would not have a leg to stand on:
"Why did your government decide to destroy this business?" "Er because we were a bit annoyed that the UK democratically left a political union."
Isn't that what you said the EU was good for in a previous post Prague? Allowing citizens and businesses to take governments to court if they make incredibly stupid decisions that could cause far-reaching damage?
For pity's sake. I referred to the Eurostar TERMINAL. Or more specifically the " UK Border" sitting inside the Brussels and Paris terminals. Where I have stood in a ridiculous queue whole some muppet from UK immigration asks inane questions of obviously innocent people. They will cancel that in a heartbeat. This is already why if you come back in the new Eurostar "direct" service from Marseilles, you have to get out, go through UK border and security checks, and then get back in after an hour delay. It will indeed be the slow death of Eurostar. I bet Michael O'leary is lining up A huge donation to Vote Leave as we speak.
I'm still not convinced, what evidence do you have that this could happen? Eurostar already has a hard enough time competing with airlines, all this would do is make it even less competitive. As a joint French-UK interest there is no possible reason that the French or anyone else would take such action purely out of spite.
As the UK lies outside of Schengen I have yet to see any compelling reason that crossing borders would be any more difficult as a UK citizen than it currently is. Any conjecture to suggest it would be comes off as baseless fearmongering.
Plenty of evidence. The reason for the current fiasco at Lille is that the Brits wanted to put up " UK Border" buildings inside the stations at Marseille and Avignon, and the French said "enough already". Similarly the delays to Eurostar direct services to Amsterdam, and DB's direct services to Cologne and Frankfurt are delayed because the Dutch and Germans are similarly unwilling to make corners of their fine stations outposts of the British Empire. Not least because the British had the temerity to suggest they, and not us, had to pay for the damn things.
Eurostar is dong just fine against the airlines at present, revenue up 11% last year AFAIR. And no wonder. Live in Eltham, business in Brussels? Eurostar can get you there less than three hours after you left your house. Now work out how long that would take if you flew. But if you have to stop at Ashford, get out, faff around for an hour, when you could have been eating sleeping or working, get back in again, bang goes your advantage.
When was the last time you actually used Eurostar, Fishy?
Again, what specifically about any of this is dependent on our membership of the EU? You have not made this clear.
I used the Eurostar a couple of years ago, London to Paris return trip.
The French and Belgian put up with British Border Force people very visibly on their territory (and sometimes behaving in quite an overbearing manner, in my personal experience) because we are part of the same club; even though it still pissed them off that we refused to join Schengen. It is quite a big deal to let someone else's police force have such a big presence on your territory.
(Actually until recently the whole border point caboodle, at least at Brussels, had a huge sign saying "UK Border" above it, just like you see at Heathrow, and eventually the Belgians requested that we take that down and make the whole thing more low key. Believe it or not, other people are quite patriotic and sensitive about their national sovereignty too.
If we leave, they won't allow it any more. Why would they allow it? They only allow it now, because we pleaded with them to do so. And we did this because of our obsession with asylum seekers. The obvious alternative is to process the passengers incoming at the UK stations, but that won't work for our government because they are scared half the trainload will demand political asylum as soon as the train gets through the tunnel. Similar argument regarding Calais and the camps, and why Cameron has a point, whatever some anonymous junior French official tells a Telegraph reporter over a few glasses of bubbly.
I left the UK for Prague beginning of 1993. Since then the benchmark salary for the job I left behind has increased by about 80%. The value of my modest three bedroom town house in Surbiton has gone up by 600%. !!! That is how ridiculous the housing market is in London, and patently that has little to do with EU migration which only really became significant from about 2008 onwards. I'd remind everyone that Roman Abramovic and his ilk arrived here long before Pete the Plumber so we might want to ask why the Government let that lot in (who pay no taxes either) rather than pick on poor old Pete.
I left the UK for Prague beginning of 1993. Since then the benchmark salary for the job I left behind has increased by about 80%. The value of my modest three bedroom town house in Surbiton has gone up by 600%. !!! That is how ridiculous the housing market is in London, and patently that has little to do with EU migration which only really became significant from about 2008 onwards. I'd remind everyone that Roman Abramovic and his ilk arrived here long before Pete the Plumber so we might want to ask why the Government let that lot in (who pay no taxes either) rather than pick on poor old Pete.
Poor old Pete more likely to use NHS and housing benefits than Roman I'd say.
I left the UK for Prague beginning of 1993. Since then the benchmark salary for the job I left behind has increased by about 80%. The value of my modest three bedroom town house in Surbiton has gone up by 600%. !!! That is how ridiculous the housing market is in London, and patently that has little to do with EU migration which only really became significant from about 2008 onwards. I'd remind everyone that Roman Abramovic and his ilk arrived here long before Pete the Plumber so we might want to ask why the Government let that lot in (who pay no taxes either) rather than pick on poor old Pete.
Poor old Pete more likely to use NHS and housing benefits than Roman I'd say.
I left the UK for Prague beginning of 1993. Since then the benchmark salary for the job I left behind has increased by about 80%. The value of my modest three bedroom town house in Surbiton has gone up by 600%. !!! That is how ridiculous the housing market is in London, and patently that has little to do with EU migration which only really became significant from about 2008 onwards. I'd remind everyone that Roman Abramovic and his ilk arrived here long before Pete the Plumber so we might want to ask why the Government let that lot in (who pay no taxes either) rather than pick on poor old Pete.
Poor old Pete more likely to use NHS and housing benefits than Roman I'd say.
He's also more likely to pay for it...
SE9addick, you're back. Still waiting on your reply?!
See I don't get that. Most people coming from eastern Europe will come here and work minimum wage, unable to buy their own house.
So the government tops up their wages and pays for social housing for them. But somehow they're massive net economic contributors to society? Someone explain please.
See I don't get that. Most people coming from eastern Europe will come here and work minimum wage, unable to buy their own house.
So the government tops up their wages and pays for social housing for them. But somehow they're massive net economic contributors to society? Someone explain please.
Because the net benefit of someone's contribution to society isn't measured solely by their wage.
You can say goodbye to the Eurostar terminals at Paris and Brussels too
Really ???? And why would that be ? Is it because the French and Belgiums won't want any tourists and businessmen spending any money in their capitals after Brexit and they'd rather parts of their local economies were shut down ? Or is it because the French will want to write off their huge investment in Eurostar ?
Indeed. The Eurostar is a joint UK-French business venture. Shutting its main link (UK to Europe) would be business suicide and likely subject to lengthy and costly legal wrangling. If the holding company took the French government to court over this, they would not have a leg to stand on:
"Why did your government decide to destroy this business?" "Er because we were a bit annoyed that the UK democratically left a political union."
Isn't that what you said the EU was good for in a previous post Prague? Allowing citizens and businesses to take governments to court if they make incredibly stupid decisions that could cause far-reaching damage?
For pity's sake. I referred to the Eurostar TERMINAL. Or more specifically the " UK Border" sitting inside the Brussels and Paris terminals. Where I have stood in a ridiculous queue whole some muppet from UK immigration asks inane questions of obviously innocent people. They will cancel that in a heartbeat. This is already why if you come back in the new Eurostar "direct" service from Marseilles, you have to get out, go through UK border and security checks, and then get back in after an hour delay. It will indeed be the slow death of Eurostar. I bet Michael O'leary is lining up A huge donation to Vote Leave as we speak.
I'm still not convinced, what evidence do you have that this could happen? Eurostar already has a hard enough time competing with airlines, all this would do is make it even less competitive. As a joint French-UK interest there is no possible reason that the French or anyone else would take such action purely out of spite.
As the UK lies outside of Schengen I have yet to see any compelling reason that crossing borders would be any more difficult as a UK citizen than it currently is. Any conjecture to suggest it would be comes off as baseless fearmongering.
Plenty of evidence. The reason for the current fiasco at Lille is that the Brits wanted to put up " UK Border" buildings inside the stations at Marseille and Avignon, and the French said "enough already". Similarly the delays to Eurostar direct services to Amsterdam, and DB's direct services to Cologne and Frankfurt are delayed because the Dutch and Germans are similarly unwilling to make corners of their fine stations outposts of the British Empire. Not least because the British had the temerity to suggest they, and not us, had to pay for the damn things.
Eurostar is dong just fine against the airlines at present, revenue up 11% last year AFAIR. And no wonder. Live in Eltham, business in Brussels? Eurostar can get you there less than three hours after you left your house. Now work out how long that would take if you flew. But if you have to stop at Ashford, get out, faff around for an hour, when you could have been eating sleeping or working, get back in again, bang goes your advantage.
When was the last time you actually used Eurostar, Fishy?
Again, what specifically about any of this is dependent on our membership of the EU? You have not made this clear.
I used the Eurostar a couple of years ago, London to Paris return trip.
The French and Belgian put up with British Border Force people very visibly on their territory (and sometimes behaving in quite an overbearing manner, in my personal experience) because we are part of the same club; even though it still pissed them off that we refused to join Schengen. It is quite a big deal to let someone else's police force have such a big presence on your territory.
(Actually until recently the whole border point caboodle, at least at Brussels, had a huge sign saying "UK Border" above it, just like you see at Heathrow, and eventually the Belgians requested that we take that down and make the whole thing more low key. Believe it or not, other people are quite patriotic and sensitive about their national sovereignty too.
If we leave, they won't allow it any more. Why would they allow it? They only allow it now, because we pleaded with them to do so. And we did this because of our obsession with asylum seekers. The obvious alternative is to process the passengers incoming at the UK stations, but that won't work for our government because they are scared half the trainload will demand political asylum as soon as the train gets through the tunnel. Similar argument regarding Calais and the camps, and why Cameron has a point, whatever some anonymous junior French official tells a Telegraph reporter over a few glasses of bubbly.
Again, none of this is evidently because we're in the EU. Neither myself nor anyone else except you, the Prime Minister and his toadies and the Mayor of Calais seem to share this opinion.
I heard the argument you are making about border controls being made by someone on the radio and he was completely shut down by someone who respectfully pointed out that we do not see lines of asylum seekers at any of the other points of entry into the UK (airports, seaports, land border with Ireland) where we do not put our own border force on other people's territory.
Interesting how you take the PM's claim at face-value even though he is clearly desperately trying to sell his EU deal, but the French source is completely unreliable for spurious reasons you seem to have invented yourself?
I see this thread has continued without one of the Europhiles answering the question asked a few pages back.
Why would you not want our boarders controlled?
I would imagine that no one answered because everyone does want or border controlled.
I travelled home from Brussels yesterday and had to navigate UK border control twice (once in another country !) so I can't quite understand your point.
Point is very simple, in the EU, uncontrolled mass immigration from Europe, out of it, controlled immigration from Europe. Why wouldn't you want to control this?
You asked if we want our "borders controlled" and I answered that they are, with a practical example of how they are.
Did you instead mean to ask "why would you not want immigration from specific other countries controlled ?
Quite different questions, and probably why I was the first person on many pages of debate to bother answering.
You can word it how you like mate, it's quite clear what I mean.
Okay let me put it to you this way. Net immigration at 380k I believe, give or take a few 1000, around half of which from the EU, made up skilled/unskilled people, why wouldn't you want a government that can control this, what with our run down and overcrowded public services?
It was clear - you asked a question about whether we should "protect our borders" and I gave you an answer. But for some reason you really wanted an answer on immigration.
No answer from SE9addick then, anyone else?
Can you clarify which question you're asking ?
Okay let me put it to you this way. Net immigration at 380k I believe, give or take a few 1000, around half of which from the EU, made up skilled/unskilled people, why wouldn't you want a government that can control this, what with our run down and overcrowded public services?
Would you like this in larger font?
Because I understand that being in a club also means signing up for the rules of the club.
You seem solely focused on the issue of immigration but surely whether or not we're members of the EU has many, many more factors - both negative and positive - than just immigration ?
Re immigration specifically - I believe that our country would be poorer economically without those 380,000 immigrants and therefore our "run down and overcrowded public services" would be even more underfunded than they are now. Leaving the EU will not improve public services, I believe that your thinking it will is a false economy.
See I don't get that. Most people coming from eastern Europe will come here and work minimum wage, unable to buy their own house.
So the government tops up their wages and pays for social housing for them. But somehow they're massive net economic contributors to society? Someone explain please.
Generally, most Eastern Europeans aren't in social housing, they are renting privately, often in the conditions that B_B_W describes if they have just arrived. I agree about the govt topping up wages, but that's what happens when all parties have a policy of subsidizing employers who pay less than it costs to live. The net benefit comes from how economic activity is measured; I'd ask a different question - what do you think will happen to control migration? I can't help but see it as tied to the economy and if people are serious about ending economic migration, the economy needs to tank and people will start leaving (much as happened in Ireland post 2008). Even with the controls already in place lots of industries are already saying that they can't hire who they want to.
I'm also concerned about how much emphasis is put on "we're big, we can negotiate a good deal". Hmm, I can see that working out really well, British managers and politicians are famed the world over for their negotiating skill, after all. And if we vote to leave, who are the politicans going to blame for their ineptness?
I think the mention of 90 million Turks coming is a red herring as well. It's only the US and UK that are serious about Turkey joining, and for strategic reasons. It's one reason the US are going to be hopping mad if its proxy leaves the EU.
I see this thread has continued without one of the Europhiles answering the question asked a few pages back.
Why would you not want our boarders controlled?
I would imagine that no one answered because everyone does want or border controlled.
I travelled home from Brussels yesterday and had to navigate UK border control twice (once in another country !) so I can't quite understand your point.
Point is very simple, in the EU, uncontrolled mass immigration from Europe, out of it, controlled immigration from Europe. Why wouldn't you want to control this?
You asked if we want our "borders controlled" and I answered that they are, with a practical example of how they are.
Did you instead mean to ask "why would you not want immigration from specific other countries controlled ?
Quite different questions, and probably why I was the first person on many pages of debate to bother answering.
You can word it how you like mate, it's quite clear what I mean.
Okay let me put it to you this way. Net immigration at 380k I believe, give or take a few 1000, around half of which from the EU, made up skilled/unskilled people, why wouldn't you want a government that can control this, what with our run down and overcrowded public services?
It was clear - you asked a question about whether we should "protect our borders" and I gave you an answer. But for some reason you really wanted an answer on immigration.
No answer from SE9addick then, anyone else?
Can you clarify which question you're asking ?
Okay let me put it to you this way. Net immigration at 380k I believe, give or take a few 1000, around half of which from the EU, made up skilled/unskilled people, why wouldn't you want a government that can control this, what with our run down and overcrowded public services?
Would you like this in larger font?
Because I understand that being in a club also means signing up for the rules of the club.
You seem solely focused on the issue of immigration but surely whether or not we're members of the EU has many, many more factors - both negative and positive - than just immigration ?
Re immigration specifically - I believe that our country would be poorer economically without those 380,000 immigrants and therefore our "run down and overcrowded public services" would be even more underfunded than they are now. Leaving the EU will not improve public services, I believe that your thinking it will is a false economy.
Immigration a big part of it though.
Point taken, but regarding "overcrowding" IMO that's a matter of sheer numbers, with the population growing, which is largely to immigration, inviting more in in such numbers is ludicrous, and the only way to be controlled is getting out of the EU.
You can say goodbye to the Eurostar terminals at Paris and Brussels too
Really ???? And why would that be ? Is it because the French and Belgiums won't want any tourists and businessmen spending any money in their capitals after Brexit and they'd rather parts of their local economies were shut down ? Or is it because the French will want to write off their huge investment in Eurostar ?
Indeed. The Eurostar is a joint UK-French business venture. Shutting its main link (UK to Europe) would be business suicide and likely subject to lengthy and costly legal wrangling. If the holding company took the French government to court over this, they would not have a leg to stand on:
"Why did your government decide to destroy this business?" "Er because we were a bit annoyed that the UK democratically left a political union."
Isn't that what you said the EU was good for in a previous post Prague? Allowing citizens and businesses to take governments to court if they make incredibly stupid decisions that could cause far-reaching damage?
For pity's sake. I referred to the Eurostar TERMINAL. Or more specifically the " UK Border" sitting inside the Brussels and Paris terminals. Where I have stood in a ridiculous queue whole some muppet from UK immigration asks inane questions of obviously innocent people. They will cancel that in a heartbeat. This is already why if you come back in the new Eurostar "direct" service from Marseilles, you have to get out, go through UK border and security checks, and then get back in after an hour delay. It will indeed be the slow death of Eurostar. I bet Michael O'leary is lining up A huge donation to Vote Leave as we speak.
I'm still not convinced, what evidence do you have that this could happen? Eurostar already has a hard enough time competing with airlines, all this would do is make it even less competitive. As a joint French-UK interest there is no possible reason that the French or anyone else would take such action purely out of spite.
As the UK lies outside of Schengen I have yet to see any compelling reason that crossing borders would be any more difficult as a UK citizen than it currently is. Any conjecture to suggest it would be comes off as baseless fearmongering.
Plenty of evidence. The reason for the current fiasco at Lille is that the Brits wanted to put up " UK Border" buildings inside the stations at Marseille and Avignon, and the French said "enough already". Similarly the delays to Eurostar direct services to Amsterdam, and DB's direct services to Cologne and Frankfurt are delayed because the Dutch and Germans are similarly unwilling to make corners of their fine stations outposts of the British Empire. Not least because the British had the temerity to suggest they, and not us, had to pay for the damn things.
Eurostar is dong just fine against the airlines at present, revenue up 11% last year AFAIR. And no wonder. Live in Eltham, business in Brussels? Eurostar can get you there less than three hours after you left your house. Now work out how long that would take if you flew. But if you have to stop at Ashford, get out, faff around for an hour, when you could have been eating sleeping or working, get back in again, bang goes your advantage.
When was the last time you actually used Eurostar, Fishy?
Again, what specifically about any of this is dependent on our membership of the EU? You have not made this clear.
I used the Eurostar a couple of years ago, London to Paris return trip.
The French and Belgian put up with British Border Force people very visibly on their territory (and sometimes behaving in quite an overbearing manner, in my personal experience) because we are part of the same club; even though it still pissed them off that we refused to join Schengen. It is quite a big deal to let someone else's police force have such a big presence on your territory.
(Actually until recently the whole border point caboodle, at least at Brussels, had a huge sign saying "UK Border" above it, just like you see at Heathrow, and eventually the Belgians requested that we take that down and make the whole thing more low key. Believe it or not, other people are quite patriotic and sensitive about their national sovereignty too.
If we leave, they won't allow it any more. Why would they allow it? They only allow it now, because we pleaded with them to do so. And we did this because of our obsession with asylum seekers. The obvious alternative is to process the passengers incoming at the UK stations, but that won't work for our government because they are scared half the trainload will demand political asylum as soon as the train gets through the tunnel. Similar argument regarding Calais and the camps, and why Cameron has a point, whatever some anonymous junior French official tells a Telegraph reporter over a few glasses of bubbly.
Again, none of this is evidently because we're in the EU. Neither myself nor anyone else except you, the Prime Minister and his toadies and the Mayor of Calais seem to share this opinion.
I heard the argument you are making about border controls being made by someone on the radio and he was completely shut down by someone who respectfully pointed out that we do not see lines of asylum seekers at any of the other points of entry into the UK (airports, seaports, land border with Ireland) where we do not put our own border force on other people's territory.
Interesting how you take the PM's claim at face-value even though he is clearly desperately trying to sell his EU deal, but the French source is completely unreliable for spurious reasons you seem to have invented yourself?
There's been freedom of movement between the Republic of Ireland and the UK since the days when the former was the Irish Free State. There are no Customs posts or any official border posts, so I'd be very surprised indeed to see any lines of asylum seekers... fuel smugglers, on the other hand, is a different story.
You can say goodbye to the Eurostar terminals at Paris and Brussels too
Really ???? And why would that be ? Is it because the French and Belgiums won't want any tourists and businessmen spending any money in their capitals after Brexit and they'd rather parts of their local economies were shut down ? Or is it because the French will want to write off their huge investment in Eurostar ?
Indeed. The Eurostar is a joint UK-French business venture. Shutting its main link (UK to Europe) would be business suicide and likely subject to lengthy and costly legal wrangling. If the holding company took the French government to court over this, they would not have a leg to stand on:
"Why did your government decide to destroy this business?" "Er because we were a bit annoyed that the UK democratically left a political union."
Isn't that what you said the EU was good for in a previous post Prague? Allowing citizens and businesses to take governments to court if they make incredibly stupid decisions that could cause far-reaching damage?
For pity's sake. I referred to the Eurostar TERMINAL. Or more specifically the " UK Border" sitting inside the Brussels and Paris terminals. Where I have stood in a ridiculous queue whole some muppet from UK immigration asks inane questions of obviously innocent people. They will cancel that in a heartbeat. This is already why if you come back in the new Eurostar "direct" service from Marseilles, you have to get out, go through UK border and security checks, and then get back in after an hour delay. It will indeed be the slow death of Eurostar. I bet Michael O'leary is lining up A huge donation to Vote Leave as we speak.
