How did Nigel do ?

[lardy]

My post was related to the hundreds of thousands entering the EU from Syria and beyond. Once they qualify for a EU passport through residency in say Germany they can enter and live in any EU country including the UK. This has nothing to do with the Schengen agreement meaning the UK are as likely to be affected as any other EU country. An EU passport granted in any EU country will entitle any migrant to settle anywhere in the EU including the UK.

You are quite correct, it's nothing to do with Schengen. It's do with the 2003 EU Directive on the status of non-EU nationals who are long-term residents, which the UK (and Ireland) is exempt from.

[Vindec]

You are quite correct, it's nothing to do with Schengen. It's do with the 2003 EU Directive on the status of non-EU nationals who are long-term residents, which the UK (and Ireland) is exempt from.

So are you saying that a migrant who qualifies and obtains an EU passport in another Member State cannot reside here?

[lardy]

So are you saying that a migrant who qualifies and obtains an EU passport in another Member State cannot reside here?

No, of course I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm saying the UK is not forced to accept them.

Interestingly enough, that directive is seen as a bit of a failure anyway because the uptake was so low. In the first few years, Germany and France had a couple of thousand each.


EDIT: My source on the last stat.

https://web.archive.org/web/20151208...ence-directive

[Vindec]

No, of course I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm saying the UK is not forced to accept them.

Interestingly enough, that directive is seen as a bit of a failure anyway because the uptake was so low. In the first few years, Germany and France had a couple of thousand each.


EDIT: My source on the last stat.

https://web.archive.org/web/20151208...ence-directive

So when the EU prevents us from deporting EU criminals the Directive states that we can deport those who are legitimately here with a bona fide passport? That runs completely counter to the aim of the EU which is that all EU citizens should be treated equally. Of course any migrant who is granted an EU passport becomes an EU citizen so the prospect of deportation is absolutely zilch.

[Vindec]

So when the EU prevents us from deporting EU criminals the Directive states that we can deport those who are legitimately here with a bona fide passport? That runs completely counter to the aim of the EU which is that all EU citizens should be treated equally. Of course any migrant who is granted an EU passport becomes an EU citizen so the prospect of deportation is absolutely zilch.

Further to the above:

I disagree that the Directive does what you think if my reading is correct.

The Directive 2003/109/EC on EU long-term residence aims to secure a common EU residence status for long-term residents, including uniform rights which are as close as possible to those enjoyed by EU citizens and, under certain conditions, the right to reside in other Member States. The share of immigrants who acquired permanent or long-term residence was recently agreed by EU Member States as a Core Indicator of Integration Outcomes, since active citizenship supports their integration, participation in the democratic process, and sense of belonging. In terms of its impact on integration, long-term residence enables third-country nationals to participate more in many areas of life on an equal legal footing with nationals and EU citizens.

Thus those with EU passports can in general reside anywhere in the EU including migrants granted EU passports.

[lardy]

Are you missing the bit where the uk is exempt?

[Vindec]

Are you missing the bit where the uk is exempt?

There is an interesting article here which seems to muddy the waters.

http://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/...vement-rights/

The practicalities of deporting someone with an EU passport from the UK to another Member State is however worrying given that we cannot even deport criminals.

[lardy]

Whose waters is that muddying? It appears to back up what I've said in the thread.

[tommy31]

for me, i have seen facts, we pay more into the EU that we get back, thats accepted by both sides, even if it is 10% of the 350 million per week, its still better being spent in the UK, one of the " fact checker sites -- fullfact.org " i read said " in In 2015 we paid in £8.5 billion more than we got back, or £23 million a day. " now surely this cannot be right

Turkey and a few Balkan countries are awaiting membership of the EU, I wonder what they will do ? ? ? Hmmmm stay in Albania earning 350 euro's a MONTH or head over to the UK and earn that in 1 week clearing tables somewhere, oh and then jump for joy when the goverment top up my wages because i have 2 children in school ( for free ) with a couple of hundred pounds a month in child benefit and family tax credit

I recently posted about my trip to franky and benny's and the eastern Europeans ( polish i guess )

Now i have nothing against these, i bet if i was born Albanian i would be moving my family over here for a better life, BUT this will stretch our public services even more, schools, health care etc etc

now them 2 above are facts, with that in mind and with the lack of other facts and loads of " what if's " and " maybe's " i am diffidently leaning towards Leave


ref the trade thing again, we Import more than we export ( another accepted fact ) and will these EU countries risk us putting import tariffs on everything ? ? No the likely situation will be a blanket 0 % from all sides, of course this isnt a fact, but it would be the only sensible outcome

Last I checked Wales got far more money back than we put in....

[Rjk]

Last I checked Wales got far more money back than we put in....

Essentially all of the uk does when you include the effect of trade agreements.

[tommy31]

Essentially all of the uk does when you include the effect of trade agreements.

I agree, but if we are talking raw numbers, as blue Matt is, then surely he can't argue that Wales is a net beneficiary, and thus by his logic we should stay in?

[chris]

Simple fact of the matter is, we wont get a decent trade deal unless we accept the free movement of people with Europe. So whats the point in leaving?

we dont need to be in the eu to trade with the rest of europe .

[Dr Lecter]

we dont need to be in the eu to trade with the rest of europe .

The font of all knowledge has spoken.

No need for a referendum - just let Chris decide.

P.s

[chris]

The font of all knowledge has spoken.

No need for a referendum - just let Chris decide.

P.s

me and my shadow, amongst the usual suspects.

[GRUMPYS DEN]

The font of all knowledge has spoken.

No need for a referendum - just let Chris decide.

P.s

[blue matt]

Essentially all of the uk does when you include the effect of trade agreements.

BUT that assumes we cannot strike a new trade agreement, which we know is not going to happen

It also means the UK can strike trade agreements with others countries, The US, China etc etc

which might outweigh what we lose

[blue matt]

I agree, but if we are talking raw numbers, as blue Matt is, then surely he can't argue that Wales is a net beneficiary, and thus by his logic we should stay in?

agreed, same as Cornwall and Scotland i believe

Afraid to say i no longer live in Wales, thus is doesnt really help my vote

[Badly Ironed Shirt]

BUT that assumes we cannot strike a new trade agreement, which we know is not going to happen

It also means the UK can strike trade agreements with others countries, The US, China etc etc

which might outweigh what we lose

No, it isn't assuming that at all. It is saying that the whole of the UK benefits financially from being in the EU - Farage conceded as much recently.

The US President recently said that the UK would be at the back of the queue when it came to new Trade Agreements. That's not a "MIGHT", but a fact.

How could any future trade deal look? I think the LEAVE camp need to tell us this.

[Badly Ironed Shirt]

BUT that assumes we cannot strike a new trade agreement, which we know is not going to happen

It also means the UK can strike trade agreements with others countries, The US, China etc etc

which might outweigh what we lose

http://news.cbi.org.uk/reports/our-g...utweigh-costs/

"A CBI literature review suggests that the net benefit of EU membership to the UK could be in the region of 4-5% of GDP or £62bn-£78bn a year – roughly the economies of the North East and Northern Ireland taken together."
"71% of CBI member businesses report that the UK’s membership of the EU has had an overall positive impact on their business, "
"The UK’s net contribution to the EU budget is around €7.3bn, or 0.4% of GDP. As a comparison that’s around a quarter of what the UK spends on the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, and less than an eighth of the UK’s defence spend. The £116 per person net contribution is less than that from Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Germany and the Netherlands."

[Mrs Steve R]

me and my shadow, amongst the usual suspects.

Don't worry chris, there will be plenty of time for 'I told you so'

[blue matt]

The US President recently said that the UK would be at the back of the queue when it came to new Trade Agreements. That's not a "MIGHT", but a fact.

How could any future trade deal look? I think the LEAVE camp need to tell us this.

You mean the prepared speech that Obama made while he was over visiting Dave " we will be at the back of the queue "
now any american would use the term " back of the line "

i am afraid that imho that speech was nothing more than a favour to Dave and while its great that Obama got involved ( i wonder what a vast % of Amercians would think of American rules / laws being set by Mexicans from across the border with Mexico's interests at heart and not Americans ) He didnt really need to get involve and will be out of office come the end of the year

[chris]

which way are you voting grumpy ? in or out of europe or are you going to go with the majority like you do on here.

saves thinking for yourself at least.

[Mrs Steve R]

which way are you voting grumpy ? in or out of europe or are you going to go with the majority like you do on here.

saves thinking for yourself at least.

Bit harsh?

[chris]

Bit harsh?

totally agree mrs r , but i reckon the vote will be in, too many will bottle it at the last minute

[Mrs Steve R]

totally agree mrs r , but i reckon the vote will be in, too many will bottle it at the last minute

I've thought all along that we will stay in but that does not make me shut up Sadly people are under the impression that nothing will change if we stay in, big mistake imo.