Cont: Brexit: Now What? Part 5

Status
Not open for further replies.
I thought you wanted to take back control of our borders?
The Good Friday agreement gets in the way of fully taking back control of the Northern Ireland / Ireland border. The EU is still saying it will have to install a hard border there - so eventually the border may become supervised.
 
The Good Friday agreement gets in the way of fully taking back control of the Northern Ireland / Ireland border. The EU is still saying it will have to install a hard border there - so eventually the border may become supervised.

I'm really not understanding this - you say you wanted to take back control of our borders as one of your reasons to leave the EU, but our only land border not being under our control doesn't bother you?

That seems remarkably.... inconsistent.
 
I'm really not understanding this - you say you wanted to take back control of our borders as one of your reasons to leave the EU, but our only land border not being under our control doesn't bother you?

That seems remarkably.... inconsistent.
I already explained that the Good Friday Agreement means that this particular border should remain open. What don't you understand? Do you think the Good Friday Agreement should be broken?
 
The Good Friday agreement gets in the way of fully taking back control of the Northern Ireland / Ireland border. The EU is still saying it will have to install a hard border there - so eventually the border may become supervised.
Again, not true.
 
So they can arrive unnoticed, under cover of the Common Travel Area arrangements between the Uk and the Republic of Ireland, engage in crime or unregulated work, and then depart again, all without being recorded as having been in the country. Sounds a bit off to me.

There I think you have hit on the pivotal point. Legal migrants are far less profitable to employ, what with the minimum wage, workers rights etc. Illegal immigrants can be used to keep down overheads and suppress wages in general. Watch in the aftermath of Brexit for demands to do away with all the 'red tape' involved in employment checks.
 
The Good Friday agreement gets in the way of fully taking back control of the Northern Ireland / Ireland border. The EU is still saying it will have to install a hard border there - so eventually the border may become supervised.

Er um...



I already explained that the Good Friday Agreement means that this particular border should remain open. What don't you understand? Do you think the Good Friday Agreement should be broken?
 
I voted in the first referendum in the 1970s for a competitive common market. At the time Ken Clarke, and others, said there would never be any possibility of a United States of Europe in the future, or a loss of sovereignty. That was patently untrue and it is the cause of a lot of the problems now. Peter Hargreaves of the investment management company Hargreaves Lansdown is supposed to have written a letter to a newspaper saying that people with business nous should be negotiating with the EU. That makes sense to me.
 
Last edited:
I already explained that the Good Friday Agreement means that this particular border should remain open. What don't you understand? Do you think the Good Friday Agreement should be broken?
It's the inconsistencies in your reasoning to achieve your goals that I'm curious about. The UK already more than any other EU country bar Ireland controls its own borders by dint that we have true physical borders. Leaving the EU will not according to you change the current situation so how does leaving the EU give us back control of our borders?
 
I voted in the first referendum in the 1970s for a competitive common market. At the time Ken Clarke, and others, said there would never be any possibility of a United States of Europe in the future, or a loss of sovereignty. That was patently untrue and it is the cause of a lot of the problems now. Peter Hargreaves of the investment management company Hargreaves Lansdown is supposed to have written a letter to a newspaper saying that people with business nous should be negotiating with the EU. That makes sense to me.
If you read the thread you would find your memory is rather inaccurate.
 
I voted in the first referendum in the 1970s for a competitive common market.
The UK was a founding member of EFTA. What did you think a move to the ever-closer-union of the EEC meant?

At the time Ken Clarke, and others, said there would never be any possibility of a United States of Europe in the future, or a loss of sovereignty.
He was right, wasn't he? The UK didn't join the Euro, Schengen, Eurocorps, etc...
 
If you read the thread you would find your memory is rather inaccurate.

I agree that there were Brexit people in those days like Tony Benn and Barbara Castle and Enoch Powell. James Goldsmith used to describe Britain as becoming an EU province. In a way the Irish problem has become less dangerous since EU membership. The thing that annoys me is I distinctly remember Ken Clarke saying on TV categorically denying that Britain would ever be part of a United States of Europe, which is patently untrue. This is an example of the referendum debate at the time:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/a-lesson-from-the-1975-referendum/
 
If you read the thread you would find your memory is rather inaccurate.
His memory is accurate in that the economic benefits were accentuated and the political effects were minimised to the voters. As to the specific regarding Kenneth Clarke, I don't recall.
The UK was a founding member of EFTA. What did you think a move to the ever-closer-union of the EEC meant?
Economic closer ties rather than political.
He was right, wasn't he? The UK didn't join the Euro, Schengen, Eurocorps, etc...
Which is not relevant when the specific quote refers to there ever being a USE. Now if you were to say categorically that there will never be a USE, you might say Kenneth Clarke is correct. You would however be directly contradicting the stated aims of the likes of J -C Juncker.

I agree that there were Brexit people in those days like Tony Benn and Barbara Castle and Enoch Powell. James Goldsmith used to describe Britain as becoming an EU province. In a way the Irish problem has become less dangerous since EU membership. The thing that annoys me is I distinctly remember Ken Clarke saying on TV categorically denying that Britain would ever be part of a United States of Europe, which is patently untrue. This is an example of the referendum debate at the time:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/a-lesson-from-the-1975-referendum/
Slightly different to your earlier post, and more like the assurances I recall hearing - that if it came to it we could try to veto it or leave...
 
Hilarious. Thanks. British politics is just funny in a way you don't elsewhere.
Don't what? see?
My favorite:
Parliamentary Democracy means that every man and woman over eighteen is entitled to vote to elect his or her Member of Parliament to serve in the House of Commons
Doesn't that just make you ill? :D
What do you think it means?
 
Economic closer ties rather than political.
Awesome. That assertion right after another leaver posts that Tony Benn letter. Just comedy gold.

But seriously:
DETERMINED to lay the foundations of an ever-closer union among the peoples of Europe,
Verbatim from the treaty of Rome.

Which is not relevant when the specific quote refers to there ever being a USE. Now if you were to say categorically that there will never be a USE, you might say Kenneth Clarke is correct. You would however be directly contradicting the stated aims of the likes of J -C Juncker.
"We must build a kind of United States of Europe." -Winston Churchill

What do you think it means?
It's a reference to this: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uk...ore-Europes-top-court-on-prisoner-voting.html

Get how funny this is? :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom