EU Referendum | UK residents vote today.

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

What happens in the situation where we don't negotiate terms within the 2 year time frame? We get kicked out of the EU... and so have no terms of trade with the EU or anyone else. France and Ireland have to block entry, we have no visa's, no rights for our nationals to live in EU countries and no rights for their nationals to live in ours.

It's unlikely, but that sounds like complete collapse to me.

More than simply unlikely i'd have thought. But if after say 12-14 months our negotiators believe that an agreement on the entire package is unrealistic (at least within the two year time frame), i would expect us to modify modify the offer to something more attainable. It is my belief that politicians would rather walk away with the rump of a deal than none at all. The prevailing economic conditions are such that the Eurozone can't afford to mess around. The sooner that terms could be announced, the sooner they can pretend that there isn't a problem at the heart of Europe. Walk away, nothing to see here.

People talk about the eastern Europeans yet their objections don't seem insurmountable; employers will continue to hire their workers, and the UK will remain and attractive destination for such. The need for a work permit does not alter the salaries available to them after all.

 

[sun_tzu]

More than simply unlikely i'd have thought. But if after say 12-14 months our negotiators believe that an agreement on the entire package is unrealistic (at least within the two year time frame), i would expect us to modify modify the offer to something more attainable. It is my belief that politicians would rather walk away with the rump of a deal than none at all. The prevailing economic conditions are such that the Eurozone can't afford to mess around. The sooner that terms could be announced, the sooner they can pretend that there isn't a problem at the heart of Europe. Walk away, nothing to see here.

People talk about the eastern Europeans yet their objections don't seem insurmountable; employers will continue to hire their workers, and the UK will remain and attractive destination for such. The need for a work permit does not alter the salaries available to them after all.

Have you seen the salary non eu people need for a work permit?
Or do you lower that threshold and allow people from all over the world a work permit with say a 12k job

 

[rcoobc]

More than simply unlikely i'd have thought. But if after say 12-14 months our negotiators believe that an agreement on the entire package is unrealistic (at least within the two year time frame), i would expect us to modify modify the offer to something more attainable. It is my belief that politicians would rather walk away with the rump of a deal than none at all. The prevailing economic conditions are such that the Eurozone can't afford to mess around. The sooner that terms could be announced, the sooner they can pretend that there isn't a problem at the heart of Europe. Walk away, nothing to see here.

People talk about the eastern Europeans yet their objections don't seem insurmountable; employers will continue to hire their workers, and the UK will remain and attractive destination for such. The need for a work permit does not alter the salaries available to them after all.

Well, it could theoretically alter the salaries available to them after Brexit. We wouldn't have EU laws forced upon us to treat everyone equally. Heck, the government could introduce a law saying that foreign nationals have to pay 20% of their wages back to the government, thereby forcing them to work for less money for the same job.

I should think that an extreme like that is very unlikely, but it's not a given. With any sort of fear of deportation (christ almighty) if they lose their jobs, then wages may automatically be lower as they have more to lose.

 

[sun_tzu]

Well, it could theoretically alter the salaries available to them after Brexit. We wouldn't have EU laws forced upon us to treat everyone equally. Heck, the government could introduce a law saying that foreign nationals have to pay 20% of their wages back to the government, thereby forcing them to work for less money for the same job.

I should think that an extreme like that is very unlikely, but it's not a given. With any sort of fear of deportation (christ almighty) if they lose their jobs, then wages may automatically be lower as they have more to lose.

An English born person can't even bring in a non eu wife unless they earn a certain amount... And even more to bring in a wife and kid
So allowing in eu people to work on low salaries I guess we have to ban their wife and kids... I dont see eu countries ratifying that

 

[rcoobc]

An English born person can't even bring in a non eu wife unless they earn a certain amount... And even more to bring in a wife and kid
So allowing in eu people to work on low salaries I guess we have to ban their wife and kids... I dont see eu countries ratifying that

I'm only saying that, things we take for a given in everyday life (anti-discrimination laws, equal rights, 28 days holiday, 6 hours work limits) would just be assumptions. We'd no longer be tied to those EU laws.

I personally think the EU have got their working time laws spot on. From doctors and nurses to lorry drivers. It helps keep us safe, and keeps people working. I think they have got the anti-discrimination stuff spot on too.

I'd like more holiday

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35686953

Its not an ideal time to be fighting for a stay vote when Greece is in serious difficulties coping with mass migration while their neighbours close the borders and the Euro economy with perfect timing moves into deflation.