I'm still not convinced, what evidence do you have that this could happen? Eurostar already has a hard enough time competing with airlines, all this would do is make it even less competitive. As a joint French-UK interest there is no possible reason that the French or anyone else would take such action purely out of spite.
As the UK lies outside of Schengen I have yet to see any compelling reason that crossing borders would be any more difficult as a UK citizen than it currently is. Any conjecture to suggest it would be comes off as baseless fearmongering.
Plenty of evidence. The reason for the current fiasco at Lille is that the Brits wanted to put up " UK Border" buildings inside the stations at Marseille and Avignon, and the French said "enough already". Similarly the delays to Eurostar direct services to Amsterdam, and DB's direct services to Cologne and Frankfurt are delayed because the Dutch and Germans are similarly unwilling to make corners of their fine stations outposts of the British Empire. Not least because the British had the temerity to suggest they, and not us, had to pay for the damn things.
Eurostar is dong just fine against the airlines at present, revenue up 11% last year AFAIR. And no wonder. Live in Eltham, business in Brussels? Eurostar can get you there less than three hours after you left your house. Now work out how long that would take if you flew. But if you have to stop at Ashford, get out, faff around for an hour, when you could have been eating sleeping or working, get back in again, bang goes your advantage.
When was the last time you actually used Eurostar, Fishy?
Again, what specifically about any of this is dependent on our membership of the EU? You have not made this clear.
I used the Eurostar a couple of years ago, London to Paris return trip.
The French and Belgian put up with British Border Force people very visibly on their territory (and sometimes behaving in quite an overbearing manner, in my personal experience) because we are part of the same club; even though it still pissed them off that we refused to join Schengen. It is quite a big deal to let someone else's police force have such a big presence on your territory.
(Actually until recently the whole border point caboodle, at least at Brussels, had a huge sign saying "UK Border" above it, just like you see at Heathrow, and eventually the Belgians requested that we take that down and make the whole thing more low key. Believe it or not, other people are quite patriotic and sensitive about their national sovereignty too.
If we leave, they won't allow it any more. Why would they allow it? They only allow it now, because we pleaded with them to do so. And we did this because of our obsession with asylum seekers. The obvious alternative is to process the passengers incoming at the UK stations, but that won't work for our government because they are scared half the trainload will demand political asylum as soon as the train gets through the tunnel. Similar argument regarding Calais and the camps, and why Cameron has a point, whatever some anonymous junior French official tells a Telegraph reporter over a few glasses of bubbly.
Again, none of this is evidently because we're in the EU. Neither myself nor anyone else except you, the Prime Minister and his toadies and the Mayor of Calais seem to share this opinion.
I heard the argument you are making about border controls being made by someone on the radio and he was completely shut down by someone who respectfully pointed out that we do not see lines of asylum seekers at any of the other points of entry into the UK (airports, seaports, land border with Ireland) where we do not put our own border force on other people's territory.
Interesting how you take the PM's claim at face-value even though he is clearly desperately trying to sell his EU deal, but the French source is completely unreliable for spurious reasons you seem to have invented yourself?
Honestly Fishy, you are a hopeless case at times. One last try.
Believe it or not, the EU is actually a club, made up of human beings. People who like each other, or at least try to, because they are in the same club. Have the same values, if that is not too wishy washy for you.
The French and Belgian allow this as a favour to us. Because we are in the club. If we leave the club, why the **** should they continue to do us a favour?
The reason why the Telegraph source is completely unreliable is that he or she is unnamed and could therefore be the receptionist. The Mayor of Calais is a real person with a name, which I forget, although I recall her because she has been on the Today programme more than once, at her wits end. if you don't understand the difference then your experience of the media is even less than your knowledge of Eurostar and the logistics around it.
I see this thread has continued without one of the Europhiles answering the question asked a few pages back.
Why would you not want our boarders controlled?
I would imagine that no one answered because everyone does want or border controlled.
I travelled home from Brussels yesterday and had to navigate UK border control twice (once in another country !) so I can't quite understand your point.
Point is very simple, in the EU, uncontrolled mass immigration from Europe, out of it, controlled immigration from Europe. Why wouldn't you want to control this?
You asked if we want our "borders controlled" and I answered that they are, with a practical example of how they are.
Did you instead mean to ask "why would you not want immigration from specific other countries controlled ?
Quite different questions, and probably why I was the first person on many pages of debate to bother answering.
You can word it how you like mate, it's quite clear what I mean.
Okay let me put it to you this way. Net immigration at 380k I believe, give or take a few 1000, around half of which from the EU, made up skilled/unskilled people, why wouldn't you want a government that can control this, what with our run down and overcrowded public services?
It was clear - you asked a question about whether we should "protect our borders" and I gave you an answer. But for some reason you really wanted an answer on immigration.
No answer from SE9addick then, anyone else?
Can you clarify which question you're asking ?
Okay let me put it to you this way. Net immigration at 380k I believe, give or take a few 1000, around half of which from the EU, made up skilled/unskilled people, why wouldn't you want a government that can control this, what with our run down and overcrowded public services?
Would you like this in larger font?
Because I understand that being in a club also means signing up for the rules of the club.
You seem solely focused on the issue of immigration but surely whether or not we're members of the EU has many, many more factors - both negative and positive - than just immigration ?
Re immigration specifically - I believe that our country would be poorer economically without those 380,000 immigrants and therefore our "run down and overcrowded public services" would be even more underfunded than they are now. Leaving the EU will not improve public services, I believe that your thinking it will is a false economy.
To test out your theory let's see how the German economy responds to its current immigration levels. By your logic Germany will be economically richer and its public services will go from strength to strength over the next few years.
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.
Not suggesting you QA but I know from other ex-pats that Australia has a serious drink-driving problem which shocked my friends who emigrated 4 years ago. They were amazed at the number of police who routinely pull people over at petrol stations and motorway service areas on random checks. But they have recently started to understand that there are serious problems in Oz with the accidents caused by drunk drivers.
Is it fair to assume that the people debating against colthe3rd would like the UK to leave the free movement of people?
People are more than free to come into the UK, they just shouldnt be allowed to stay indefinitely / work / buy a house unless they've got the correct Visa
What about people who don't live in the UK buying property? I would seriously limit this to allow UK citizens the chance to buy affordable property.
You can say goodbye to the Eurostar terminals at Paris and Brussels too
Really ???? And why would that be ? Is it because the French and Belgiums won't want any tourists and businessmen spending any money in their capitals after Brexit and they'd rather parts of their local economies were shut down ? Or is it because the French will want to write off their huge investment in Eurostar ?
Indeed. The Eurostar is a joint UK-French business venture. Shutting its main link (UK to Europe) would be business suicide and likely subject to lengthy and costly legal wrangling. If the holding company took the French government to court over this, they would not have a leg to stand on:
"Why did your government decide to destroy this business?" "Er because we were a bit annoyed that the UK democratically left a political union."
Isn't that what you said the EU was good for in a previous post Prague? Allowing citizens and businesses to take governments to court if they make incredibly stupid decisions that could cause far-reaching damage?
For pity's sake. I referred to the Eurostar TERMINAL. Or more specifically the " UK Border" sitting inside the Brussels and Paris terminals. Where I have stood in a ridiculous queue whole some muppet from UK immigration asks inane questions of obviously innocent people. They will cancel that in a heartbeat. This is already why if you come back in the new Eurostar "direct" service from Marseilles, you have to get out, go through UK border and security checks, and then get back in after an hour delay. It will indeed be the slow death of Eurostar. I bet Michael O'leary is lining up A huge donation to Vote Leave as we speak.
I'm still not convinced, what evidence do you have that this could happen? Eurostar already has a hard enough time competing with airlines, all this would do is make it even less competitive. As a joint French-UK interest there is no possible reason that the French or anyone else would take such action purely out of spite.
As the UK lies outside of Schengen I have yet to see any compelling reason that crossing borders would be any more difficult as a UK citizen than it currently is. Any conjecture to suggest it would be comes off as baseless fearmongering.
Plenty of evidence. The reason for the current fiasco at Lille is that the Brits wanted to put up " UK Border" buildings inside the stations at Marseille and Avignon, and the French said "enough already". Similarly the delays to Eurostar direct services to Amsterdam, and DB's direct services to Cologne and Frankfurt are delayed because the Dutch and Germans are similarly unwilling to make corners of their fine stations outposts of the British Empire. Not least because the British had the temerity to suggest they, and not us, had to pay for the damn things.
Eurostar is dong just fine against the airlines at present, revenue up 11% last year AFAIR. And no wonder. Live in Eltham, business in Brussels? Eurostar can get you there less than three hours after you left your house. Now work out how long that would take if you flew. But if you have to stop at Ashford, get out, faff around for an hour, when you could have been eating sleeping or working, get back in again, bang goes your advantage.
When was the last time you actually used Eurostar, Fishy?
Again, what specifically about any of this is dependent on our membership of the EU? You have not made this clear.
I used the Eurostar a couple of years ago, London to Paris return trip.
The French and Belgian put up with British Border Force people very visibly on their territory (and sometimes behaving in quite an overbearing manner, in my personal experience) because we are part of the same club; even though it still pissed them off that we refused to join Schengen. It is quite a big deal to let someone else's police force have such a big presence on your territory.
(Actually until recently the whole border point caboodle, at least at Brussels, had a huge sign saying "UK Border" above it, just like you see at Heathrow, and eventually the Belgians requested that we take that down and make the whole thing more low key. Believe it or not, other people are quite patriotic and sensitive about their national sovereignty too.
If we leave, they won't allow it any more. Why would they allow it? They only allow it now, because we pleaded with them to do so. And we did this because of our obsession with asylum seekers. The obvious alternative is to process the passengers incoming at the UK stations, but that won't work for our government because they are scared half the trainload will demand political asylum as soon as the train gets through the tunnel. Similar argument regarding Calais and the camps, and why Cameron has a point, whatever some anonymous junior French official tells a Telegraph reporter over a few glasses of bubbly.
Again, none of this is evidently because we're in the EU. Neither myself nor anyone else except you, the Prime Minister and his toadies and the Mayor of Calais seem to share this opinion.
I heard the argument you are making about border controls being made by someone on the radio and he was completely shut down by someone who respectfully pointed out that we do not see lines of asylum seekers at any of the other points of entry into the UK (airports, seaports, land border with Ireland) where we do not put our own border force on other people's territory.
Interesting how you take the PM's claim at face-value even though he is clearly desperately trying to sell his EU deal, but the French source is completely unreliable for spurious reasons you seem to have invented yourself?
Honestly Fishy, you are a hopeless case at times. One last try.
Believe it or not, the EU is actually a club, made up of human beings. People who like each other, or at least try to, because they are in the same club. Have the same values, if that is not too wishy washy for you.
The French and Belgian allow this as a favour to us. Because we are in the club. If we leave the club, why the **** should they continue to do us a favour?
The reason why the Telegraph source is completely unreliable is that he or she is unnamed and could therefore be the receptionist. The Mayor of Calais is a real person with a name, which I forget, although I recall her because she has been on the Today programme more than once, at her wits end. if you don't understand the difference then your experience of the media is even less than your knowledge of Eurostar and the logistics around it.
Hopeless. You've yet to inject a single fact into any of your recent posts, relying on mainly conjecture and tedious hypotheticals. I do find your naivety on this truly laughable given your self-professed expertise on all things Europe. Just because you once lost your rag with a border officer at Ebbsfleet doesn't make you the CL expert on all things EU and Europe related.
I see this thread has continued without one of the Europhiles answering the question asked a few pages back.
Why would you not want our boarders controlled?
I would imagine that no one answered because everyone does want or border controlled.
I travelled home from Brussels yesterday and had to navigate UK border control twice (once in another country !) so I can't quite understand your point.
Point is very simple, in the EU, uncontrolled mass immigration from Europe, out of it, controlled immigration from Europe. Why wouldn't you want to control this?
You asked if we want our "borders controlled" and I answered that they are, with a practical example of how they are.
Did you instead mean to ask "why would you not want immigration from specific other countries controlled ?
Quite different questions, and probably why I was the first person on many pages of debate to bother answering.
You can word it how you like mate, it's quite clear what I mean.
Okay let me put it to you this way. Net immigration at 380k I believe, give or take a few 1000, around half of which from the EU, made up skilled/unskilled people, why wouldn't you want a government that can control this, what with our run down and overcrowded public services?
It was clear - you asked a question about whether we should "protect our borders" and I gave you an answer. But for some reason you really wanted an answer on immigration.
No answer from SE9addick then, anyone else?
Can you clarify which question you're asking ?
Okay let me put it to you this way. Net immigration at 380k I believe, give or take a few 1000, around half of which from the EU, made up skilled/unskilled people, why wouldn't you want a government that can control this, what with our run down and overcrowded public services?
Would you like this in larger font?
Because I understand that being in a club also means signing up for the rules of the club.
You seem solely focused on the issue of immigration but surely whether or not we're members of the EU has many, many more factors - both negative and positive - than just immigration ?
Re immigration specifically - I believe that our country would be poorer economically without those 380,000 immigrants and therefore our "run down and overcrowded public services" would be even more underfunded than they are now. Leaving the EU will not improve public services, I believe that your thinking it will is a false economy.
To test out your theory let's see how the German economy responds to its current immigration levels. By your logic Germany will be economically richer and its public services will go from strength to strength over the next few years.
The German economy experienced something similar with the reunification in the 1990s. Admittedly, the world economic situation was better then, but Germany has a resilient economy. It won't happen any time soon, only crashes come quickly, but I have more faith in the German economy than that of the UK.
It's clear, also, from Frau Merkel's comments that the German design is to welcome the refugees, and improve their skills, until and only until such a time as it is safe to return.
A bit like a Syrian Auf Weidersen Pet, barring the comparison that people might want to go back to live in Aleppo....
And honestly, if we're going to play the 'club' card, then if we leave the EU we will likely stay in the EEC, EU Customs Union, Council of Europe and NATO, so I doubt we will see our relationship with France (and Belgium since you bizarrely insist that Belgium are also going to kick us out) go the way that Cuba and the USA interact, which is the scenario you appear to be painting. Except even Cuba lets the US station guards on Cuban soil. So you're suggesting if we left the EU but remained in the EEC our relationship with France would be even worse than the one between Cuba and the US?
Comments
A Brexit will eventually lead to a slow break up of the EU, I'm fairly sure. The anti EU movement appears to be getting stronger, mainly because Pierre, Pedro, Mario, Eric and Johann really don't want some small former Iron Curtain nation with a dubious election processes dictating what they can or cannot do in their own Country.
Personally speaking, I have little doubt that, were there to be a Brexit, all monies that would no longer be paid to the EU (if any) would be frittered away on the government's best mates, with the occasional crumb from the high table for the electorate to keep them voting for their parties. I cannot imagine a situation where those massive companies, currently paying only a proportion of the tax that normal businesses do, will not end up paying in less, as part of the government attempts to keep them in the UK.
Whilst we are in the EU we can do nothing to stop as many Europeans as want, to come here. If Turkey also joins the EU, even more will come here. The only way we can control the numbers coming here, is if we are out of the EU and for that reason, I will be voting to exit.
I cannot see any good from the current rate of population increase. More and more countryside is being lost to housing and once gone, we will never get green spaces back. Our roads cannot cope with the amount of traffic now using them. Schools, hospitals, doctors surgeries cannot cope with number of people needing their services.
