How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)

[youngsyr]

gooner1 said:

youngsyr said:

Do you not feel that membership is worth the compromises?

Snipped for brevity.

17+ million voters have already answered the above.

Absolutely, now if you could just tell me what the solution for the border at RoI/NI is under the policy that 17m+ voted for, then we can all sign off and go have a cup of tea!

Surely at least 1 of those 17 million people knows the answer, after all, they voted for it?

[gooner1]

alfie2244 said:

youngsyr said:

Ok, for the sake of argument I'll concede that Brexit was only ever sold on the basis of increasing controls over regular immigration.

You've admitted yourself above that it won't even do that, so where does that leave your argument?

So you made that bit up.............where does that leave your arguments?

Good post.

[youngsyr]

alfie2244 said:

youngsyr said:

Ok, for the sake of argument I'll concede that Brexit was only ever sold on the basis of increasing controls over regular immigration.

You've admitted yourself above that it won't even do that, so where does that leave your argument?

So you made that bit up.............where does that leave your arguments?

What bit did I make up? Was it the bit where amusingduck stated that Brexit was sold on controlling regular immigration, because I can requote the part where he wrote that, if you like?

Perhaps I made this website up too?

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_immig...

Do I need to provide more examples? OK, how about Farage stating that immigration was crucial to the leave side winning:

Nigel Farage on LBC said:

“I knew that if the issue of soverignity, in relation to the European Union, could be seen directly linked to immigration and open borders, this is what would change the whole national debate, and when George Osborne says in the referendum that issue was ‘lethal’ he is absolutely right, and that’s precisely Mr Osborne what I set out to do in 2004.”

Edited by youngsyr on Tuesday 18th December 15:07

[amusingduck]

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

Quoted from said thread, thanks jsf

That argument doesn't stack up though, did it?

You're claiming that illegal immigration is controlled by it being illegal and holding up the US as an example of where this system is effectively controlling illegal immigration.

However, illegal immigration is (at least perceived) to be a huge problem in the Southern United States and in the Southern EU states, routinely making headline news. Do I need to link the stories for you?

The reality is that illegal immigration is a problem even with closed borders in both the EU and the USA. I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be a problem in the UK too.

[b]Why are they waiting at Calais instead of hopping over to Ireland and in through the back door?[b] They can do that right now, and we're not proposing any change to that.

If we cut out the middle of this argument and skip to the end, the logical conclusion of your argument is "I thought we voted to take back control - why are we taking back control and changing nothing?".

To which the answer is "everyone is happy with the current arrangements so why change them?".

That is precisely what they're doing...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/06/irelan...

So how is it a Brexit specific issue?

Because Brexit has been sold to us as a cure to __illegal__ immigration, when at best it won't impact on it at all and at worst could make it significantly worse.

Has it? That's never been my understanding.

Controlled regular immigration, sure.

Ok, for the sake of argument I'll concede that Brexit was only ever sold on the basis of increasing controls over regular immigration.

You've admitted yourself above that it won't even do that, so where does that leave your argument?

Huh?

Where did I admit that?

Travelling to ROI and hopping over the border isn't "regular immigration"

[gooner1]

youngsyr said:

Absolutely, now if you could just tell me what the solution for the border at RoI/NI is under the policy that 17m+ voted for, then we can all sign off and go have a cup of tea!

Surely at least 1 of those 17 million people knows the answer, after all, they voted for it?

Certainly, we leave on the 29th March 2019 under the No Deal deal option
and let the EU or the RoI decide if they want a hard border or not.

Sugar, Milk?

[youngsyr]

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

Quoted from said thread, thanks jsf

That argument doesn't stack up though, did it?

You're claiming that illegal immigration is controlled by it being illegal and holding up the US as an example of where this system is effectively controlling illegal immigration.

However, illegal immigration is (at least perceived) to be a huge problem in the Southern United States and in the Southern EU states, routinely making headline news. Do I need to link the stories for you?

The reality is that illegal immigration is a problem even with closed borders in both the EU and the USA. I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be a problem in the UK too.

[b]Why are they waiting at Calais instead of hopping over to Ireland and in through the back door?[b] They can do that right now, and we're not proposing any change to that.

If we cut out the middle of this argument and skip to the end, the logical conclusion of your argument is "I thought we voted to take back control - why are we taking back control and changing nothing?".

To which the answer is "everyone is happy with the current arrangements so why change them?".

That is precisely what they're doing...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/06/irelan...

So how is it a Brexit specific issue?

Because Brexit has been sold to us as a cure to __illegal__ immigration, when at best it won't impact on it at all and at worst could make it significantly worse.

Has it? That's never been my understanding.

Controlled regular immigration, sure.

Ok, for the sake of argument I'll concede that Brexit was only ever sold on the basis of increasing controls over regular immigration.

You've admitted yourself above that it won't even do that, so where does that leave your argument?

Huh?

Where did I admit that?

Travelling to ROI and hopping over the border isn't "regular immigration"

This is getting bizarre, I've highlighted the words you typed in bold above.

[amusingduck]

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

Quoted from said thread, thanks jsf

That argument doesn't stack up though, did it?

You're claiming that illegal immigration is controlled by it being illegal and holding up the US as an example of where this system is effectively controlling illegal immigration.

However, illegal immigration is (at least perceived) to be a huge problem in the Southern United States and in the Southern EU states, routinely making headline news. Do I need to link the stories for you?

The reality is that illegal immigration is a problem even with closed borders in both the EU and the USA. I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be a problem in the UK too.

[b]Why are they waiting at Calais instead of hopping over to Ireland and in through the back door?[b] They can do that right now, and we're not proposing any change to that.

If we cut out the middle of this argument and skip to the end, the logical conclusion of your argument is "I thought we voted to take back control - why are we taking back control and changing nothing?".

To which the answer is "everyone is happy with the current arrangements so why change them?".

That is precisely what they're doing...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/06/irelan...

So how is it a Brexit specific issue?

Because Brexit has been sold to us as a cure to __illegal__ immigration, when at best it won't impact on it at all and at worst could make it significantly worse.

Has it? That's never been my understanding.

Controlled regular immigration, sure.

Ok, for the sake of argument I'll concede that Brexit was only ever sold on the basis of increasing controls over regular immigration.

You've admitted yourself above that it won't even do that, so where does that leave your argument?

Huh?

Where did I admit that?

Travelling to ROI and hopping over the border isn't "regular immigration"

This is getting bizarre, I've highlighted the words you typed in bold above.

Yeah, "the current arrangements" being the CTA.

"controlled regular immigration" being the end of FoML.

I'd like to see every potential immigrant treated identically. Based on suitability and skills, not geography.

[alfie2244]

youngsyr said:

alfie2244 said:

youngsyr said:

Ok, for the sake of argument I'll concede that Brexit was only ever sold on the basis of increasing controls over regular immigration.

You've admitted yourself above that it won't even do that, so where does that leave your argument?

So you made that bit up.............where does that leave your arguments?

What bit did I make up?



]

This bit......I've not bothered reading anything else sorry.

youngsyr said:

Because Brexit has been sold to us as a cure to illegal immigration,

Edited by alfie2244 on Tuesday 18th December 15:16

[wc98]

alfie2244 said:

youngsyr said:

Because Brexit has been sold to us as a cure to illegal immigration, when at best it won't impact on it at all and at worst could make it significantly worse.

Was it really?

unfkinbelievable that some people believe that.that some still can't see the difference between fmol and fmop leads me to believe they are being deliberately obtuse.

[youngsyr]

alfie2244 said:

youngsyr said:

alfie2244 said:

youngsyr said:

Ok, for the sake of argument I'll concede that Brexit was only ever sold on the basis of increasing controls over regular immigration.

You've admitted yourself above that it won't even do that, so where does that leave your argument?

So you made that bit up.............where does that leave your arguments?

What bit did I make up?



]

This bit......I've not bothered reading anything else sorry.

youngsyr said:

Because Brexit has been sold to us as a cure to illegal immigration,

That's ok, I won't bother reading any of your posts either.

[PurpleMoonlight]

I thought I would pay a visit, but it's just full of endless repeats so I'm off back to bed.

Oh, don't forget to stock up on Spam and toilet rolls.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6507943/M...

Be safe out there ....

[wc98]

youngsyr said:

alfie2244 said:

youngsyr said:

Ok, for the sake of argument I'll concede that Brexit was only ever sold on the basis of increasing controls over regular immigration.

You've admitted yourself above that it won't even do that, so where does that leave your argument?

So you made that bit up.............where does that leave your arguments?

What bit did I make up? Was it the bit where amusingduck stated that Brexit was sold on controlling regular immigration, because I can requote the part where he wrote that, if you like?

Perhaps I made this website up too?

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_immig...

Do I need to provide more examples? OK, how about Farage stating that immigration was crucial to the leave side winning:

Nigel Farage on LBC said:

“I knew that if the issue of soverignity, in relation to the European Union, could be seen directly linked to immigration and open borders, this is what would change the whole national debate, and when George Osborne says in the referendum that issue was ‘lethal’ he is absolutely right, and that’s precisely Mr Osborne what I set out to do in 2004.”

Edited by youngsyr on Tuesday 18th December 15:07

ahhh ! i see the problem, you bought something from some politicians .best not do that again. better looking at the situation for yourself before deciding.

[alfie2244]

youngsyr said:

That's ok, I won't bother reading any of your posts either.

You are making that up as well - I bet you do.

[youngsyr]

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

Quoted from said thread, thanks jsf

That argument doesn't stack up though, did it?

You're claiming that illegal immigration is controlled by it being illegal and holding up the US as an example of where this system is effectively controlling illegal immigration.

However, illegal immigration is (at least perceived) to be a huge problem in the Southern United States and in the Southern EU states, routinely making headline news. Do I need to link the stories for you?

The reality is that illegal immigration is a problem even with closed borders in both the EU and the USA. I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be a problem in the UK too.

[b]Why are they waiting at Calais instead of hopping over to Ireland and in through the back door?[b] They can do that right now, and we're not proposing any change to that.

If we cut out the middle of this argument and skip to the end, the logical conclusion of your argument is "I thought we voted to take back control - why are we taking back control and changing nothing?".

To which the answer is "everyone is happy with the current arrangements so why change them?".

That is precisely what they're doing...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/06/irelan...

So how is it a Brexit specific issue?

Because Brexit has been sold to us as a cure to __illegal__ immigration, when at best it won't impact on it at all and at worst could make it significantly worse.

Has it? That's never been my understanding.

Controlled regular immigration, sure.

Ok, for the sake of argument I'll concede that Brexit was only ever sold on the basis of increasing controls over regular immigration.

You've admitted yourself above that it won't even do that, so where does that leave your argument?

Huh?

Where did I admit that?

Travelling to ROI and hopping over the border isn't "regular immigration"

This is getting bizarre, I've highlighted the words you typed in bold above.

Yeah, "the current arrangements" being the CTA.

"controlled regular immigration" being the end of FoML.

I'd like to see every potential immigrant treated identically. Based on suitability and skills, not geography.

Ok, so how does Brexit result in every potential immigrant being treated identically?

Specifically, how does Brexit ensure those who enter illegally are treated identically to those who enter legally?

[alfie2244]

PurpleMoonlight said:

I thought I would pay a visit, but it's just full of endless repeats so I'm off back to bed.

Oh, don't forget to stock up on Spam and toilet rolls.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6507943/M...

Be safe out there ....

Good post PM (aka RipVanWinkle)

[youngsyr]

wc98 said:

youngsyr said:

alfie2244 said:

youngsyr said:

Ok, for the sake of argument I'll concede that Brexit was only ever sold on the basis of increasing controls over regular immigration.

You've admitted yourself above that it won't even do that, so where does that leave your argument?

So you made that bit up.............where does that leave your arguments?

What bit did I make up? Was it the bit where amusingduck stated that Brexit was sold on controlling regular immigration, because I can requote the part where he wrote that, if you like?

Perhaps I made this website up too?

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_immig...

Do I need to provide more examples? OK, how about Farage stating that immigration was crucial to the leave side winning:

Nigel Farage on LBC said:

“I knew that if the issue of soverignity, in relation to the European Union, could be seen directly linked to immigration and open borders, this is what would change the whole national debate, and when George Osborne says in the referendum that issue was ‘lethal’ he is absolutely right, and that’s precisely Mr Osborne what I set out to do in 2004.”

Edited by youngsyr on Tuesday 18th December 15:07

ahhh ! i see the problem, you bought something from some politicians .best not do that again. better looking at the situation for yourself before deciding.

So, you agree that Brexit will not give us more control over immigration? Good.

Ok, so do you also agree that if you increase the requirements to enter legally, whilst not increasing the controls over those who enter, the logical result is that you will have more people entering illegally?

[amusingduck]

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

Quoted from said thread, thanks jsf

That argument doesn't stack up though, did it?

You're claiming that illegal immigration is controlled by it being illegal and holding up the US as an example of where this system is effectively controlling illegal immigration.

However, illegal immigration is (at least perceived) to be a huge problem in the Southern United States and in the Southern EU states, routinely making headline news. Do I need to link the stories for you?

The reality is that illegal immigration is a problem even with closed borders in both the EU and the USA. I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be a problem in the UK too.

[b]Why are they waiting at Calais instead of hopping over to Ireland and in through the back door?[b] They can do that right now, and we're not proposing any change to that.

If we cut out the middle of this argument and skip to the end, the logical conclusion of your argument is "I thought we voted to take back control - why are we taking back control and changing nothing?".

To which the answer is "everyone is happy with the current arrangements so why change them?".

That is precisely what they're doing...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/06/irelan...

So how is it a Brexit specific issue?

Because Brexit has been sold to us as a cure to __illegal__ immigration, when at best it won't impact on it at all and at worst could make it significantly worse.

Has it? That's never been my understanding.

Controlled regular immigration, sure.

Ok, for the sake of argument I'll concede that Brexit was only ever sold on the basis of increasing controls over regular immigration.

You've admitted yourself above that it won't even do that, so where does that leave your argument?

Huh?

Where did I admit that?

Travelling to ROI and hopping over the border isn't "regular immigration"

This is getting bizarre, I've highlighted the words you typed in bold above.

Yeah, "the current arrangements" being the CTA.

"controlled regular immigration" being the end of FoML.

I'd like to see every potential immigrant treated identically. Based on suitability and skills, not geography.

Ok, so how does Brexit result in every potential immigrant being treated identically?

Specifically, how does Brexit ensure those who enter illegally are treated identically to those who enter legally?

I'm not sure if you're asking what I think will happen, or what I'd like to happen. So I'll answer one of each

It doesn't, necessarily. But I do think that it will be fairer, on the whole, than our current system.

Those who enter illegally would be ruled out under "suitability" if I was making the rules

[amusingduck]

PurpleMoonlight said:

I thought I would pay a visit, but it's just full of endless repeats so I'm off back to bed.

Oh, don't forget to stock up on Spam and toilet rolls.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6507943/M...

Be safe out there ....

Don't go, Don!

Look at all these lovely nested quotes I've made especially for you

[youngsyr]

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

Quoted from said thread, thanks jsf

That argument doesn't stack up though, did it?

You're claiming that illegal immigration is controlled by it being illegal and holding up the US as an example of where this system is effectively controlling illegal immigration.

However, illegal immigration is (at least perceived) to be a huge problem in the Southern United States and in the Southern EU states, routinely making headline news. Do I need to link the stories for you?

The reality is that illegal immigration is a problem even with closed borders in both the EU and the USA. I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be a problem in the UK too.

[b]Why are they waiting at Calais instead of hopping over to Ireland and in through the back door?[b] They can do that right now, and we're not proposing any change to that.

If we cut out the middle of this argument and skip to the end, the logical conclusion of your argument is "I thought we voted to take back control - why are we taking back control and changing nothing?".

To which the answer is "everyone is happy with the current arrangements so why change them?".

That is precisely what they're doing...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/06/irelan...

So how is it a Brexit specific issue?

Because Brexit has been sold to us as a cure to __illegal__ immigration, when at best it won't impact on it at all and at worst could make it significantly worse.

Has it? That's never been my understanding.

Controlled regular immigration, sure.

Ok, for the sake of argument I'll concede that Brexit was only ever sold on the basis of increasing controls over regular immigration.

You've admitted yourself above that it won't even do that, so where does that leave your argument?

Huh?

Where did I admit that?

Travelling to ROI and hopping over the border isn't "regular immigration"

This is getting bizarre, I've highlighted the words you typed in bold above.

Yeah, "the current arrangements" being the CTA.

"controlled regular immigration" being the end of FoML.

I'd like to see every potential immigrant treated identically. Based on suitability and skills, not geography.

Ok, so how does Brexit result in every potential immigrant being treated identically?

Specifically, how does Brexit ensure those who enter illegally are treated identically to those who enter legally?

I'm not sure if you're asking what I think will happen, or what I'd like to happen. So I'll answer one of each

It doesn't, necessarily. But I do think that it will be fairer, on the whole, than our current system.

Those who enter illegally would be ruled out under "suitability" if I was making the rules

Ok, so it seems you agree that Brexit will not increase our controls over illegal immigration on its own or ensure that all immigrants are treated equally. So same question as above to you then:

Do you agree that if you increase the requirements to enter legally, whilst not increasing the controls over those who enter, the logical result is that you will have more people entering illegally?

[wc98]

youngsyr said:

So, you agree that Brexit will not give us more control over immigration? Good.

Ok, so do you also agree that if you increase the requirements to enter legally, whilst not increasing the controls over those who enter, the logical result is that you will have more people entering illegally?

no, it will allow us to select say egyptian doctors over criminals from the eu. it will be based on the requirements of the uk at the time the application is made.
the illegal immigration issue will still exist, though given the proposed increase in border force employees and an increase in fisheries patrol boats some illegal immigration should be easier to detect.

worst case scenario we have some off the books people on a quid an hour living in sheds, should help with the competitiveness when we leave with no deal and armageddon ensues .