I don’t think the stats back up your claim that the scale of internal-EU migration would make it impossible to apply employment checks in the same way countries do currently for non-EU workers.How do you know who entered your country? This system works well when there are no land borders when your point of entry is an airport or a port but it doesn't work when you go from France to Poland, the geography of Europe means that the scale of potential illegal immigration and administration would be a lot higher than from non-EU immigrants. And if I go back to your point about downward pressure on worker's wage, if you don't prevent illegal immigrants from entering your country, you are basically doing nothing to fix that issue because they will work illegally(unregistered), they will be employed and actually lower wages, in order to avoid that they need to either not enter your country or be registered and protected by employment and minimum wage laws.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/DDN-20190315-1The number of people residing in European Union (EU) Member States with citizenship of a non-member country on 1 January 2018 was 22.3 million, representing 4.4 % of the EU population. In addition, there were 17.6 million people living in one of the EU Member States on 1 January 2018 with the citizenship of another EU Member State. In most EU Member States, the majority of non-nationals were citizens of non-EU countries.
I don’t think the stats back up your claim that the scale of internal-EU migration would make it impossible to apply employment checks in the same way countries do currently for non-EU workers.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/DDN-20190315-1
There are more non-EU immigrants than EU immigrants throughout the continent. The scale seems perfectly comparable.
To me this is obvious, but maybe not... Please consider the example of new countries joining the EU and the transitional arrangements that are put in place.Maybe I'm not being clear but the non EU immigrants come from outside the EU and have been checked invidivually and at an EU external port of entry, the EU immigrants are already in the EU and haven't been checked at a port of entry. If you take away the freedom of movement of labour, do you think that the EU potential immigrants will just not immigrate? And keep in mind that the non EU immigrants already chose a country, most of them have no intention to move, EU potential immigrants have every intentions to move. You are comparing 17m people that have every intention to move with a minority among 22m that will maybe move.
https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=466&langId=enWorkers from new EU member countries - transitional arrangements
Restrictions on the free movement of workers may apply to workers from EU member countries for a transitional period of up to 7 years after they join the EU. For the moment this concerns workers from:
Individual governments of the countries that were already part of the EU can decide themselves whether they want to apply restrictions to workers from these countries, and what kind of restrictions. However:
- Croatia (joined 1 July 2013)
- They are not allowed to restrict the general freedom to travel, only the right to work in another country as an employed person.
Yes, that would be impossible as people from Manchester have exactly the same documents (passports) as the people from London. And for economic reasons you don't want to restrict movement of workers within a currency block, in this instance the Pound Sterling zone.You could look at it internally, it's like suggesting that people from the UK should be prevented to work in London if they aren't from London. How do you do that, if you can't check who comes to London?
To me this is obvious, but maybe not... Please consider the example of new countries joining the EU and the transitional arrangements that are put in place.
https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=466&langId=en
As you can see, for 7 years people from Croatia (in this example) are free to travel throughout the EU unrestricted, but Croatians do not have the right to work in another EU country. This shows that it is of course technically possible and mirrors the situation that would occur in a European Union where member states were free to set their own rules on eligibility to work, without automatic Freedom of Movement for Workers. Like the Croatians, people could travel around as they please, unrestricted, but would not be permitted to work without first obtaining permission from the nation state.
Yes, that would be impossible as people from Manchester have exactly the same documents (passports) as the people from London. And for economic reasons you don't want to restrict movement of workers within a currency block, in this instance the Pound Sterling zone.
People generally aren’t coming to the UK for the shitty benefits. They’re coming for employment.
I think the concern from low-skill British workers has been about downward pressure on wages. Certainly that’s how it’s been portrayed in the British press.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...dom-movement-euroep-foreign-posted-workers-eu
All a Croatian has to do to enter Schengen countries, or any other EU state, is show their passport. That's it. No one is asking them about their intention to work, or anything else, at the border.I can see this and it has nothing to do with FOM ideology. I already told you that the UK could have done it early but they decided not to. As for Croatia, they aren't part of Schengen, they will at the end of that transitional period, currently they are in a different territory, there are border controls.
