The 'No to the EU' campaign
Discussion
jogon said:
zygalski said:
Your copy of the Telegraph is almost a week old..http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eurefer...
Another point in the article, wanting to prevent the EU spunking millions of our own money (and others') on referendum propaganda makes perfect sense.
BlackLabel said:
Also interesting that despite the hysteria in the media the public haven't suddenly switched to a "let them all in" approach to Syrian migrants. 
zygalski said:
Migrant madness. What's that? Do you mean the refugees fleeing civil war zones?
The inability of a community on nations to control its own borders despite most of those borders being at sea. Add in the fact that the one EU country to actually make an attempt to secure the borders of the EU (Hungary) is being roundly condemned for its efforts. We are talking about a mass illegal migration that is being facilitated or even encouraged by those who lead the EU.
zygalski said:
Migrant madness. What's that? Do you mean the refugees fleeing civil war zones?
If they aren't claming asylum in the first safe country they come to they are nothing more than illegal economic migrants.I've gone from being a confirmed Yes voter to a No vote over the way this migrant crisis is being handled.
I'm somewhat confused as to why the current problems with migrants from Syria, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Libya etc is being presented as a problem caused by our membership of the EU? What exactly would change if we left the EU? If anything, it could make the problem worse by moving border control from France to the UK, which would make it easier for migrants to get to the UK.
RYH64E said:
I'm somewhat confused as to why the current problems with migrants from Syria, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Libya etc is being presented as a problem caused by our membership of the EU? What exactly would change if we left the EU? If anything, it could make the problem worse by moving border control from France to the UK, which would make it easier for migrants to get to the UK.
Is not this type of situation that the EU should deal with, why is there no strategy for this crisis coming out of Brussels ? It's not like it just happened, now we are in the situation were unlimited immigration is going to take place, mainly to Germany, the next step will be to distribute the economic migrants around the other countries, Cameron will say it will not happen but we all know he does as he is told, remember the £7 billion he was not going to pay to the EU, these are economic migrants we are talking about, how many can the EU take, the only way out of this madness is to get out of the EU.
RYH64E said:
I'm somewhat confused as to why the current problems with migrants from Syria, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Libya etc is being presented as a problem caused by our membership of the EU? What exactly would change if we left the EU? If anything, it could make the problem worse by moving border control from France to the UK, which would make it easier for migrants to get to the UK.
You are confused that your average kipper doesn't see the difference between 'them immigrants, innit'. Somali, Romanian, Bulgarian, Afgan, Syrian they all come 'ere to sponge and rape and pillage, and our only hope is to say no to EU. Immigrant bad, EU bad, UK better out. Not hard.I'm confused by your confusion.
PRTVR said:
RYH64E said:
I'm somewhat confused as to why the current problems with migrants from Syria, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Libya etc is being presented as a problem caused by our membership of the EU? What exactly would change if we left the EU? If anything, it could make the problem worse by moving border control from France to the UK, which would make it easier for migrants to get to the UK.
Is not this type of situation that the EU should deal with, why is there no strategy for this crisis coming out of Brussels ? It's not like it just happened, now we are in the situation were unlimited immigration is going to take place, mainly to Germany, the next step will be to distribute the economic migrants around the other countries, Cameron will say it will not happen but we all know he does as he is told, remember the £7 billion he was not going to pay to the EU, these are economic migrants we are talking about, how many can the EU take, the only way out of this madness is to get out of the EU.
Without cooperation from the French we would see a lot more migrants getting across the channel, moving the border control back to the UK would be disastrous imo.
RYH64E said:
PRTVR said:
RYH64E said:
I'm somewhat confused as to why the current problems with migrants from Syria, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Libya etc is being presented as a problem caused by our membership of the EU? What exactly would change if we left the EU? If anything, it could make the problem worse by moving border control from France to the UK, which would make it easier for migrants to get to the UK.
Is not this type of situation that the EU should deal with, why is there no strategy for this crisis coming out of Brussels ? It's not like it just happened, now we are in the situation were unlimited immigration is going to take place, mainly to Germany, the next step will be to distribute the economic migrants around the other countries, Cameron will say it will not happen but we all know he does as he is told, remember the £7 billion he was not going to pay to the EU, these are economic migrants we are talking about, how many can the EU take, the only way out of this madness is to get out of the EU.
