Except for Norway, Belarus and some on the Balkan all countries visited are in the EU.
If he hadn't put it in the manifesto then I think he would still be PM. Once it was in the manifesto he had to follow through.
Agreed. But the advantage is that the only people would would be affected/have a reason to care about it would be the 100,000 or so registered members of the Conservative Party rather than all 50+ million British citizens (and 300M or so EU citizens).So somewhere around now there would have been some kind of transition - whether that would have been smooth or messy we shall never know!
When he finished his passport should have been revoked.
When he finished his passport should have been revoked. Then he’d have been doomed to drive his white van around his beloved Europe forevermore.
Why, because he spent his own free time doing something you don't like? Or is there another, more substantial reason you think his passport should be revoked?
Probably. BromleyBoy seems to be in a more curmudgeonly mood than usual today.Why, because he spent his own free time doing something you don't like?
The immediate consequences of a “no deal” Brexit in March could be worse for the European Union than for Britain, senior Brussels figures have said.
Officials working for the European Commission have been given the task of drawing up contingency plans to be unveiled early next year in the event that Brexit negotiations collapse or fail to be ratified. Under the plans being co-ordinated by Martin Selmayr, the commission’s secretary-general, the EU would take unilateral measures to keep trade links open and aircraft flying immediately after a “chaotic” Brexit.
Concern is growing in Brussels, however, over whether EU institutions could act swiftly enough. In particular officials are worried that many decisions would require the unilateral endorsement of all member states as well as the European parliament. Moves would also have to be compatible with European treaties and could be challenged in the Court of Justice.
Even remainers like me know that it's not totally one-sided in the EU's favour. All those EU politicians sat on the beaches in Greece and Spain will be looking at the pot-bellied Brits and noticing just how much income we are bringing them. Also looking at the cars we drive and where they come from - which is usually a mixture of different countries for even one car.https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...dache-for-eu-than-uk-officials-fear-9m0g7nr98
A reminder that this process isn’t as one-sided as some on here like to make out.
All those EU politicians sat on the beaches in Greece and Spain will be looking at the pot-bellied Brits and noticing just how much income we are bringing them. Also looking at the cars we drive and where they come from - which is usually a mixture of different countries for even one car.
Indeed, they certainly should be.
The worry is that the EU is now so divorced from its member states that common sense like that falls on deaf ears.
The EU did nothing by stealth. Our politicians were involved all the way (Including UKIP politicians taking cash and literally doing nothing). The referendum came about because of Tory in fighting and trying to negate the threat of losing votes to UKIP.Exactly. It's very telling that we, including leavers and remainers, all talk about "the EU" as if it's an entity in its own, divine, right which is absolute, rather than an agreement between nations with elected delegates to it.
There are a lot of people on here who seem to think Brexit is a party political matter, left vs right, or Tory vs Labour. It isn't, and the creation of the current EU almost by stealth over the past two decades is what has bred the scepticism, left and right, in Britain and across Europe, which led to the referendum happening.
A few have suggested this should have purely been an internal Tory fight. Nonsense. Yes, the Conservatives spent much of the 80s and 90s famously arguing over Europe, but that's because they were in power. The Labour party was also split, and always has been. The Blair era airbrushed it out of history but it's always been there.
Twenty years on we have Labour constituencies trying to oust long serving and respected MPs because they dare to have an opinion on Brexit that differs from the non-existent party line. I could well be wrong, often am, but I seem to remember neither party whipped on article 50.
I haven't heard of any Conservatives being threatened with deselection.
Before the inevitable: I'm a Labour member, a union member since 1998 and my voting record is predictably unremarkable.
It was only supposed to be a joke! Hence the reference to hand writing.
I should have included a smilie.
Still a stupid and pointless thing to do though!
I could well be wrong, often am, but I seem to remember neither party whipped on article 50.
The EU did nothing by stealth. Our politicians were involved all the way (Including UKIP politicians taking cash and literally doing nothing). The referendum came about because of Tory in fighting and trying to negate the threat of losing votes to UKIP.
The worry is that the EU is now so divorced from its member states that common sense like that falls on deaf ears.
The EU did nothing by stealth. Our politicians were involved all the way (Including UKIP politicians taking cash and literally doing nothing). The referendum came about because of Tory in fighting and trying to negate the threat of losing votes to UKIP.
