The Brexit Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ancalagon said:
What does the ECHR have to do with the price of eggs? As far as I know, it is separate from the EU, since it was created decades before the EU even existed.

If the UK is a signatory to the ECHR, which they are, then it makes no sense for NI to not implement the ECHR. Even if Brexit occurs, I don't see why that would change.
Click to expand...

It’s one of the things the hard Brexiteers want, the UK has to leave the ECHR and not be subject to ECHR jurisdiction.

Bernard Jenkin, a prominent Brexiteer, told The Independent: “If we remain in the ECHR we will continue to have problems expelling foreign terrorist suspects, and be obliged to treat them as asylum seekers if they insist when they arrive.

“So it is a further loss of control over our borders. There is no reason that parliament should not oversee the UK’s human rights, rather than a foreign-dominated court.”
Click to expand...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ention-on-human-rights-tory-mps-a8444386.html

Mrs May, who served as home secretary from 2010 to 2016, said last year she wanted to quit the ECHR

“We will remain signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights for the duration of the next Parliament.”
This means that Britain will only the process of withdrawal if the Tories win the 2022 general election.
Click to expand...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...uropean-human-rights-laws-least-another-five/
 
Frequent visitor said:
Simple really. The competent (well, better than most!) higher civil servants were replaced by Blairite Quangoistas who flitted from catastrophe to catastrophe. Follow the career of the scruff head who ended up at HMRC a few years ago for an example, one Lin Homer. You will see what I mean.
Click to expand...

Though changing the law wouldn’t give those civil servants any scope to not tighten up procedures, would it?

They had 6 years before the referendum in which they could have, but “the EU” was a convenient scapegoat that allowed them to do nothing.
 
Dave said:
Though changing the law wouldn’t give those civil servants any scope to not tighten up procedures, would it?

They had 6 years before the referendum in which they could have, but “the EU” was a convenient scapegoat that allowed them to do nothing.
Click to expand...
She brought in her own people, with her agendum. Tightening up procedures was not on the agendum. We have to give priority to the great and good EU.
 
Pro-Brexit supporters are going to be the new Communist/Socialism supporters who are going to say if only it was implemented properly everyone would be living in some Utopia.
 
Dave said:
Plenty of that around as well, unfortunately, look at Libya as an example.
Click to expand...
USA Britain and France caused that problem they should have left Gaddafi alone to rule Libya as he had control of the militias and terrorists same with Syria just let them rule their countries even Iraq because democracy doesn't work in all countries in the world.
 
Dave said:
So now you’re agreeing the failure to protect the borders was caused by the UK government?
Click to expand...
You do seem to have difficulty reading what I say. I suppose I will have to talk down to you a bit. The EU policy was to do away with borders. They disliked borders so much that we had to introduce Blue channels between the Red and the Green for pax from the EU. Even if we suspected smuggling of prohibitions via the Blue channel we had to exercise extreme care before challenging such in the Blue. This was originated by the EU, not HMG. However HMG opposed with varying degrees of vigour. That does not mean they caused the failure as you allege.
To elaborate. The Green was for nothing to declare. The Red was for something to declare - all too often replaced by a 'phone on the wall, as in LHR. The Blue was for EU travellers from within the EU. The Blue was in fact not required in practical terms, as if stopped in the Green you simply said you were an EU traveller, as indicated by your baggage labels, and off you went. But even that 'intrusion' was too much for the EU people. So we had the Blue Channel built.

OK now?
 
Frequent visitor said:
You do seem to have difficulty reading what I say. I suppose I will have to talk down to you a bit. The EU policy was to do away with borders. They disliked borders so much that we had to introduce Blue channels between the Red and the Green for pax from the EU. Even if we suspected smuggling of prohibitions via the Blue channel we had to exercise extreme care before challenging such in the Blue. This was originated by the EU, not HMG. However HMG opposed with varying degrees of vigour. That does not mean they caused the failure as you allege.
To elaborate. The Green was for nothing to declare. The Red was for something to declare - all too often replaced by a 'phone on the wall, as in LHR. The Blue was for EU travellers from within the EU. The Blue was in fact not required in practical terms, as if stopped in the Green you simply said you were an EU traveller, as indicated by your baggage labels, and off you went. But even that 'intrusion' was too much for the EU people. So we had the Blue Channel built.