Being in the EU also drives down wages. My husband works in the hospitality industry and hasn't had a pay rise for 4 years. He was earning well above the minimum wage four years ago, but now earns only a small amount above that level. In that time more and more Romanians have started work and are happy with the lower wages, so there is no incentive for his employer to increase wages. When one Romanian leaves there is always another relative or friend to take their place.
I will repeat, the major reason that there are so many landlords renting out property is due to UK government policy, decided in the UK parliament, by UK MPs, with no input from the EU, Strasborg, Brussels, Angela Merkel, Norway, Batman, the Cheese Ranger, Nobby Stiles, the king of Jordan or anyone else people might choose to blame...
I used the Eurostar a couple of years ago, London to Paris return trip.
There was an interesting article in the Standard last year that suggested that London could end up as some kind of giant theme park for the wealthy because of the current housing trends.
What I found ironic was the government have this idea that people earning over £30K should pay the full private market rate on a council house because they are earning an "above average" wage, yet I am on the mailing list for Fulham and Hammersmith Councils' "affordable homes" as I work in the borough, and I see required salaries of £60K-£80K on the housing authority homes for sale to purchase an "affordable home" from the council. How is £30K being branded a good wage if a local authority affordable housing scheme mail outs usually quote figures between £60K and £80K to be eligible for their implementation of Government affordable home buying schemes?
(Actually until recently the whole border point caboodle, at least at Brussels, had a huge sign saying "UK Border" above it, just like you see at Heathrow, and eventually the Belgians requested that we take that down and make the whole thing more low key. Believe it or not, other people are quite patriotic and sensitive about their national sovereignty too.
If we leave, they won't allow it any more. Why would they allow it? They only allow it now, because we pleaded with them to do so. And we did this because of our obsession with asylum seekers. The obvious alternative is to process the passengers incoming at the UK stations, but that won't work for our government because they are scared half the trainload will demand political asylum as soon as the train gets through the tunnel. Similar argument regarding Calais and the camps, and why Cameron has a point, whatever some anonymous junior French official tells a Telegraph reporter over a few glasses of bubbly.
I left the UK for Prague beginning of 1993. Since then the benchmark salary for the job I left behind has increased by about 80%. The value of my modest three bedroom town house in Surbiton has gone up by 600%. !!! That is how ridiculous the housing market is in London, and patently that has little to do with EU migration which only really became significant from about 2008 onwards. I'd remind everyone that Roman Abramovic and his ilk arrived here long before Pete the Plumber so we might want to ask why the Government let that lot in (who pay no taxes either) rather than pick on poor old Pete.
So the government tops up their wages and pays for social housing for them. But somehow they're massive net economic contributors to society? Someone explain please.
I heard the argument you are making about border controls being made by someone on the radio and he was completely shut down by someone who respectfully pointed out that we do not see lines of asylum seekers at any of the other points of entry into the UK (airports, seaports, land border with Ireland) where we do not put our own border force on other people's territory.
Interesting how you take the PM's claim at face-value even though he is clearly desperately trying to sell his EU deal, but the French source is completely unreliable for spurious reasons you seem to have invented yourself?
Sorry, not been well for a while..........
You seem solely focused on the issue of immigration but surely whether or not we're members of the EU has many, many more factors - both negative and positive - than just immigration ?
Re immigration specifically - I believe that our country would be poorer economically without those 380,000 immigrants and therefore our "run down and overcrowded public services" would be even more underfunded than they are now. Leaving the EU will not improve public services, I believe that your thinking it will is a false economy.
The net benefit comes from how economic activity is measured; I'd ask a different question - what do you think will happen to control migration? I can't help but see it as tied to the economy and if people are serious about ending economic migration, the economy needs to tank and people will start leaving (much as happened in Ireland post 2008). Even with the controls already in place lots of industries are already saying that they can't hire who they want to.
I'm also concerned about how much emphasis is put on "we're big, we can negotiate a good deal". Hmm, I can see that working out really well, British managers and politicians are famed the world over for their negotiating skill, after all. And if we vote to leave, who are the politicans going to blame for their ineptness?
I think the mention of 90 million Turks coming is a red herring as well. It's only the US and UK that are serious about Turkey joining, and for strategic reasons. It's one reason the US are going to be hopping mad if its proxy leaves the EU.
Point taken, but regarding "overcrowding" IMO that's a matter of sheer numbers, with the population growing, which is largely to immigration, inviting more in in such numbers is ludicrous, and the only way to be controlled is getting out of the EU.
Believe it or not, the EU is actually a club, made up of human beings. People who like each other, or at least try to, because they are in the same club. Have the same values, if that is not too wishy washy for you.
The French and Belgian allow this as a favour to us. Because we are in the club. If we leave the club, why the **** should they continue to do us a favour?
The reason why the Telegraph source is completely unreliable is that he or she is unnamed and could therefore be the receptionist. The Mayor of Calais is a real person with a name, which I forget, although I recall her because she has been on the Today programme more than once, at her wits end. if you don't understand the difference then your experience of the media is even less than your knowledge of Eurostar and the logistics around it.
Was a serious question.
Thought it was either a Belguim player or another of "his" clubs.
It's clear, also, from Frau Merkel's comments that the German design is to welcome the refugees, and improve their skills, until and only until such a time as it is safe to return.
A bit like a Syrian Auf Weidersen Pet, barring the comparison that people might want to go back to live in Aleppo....