All a Croatian has to do to enter Schengen countries, or any other EU state, is show their passport. That's it. No one is asking them about their intention to work, or anything else, at the border.
Me - Google what is Brexit ?
Google -
I honestly can't wait until these old white men die off.
None of the countries in the Schengen zone know when a Croatian, or anyone else present in the block, including non-EU citizens, have entered or left their national territory. Some of the people circulating in the Schengen zone will have the right to work, some won't, and some will have the right to only work in one specific Schengen country. You've created a myth in your own head about the link between border controls, entry and right to work.Which is enough, you just need to know who they are, when they entered and left.
imagine if Corbyn got elected and the Uk were still in the EU , there'd be another 3 years of this nonsense.
None of the countries in the Schengen zone know when a Croatian, or anyone else present in the block, including non-EU citizens, have entered or left their national territory. Some of the people circulating in the Schengen zone will have the right to work, some won't, and some will have the right to only work in one specific Schengen country. You've created a myth in your own head about the link between border controls, entry and right to work.
This has precisely nothing to do with the right to work.So this isn't a thing?
To me this is obvious, but maybe not... Please consider the example of new countries joining the EU and the transitional arrangements that are put in place.
https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=466&langId=en
As you can see, for 7 years people from Croatia (in this example) are free to travel throughout the EU unrestricted, but Croatians do not have the right to work in another EU country. This shows that it is of course technically possible and mirrors the situation that would occur in a European Union where member states were free to set their own rules on eligibility to work, without automatic Freedom of Movement for Workers. Like the Croatians, people could travel around as they please, unrestricted, but would not be permitted to work without first obtaining permission from the nation state.
Yes, that would be impossible as people from Manchester have exactly the same documents (passports) as the people from London. And for economic reasons you don't want to restrict movement of workers within a currency block, in this instance the Pound Sterling zone.
Me - Google what is Brexit ?
Google -
I honestly can't wait until these old white men die off.
I'd imagine no one cares about the nationality of nurses, so long as there are enough nurses in the country.Freedom of movement has existed since the beginning and was a main reason I voted for remaining in 1975. There were no currency zones, every country had their own currency.
British people are having their rights taken away by people who have been given false information by the media or because of other more sinister reasons.
What does the average person who voted leave care what nationaity their nurse is as long as they are getting care?
My original point was not about denying other EU citizens their rights but about the UK denying British citizens their rights.
This has precisely nothing to do with the right to work.
I'll give you a concrete example of the situation right now:This has everything to do with preventing/reducing illegal activities by knowing who enters your country and with which rights.
I'd imagine no one cares about the nationality of nurses, so long as there are enough nurses in the country.
But people do care about their wages being undercut by 'posted' workers. https://www.theguardian.com/comment...dom-movement-euroep-foreign-posted-workers-eu
I've posted this article earlier, but it was ignored. There are problems with Freedom of Movement of Workers in the modern world which need to be addressed, whether Britain leaves the EU or not.
It would be interesting to run a poll to see what percentage of British people voted remain but believe in leave.
In this thread alone, it appears that almost every beligerent arguer for brexit, actually voted remain, even while they're buying all the myths pedalled by the leave campaign.
The idea that the EU are refusing to compromise and both sides share equal blame for this impasse is a myth. The EU has compromised while the UK government has negotiated in bad faith, refused to compromise in anyway seriously and acted deliberately to paint the EU in a poor light. They have even leaked documents which explicitly reveal this to be policy.
The idea that the EU and Ireland are taking a hard line on Northern Ireland simply to punish the UK for Brexit is a myth. It's also incredibly insulting and dismissive of the genuine concern for peace and security on this island. Every time someone insists on repeating it, it demonstrates an ignorance and total lack of care for the real issues which will result from an enforced border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.
The idea that Irish people are too stupid to have opinions unclouded by an imaginary hatred of the English is a myth, and an offensive one at that. We are telling you what we know will happen in the result of a hard border and yes, we are not allowing some of you to simply ignore the part your country played in the situation. That is not hatred, it is merely accountability. This isn't us jumping on an opportunity to finally get one back on the UK, it is us fighting to maintain peace in a situation that has arisen through no fault of our own.
@TheReligion instead of telling us what you haven't said, why not tell us your actual opinions? Instead of slagging off the EU, why not tell us how they can be softer in their approach to Northern Ireland and where they can compromise? Start engaging on the actual issues and stop pretending you're a victim.
I'll give you a concrete example of the situation right now:
Does this matter to Austria? Does it fatally undermine their ability to stop Croatians breaking their employment laws? No.
- Croatians are free to enter the Schengen zone (and all EU countries) at any point of entry simply by showing a valid passport
- All EU countries have now dropped restrictions on Croatians' right to work, with one exception: Austria
- Croatians need a work permit to take employment in Austria
- It is theoretically known which Croatians are within the Schengen zone at any point in time due to border checks at the entry points to the Schengen zone
- But it is unknown, and unknowable, which Croatians are within Austria
- The only thing stopping Croatians working illegally in Austria is the checks done by employers (and government agencies working with employers)
If Austria were somehow granted a right to require Belgians to also have work permits to take employment in Austria, all that would change is that employers in Austria would ask Belgians for their permits. Nothing would change regarding border checks, or entry to the country.
Who is saying this ? Where in the media are white men not having their voices heard ? Genuinely interested if you have any examples.True, but I equally hate that “you’re not, I am” line and general sentiment, where [mostly] white males are repeatedly told they don’t understand and aren’t allowed an opinion on these matters because they are white males. That very notion is the exact sort of racism that we are trying to stamp out. It also creates a divisive and hostile culture - “them and us”.
Again your a copper, right ?Ermm yeah. I don't particularly think Greer came out of this looking particularly smart either in my opinion. Making sweeping statements based on her friend who can't speak Polish on the tube is a bit daft then when being asked to explain it snapping "well I'm foreign and you're not" is weak and not the basis for a meaningful discussion.
Who is saying this ? Where in the media are white men not having their voices heard ? Genuinely interested if you have any examples.
These types of white middle men view someone disagreeing with them as a form of censorship. The guy in the audience didn't even listen to the reply from Geer instead he went on to accuse her of label the whole of Britain racist! 1)She literally didn't do that 2)Her friend was getting abuse because of the language she speak not because of her race, its xenophobia not racism.
She was right to shut him down at the end.
Again your a copper, right ?
But really. Did you miss the part where Greer said her friend can't speak polish on the bus or tube because she gets abuse from passengers ? And the part where Greer talks again about her friend being hassled by passengers for speaking polish ? Greer mentions as well the effect its have on her friend child, the child is losing her maternal language.
Did you watch the clip, at all ?
And what if they somehow DID know which Croatians were in Austria... what difference would it actually make? They're legally allowed to be in the country regardless. As far as I know, they're not microchipping people at the border and then covertly following them around to see if they happen to be working illegally on the black market somewhere in the country.Of course it undermines their ability to prevent croatians, they don't know which croatians are within Austria. And employers being crooks isn't exactly inimaginable, you seem to think that you can actually trust them when working on the black is extremely common and has direct consequences on the issue that you have been talking about many time, downward pressure on wages. But I get it, you think that employers will honestly do the job or that companies will be tightly checked, they won't and the people that you want to protect will be the first victims.
This is exactly how it works for the 22m non-EU citizens in the EU - the vast majority of these people being within the Schengen zone. We rely on employers to check their right to work at the time of hiring. Indeed, the only way an employer even knows whether someone is an EU citizen or a non-EU citizen is by checking their documents when they hire them.Of course it undermines their ability to prevent croatians, they don't know which croatians are within Austria. And employers being crooks isn't exactly inimaginable, you seem to think that you can actually trust them when working on the black is extremely common and has direct consequences on the issue that you have been talking about many time, downward pressure on wages. But I get it, you think that employers will honestly do the job or that companies will be tightly checked, they won't and the people that you want to protect will be the first victims.
1) I've not slagged off the EU as you put it
2) I'm not belligerent arguer for Brexit
3) I'm not pretending to be a victim
4) No one is ignoring history or the horrendous actions by the British in Ireland over the years
5) No one is saying Britain should not fulfill its responsibilities regarding Ireland
What's your point again?
indeed - I have to see an EU passport to employ somebody - or if a non EU passport documentation that confirms the right to workThis is exactly how it works for the 22m non-EU citizens in the EU - the vast majority of these people being within the Schengen zone. We rely on employers to check their right to work at the time of hiring. Indeed, the only way an employer even knows whether someone is an EU citizen or a non-EU citizen is by checking their documents when they hire them.
Hey remain voters can be just as thick and racist as any leave voter. But yeah I sort do because its literally becoming a common thing with you now. Be it calling the first black person to represent her party at PMQs a ''moron''(Abbott literally went to Cambridge and has won awards as a MP), thinking the troubles in NI are similar to the fecking vikings and now this.What the feck has my job got to do with anything? What is it that you do again? Totally irrelevant. Or are you trying to suggest I'm a thick, racist brexiteer because I'm a cop? Do share..
Again she DIDN'T! The audience member asked Greer to explain her comments about why it's bad being foreigner in Britain. At no point did Greer framed the whole of Britain as anything.And you totally missed the point it seems. Greer's personal story about her Polish friend is of course upsetting and unacceptable but you can't frame the whole of the country in that light because of it. It wasn't the point she made that was the issue, it was how she made it.
6) You are not engaging honestly on issues.
You have slagged off the EU every time you have pretended that they have acted as equally poorly in these negotiations as the UK government. The behaviour of several British politicians over the last few years has been nothing short of shameful and you acting like the EU have acted just as poorly is very wrong.
You have continually pretended to be a victim rather than debate properly with issues raised. I'm not going to go back over every example but a read through my last ten posts shows numerous examples.
You have called the history boring and continually said it shouldn't be a factor in Britain being allowed to leave the EU. You equated Irish posters bringing up these issues to Brits complaining about Danish vikings.
Plenty of people have said exactly that. Suggesting that Ireland and the EU compromise on the border issue is arguing that the UK be allowed to ignore its responsibilities.
This is exactly how it works for the 22m non-EU citizens in the EU - the vast majority of these people being within the Schengen zone. We rely on employers to check their right to work at the time of hiring. Indeed, the only way an employer even knows whether someone is an EU citizen or a non-EU citizen is by checking their documents when they hire them.
The point I was making which started this whole conversation is that the EU should be changed to allow member states to restrict Freedom of Movement for Workers. i.e. Any member state should be able to decide independently which EU nationals are allowed to work in its country. It would go a long way to addressing the concerns of voters in the UK, and across the continent.?
I don't see what point you are trying to make,for a start the Uk isn't in Schengen and already has border controls. As an employer in the UK whenever you employ someone you need to have the National Insurance number of the person and I've been through this process with British and immigrants from EU and non-EU countries. So what control doesn't the UK have?
All you are talking about are illegal immigrants but they could be EU citizens being paid on the black or non-EU visitors overstaying their tourist visa and working on the black or a British person getting paid cash in hand or a rich person earning a fortune and not declaring their revenue. What has this got to do with FoM?
I didn't bring up the Vikings either.
Christ. Maybe we Brits should have a right go at the Danes for burning our villages and raping our women. When does it stop?
Yeah it's ridiculous isn't it.
This is exactly how it works for the 22m non-EU citizens in the EU - the vast majority of these people being within the Schengen zone. We rely on employers to check their right to work at the time of hiring. Indeed, the only way an employer even knows whether someone is an EU citizen or a non-EU citizen is by checking their documents when they hire them.
What the feck has my job got to do with anything? What is it that you do again? Totally irrelevant. Or are you trying to suggest I'm a thick, racist brexiteer because I'm a cop? Do share..
And you totally missed the point it seems. Greer's personal story about her Polish friend is of course upsetting and unacceptable but you can't frame the whole of the country in that light because of it. It wasn't the point she made that was the issue, it was how she made it.