OK now?
Click to expand...

Nope, you’re waffling in an effort to cover up your crap.

Not one word of that has anything to do with illegal migration or even with the lack of enforcement on overstaying by EU citizens.

It’s not really clever to write a large paragraph of nothing to do with the topic. You really are the archetypal Brexit supporter that will try and blame Europe for everything, aren’t you?

“Look, it’s raining today”

“Yeah, that’s just the EU meddling and forcing the weather to rain”
 
Dave said:
Nope, you’re waffling in an effort to cover up your crap.

Not one word of that has anything to do with illegal migration or even with tloadhe lack of enforcement on overstaying by EU citizens.

It’s not really clever to write a large paragraph of nothing to do with the topic. You really are the archetypal Brexit supporter that will try and blame Europe for everything, aren’t you?

“Look, it’s raining today”

“Yeah, that’s just the EU meddling and forcing the weather to rain”
Click to expand...
Unsurprisingly I was focussing on my part of border control. I apologise for being too narrow, although it does go some way to explaining the EU modus operandi.
The main Immigration problem arose in 2004. Blair and co decided to allow the the 8 eastern european countries full access immediately to EU privileges, as opposed to phasing it in over say 10 years or so. This meant that the new EU citizens were immediately entitled to unemployment etc benefits, which was mandatory for EU citizens. This caused something of a ruckus in certain sections of the press. The implementation of the Schengen treaty in 1999 was relatively unremarked from memory, but I was in Uganda, Georgia and SA for much of that time, so stand to be corrected.
The real, and major, ruckus re Immigration started quite some while ago, but got heated with the camps in Calais and elsewhere. The receiving Schengen countries did little to sort things out. There had been some largely unreported immigration issues in Southern Spain for example, although these were intertwined with smuggling of tobacco etc near to Gibraltar. A son of mine was working there for a family on the beach side, and he could not use the beach at dusk and later without danger.
I and colleagues on matthaeus exchanges saw how immigrants from outside the EU were nodded through by the Spanish, provided they could show they were going on from Spain.
I and colleagues have seen similar things in Dublin, in my case by the coach load to Cork and on to Dublin and the UK.
These are just samples of course, and have to be treated with caution.
As to post immigration enforcement, that was not my Department, but I do know quite a few, some in service right now. We talk. Many have packed it in. Mrs. May was the Home Secretary for most of the period since 2010. She carries most of the responsibility to my mind. You might disagree, but so be it.
Would it be within your vacabulary to use non crude words in your reply please? Just as a favour to me.
 
Last edited:
Frequent visitor said:
Unsurprisingly I was focussing on my part of border control. I apologise for being too narrow, although it does go some way to explaining the EU modus operandi.
The main Immigration problem arose in 2004. Blair and co decided to allow the the 8 eastern european countries full access immediately to EU privileges, as opposed to phasing it in over say 10 years or so. This meant that the new EU citizens were immediately entitled to unemployment etc benefits, which was mandatory for EU citizens. This caused something of a ruckus in certain sections of the press. The implementation of the Schengen treaty in 1999 was relatively unremarked from memory, but I was in Uganda, Georgia and SA for much of that time, so stand to be corrected.
The real, and major, ruckus re Immigration started quite some while ago, but got heated with the camps in Calais and elsewhere. The receiving Schengen countries did little to sort things out. There had been some largely unreported immigration issues in Southern Spain for example, although these were intertwined with smuggling of tobacco etc near to Gibraltar. A son of mine was working there for a family on the beach side, and he could not use the beach at dusk and later without danger.
I and colleagues on matthaeus exchanges saw how immigrants from outside the EU were nodded through by the Spanish, provided they could show they were going on from Spain.
I and colleagues have seen similar things in Dublin, in my case by the coach load to Cork and on to Dublin and the UK.
These are just samples of course, and have to be treated with caution.
As to post immigration enforcement, that was not my Department, but I do know quite a few, some in service right now. We talk. Many have packed it in. Mrs. May was the Home Secretary for most of the period since 2010. She carries most of the responsibility to my mind. You might disagree, but so be it.
Would it be within your vacabulary to use non crude words in your reply please? Just as a favour to me.
Click to expand...


And more BLAH BLAH BLAH with absolutely no basis in fact to substantiate your personal opinions...

EU citizens are not immediately entitled to benefits and the UK is entitled to deport EU citizens who don’t find work within 6 months of failure.

Once again, it’s been a failure of the UK government to enforce this.

As things stand, EU citizens who come to the UK to find work cannot claim jobseeker's allowance during their first three months in the country.

After that they can claim for a total of 91 days, which can be split across several periods of jobseeking. They can continue claiming beyond that period if they can demonstrate that they are actively looking for a job and are likely to get it.

After a total of six months they can be removed if they still have not found a job, and have no realistic possibility of finding one, and require support from the welfare system.
Click to expand...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36449974


You know, you come over as a bit of a Walter Mitty character (with a touch of Godfrey Bloom) with all the tales of how you’ve personally seen everything the red top tabloids report and how you’ve managed to enforce tax and immigration all over the world on behalf of the UK?
 
Dave said:
And more BLAH BLAH BLAH with absolutely no basis in fact to substantiate your personal opinions...

EU citizens are not immediately entitled to benefits and the UK is entitled to deport EU citizens who don’t find work within 6 months of failure.

Once again, it’s been a failure of the UK government to enforce this.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36449974


You know, you come over as a bit of a Walter Mitty character (with a touch of Godfrey Bloom) with all the tales of how you’ve personally seen everything the red top tabloids report and how you’ve managed to enforce tax and immigration all over the world on behalf of the UK?
Click to expand...
'On behalf of the UK' would be in the UK only of course (although some - not me!) have done so elsewhere on rare occasions. The EU experiences were either private, noted in passing, or on approved exchanges. I was not enforcing taxes elsewhere in my private capacity, but as a guest of the administration involved. There are a fair few people doing things like that for various sponsoring bodies. There were over 30 in Afghanistan for one, when I was there. In some cases I was alone or one of a few. Some of the projects, not involving myself of course, were to do with improving justice procedures, health procedures, water supplies (but not all the dams DFID paid for were built!), education...... the DFID site will tell you more, as will the EU equivalent or USAID.
You may think that my post 3171 is unsubstantiated, and I did in fact advise treating some of it with caution. I do not carry the can for the press, just said that it caused a ruckus.
What I see in my travels is truthfully reported. If convenient you can ignore it: it matters little to me.
 
Thank god when Brexit happens, the British will be able to use proper paragraphs again. The EU regulations wrt writing have destroyed that space between 1 paragraph and the next
 
I... I... I don't even know what to say about this...?!

Don't post here often, but this needed sharing. It really did.

Leave-voting MP Nadine Dorries slams May's Brexit deal because UK won’t have seats in European parliament

Theresa May’s Brexit deal has been slammed by arch-leave MP Nadine Dorries – because it means the UK will be left without any Members of the European Parliament.

The Tory backbencher, who campaigned tirelessly to get the country out of Europe, said Ms May's deal would leave the UK without any influence in Europe.

“This is a very sad place to be,” she told Sky News. “But unfortunately, the future of the country and of our relationship with Europe is at stake. This deal gives us no voice, no votes, no MEPs, no commissioner.”
Click to expand...
 
Dave said:
Nadine Dorries sees herself as a female Farage/Mogg hybrid, unfortunately she is far too stupid to even try to emulate them.
Click to expand...

I can't decide if she's an actual human being, or a Twitter parody account with advanced hologram technology.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X