But lets focus on the myth that all the risks run only one way in this vote and that without Europe holding us on the path of righteousness Britain wouldn't be able to stop itself from becoming a sweatshop human rights abusing dictatorship or whatever the next bollocks line of reasoning is.

 

[Red Defence]

Smaller, sweeter, more curved.

Didn't the EU have an issue with curved bananas at one time?

 

[711]

Bananas are about to be wiped out by spreading Panama disease again. Researchers are frantically trying to create a resistant strain. They managed it last time, in the fifties, but the new strain was a lot less tasty than the original, so my parents said anyway.

 

[Phurry]

Didn't the EU have an issue with curved bananas at one time?

When I used to work for Sainsburys I remember us having a government issue laminated poster next to where the bananas were stored showing the acceptable colour range & curvature for sale.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35686953

Its not an ideal time to be fighting for a stay vote when Greece is in serious difficulties coping with mass migration while their neighbours close the borders and the Euro economy with perfect timing moves into deflation.

But lets focus on the myth that all the risks run only one way in this vote and that without Europe holding us on the path of righteousness Britain wouldn't be able to stop itself from becoming a sweatshop human rights abusing dictatorship or whatever the next bollocks line of reasoning is.

We could feasibly become more like America though, which is bad enough.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

I'm of the opinion that the symbolic value of a thing is not to be underestimated. Not at all, I might add. Or more emphatically – it's actually bloody important, even when it's not estimable. Or, even more emphatically - it's all the more important when it's not estimable.

It's a matter of great importance, I think. The EU is flawed and has been flawed from its inception for many reasons. But here and now it's important that Britain remains a part of the bloody thing. So, spoken as a European with unbreakable ties to your silly – but also great – little island, I implore you not to be silly now.

That is all.

 

[Penna]

Didn't the EU have an issue with curved bananas at one time?

When I used to work for Sainsburys I remember us having a government issue laminated poster next to where the bananas were stored showing the acceptable colour range & curvature for sale.

Yes, those kind of things are stupid but sadly, they are what people remember. I couldn't care less if the EU forces us to call our chocolate something else, that's insignificant compared with the benefits we get from being on the inside of Europe.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Bananas are crap these days. Every time I buy any they are always bruised. Is this the sinister influence of the EU once again?

 

[Jippy]

When I used to work for Sainsburys I remember us having a government issue laminated poster showing the acceptable colour range & curvature

There must be a bad joke in there somewhere.

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

Have you seen the salary non eu people need for a work permit?
Or do you lower that threshold and allow people from all over the world a work permit with say a 12k job

Of course that threshold should be lowered, the same goes for the cost of visas. The Home Office has been unfairly targeting non-EU citizens for years, Brexit only strengthens the case against such policies.

We could feasibly become more like America though, which is bad enough.

Brussels has its heart set on TTIP though, which will begin us on that journey anyway. Whereas a vote for Leave on the other hand, could see it become an election issue in the future.

I'm of the opinion that the symbolic value of a thing is not to be underestimated. Not at all, I might add. Or more emphatically – it's actually bloody important, even when it's not estimable. Or, even more emphatically - it's all the more important when it's not estimable.

It's a matter of great importance, I think. The EU is flawed and has been flawed from its inception for many reasons. But here and now it's important that Britain remains a part of the bloody thing. So, spoken as a European with unbreakable ties to your silly – but also great – little island, I implore you not to be silly now.

That is all.

You would like for us to throw away a once in a generation opportunity when even your own post acknowledges that the damned thing is flawed?

Yes, symbolism is important, but the continent of Europe can bring more to the world than a German-centric trading bloc and a grubby elite in Brussels. This isn't our only route to better human rights and a greener planet for pity sake; we can make those things a reality without the EU, because we as people care about them. There is no need for a messed up currency union, an external affairs department, a European army, or a bunch of greedy politicians across the Channel telling us how much VAT we should apply to tampons, medicine and children's clothing.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Yes, symbolism is important, but the continent of Europe can bring more to the world that German-centric trading bloc and a grubby elite in Brussels. This isn't our only route to better human rights and a greener planet for pity sake; we can make those things a reality without the EU, because we as people care about them. There is no need for a messed up currency union, an external affairs department, a European army, or a bunch of greedy politicians across the Channel telling us how much VAT we should apply to tampons, medicine and children's clothing.

The problem - and the reality - is that there isn't an obvious alternative. Common goals could be reached in other ways - and better ways - I agree. But here and now the answer isn't to sever the connection. Britain, being the heavyweight she is, in Europe has a responsibility to shoulder her fair share: It's a responsibility that should come to her naturally, I would even say. It's not for Britain to withdraw now - Europe depends on her.

That's what I mean by symbolism - it goes far beyond practical policy on the detail level. It would be an immense blow to the best part of the pan-European idea (not the part about free trade and exchange of goods and services, but the part about, well, fellowship - which actually means something to many people, and might mean something very real before too long) if Britain pulled out.

There are iceberg problems in the world which we've only seen the tip of thus far. We - Europe - need Britain on board to deal with these problems, as a united force, even if it's an imperfect union.

 

[711]

Of course that threshold should be lowered, the same goes for the cost of visas. The Home Office has been unfairly targeting non-EU citizens for years, Brexit only strengthens the case against such policies.

That's an interesting view. The factor that would be most likely to make me vote Out would be if I believed being out would greatly reduce immigration. I've not believed this up to now, partly because other countries that want want to trade with the EU have had to accept free movement, but mainly because we've been pretty shit at reducing non-EU immigration anyway, numbers-wise.
Is the Out campaign now suggesting a slackening of thresholds to increase non-Eu immigration?

 

[Jippy]

Of course that threshold should be lowered, the same goes for the cost of visas. The Home Office has been unfairly targeting non-EU citizens for years, Brexit only strengthens the case against such policies.




Brussels has its heart set on TTIP though, which will begin us on that journey anyway. Whereas a vote for Leave on the other hand, could see it become an election issue in the future.




You would like for us to throw away a once in a generation opportunity when even your own post acknowledges that the damned thing is flawed?

Yes, symbolism is important, but the continent of Europe can bring more to the world that German-centric trading bloc and a grubby elite in Brussels. This isn't our only route to better human rights and a greener planet for pity sake; we can make those things a reality without the EU, because we as people care about them. There is no need for a messed up currency union, an external affairs department, a European army, or a bunch of greedy politicians across the Channel telling us how much VAT we should apply to tampons, medicine and children's clothing.

We should claim back our toasters.

 

[Jippy]

That's an interesting view. The factor that would be most likely to make me vote Out would be if I believed being out would greatly reduce immigration. I've not believed this up to now, partly because other countries that want want to trade with the EU have had to accept free movement, but mainly because we've been pretty shit at reducing non-EU immigration anyway, numbers-wise.
Is the Out campaign now suggesting a slackening of thresholds to increase non-Eu immigration?

From what I've gathered, we've slayed non-EU immigration, potentially to our own detriment, because we can't control EU immigration, so need to 'manage the numbers'. At the DM level, that means you lose an Indian IT graduate and gain a Romanian homeless.

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

The problem - and the reality - is that there isn't an obvious alternative. Common goals could be reached in other ways - and better ways - I agree. But here and now the answer isn't to sever the connection. Britain, being the heavyweight she is, in Europe has a responsibility to shoulder her fair share: It's a responsibility that should come to her naturally, I would even say. It's not for Britain to withdraw now - Europe depends on her.

That's what I mean by symbolism - it goes far beyond practical policy on the detail level. It would be an immense blow to the best part of the pan-European idea (not the part about free trade and exchange of goods and services, but the part about, well, fellowship - which actually means something to many people, and might mean something very real before too long) if Britain pulled out.

There are iceberg problems in the world which we've only seen the tip of thus far. We - Europe - need Britain on board to deal with these problems, as a united force, even if it's an imperfect union.

But if we remain bound by the EU's strictures and objectives, there shall be no opportunity to aim for something better. Now is the time to act, it could be our only chance for decades (i wasn't even alive the time the public were granted a say on the matter).

What would you like us to shoulder responsibility for precisely? The Eurozone, a concept which we warned against?

You talk about pan-European ideals yet there's a whole world out there, we can just as easily find common cause with Canada for all that is is an ocean away.

That's an interesting view. The factor that would be most likely to make me vote Out would be if I believed being out would greatly reduce immigration. I've not believed this up to now, partly because other countries that want want to trade with the EU have had to accept free movement, but mainly because we've been pretty shit at reducing non-EU immigration anyway, numbers-wise.
Is the Out campaign now suggesting a slackening of thresholds to increase non-Eu immigration?

I have not heard either campaign refer to the threshold, yet it stands to reason that if we have control of our entire immigration policy such measures ought not be necessary. The criteria for admittance should be as close to equal as we can make it; asylum seekers too could be allowed to enter the workplace sooner, instead of being left in an undignified limbo. Overall migration therefore can be reduced, and through a fairer system than is presently possible.

 

[RedTiger]

I'm of the opinion that the symbolic value of a thing is not to be underestimated. Not at all, I might add. Or more emphatically – it's actually bloody important, even when it's not estimable. Or, even more emphatically - it's all the more important when it's not estimable.

It's a matter of great importance, I think. The EU is flawed and has been flawed from its inception for many reasons. But here and now it's important that Britain remains a part of the bloody thing. So, spoken as a European with unbreakable ties to your silly – but also great – little island, I implore you not to be silly now.

That is all.

Where are you from? I always assumed that you were a Geordie (your username).

 

[rcoobc]

From what I've gathered, we've slayed non-EU immigration, potentially to our own detriment, because we can't control EU immigration, so need to 'manage the numbers'. At the DM level, that means you lose an Indian IT graduate and gain a Romanian homeless.

Is this true? I'm not sure I believe it. This chart is from 2008:

And this from more recently

Sorry for the quality, I'm on the phone. But we still have huge migration numbers from non-eu nations

 

[rcoobc]

Here we go.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30243472

So, despite us being able to block any non-eu person coming to the UK if we so choosed, and being unable to stop any non-eu person... Non-eu migration still outstrips eu migration, although it's definitely dropped since 2004.

 

[sun_tzu]

Here we go.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30243472

So, despite us being able to block any non-eu person coming to the UK if we so choosed, and being unable to stop any non-eu person... Non-eu migration still outstrips eu migration, although it's definitely dropped since 2004.

though for clarity 1 Jan 2004 to 4 May 2004 immigrants from Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Solvakia & Slovenia would have counted as non EU and after 4th May they were EU - which may explain somewhat the sharp change.

 

[rcoobc]

though for clarity 1 Jan 2004 to 4 May 2004 immigrants from Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Solvakia & Slovenia would have counted as non EU and after 4th May they were EU - which may explain somewhat the sharp change.

Great point. I wonder how the BBC worked around that.

 

[711]

though for clarity 1 Jan 2004 to 4 May 2004 immigrants from Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Solvakia & Slovenia would have counted as non EU and after 4th May they were EU - which may explain somewhat the sharp change.

Switch Poland and the difference might disappear completely. In any event the argument is 'we could make changes if more free to do so', which is true, but we have had a government as anti-immigration as we are likely to get, and one that has declared drastic reduction a top priority, yet has failed in that task for both non-EU and EU categories. Still not convinced on this subject.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

People moaning about immigration from EU rather than non-EU
Prior to the UK entering the EEC in 1973, British people were moaning about immigration from the ex-colonies, commonwealth, done a full circle?

 

[Jippy]

Here we go.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30243472

So, despite us being able to block any non-eu person coming to the UK if we so choosed, and being unable to stop any non-eu person... Non-eu migration still outstrips eu migration, although it's definitely dropped since 2004.

Non-EU has dropped by over a quarter. Maybe I over-egged it by thinking about the Indian student visa issue and my own wife's friends' struggles with visas, but it is on a clear downward trend, albeit with a marginal uptick at the end.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Where are you from? I always assumed that you were a Geordie (your username).

I'm of mixed origins, you could say. But no, I'm not a Geordie. I lived for years in England, though, including a spell in Durham (but the name is a tribute to Robbo more than anything).

 

[rcoobc]

Non-EU has dropped by over a quarter. Maybe I over-egged it by thinking about the Indian student visa issue and my own wife's friends' struggles with visas, but it is on a clear downward trend, albeit with a marginal uptick at the end.

Ah, sorry to hear about your wife, hope it all went well in the end.

I don't really know much about this. I thought anyone getting married to a UK citizen had a pretty slick pathway to remain in the UK with rights to work,

 

[RedTiger]

I'm of mixed origins, you could say. But no, I'm not a Geordie. I lived for years in England, though, including a spell in Durham (but the name is a tribute to Robbo more than anything).

Ahhh, another Robbo fan like myself

 

[Jippy]

Ah, sorry to hear about your wife, hope it all went well in the end.

I don't really know much about this. I thought anyone getting married to a UK citizen had a pretty slick pathway to remain in the UK with rights to work,

We actually got married to get round the visa issue- not the most romantic thing ever, but it worked out thankfully.

 

[The Purley King]

Switch Poland and the difference might disappear completely. In any event the argument is 'we could make changes if more free to do so', which is true, but we have had a government as anti-immigration as we are likely to get, and one that has declared drastic reduction a top priority, yet has failed in that task for both non-EU and EU categories. Still not convinced on this subject.

How are they supposed to do anything about EU migration at the moment?

 

[711]

How are they supposed to do anything about EU migration at the moment?

Read the posts. Everyone has accepted they can't, what is being questioned is how the issue would be addressed if we leave.

 

[The Purley King]

Read the posts. Everyone has accepted they can't, what is being questioned is how the issue would be addressed if we leave.

Well, thats up to the ruling party isn't it. What is clear is that they would be under huge public pressure to do something about it if we left.
What would be wrong with using the system we currently use for non-EU migrants? Or a version of it.

 

[Adebesi]

I dont think the fact that Europe has been unable to change for many years is evidence it cant or wont change, I think it will, inevitably, regardless of whether we leave or not. In the past it hasnt really needed to change, it has stumbled along fine in its dysfunction, but now it faces existential threats and not just because we might leave but because of the immigration crisis and because the global downturn has exposed massive financial divergences that were hidden during The Great Expansion.

This isnt really an argument for or against leaving, or more accurately, you can spin it both ways, depending on your preexisting disposition towards Europe. It probably will mean "more Europe" as we are already seeing in the eurozone as they move towards greater centralisation, meaning, ultimately, federalism. I dont think the UK is ever going to get caught up in that as we are outside the eurozone but i do think people who dislike the idea of giving up sovereignty - as they perceive it - will dislike the direction even we end up going within Europe in coming years. For example it means sharing refugees more evenly, which will certainly fall hard on the UK which IMO has been shockingly negligent. It means more cooperation generally, which means doing things you dont want to do in the greater good. Personally, as someone who feels the UK should be more internationalist than nationalist, I would welcome that.

 

[rcoobc]

Well, thats up to the ruling party isn't it. What is clear is that they would be under huge public pressure to do something about it if we left.
What would be wrong with using the system we currently use for non-EU migrants? Or a version of it.

For two reasons, firstly we have millions of expats living in the EU, and secondly we need access to the EU common market.

If we want access to the EU common market (the same as what Switzerland, Norway and Iceland have), then we probably have to join the EFTA. And guess what, joining the EFTA means taking on much of the current EU laws (human rights, etc) and future laws, and allowing EU workers unqualified access to our country.

Now there is a difference between free movement of workers and free movement of people, but not that much difference. Take a look at who can work, study or live in Norway.

So, we've voted to leave the EU and the government has chosen to join the EFTA. Why have they done that? Well for one thing, that would certainly help smooth the path between leaving the EU and having to agree terms with every EU country. It would also largely solve the problems of UK expats living in the EU and so on.

And so we've left the EU to regain our sovereignty and stop EU nationals from coming to this country, and straight away we've given away even more of our sovereignty and still allow EU nations to come to this country.

 

[711]

Well, thats up to the ruling party isn't it. What is clear is that they would be under huge public pressure to do something about it if we left.
What would be wrong with using the system we currently use for non-EU migrants? Or a version of it.

I'm sorry to be an arsehole, but read back, rcoobc has shown the system we currently use for non-EU migrants hasn't worked. And we have already had huge public pressure on the ruling party, which led Cameron to say it was his highest priority, yet he has failed.

I'm really open to argument on the likelihood of reducing immigration, but I'm just seeing nothing that convinces me.

 

[rcoobc]

I'm sorry to be an arsehole, but read back, rcoobc has shown the system we currently use for non-EU migrants hasn't worked.

I'm not sure I'd say the system we use for non-eu members hasn't worked... it's just it's goal was never to cut down on people coming into the country. The government likes non-eu migrants because they tend to be either a) skilled employees like doctors, or b) students paying a lot of money, or c) the spouses of a UK citizen. Even legal refugees makes the government look good in a lot of peoples eyes.

But EU migrants get the stick, because they don't have to have a job to come here, and they are "claiming benefits" and "sending money home"... Even though the UK economy depends on unskilled labour: There is a HGV driver shortage, a farm-worker shortage (especially as this is seasonal), etc

 

[Red Defence]

Switch Poland and the difference might disappear completely. In any event the argument is 'we could make changes if more free to do so', which is true, but we have had a government as anti-immigration as we are likely to get, and one that has declared drastic reduction a top priority, yet has failed in that task for both non-EU and EU categories. Still not convinced on this subject.

Maybe EU laws prevent us from making the changes we would like to make, but one way or another we are going to have to make them. Controlled immigration is a must for most countries and it certainly is for ours.

Perhaps us leaving the EU would also benefit other countries too. A few weeks ago it was reported that 1 in 8 Lithuanians live in the UK. How on earth is Lithuania going to build itself up if the population is decreasing at that rate. Poland and Romania will have the same problem, others too I should imagine. The EU policy of free borders causes workers to cross over into the richer countries whilst the poorer countries become worse off. Makes no sense.