Hey remain voters can be just as thick and racist as any leave voter. But yeah I sort do because its literally becoming a common thing with you now. Be it calling the first black person to represent her party at PMQs a ''moron''(Abbott literally went to Cambridge and has won awards as a MP), thinking the troubles in NI are similar to the fecking vikings and now this.
I'm sure your perfectly nice etc etc but you do seem to share a lot views similar to well that audience member.
Again she DIDN'T! The audience member asked Greer to explain her comments about why it's bad being foreigner in Britain. At no point did Greer framed the whole of Britain as anything.
Also its Question Time, Greer hasn't got time to give a whole ted talk. Just google xenophobia brexit spike.
I maybe completely ignorant here so please correct me if I am but:
If these points are correct (and again they may not be), surely that means four things:
- EU allows restrictions on the freedom of workers on new countries that have entered the EU, which illustrates that the four freedoms are not absolutely sacrosanct Correct
- EU member states in the Schengen Area have no knowledge of who is in their country, because any state has the right to offer an external citizen the right to work and that worker can then travel freely from one member state to another (not working) Correct
- Northern Ireland would be perfectly within its rights to legalise cannabis and this wouldn't trigger border checks, despite something being legal on one side of the border but illegal on the other side of the border. This would be controlled the same way that the US controls cannabis being taken across state borders Correct. For example, Luxembourg is the first EU country planning to legalise cannabis. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...e-first-european-country-to-legalise-cannabis. I'm not sure if/how the other EU countries would try and prevent the product entering their territories given there is no hard border.
- Some elements of taxation such as VAT are already calculated and allowable without the implementation of a hard border Yes, VAT rates vary between EU member states
If I'm missing something could someone could enlighten me?
- Firstly the four freedoms are negotiable as they already restrict the ability to work for new members; meaning in theory the UK could be offered a deal whereby they stay in the EU and are granted for example a net maximum per annum level on immigration for EU workers (something that would make a remain vote in a second referendum a home run and would justify a second referendum with both sides of the argument having changed: remain and leave) My view is that it is technically possible, but not politically possible as the EU is ideologically attached to the 'indivisibility of the four freedoms'. I agree with you that this should be how the EU evolves where right to work is decided more at a national level.
- Secondly traveling between Ireland and Northern Ireland isn't an issue irrespective of Brexit, since someone from Senegal who had the right to work in Italy could freely travel throughout 26 EU countries without any checks. He wouldn't be able to work in the other 25 countries, but that would be the same with ROI and NI post Brexit. So an English man could travel to NI, then to ROI, then to Italy and it wouldn't be an issue in the same manner (again though he couldn't work outside of the UK) The UK and Ireland have a Common Travel Area. There is no issue with people travelling within the islands whatever happens. ROI is not in Schengen, so a person needs to show documentation to travel from ROI to Italy.
- Goods travelling between the two Nations could be policed the same way cannabis is policed between US states. In the scenario of chlorinated chicken being deemed compliant with post Brexit UK standards, but not EU standards; this produce would be legal in NI but illegal in the ROI. If you were found smuggling across the border you would be charged in the same manner. NI will need regulatory alignment with the EU single market for goods to avoid a hard border. This would mean chlorinated chicken would remain illegal in NI, even if legal in the rest of the UK.
- Taxation issues are already calculated without a hard border, so further duties could be calculated in the same fashion. The issue with NI and ROI being in different customs territories is enforcement. If you could trust businesses and smugglers not to cheat the rules and to abide by the customs rules without inspections, then there would be no need for a hard border. But you can't just trust people.
Your reply here
I've called the history boring? No I haven't. I said the poster was boring. Let's not make things up!
We seem to have a difference in understanding with regards to slagging off. If that's the case I've slagged off the UK equally, if not more so, during the points raised as I've been pretty clear on my thoughts with how it has conducted itself.
You seem to want to argue about things that simply haven't been said or suggested. I didn't bring up the Vikings either.
