The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (3 Viewers)

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

Moving on......I'm interested in what the staunchest of remainers on this thread really think of Junckers proposals & vision for the further expansion of the Federalist EU state, the Eurozone, the Schengen zone, the appointment of trans-national MEPs, an EU president & EU finance minister......

I was going to say he's let his mask slip, but his ambitions of a Federalist super-state that suppresses sovereign democracies are already widely known......but I'd suggest his gloating tone, coupled with his rather overstated version of Europes current fragile recovery (don't look in the long grass folks) and the newly stated ambitions for further expansion & centralist control may well back-fire dramatically.......

Time will tell.....

 

---

[Astute]

Is it true that immigrants as a whole are sleeping on the streets? I don't think a small city of people land on the streets every year - at least not because of foreigners. Houses will be built if there is a demand. What happened here though is that high quality homes are being built by private firms as they bring in more money than cheaper homes. The government or rather local government, doesn't provide enough "council house" cheap property- "Sozialwohnungen".

Make your mind up. One minute you say they don't build enough houses and the next you say they will be built.

The banks have stopped lending to the smaller house builders. The large ones limit what they build so they can maximise their profits.

 

[Astute]

OK, so if we can't enforce the regulations now how are we going to enforce whatever new regulations come in? That's what makes no sense. We vote to leave to 'take back control of our borders' when we already have the right to control them but not he ability and / or manpower.

Hamza is Egyptian so leaving the EU will make zero difference to how cases such as his are handled.

Where in particular did you want to know about. There's 26,576 in the West Midlands, 3,189 of those in Cov.

The rules at the moment, if we enforced them, mean only those who have jobs here are allowed in. What is the difference between that and whatever new system it is you are proposing?

So what does freedom of movement mean to you?

The EU rules made it difficult to get rid of Hamza. The same rules some try to say that we don't have to follow.

So you are only allowed into countries that you have a job in? That is totally against freedom of movement.

 

[Astute]

Moving on......I'm interested in what the staunchest of remainers on this thread really think of Junckers proposals & vision for the further expansion of the Federalist EU state, the Eurozone, the Schengen zone, the appointment of trans-national MEPs, an EU president & EU finance minister......

I was going to say he's let his mask slip, but his ambitions of a Federalist super-state that suppresses sovereign democracies are already widely known......but I'd suggest his gloating tone, coupled with his rather overstated version of Europes current fragile recovery (don't look in the long grass folks) and the newly stated ambitions for further expansion & centralist control may well back-fire dramatically.......

Time will tell.....

I got ignored when I mentioned it earlier. So don't expect a proper answer soon.

To me it means the gravy train gets bigger. More poorer countries would have to join the Euro. They would be tied to how Germany does. So they would need bailing out. Yet Mart thinks EU spending will be reduced when we are not there to pick up the tab.

The EU is a good idea. But it is run by those who put their own interests before those they are supposed to be helping.

And nobody has mentioned about the Hungarian PM being very unhappy with what Juncker had to say.

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

Danish weren't too happy either......and I can't imagine the unsettled Dutch & French electorate whose democracies have already been brushed aside by the EU were too happy with the ideas.....

....Oh yeah.....and embracing the Balkan states fully into the EU......provided, of course, they relinquish the sovereign powers they all fought a bloody brutal & ferocious 8 year war over not so long back......that'll go smoothly, I'm sure.....

 

[Astute]

Danish weren't too happy either......and I can't imagine the unsettled Dutch & French electorate whose democracies have already been brushed aside by the EU were too happy with the ideas.....

....Oh yeah.....and embracing the Balkan states fully into the EU......provided, of course, they relinquish the sovereign powers they all fought a bloody brutal & ferocious 8 year war over not so long back......that'll go smoothly, I'm sure.....

Just shows how deluded Juncker is.

 

[clint van damme]

Danish weren't too happy either......and I can't imagine the unsettled Dutch & French electorate whose democracies have already been brushed aside by the EU were too happy with the ideas.....

....Oh yeah.....and embracing the Balkan states fully into the EU......provided, of course, they relinquish the sovereign powers they all fought a bloody brutal & ferocious 8 year war over not so long back......that'll go smoothly, I'm sure.....

that may be the only way to stop it happening again. It's pretty much how Tito kept a lid on things.

 

[chiefdave]

So what does freedom of movement mean to you?

The ability to go and work in another country without having to deal with the time and expense of obtaining a work permit.

The EU rules made it difficult to get rid of Hamza. The same rules some try to say that we don't have to follow.

The better question here is why did the UK authorities ignore Hamza and take no action against him for years? Had they done so he would more than likely have been locked up and extradition would not have been an issue.

But even if you ignore that, by May's own admission, and she was the home secretary responsible at the time, the delays had nothing to do with the EU and were down to the ECHR of which we will remain a member.

The delay was caused while it was determined if the 8th Amendment of the US Constitution was equivalent to Article 3 of the EHRC. Now that has been established a similar delay would not happen in the future.

So you are only allowed into countries that you have a job in? That is totally against freedom of movement.

No, you're allowed to visit any EU country for 3 months, which is actually less than we can visit some non-EU countries for, after that you have to be economically active which means you can support yourself and you are not reliant in any way on the state. In practical terms that means you either have a job or have enough wealth that you don't need a job.

That is what is in the freedom of movement is as defined by EU directives. You can hardly blame the EU for the UK and Ireland being the only countries who decided to opt out and not enforce the regulations.

What do you want put in place with regards to movement of EU citizens to and from the UK post Brexit?

 

[chiefdave]

Moving on......I'm interested in what the staunchest of remainers on this thread really think of Junckers proposals & vision for the further expansion of the Federalist EU state, the Eurozone, the Schengen zone, the appointment of trans-national MEPs, an EU president & EU finance minister

His speech, at least the scenario six part of it came across more like his personal wish list than a practical and achievable way for the Union to move forward. The reaction it received gives early indication he is unlikely to be able to cross off much of his wish list.

I can see the benefit of extending Schengen, half in half out in places like Croatia just makes it harder to police. The issue that didn't seem to be mention is the problem of having a border around Schengen, strengthened by a European Border Force (which makes sense, why should only the countries on the border take on the cost of policing it) when you have the remaining parts of the former Yugoslavia and Albania outside the agreement but inside the border.

I'm not a fan at all of the continued drive to expand the EU. For me it should have stopped in 95, although you can make an argument for 86. At the very least it should have been a 2-tier systems with the countries ascending after 86 making up and EU East.

Of course the thing that gets forgotten when this type of speech is made is that it needs everyone to agree as unanimity is required on major issues. On that front our positon is weaker as we no longer have a vote.

 

[Astute]

The ability to go and work in another country without having to deal with the time and expense of obtaining a work permit.

The better question here is why did the UK authorities ignore Hamza and take no action against him for years? Had they done so he would more than likely have been locked up and extradition would not have been an issue.

But even if you ignore that, by May's own admission, and she was the home secretary responsible at the time, the delays had nothing to do with the EU and were down to the ECHR of which we will remain a member.

The delay was caused while it was determined if the 8th Amendment of the US Constitution was equivalent to Article 3 of the EHRC. Now that has been established a similar delay would not happen in the future.

No, you're allowed to visit any EU country for 3 months, which is actually less than we can visit some non-EU countries for, after that you have to be economically active which means you can support yourself and you are not reliant in any way on the state. In practical terms that means you either have a job or have enough wealth that you don't need a job.

That is what is in the freedom of movement is as defined by EU directives. You can hardly blame the EU for the UK and Ireland being the only countries who decided to opt out and not enforce the regulations.

What do you want put in place with regards to movement of EU citizens to and from the UK post Brexit?

Just been reading The Times. Says in an article that illegal immigrants from outside the EU even are not easy to remove. Germany fails in 73% of cases even when all of the paperwork is completed. Yet you make out it is easy to remove people who are EU nationals when EU rules give them more rights.

 

[Astute]

His speech, at least the scenario six part of it came across more like his personal wish list than a practical and achievable way for the Union to move forward. The reaction it received gives early indication he is unlikely to be able to cross off much of his wish list.

I can see the benefit of extending Schengen, half in half out in places like Croatia just makes it harder to police. The issue that didn't seem to be mention is the problem of having a border around Schengen, strengthened by a European Border Force (which makes sense, why should only the countries on the border take on the cost of policing it) when you have the remaining parts of the former Yugoslavia and Albania outside the agreement but inside the border.

I'm not a fan at all of the continued drive to expand the EU. For me it should have stopped in 95, although you can make an argument for 86. At the very least it should have been a 2-tier systems with the countries ascending after 86 making up and EU East.

Of course the thing that gets forgotten when this type of speech is made is that it needs everyone to agree as unanimity is required on major issues. On that front our positon is weaker as we no longer have a vote.

His speech is what he wants to happen. Most of the time what he wants to happen does. It includes taking away even more rights from EU countries.

If amendments are needed it takes a unanimous vote. Something that is very hard to get.

 

[SIR ERNIE]

I accept your point on the lords and monarchy as I did earlier in this thread but luckily both are subjected to parliament who has final say. Elected politicians by us the public. Who voted for juncker? I didn't and nor did you.

Oh brexit is very relevant. Believe you me. Hundreds of thousands of German jobs are at risk due to brexit as we've discussed. It's a total embarrassment for the EU and Germany. They didn't discuss it in the tv debate and juncker didn't hardly mention it today. The eu don't like democracy and referendum results as we well know and as for Germany Britain leaving means the second biggest contributed is leaving and who will foot the bill? More than likely the Germans. That and the big risk to German hundreds of thousands manufactor jobs, That's why it isn't being discussed. Sweep sweep sweep.

Spot on, King.

 

[chiefdave]

Says in an article that illegal immigrants from outside the EU even are not easy to remove. Germany fails in 73% of cases even when all of the paperwork is completed. Yet you make out it is easy to remove people who are EU nationals when EU rules give them more rights.

Sounds like you're agreeing that being in the EU wasn't the issue and leaving won't solve it. You still haven't said what you want changing with regards to EU citizens post Brexit.

His speech is what he wants to happen. Most of the time what he wants to happen does. It includes taking away even more rights from EU countries.

When did we give total autonomous control to Junker? Will he retain that when his term ends in two years?
The sort of changes he's talking about would need a unanimous vote. So the point stands, are we best positioned to stop any plans he has when we have a vote or when we don't?

 

[Astute]

Sounds like you're agreeing that being in the EU wasn't the issue and leaving won't solve it. You still haven't said what you want changing with regards to EU citizens post Brexit.

When did we give total autonomous control to Junker? Will he retain that when his term ends in two years?
The sort of changes he's talking about would need a unanimous vote. So the point stands, are we best positioned to stop any plans he has when we have a vote or when we don't?

I have said several times on this thread that those already here should be allowed to stay. They have made their futures here. And those from the UK that have moved to the EU should be allowed to stay there. But where have I said that leaving the EU won't solve any problems? Staying in it certainly won't. If Juncker gets his way it will become worse.

We didn't give Juncker any control at all. He was given the role and has made it bigger than it was by the rules he has brought in.

Do you really think that we would have a choice in what direction that he takes the EU if we stayed in it? Have you forgotten about just before the vote when Cameron said that we would get changes and Juncker said straight away that we wouldn't?

And Juncker has just said that he is going to stand again once his term is over :wideyed:

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

I think when the vote was getting closer, a big argument for remain was that it was the safe option, and essentially you would be voting for the status quo.

I think the stuff coming out of Strasbourg yesterday suggests entirely otherwise now. Of course, leaving is uncertain, but I think had we voted remain last year there would be a certain chunk of remainers going berserk given the play out of where Junker wants to take the EU based on yesterday.

 

[chiefdave]

But where have I said that leaving the EU won't solve any problems? Staying in it certainly won't. If Juncker gets his way it will become worse.

Lets try and simplify the question and we might get an answer. Once we have left the EU what should the rules be on who can and can't enter the UK from the EU and of those people what rules will determine who can work and finally what rules would you put in place regarding family members of those you do allow in?

 

[chiefdave]

Just so I'm clear we're saying the EU is now a dictatorship where Junker can do whatever he likes and everyone else is powerless to stop him?

 

[Kingokings204]

Just so I'm clear we're saying the EU is now a dictatorship where Junker can do whatever he likes and everyone else is powerless to stop him?

It's not far off. Let's not forget Cameron voted against juncker being commission president and lost 26-2. It was humiliating.

The European Commission has the sole right to propose laws and legislation on eu member states without a say. Not far off being a dictatorship in my opinion.

 

[Kingokings204]

Also need I remind everyone again of the multiple referendum results the EU have ignored?

France, Denmark, holland and Ireland might tell you a thing or two about being ignored.

 

[Astute]

Just so I'm clear we're saying the EU is now a dictatorship where Junker can do whatever he likes and everyone else is powerless to stop him?

Most countries in the EU take out a lot more than they put in. So they don't want to rock the boat.

 

[Astute]

Lets try and simplify the question and we might get an answer. Once we have left the EU what should the rules be on who can and can't enter the UK from the EU and of those people what rules will determine who can work and finally what rules would you put in place regarding family members of those you do allow in?

You tell me what Juncker is going to decide and we can take it from there.

How about you finally answering one question I have asked several times. Are you happy that we can't limit how many people come here from the EU when we can't house those already here? And saying that we should build more houses isn't an answer. We already have millions that are homeless/in temporary accommodation.

 

[SIR ERNIE]

I think when the vote was getting closer, a big argument for remain was that it was the safe option, and essentially you would be voting for the status quo.

I think the stuff coming out of Strasbourg yesterday suggests entirely otherwise now. Of course, leaving is uncertain, but I think had we voted remain last year there would be a certain chunk of remainers going berserk given the play out of where Junker wants to take the EU based on yesterday.

During the referendum campaign I recall the excellent Daniel Hannan emphasising very effectively that a vote to remain was not in fact a vote to keep things as they are, not a vote to keep the status quo, but in fact a vote to 'stay on the EU train'... a train was moving ever closer to the ultimate destination of a one-state, united Europe, with Germany pulling all the strings. One in which the UK electorate would have even less control of their country.

The fool Juncker's speech has proved those words to be very prophetic.

Boy am I glad we're getting out.

 

[chiefdave]

You tell me what Juncker is going to decide and we can take it from there.

What has Junker got to do with it? I thought we were leaving to take back control but you're now saying Junker will decide the UKs immigration policy.

How about you finally answering one question I have asked several times. Are you happy that we can't limit how many people come here from the EU when we can't house those already here? And saying that we should build more houses isn't an answer. We already have millions that are homeless/in temporary accommodation.

I've answered that several times. We can limit how many people come here from the EU as they have to be economically active so the number of available jobs is the limit. It has absolutely nothing to do with the EU that the UK and Ireland decided to opt out and not enforce the restriction.

 

[chiefdave]

Germany pulling all the strings

But just a few posts ago we were told Junker had total control and could do what he liked. Now you're saying its Germany that is all powerful. Which one is it?

 

[Grendel]

You can move to any country in the EU as a member with no job and receive benefits as long as you are actively seeking employment.

 

[Sick Boy]

Just so I'm clear we're saying the EU is now a dictatorship where Junker can do whatever he likes and everyone else is powerless to stop him?

Come on, keep up!!!

 

[Sick Boy]

You can move to any country in the EU as a member with no job and receive benefits as long as you are actively seeking employment.

Can you? I wasn't entitled to any in Italy while not working. Had I not found work within 3 months I would have been thrown out.

 

[chiefdave]

You can move to any country in the EU as a member with no job and receive benefits as long as you are actively seeking employment.

On what basis?

Right of residence is only granted for 3 months for non workers and clause 21 states it 'left to the host Member State to decide whether it will grant social assistance during the first three months of residence'.

Article 7 Clause 1 states that to stay past 3 months you have to either be working; self sufficient with comprehensive medial coverage or a student on a recognised course with comprehensive medical coverage.

 

[Astute]

What has Junker got to do with it? I thought we were leaving to take back control but you're now saying Junker will decide the UKs immigration policy.

I've answered that several times. We can limit how many people come here from the EU as they have to be economically active so the number of available jobs is the limit. It has absolutely nothing to do with the EU that the UK and Ireland decided to opt out and not enforce the restriction.

You tell me what brexit will look like and I will tell you what is fair. If he wants to shaft everyone who has left the UK to live in the EU or something similar then many would have to come back. And as you well know we can't home millions already. And I wouldn't put it past him.

Can you explain how EU countries can't send back 73% of non EU residents when the paperwork is done yet you say that we can send back EU residents who have more rights.

 

[Astute]

On what basis?

Right of residence is only granted for 3 months for non workers and clause 21 states it 'left to the host Member State to decide whether it will grant social assistance during the first three months of residence'.

Article 7 Clause 1 states that to stay past 3 months you have to either be working; self sufficient with comprehensive medial coverage or a student on a recognised course with comprehensive medical coverage.

And clause human rights takes priority. Like the bloke who couldn't stop committing crimes was allowed to stay as he had a dog :banghead:

 

[Sick Boy]

In the real world I had a local policeman randomly banging on my door at 7am in Verona to check my I'D and work contract after producing it at the local commune.

 

[chiefdave]

You tell me what brexit will look like and I will tell you what is fair. If he wants to shaft everyone who has left the UK to live in the EU or something similar then many would have to come back. And as you well know we can't home millions already. And I wouldn't put it past him.

Its nothing to do with Junker or the EU remember, we're taking back control and don't have to listen to anyone else.

It will be down to the UK to decide who is allowed in to the UK. Why can nobody say, or even give a vague idea, of what the rules are likely to be.

Its as if the whole thing wasn't thought through and we're now trying to do everything on the fly.

Ridiculous to vote to leave the EU as its in our best interests but then complain if the EU looks to protect its own interests.

Can you explain how EU countries can't send back 73% of non EU residents when the paperwork is done yet you say that we can send back EU residents who have more rights.

Once again showing that leaving the EU will not resolve the issues people were claiming it would as it is not under the control of the EU.

And clause human rights takes priority. Like the bloke who couldn't stop committing crimes was allowed to stay as he had a dog :banghead:

So yet again you are confirming leaving the EU will not have any impact as it wasn't the EU causing the issues people were unhappy about.

 

[Grendel]

Can you? I wasn't entitled to any in Italy while not working. Had I not found work within 3 months I would have been thrown out.

No you wouldn't at all - deportation is made in exceptional circumstances and also if you had a job (say a bar job) for a week it becomes even more difficult - that's according to the EU website.

Also weren't you saying astute wouldn't be able to stay in an eu country for more than 90 days after we left but could stay if we are still in the EU? Which is it?

 

[Grendel]

On what basis?

Right of residence is only granted for 3 months for non workers and clause 21 states it 'left to the host Member State to decide whether it will grant social assistance during the first three months of residence'.

Article 7 Clause 1 states that to stay past 3 months you have to either be working; self sufficient with comprehensive medial coverage or a student on a recognised course with comprehensive medical coverage.

So sick boy and Martcov are liars when they said astute could pitch his camper van in a EU country for how long he wants if we stay?

What happens if someone gets a job for a week having come to the country and then is made unemployed? Can he stay then and seek work here?

 

[Grendel]

In the real world I had a local policeman randomly banging on my door at 7am in Verona to check my I'D and work contract after producing it at the local commune.

I think that's your make believe world.