And the point cannot be emphasised too strongly. Ever since our entry into the EEC our elected politicians (leaving aside arguments about just how representative they are) have been fully involved in every decision about the way the EEC/EU has developed, taking a leading role in the development of such things as the open market and (regrettably from my perspective) arguing for and obtaining British special-case treatment and opt-outs in others. The European Parliament may not be perfect, but it is at least as democratically elected and representative as Westminster and it is our fault if we have not made full use of the possibilities it offers, not least by sending members who have taken the money and played no part. We have played a full part in making the EU what it is — no-one can argue that the things they dislike are what "they" do to "us" if we were a full part of the "they".Yes the EU has done nothing by stealth, we are part of the EU and part of it's political process. The problem is the vast majority (leavers and remainers for that matter) have little or no idea what the EU is or how it works. The information is out there though.
BiB 1 - if the electorate now turn against Brexit, should it be scrapped?;I really tire at this idea that there’s somehow something sinister about the Conservatives being worried at the prospect of losing votes to UKIP. Responding to the electorate should be seen as a positive.
Perhaps if Labour had given even a tiny hint in their 13 years that they were prepared to even think about addressing excessive immigration then UKIP may not have become so popular.
BiB 1 - if the electorate now turn against Brexit, should it be scrapped?;
BiB 2 - Can you quantify that?
I'm glad to read that - as for the polititians who can't deliver Brexit they are almost to a man/woman the ones who wanted the country to vote Leave in the first place. Perhaps, in mitigation, they were too concerned about finding tax-havens for their money to realise Brexit was (a) difficult if not (b) impossible. What did Fox say - "Brexit will be the easiest thing ever?" Or was it Davis?*If* that is clearly the case then yes. However I think there should be more justification than the country having a batch of below-par politicians who don’t seem to be able to deliver any policies let alone Brexit - which seems to be where we are at the moment.
.
So pretty much since forever, then?Regarding immigration, as far as I am concerned anything where the number arriving is more than the number leaving is excessive.
If we all looked back far enough, we're pretty well all immigrants. Judging by the length of ny nose (or ability to drink wine), I must be Roman therefore I assume to make Brexiters happy I've to go back? Well, that should be no problem under freedom of movement.So pretty much since forever, then?
Spiralling numbers of non-EU migrants are entering Britain by exploiting a 'gaping loophole' in the system, a report reveals today.
A total of 58,000 visas were issued to migrants and their families last year using 'intra-company transfers'. That is a rise of nearly 25 per cent in a decade.
The scheme allows multinational firms to bring in workers from overseas and was designed to allow senior executives to move to and from the UK easily.
But a report by the MigrationWatch think-tank says IT firms are abusing the scheme to bring in workers, typically from India, to fulfil contracts with UK firms.
Workers who arrive under intra-company transfers are not included in the Home Office cap on skilled work permits, currently set at just over 20,000.
The report warns that transfers 'distort the visa system' and 'undermine the integrity of the immigration system'.
The loophole is also damaging the prospects of British IT workers, it says.
Lord Green of Deddington, chairman of MigrationWatch, said: 'Many people are asking why non-EU migration has not been reduced.
Here is part of the answer. Either the Government have taken their eye off the ball or they have been too heavily influenced by a small group of companies and have ignored their own advisory committee.'
The report reveals that in 1992 some 7,185 intra-company transfer visas were issued. That figure has increased eightfold and the scheme now accounts for 60 per cent of all work permits.
Last year a total of 94,000 Tier 2 – or skilled worker visas – were issued, of which 58,000 were transfers. MigrationWatch found a majority of these are for 'third party contracting'. But it warned there appeared to be 'little political will' to deal with deficiencies in the system.
I'm glad to read that - as for the polititians who can't deliver Brexit they are almost to a man/woman the ones who wanted the country to vote Leave in the first place. Perhaps, in mitigation, they were too concerned about finding tax-havens for their money to realise Brexit was (a) difficult if not (b) impossible. What did Fox say - "Brexit will be the easiest thing ever?" Or was it Davis?
If Brexit ever gets reversed (and by heck I hope it is for everyone's sakes - except the filthy rich) then the blame lies not with the electorate who can only vote on what's in front of them, but those who offered the electorate golden paving.
BiB 1 - if the electorate now turn against Brexit, should it be scrapped
National interest or political expediency? Guess which is going to win every time.Neither party is about to suggest a second referendum. Neither are that suicidal.