[Politics] Brexit

Hamilton said:

It'll be Osborne. Corbyn won't win and will then be replaced. Labour face another term out at least - unless there is a Tory meltdown.

Click to expand...

Hamilton said:

Let me answer these questions.

EU treaties are designed to ensure closer cooperation across member states. That is there point. There is no point in having a treaty that is designed to create disharmony. An example would be the Treaty of Rome which included proposed legislation on equality at work and working conditions across Europe.

On immigration, we are not part of Schegen and so can check every passport of any EU national wishing to enter the UK. This way we can prevent those with criminal records entering the UK or we can monitor them whilst they are here. We have one truly open border and that is with Ireland. Ireland is also not a member of the Schengen area. Now, is immigration a bad thing. In all likelihood no. Studies have shown time and again that the net contribution of immigrants to this country far outweighs the costs. Immigrants are required for two reasons: to shore up the critical skills shortage gap, and to fuel our economy. At present, we simply do not have enough native Brits to fill all the roles that exist in the UK (for example, we will need 70,000 nurses to deal with the ageing native population, and those skills are not available amongst the population as it stands - this is just one industry.)

The argument then goes that we should stop immigration and hand all jobs to the native population. This is a short-termist view. As I have said, the ONS statistics show a surplus of jobs to those out of work. The issue is that many of these jobs are low-paid and low-skilled. It is not in the long-term interests of UK plc to direct its combined workforce into filling low-pains and low-skilled work. This is not going to boost the GDP of the country, it will suppress. If we suppress our GDP, then we have less money to spend on the infrastructure of the country - less money to spend on schools, hospitals and vital public services. As I have mentioned, we are an ageing population, so we have to find the growth to cater for our needs.

We therefore must invest in hi-tech industries; in pharmaceutical research; in finch (financial technology); in mechanical engineering; in design. All of these industries are less likely to be replaced through artificial intelligence or automation as they require human beings. They are high value industries we can export. We will not be able to do this unless we embrace immigration and welcome those that can both help us develop these industries and, crucially, fill other roles right through the economy. This is the macro-economic picture we face.

So, do we want to control immigration? Yes, we want to keep the bad apples out - and we can do that - but much wider than that, no, we need immigration.

Now, to your last question, how can we reform the EU to our liking. The EU by its very nature is a partnership. It is not a partnership of equals, but it is a partnership. In the South East we have around 16 MEPs. This number is determined according to the size of population in the South East. So, we have more MEPs than say Wales for example. Similarly, the number of MEPs the UK has is predicated on the size of our population. Therefore we have more MEPs than Austria, but less than Germany. All these MEPs are responsible for shaping legislation inside the EU. By working together, they are able to fashion laws that are in the interests of all Europeans. That's a tall ask, as there is always going to be someone who feels hard done by. They also influence the Commission. Now the Commission desperately needs reforming. It is wasting taxpayers money and can be far more efficient. However, it is responsible for negotiating on matters like TTIP and therefore acts as a civil service in negotiating deals for EU member states. All EU members can influence appointments within the Commission, but the more involved a nation is, the more influence it can have. We have seen that our attitude to Europe has not been that positive over the past 40 years, so we really should not be surprised that the more proactive and willing participants are probably more influential.

European Commissioners can, as well as MEPs, draft legislation and laws. There is one Commissioner for each EU member state. As this is a partnership, that seems fair at this point. The more populous the more MEPs, but each member has one Commissioner. One could argue that here there is room for some reform. Should more populous nations have more than one Commissioner, but looking back down the system, MEPs should and are drafting the lion's share of legislation and here there is proportionality. Laws are ratified by EU member states i.e. Dave, Angela etc.

So, can we reform the EU to our liking? No, but we can reform the EU to the benefit of all Europeans and by default the benefit of the UK.

As I have said many times, this is not a polar debate i.e. all good/all bad. There are many things that need to change, but the UK will not prosper outside of the EU. We need to work with all Europeans; we need to learn to turn immigration to our advantage; we need to celebrate the fact that people want to come and work here, not because of 'easy money', but because the country is admired, it rewards work, it is tolerant and fair. And we ourselves need to do two things - decide what role we want in Europe and play an active part (don't return a UKIP MEP that by very definition just wants to smash things up and slow things down), and secondly, hold our own MPs at Westminster to account. Don't let them lie to us that it is the EU that is stopping them from passing policies that are in the interests of the UK. The Living Wage is controlled by UK MPs, the NHS by UK MPs, Schools by UK MPs, Trident by by UK MPs, zero contract hours by UK MPs, franchises for train operating companies by UK MPs, HS2 by UK MPs, HMRC and corporate tax dodgers by UK MPs.

I hope I have addressed some of the issues you [MENTION=277]looney[/MENTION] [MENTION=12825]cunning fergus[/MENTION] and others raise. I understand where concerns come from, I do. I think many are emotive and not real, and I think there is scaremongering on both sides, but on balance, I believe we must remain.

Click to expand...

Bladders said:

You really need to give up on this controlled border nonsense.

Checking a passport only confirms the EU citizen
Is who he/she claims to be. They can't stop them from coming here to live and work.

You know this so give it up will you . You're wasting your own time by keep repeatedly typing it.

Click to expand...

Hamilton said:

The EU’s 2004 citizenship directive makes it clear that the free movement of people within the EU is not an unqualified right and can be restricted on grounds of public policy, public security or public health. This means that serious offenders can be denied entry and the right to live in Britain.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:229:0035:0048:en:PDF


Sent from my iPhone in a non-Calde world :-(

Click to expand...

Bladders said:

I don't think any one is disputing we cant stop a handful of criminals at the border.

Not really the argument though is it. It's the millions of non criminals we have no real control over if they're EU citizens.

Again, you know this , why are you pretending any different?

Click to expand...

Bladders said:

You really need to give up on this controlled border nonsense.

Checking a passport only confirms the EU citizen
Is who he/she claims to be. They can't stop them from coming here to live and work.

You know this so give it up will you . You're wasting your own time by keep repeatedly typing it.

Click to expand...

Bladders said:

Also [MENTION=225]Hamilton[/MENTION], how do you feel about Junkers threatening you if you don't vote the way he thinks you should?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Hamilton said:

The EU’s 2004 citizenship directive makes it clear that the free movement of people within the EU is not an unqualified right and can be restricted on grounds of public policy, public security or public health. This means that serious offenders can be denied entry and the right to live in Britain.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:229:0035:0048:en:PDF


Sent from my iPhone in a non-Calde world :-(

Click to expand...

Hamilton said:

The EU’s 2004 citizenship directive makes it clear that the free movement of people within the EU is not an unqualified right and can be restricted on grounds of public policy, public security or public health. This means that serious offenders can be denied entry and the right to live in Britain.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:229:0035:0048:en:PDF


Sent from my iPhone in a non-Calde world :-(

Click to expand...

Westdene Seagull said:

When the passports at our border are checked they don't check for a criminal record ..... they just swipe that EU national in and swipe them out again when they leave. So as much as we have the right to prevent criminals coming in from the EU we can't do anything about it when the criminal just rocks up ( as they are allowed to do ) and when our border computers aren't linked to any criminal record systems across the EU.

Click to expand...

Hamilton said:

I haven't read the threat yet, so until I do I can't comment.


Sent from my iPhone in a non-Calde world :-(

Click to expand...

5ways said:

In fairness there is no other way to talk about things that may happen in the future. I don't know what you expect people do to apart from gather all available data to make informed predictions. These predictions from any respectable body show that: the economy will shrink, price will rise, and investment will slow.

I don't know what would satisfy you, perhaps we can get Dr Who to jump in the Tardis and tell us the situation in 2017, 2025 and 2030, both if we leave and remain. Without that option all we have is reams of expert analysis that point in the same direction and predict negative outcomes. Predictions is what the Bank of England is basically for, if you don't heed their warning that Brexit is a serious body-blow to the economy in the short and long-term, and could impact our basic ability to service our massive debt I guess nothing will convince.

Click to expand...

Hamilton said:

I think you will find that the UK Border Agency would take a very different view to you.


Sent from my iPhone in a non-Calde world :-(

Click to expand...

Hamilton said:

The 1 million figure includes 750000 refugees who did not ask or want to move. Will we help them return to their homes or will we turn our backs on them.


Sent from my iPhone in a non-Calde world :-(

Click to expand...