Without cooperation from the French we would see a lot more migrants getting across the channel, moving the border control back to the UK would be disastrous imo.
Why would we have to move the border back to the UK?
turbobloke said:
jogon said:
zygalski said:
Your copy of the Telegraph is almost a week old..http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eurefer...
Another point in the article, wanting to prevent the EU spunking millions of our own money (and others') on referendum propaganda makes perfect sense.
Even though exiting the EU wouldn't in itself deal with the refugee situation one jot. One suspects in the mind of the public all the various facets which add up to the whole issue of immigration, returning expats, students, Eu migrants, non EU migrants, asylum seekers etc are unfortunately inextricably bound but are all quite separate issues.
FiF said:
Let's not forget that if you ignore the ridiculous Torygraph poll tracker and follow just one pollster to eliminate the variability of sampling and data handling methods then it does seem as if there is a gradual shift towards no.
Even though exiting the EU wouldn't in itself deal with the refugee situation one jot. One suspects in the mind of the public all the various facets which add up to the whole issue of immigration, returning expats, students, Eu migrants, non EU migrants, asylum seekers etc are unfortunately inextricably bound but are all quite separate issues.
Very eloquently put. Nothing to disagree with.Even though exiting the EU wouldn't in itself deal with the refugee situation one jot. One suspects in the mind of the public all the various facets which add up to the whole issue of immigration, returning expats, students, Eu migrants, non EU migrants, asylum seekers etc are unfortunately inextricably bound but are all quite separate issues.
RYH64E said:
I'll ask again, how is getting out of the EU going to discourage migrants from Syria, Afghanistan, Eritrea, Libya etc wanting to get to the UK? It's easy to blame the EU for all of the UK's problems, but in this instance I can't see any reason to do so.
Without cooperation from the French we would see a lot more migrants getting across the channel, moving the border control back to the UK would be disastrous imo.
It won't discourage them from leaving their home countries. But will allow us to control who comes in to our country once they have left their own countries and are in the EU. Without cooperation from the French we would see a lot more migrants getting across the channel, moving the border control back to the UK would be disastrous imo.
Rather than, for example, Germany looking to take 800k people in (a staggering figure) knowing that once in those 800k can go wherever they want. They may choose to stay in Germany, they may not.
Assuming we leave the EU there would be nothing whatsoever to prevent us returning illegals to their last country of departure, no matter where our border control is. So if they come through the tunnel, or on the ferries, then ship them straight back to France (or wherever else they arrive from, though France seems the likely place in many respects).
People wanting to leave s
t hole countries is not the EU's fault. But the way the EU is set up, what happens to them once they leave their home countries and enter EU space very much is. The lack of a strategy to deal with this scenario (as someone else already mentioned) is surely a big red flag - it's one of the very things that should be in place if a construct like the EU is to have any value. And we have nothing...Murph7355 said:
It won't discourage them from leaving their home countries. But will allow us to control who comes in to our country once they have left their own countries and are in the EU.
Rather than, for example, Germany looking to take 800k people in (a staggering figure) knowing that once in those 800k can go wherever they want. They may choose to stay in Germany, they may not.
Assuming we leave the EU there would be nothing whatsoever to prevent us returning illegals to their last country of departure, no matter where our border control is. So if they come through the tunnel, or on the ferries, then ship them straight back to France (or wherever else they arrive from, though France seems the likely place in many respects).
People wanting to leave st hole countries is not the EU's fault. But the way the EU is set up, what happens to them once they leave their home countries and enter EU space very much is. The lack of a strategy to deal with this scenario (as someone else already mentioned) is surely a big red flag - it's one of the very things that should be in place if a construct like the EU is to have any value. And we have nothing...
1. we are not in Schengen Rather than, for example, Germany looking to take 800k people in (a staggering figure) knowing that once in those 800k can go wherever they want. They may choose to stay in Germany, they may not.
Assuming we leave the EU there would be nothing whatsoever to prevent us returning illegals to their last country of departure, no matter where our border control is. So if they come through the tunnel, or on the ferries, then ship them straight back to France (or wherever else they arrive from, though France seems the likely place in many respects).
People wanting to leave s
t hole countries is not the EU's fault. But the way the EU is set up, what happens to them once they leave their home countries and enter EU space very much is. The lack of a strategy to deal with this scenario (as someone else already mentioned) is surely a big red flag - it's one of the very things that should be in place if a construct like the EU is to have any value. And we have nothing...2. they do not get freedom and movement for living andworking until they have citizenship of an EU state, rather than rleave to remain or indefinite leave but retain their home country citizenship
3. the problem the EU needs to address is to encourage people ot register their asylum claim when they first set foot i nthe EU and then as part of their screening they can offer reasons why they should be offered asylum by a specific state
mph1977 said:
1. we are not in Schengen
2. they do not get freedom and movement for living andworking until they have citizenship of an EU state, rather than rleave to remain or indefinite leave but retain their home country citizenship
3. the problem the EU needs to address is to encourage people ot register their asylum claim when they first set foot i nthe EU and then as part of their screening they can offer reasons why they should be offered asylum by a specific state
You are way, way more trusting than I am.2. they do not get freedom and movement for living andworking until they have citizenship of an EU state, rather than rleave to remain or indefinite leave but retain their home country citizenship
3. the problem the EU needs to address is to encourage people ot register their asylum claim when they first set foot i nthe EU and then as part of their screening they can offer reasons why they should be offered asylum by a specific state
What are the naturalisation requirements for refugees in every EU state? My understanding is that they differ a fair amount but could be simply down to a small number of years residency. Once another state confers this, my understanding is that points (1) and (2) become irrelevant while we are a full member of the EU.
Point (3) is very valid...but just compounds my distrust of the EU and that it simply has not thought this sort of scenario through even remotely hard enough.
It's a bit naïve to say that the migrant crisis has nothing to do with our EU membership.
Firstly the EU's NAVFOR MED operation has been busily assisting migrants crossing from North Africa all summer.
Italy, quite understandably has said it can not take in all these migrants on it's own so where else will they go?
France called for a system to distribute these asylum seekers more evenly throughout the EU and Juncker seems to back this. I don't see how anyone can imagine this won't happen.
As soon as any one of these 28 member states grants citizenship to these migrants then they have the right to live and work in the UK just the same. Spain has had amnesties before, I believe Italy has too.
There is already a Common European Asylum System (CEAS). Although countries still have their own policies as regards granting residency and citizenship the direction of travel is quite clear.
Firstly the EU's NAVFOR MED operation has been busily assisting migrants crossing from North Africa all summer.
Italy, quite understandably has said it can not take in all these migrants on it's own so where else will they go?
France called for a system to distribute these asylum seekers more evenly throughout the EU and Juncker seems to back this. I don't see how anyone can imagine this won't happen.
As soon as any one of these 28 member states grants citizenship to these migrants then they have the right to live and work in the UK just the same. Spain has had amnesties before, I believe Italy has too.
There is already a Common European Asylum System (CEAS). Although countries still have their own policies as regards granting residency and citizenship the direction of travel is quite clear.
AJS- said:
As soon as any one of these 28 member states grants citizenship to these migrants then they have the right to live and work in the UK just the same. Spain has had amnesties before, I believe Italy has too.
You would imagine if the southern EU states really had issues dealing with their number of migrants, knowing that 90%+ of them want to be in Germany/UK, they might see having an amnesty as an easy answer to their problem.Esseesse said:
AJS- said:
As soon as any one of these 28 member states grants citizenship to these migrants then they have the right to live and work in the UK just the same. Spain has had amnesties before, I believe Italy has too.
You would imagine if the southern EU states really had issues dealing with their number of migrants, knowing that 90%+ of them want to be in Germany/UK, they might see having an amnesty as an easy answer to their problem.However, Cyprus already basically sells EU citizenship for a donation of 500K Euros and an investment of 2m, so it would seem possible that some poorer or more desperate country could undercut them. You would hope they would have at least the basic administrative competence to stop this but nothing is certain.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff