Forgive me, Ms Apocalypse: it seems strange that you are arguing a case around someone's correct name and yet your fingers seem unable to type her name correctly.
Forgive me, AnneJCP, but my central case isn't 'May used the incorrect name'. My central case is that May implied that Thornberry (happy now) should have taken on her husband's name.
Secondly, a accidental typo in a rush to reply to a number of posters is nothing compared to a deliberate referral of Thornberry as 'Lady Nugee', in order to imply that should have taken on her married name. One is accidentally putting an r before o on a random internet message board that Thornberry will most likely not read. The other is a public attempt to humilate/embrass her.
She was not implying she should have taken her husbands name, she was mocking her for being a "Lady". Please accept this point, it is painful to keep seeing the misunderstanding. It isn't as if any of us correcting you have anything to gain from it being so, it just is.
I'm not going to accept that point. Nor do I accept that it is a 'misunderstanding'. This is an online discussion forum. It's supposed to be an exchange of views, not a right-wing get together.
Well it is a misunderstanding, and you are embarrassing yourself by continuing to make it. It has nothing to do with right wing or left wing, it is just blatantly obvious. Don't play the victim, there's a good girl
'Playing the victim?' Why the strawman arguments isam? I'm simply stating my thoughts and arguments - I haven't implied that I'm any sort of victim at all.
No need to be patronising.
Furthermore, something isn't a 'misunderstanding', or 'embarrassing', because you state it is.
Haha, get the landing net!
No things aren't necessarily 'embarrassing' or 'misunderstandings' just because I say so, but you are repeatedly making an embarrassing misunderstanding whether I say so or not!
Yeah, I have to tell you again: repeatedly saying that something is 'embarrassing', and 'misunderstanding' because you disagree with an another view does not make it so.
Off Topic A magnificent Aurora tonight. Never seen it before at 55 degrees North and neither has my partner who grew up at these latitudes. If you have clear skies, worth a look at the horizon to the North.
This board will be an absolute delight when the newly independent Scots start behaving to the RUK in the same high handed way we are behaving towards the other 27.
Your prejudice and bitterness seems to have overwhelmed any sense of rationality.
That said, I make the same point to you that was made to William. You are trying to turn EU immigrants into a homogenised virtuous blob of 3m people, rather than look at them as 3m individuals
Assess them individually, and then advance your case to retain those who have records of criminality, poor employment and a need for taxpayer subsidy,
At the moment they aren't looked at as individuals, but I agree that now they should be. I don't think having a job here and not having a criminal record should be sufficient to get someone permanent residence. And if someone claims they are settled here but never bothered getting on the path to making an application for British citizenship, immigration officials should be very sceptical. That doesn't sound like proper settlement.
Forgive me, Ms Apocalypse: it seems strange that you are arguing a case around someone's correct name and yet your fingers seem unable to type her name correctly.
Forgive me, AnneJCP, but my central case isn't 'May used the incorrect name'. My central case is that May implied that Thornberry (happy now) should have taken on her husband's name.
Secondly, a accidental typo in a rush to reply to a number of posters is nothing compared to a deliberate referral of Thornberry as 'Lady Nugee', in order to imply that should have taken on her married name. One is accidentally putting an r before o on a random internet message board that Thornberry will most likely not read. The other is a public attempt to humilate/embrass her.
She was not implying she should have taken her husbands name, she was mocking her for being a "Lady". Please accept this point, it is painful to keep seeing the misunderstanding. It isn't as if any of us correcting you have anything to gain from it being so, it just is.
I'm not going to accept that point. Nor do I accept that it is a 'misunderstanding'. This is an online discussion forum. It's supposed to be an exchange of views, not a right-wing get together.
Well it is a misunderstanding, and you are embarrassing yourself by continuing to make it. It has nothing to do with right wing or left wing, it is just blatantly obvious. Don't play the victim, there's a good girl
'Playing the victim?' Why the strawman arguments isam? I'm simply stating my thoughts and arguments - I haven't implied that I'm any sort of victim at all.
No need to be patronising.
Furthermore, something isn't a 'misunderstanding', or 'embarrassing', because you state it is.
Haha, get the landing net!
No things aren't necessarily 'embarrassing' or 'misunderstandings' just because I say so, but you are repeatedly making an embarrassing misunderstanding whether I say so or not!
Yeah, I have to tell you again: repeatedly saying that something is 'embarrassing', and 'misunderstanding' because you disagree with an another view does not make it so.
I'd suggest you get the landing net.
I am agreeing with you! Just because I say so does not make it embarrassing or a misunderstanding, it would be even if I hadn't said it.
Forgive me, Ms Apocalypse: it seems strange that you are arguing a case around someone's correct name and yet your fingers seem unable to type her name correctly.
Forgive me, AnneJCP, but my central case isn't 'May used the incorrect name'. My central case is that May implied that Thornberry (happy now) should have taken on her husband's name.
Secondly, a accidental typo in a rush to reply to a number of posters is nothing compared to a deliberate referral of Thornberry as 'Lady Nugee', in order to imply that should have taken on her married name. One is accidentally putting an r before o on a random internet message board that Thornberry will most likely not read. The other is a public attempt to humilate/embrass her.
She was not implying she should have taken her husbands name, she was mocking her for being a "Lady". Please accept this point, it is painful to keep seeing the misunderstanding. It isn't as if any of us correcting you have anything to gain from it being so, it just is.
I'm not going to accept that point. Nor do I accept that it is a 'misunderstanding'. This is an online discussion forum. It's supposed to be an exchange of views, not a right-wing get together.
Militant Black Girl The Apocalypse in full on Socialist Justice Warrior mode!
If we're really being picky, I'm not technically Black but mixed race. After all, we know how some PBers feel about mixed race people being called Black....
Aren't you racist for self-identifying as Black and denying your White heritage?
I've always said I'm mixed, Sunil!
@AnneJGP Tbf, I think some members of the general public who referred to Ed as David did it because they were genuinely confused which brother is which. However I agree with you that those referring to Hunt as the C word were out of line.
There it is again - the 3m dressed up as uniformly virtuous contributors. Shame it's nonsense.
Did I imply that all economic activity is virtuous?
You stated that the 3m are economically active and therefore implied it is a uniformly good thing and somehow right for us..
The truth is that a sizeable portion can only survive here through very generous taxpayer funded support.
There is little value in importing a family whose earnings are so low that they pay no tax, yet need support for living expenses, housing, education ,health and so on. You really don't have to go far to find these people in London.
There are also consequences for people who are trying to set down a permanent base and build families when we allow so many transient workers in who accept relatively low pay and modest housing conditions .
To find these people in London I have to walk precisely 30 yards, where the Roma Big Issue sellers have their pitch. They're very polite, and don't care how many they sell, because they get tax credits & housing benefit from the get go
They come here TO be homeless and get the benefits.
If I walked another 10 yards I would find Bulgarians sleeping rough on the corner of Arlington St. Etc etc
Snip
Why SHOULD 16 hours a week keep a place in East Ham, Edmonton or Barking? Why shouldn't you be working 40 hours plus to keep a place there?
I have no problem whatsoever with migrants who come here to work and build a life to support their family. Work does not mean two eight hour days a week though.
Before this thread hits Peak Daily Mail, maybe you or someone else would look up the rate of benefit claims from EU nationals, compared to UK nationals.
Off Topic A magnificent Aurora tonight. Never seen it before at 55 degrees North and neither has my partner who grew up at these latitudes. If you have clear skies, worth a look at the horizon to the North.
Where in the UK are you? I remember seeing it in London (just about, due to light pollution) c. 1991.
It's a power play. If there's no prenegotiation, time becomes a weapon for the EU27 in the actual negotiation.
Only if you think the EU27 have nothing to lose from a botched Brexit. That may well be the disastrous miscalculation they are making.
They think that they can screw Britain to the floor. They misjudge the manic mood of their negotiating counterparts and yes I am braced for disaster.
I think that even if the EU27 could screw Britain to the floor it would be a huge mistake to try to do so, but the British government has hardly been saying anything that might make the EU27 look at this in a way that would develop a constructive post-Brexit relationship.
@AlastairMeeks & Nigel sitting in a tree, K-IS-S-I-N-G ☺️
twitter.com/lbc/status/837045651426922496
It's very sad how quickly Leavers' basic sense of decency has degraded. Policy stances that a few months ago were too extreme for the wildest headbangers are now presented unblushingly as practical common sense.
By the way, are you bunging Richard Nabavi in with the Loony Leavers now?!
Richard Nabavi is not, so far as I am aware, a Leaver (still less a loony one). I can try drawing Venn diagrams in MS Paint if this would be of assistance.
I do, however, think that it is wrong both morally and as a matter of policy to leave large numbers of the country's residents in limbo as to whether they can stay in the country (especially as Britain will inevitably be conceding the point at some point).
Taking this off the table was offered to the EU very recently - and rejected.
Remainers should stop grandstanding and whinging. And start getting real.
No. It's not about whinging. Threatening 3m with deportation is a serious matter. That is what we are effectively doing with this fiasco. Agreed, the EU are also doing it. We should rise above.
Do you really think it would be practical and desirable to really deport 3 million?
And if someone claims they are settled here but never bothered getting on the path to making an application for British citizenship, immigration officials should be very sceptical.
If you're talking about EU citizens I would strongly disagree with this. The whole point of EU citizenship is that you are a citizen of the union automatically so there should be no point in changing your citizenship just because you are a long term resident of another member state.
"Boots is shutting more than two-thirds of its photo processing laboratories"
If I held shares in Boots I'd be asking why those weren't shut yesterday.
Too soon. Lots of people are going back to film
In the same way as "lots of people" are going back to vinyl. There is a niche, and those part of it are very vocal and really into that niche. But the mass market have moved on.
Vinyl sales are growing again. I started re-buying last summer.
There's something about the artwork and something about listening to it on a record player that a CD, or god forbid a download - can't replicate. It's about collecting as well.
Perhaps it's age.
My better half has gone back to the printed book as well. Thrown her e-reader away. Digital photographs are so disposable that the feeling of ownership is missing also. They don't have that special feeling of a actual print.
It's as though digitization has been an phase. Owning a digital file is such an empty experience.
I think that's right and I too have gone back to vinyl, for most music listening. I have about 40GB of music but listen much more to my fairly modest collection of records. Never bothered with kindle.
I think that even if the EU27 could screw Britain to the floor it would be a huge mistake to try to do so, but the British government has hardly been saying anything that might make the EU27 look at this in a way that would develop a constructive post-Brexit relationship.
I disagree on the latter point. The UK government has been very clear that it wants a constructive relationship, whereas the EU27 have been sending out mixed messages (and mixed within individual EU27 countries). I don't think they have yet quite understood that we are leaving, and that therefore they need to negotiate with us not as naughty schoolchildren who have misbehaved and deserve to be punished, but as independent adults who want a friendly neighbourly relationship of equals.
They may well be making a catastrophic mistake, and certainly from a financial planning point of view it's best to assume that they might be, IMO.
Off Topic A magnificent Aurora tonight. Never seen it before at 55 degrees North and neither has my partner who grew up at these latitudes. If you have clear skies, worth a look at the horizon to the North.
Where in the UK are you? I remember seeing it in London (just about, due to light pollution) c. 1991.
In Northumberland. Maybe it is because we used to live at the bottom of the valley. Mind you I was in London in 1991 too, and didn't see it then, so maybe was just unobservant!
I think that even if the EU27 could screw Britain to the floor it would be a huge mistake to try to do so, but the British government has hardly been saying anything that might make the EU27 look at this in a way that would develop a constructive post-Brexit relationship.
I disagree on the latter point. The UK government has been very clear that it wants a constructive relationship, whereas the EU27 have been sending out mixed messages (and mixed within individual EU27 countries). I don't think they have yet quite understood that we are leaving, and that therefore they need to negotiate with us not as naughty schoolchildren who have misbehaved and deserve to be punished, but as independent adults who want a friendly neighbourly relationship of equals.
It may well be a catastrophic mistake, and certainly from a financial planning point of view it's best to assume that it might be, IMO.
I think you're far too kind to the UK government, which has bordered on boorish.
This board will be an absolute delight when the newly independent Scots start behaving to the RUK in the same high handed way we are behaving towards the other 27.
The polls will have to start backing independence first but given the majority of Scottish exports go to the UK and only a minority of UK exports go to the UK they have even more need to have good relations with us as we do with the EU
And if someone claims they are settled here but never bothered getting on the path to making an application for British citizenship, immigration officials should be very sceptical.
If you're talking about EU citizens I would strongly disagree with this. The whole point of EU citizenship is that you are a citizen of the union automatically so there should be no point in changing your citizenship just because you are a long term resident of another member state.
So they were wrong weren't they? Believed the EU ideal without thinking it was built on shaky ground and the nation state would be a factor. They should have the right to stay for sure, but only if it is reciprocal with UK citizens' rights in rEU. The Lords are being bonkers idealistic and guilty of looking out for foreign citizens ahead of their own.
@kle4 I didn't say that all those who disagreed with me were right-wing. You've just mentioned this place is right-leaning: well that is what it was a comment on.
Secondly, I didn't say you were right-wing specifically either.
Thirdly, I didn't typify the alternative view as a right-wing together either. It was in response to someone who wasn't engaging with my argument at all by providing an alternative view, but dismissed my argument entirely. The dismissive attitude, and the idea that my alternative view should not be put forward was what caused the 'right-wing get together comment.' I thought that was fairly obvious, given that in my exchanges with you I never actually characterised your disagreement with me as 'right-wing'. Nor did I ever explicitly define terms of this debate in ideological terms. Your reply to me is filled with accusations of things I never actually said.
Nor did I said that my argument wasn't my opinion. The difference is, is that I did not dismiss all other arguments, but I tried to make my case. (And again I'm not accusing YOU of dismissing my opinion).
As for your last question: because politicians do stupid things. It was a dumb thing for May to do, but it was hardly the crime of the century. If I disliked a politician over this one thing, then I'd probably hate most of them, given they have all made silly comments over the years. Indeed I didn't actually intend to get into a heated argument over this. A similar observation in regard to May's comment was made previously, and funnily enough there wasn't all that much debate about it. Yet there is now....
Really, if people are going to disagree with me, disagree with me on things I actually say. This is not the first time on this site that criticisms have been brought my way on statements I've never said.
...they need to negotiate with us not as naughty schoolchildren who have misbehaved and deserve to be punished, but as independent adults who want a friendly neighbourly relationship of equals.
This sounds uncannily like early-era Putin's attitude towards the West...
And if someone claims they are settled here but never bothered getting on the path to making an application for British citizenship, immigration officials should be very sceptical.
If you're talking about EU citizens I would strongly disagree with this. The whole point of EU citizenship is that you are a citizen of the union automatically so there should be no point in changing your citizenship just because you are a long term resident of another member state.
That's not the same as settled, though. If you are settled, you should want to have a vote in general elections even if you don't use it. Non-British EU citizens here who say they are settled and there was no reason for them to apply for British citizenship are treating the place as if it's somewhere they're on holiday or just staying for a while.
...they need to negotiate with us not as naughty schoolchildren who have misbehaved and deserve to be punished, but as independent adults who want a friendly neighbourly relationship of equals.
This sounds uncannily like early-era Putin's attitude towards the West...
Squeezes eyes.. tries screwing up face... tilts head
Sorry, try as I might, I can't distort my view of Theresa May into being in the tiniest bit like Putin.
The issue for negotiation is what the terms of movement of labour will be in the future. To make a unilateral guarantee for people currently resident in the UK is to concede nothing. The only real argument against it is that it would just be gratuitous virtue signalling.
Of course a unilateral guarantee would be a concession, and a very foolish one. It would concede the very important principle that we want the same rights for UK citizens in the EU as EU citizens have here.
Absolutely right. This idea that insane acts of generosity will inspire equal kindness from flinty selfish EU politicians with their own demanding voters, is just nuts.
When we waived the transition period for the A8 countries it wasn't out of generosity but out of self-interest. We thought we were getting one over on the stuffy French and Germans, with their irrational fear of the Polish plumber, and truth be told, we were.
From a Brexiteer perspective, the fact that this act of economic selfishness also contributed to building the Brexit vote coalition is just the deliciously ironic icing on the cake, but it's no reason to abandon the competitive advantage we've gained in the intervening period.
If we still had the 48 000 immigrants a year we had under Major rather than the almost 300 000 immigrants we now have I doubt we would have voted for Brexit
Half of that 300,000 were non-EU citizens. Who was the incompetent Home Secretary ?
The largest destination for immigrants to the UK is no longer India but Poland
Forgive me, Ms Apocalypse: it seems strange that you are arguing a case around someone's correct name and yet your fingers seem unable to type her name correctly.
Forgive me, AnneJCP, but my central case isn't 'May used the incorrect name'. My central case is that May implied that Thornberry (happy now) should have taken on her husband's name.
Secondly, a accidental typo in a rush to reply to a number of posters is nothing compared to a deliberate referral of Thornberry as 'Lady Nugee', in order to imply that should have taken on her married name. One is accidentally putting an r before o on a random internet message board that Thornberry will most likely not read. The other is a public attempt to humilate/embrass her.
She was not implying she should have taken her husbands name, she was mocking her for being a "Lady". Please accept this point, it is painful to keep seeing the misunderstanding. It isn't as if any of us correcting you have anything to gain from it being so, it just is.
I'm not going to accept that point. Nor do I accept that it is a 'misunderstanding'. This is an online discussion forum. It's supposed to be an exchange of views, not a right-wing get together.
Militant Black Girl The Apocalypse in full on Socialist Justice Warrior mode!
@chestnut The 3m are here by legal right. Unless you are willing to deport them (which you might be, but knowing your usual views, I doubt) it's just an empty threat. An empty threat that creates instability and causes divisiness. An empty threat that is too extreme even for Nigel Farage!
Off Topic A magnificent Aurora tonight. Never seen it before at 55 degrees North and neither has my partner who grew up at these latitudes. If you have clear skies, worth a look at the horizon to the North.
I sincerely believe that if some brave government had tackled this idiocy, years ago, we'd never have Brexited. Welfare should be based on contributions. The longer you've worked here, lived here, paid taxes here, the better your benefits. And this should extend over generations, incentivising loyalty. Indeed, I'd add a military option: if you or your mum or dad or grandparents fought or died for Britain, etc etc, then your claim is even stronger.
Not only would we not have Brexited, we'd have had more constructive politics across the board.
One of the main factors that made working class Tories turn out to vote against Labour come hell or high water was always the perception that they were for the shirkers, not the workers. They viscerally objected to the unfairness of living a life of hard graft while their neighbour, relative or acquaintance was better off milking the system.
I've variously been dating a couple of younger, working class girls the last few months: graduates who made it out of chavdom, went to Uni, and are now looking for work.
They are really quite surprisingly rightwing and have an absolute loathing for welfare spongers (who definitely exist, in all races and faiths).
The generation after the Corbynite Millennials is quite flinty and Thatcherite. Probably because they have to be, in a world of student loans, automation, and the gig economy.
They don't want overly generous welfare but they still back the NHS
And if someone claims they are settled here but never bothered getting on the path to making an application for British citizenship, immigration officials should be very sceptical.
If you're talking about EU citizens I would strongly disagree with this. The whole point of EU citizenship is that you are a citizen of the union automatically so there should be no point in changing your citizenship just because you are a long term resident of another member state.
That's not the same as settled, though. If you are settled, you should want to have a vote in general elections even if you don't use it. Non-British EU citizens here who say they are settled and there was no reason for them to apply for British citizenship are treating the place as if it's somewhere they're on holiday or just staying for a while.
That's overly prescriptive. If a French woman has lived here for 20 years and has children who have British passports I don't see why she should be made to feel any obligation to change her own nationality.
Indeed I would make it much harder to acquire a different nationality, full stop. Too many people treat passports like entitlement cards.
...they need to negotiate with us not as naughty schoolchildren who have misbehaved and deserve to be punished, but as independent adults who want a friendly neighbourly relationship of equals.
This sounds uncannily like early-era Putin's attitude towards the West...
Squeezes eyes.. tries screwing up face... tilts head
Sorry, try as I might, I can't distort my view of Theresa May into being in the tiniest bit like Putin.
I was talking about your phrasing, not Theresa May.
We're equals... You must respect us... We are not schoolchildren... We can hurt you if you mess us around...
I really think the Lords and their many opponents on this forum are missing the point. There's nothing to negotiate on residency at this point because it's a national not an EU competency, beyond the requirement that national governments must offer residence after five years under FoM rules. EU citizens who have been living in the UK for more than five years without formalising their indefinite leave to remain status because they haven't needed to before are catching up now. The same probably is happening with UK citizens in Spain etc. What needs to happen now is that the respective governments actually implement their existing immigration rules and legalise anyone who qualifies. The UK government could streamline the process so applicants don't have to fill 100 page forms and supply 60 affadavitted bank statements going back 5 years or whatever nonsense they currently require, which leads to the system being gummed up and a far too high false rejection rate.
The Article 50 talks will deal with the tricky issues like welfare rights and special cases. There's no need for any binding on the Article 50 law. Equally, talk of early settlement is a red herring.
@AlastairMeeks & Nigel sitting in a tree, K-IS-S-I-N-G ☺️
twitter.com/lbc/status/837045651426922496
It's very sad how quickly Leavers' basic sense of decency has degraded. Policy stances that a few months ago were too extreme for the wildest headbangers are now presented unblushingly as practical common sense.
By the way, are you bunging Richard Nabavi in with the Loony Leavers now?!
Richard Nabavi is not, so far as I am aware, a Leaver (still less a loony one). I can try drawing Venn diagrams in MS Paint if this would be of assistance.
I do, however, think that it is wrong both morally and as a matter of policy to leave large numbers of the country's residents in limbo as to whether they can stay in the country (especially as Britain will inevitably be conceding the point at some point).
Taking this off the table was offered to the EU very recently - and rejected.
Remainers should stop grandstanding and whinging. And start getting real.
No. It's not about whinging. Threatening 3m with deportation is a serious matter. That is what we are effectively doing with this fiasco. Agreed, the EU are also doing it. We should rise above.
Do you really think it would be practical and desirable to really deport 3 million?
No. And that is my fucking point. Let them all stay, as I have said from the beginning.
The UK government has been very clear that it wants a constructive relationship
by threatening the future of all EU Nationals currently in the UK.
I am amazed the EU don't regard that as constructive...
There was a furore over this issue, I seem to remember, pre Rochester by election, when Reckless kind of umm and ahhd over who could stay post Brexit, and UKIP slapped him down
Was it only UKIP that had a clear plan on post Brexit Britain? They were asked about it more than anyone else obviously
@SeanT A sample of only three working class girls isn't all that much to conclude the views of an entire generation. Although I don't see why student loans etc would make one Thatcherite. Student loans, automation, and the gig economy are also issues that the Corbynite Millenials have to face after all.
She has been humiliated and embarrassed apparently, but then sitting on the shadow frontbench and expected to defend Jeremy daily, I’m sure she has the rind of a rhinoceros.
...they need to negotiate with us not as naughty schoolchildren who have misbehaved and deserve to be punished, but as independent adults who want a friendly neighbourly relationship of equals.
This sounds uncannily like early-era Putin's attitude towards the West...
Squeezes eyes.. tries screwing up face... tilts head
Sorry, try as I might, I can't distort my view of Theresa May into being in the tiniest bit like Putin.
I was talking about your phrasing, not Theresa May.
LOL, well I find it even harder to view myself as a Putin!
...they need to negotiate with us not as naughty schoolchildren who have misbehaved and deserve to be punished, but as independent adults who want a friendly neighbourly relationship of equals.
This sounds uncannily like early-era Putin's attitude towards the West...
Squeezes eyes.. tries screwing up face... tilts head
Sorry, try as I might, I can't distort my view of Theresa May into being in the tiniest bit like Putin.
You must have missed her connections to organised crime, enormous wealth of unknown origin, and the way her opponents have a habit of dying in a mysterious fashion.
It's a power play. If there's no prenegotiation, time becomes a weapon for the EU27 in the actual negotiation.
Only if you think the EU27 have nothing to lose from a botched Brexit. That may well be the disastrous miscalculation they are making.
They think that they can screw Britain to the floor.
They can, and they must.
Beyond parody.
Why on Earth then would we defend Europe through NATO in that scenario? We would pull up the drawbridge, hug the Anglosphere and anybody else willing very tight, invite the Russian navy to joint exercises in the North Sea and turn a blind eye when uncle Vlad rolls his tanks right though Ukraine Belarus Moldova and the Baltics.
I hasten to add I do not want the above outcome at all, but, listen to yourself: you seem to want the utter destruction and destitution of the UK for daring to leave a club according to its rules.
You must have missed her connections to organised crime, enormous wealth of unknown origin, and the way her opponents have a habit of dying in a mysterious fashion.
Hmm... it is true that her opponents seem to have a habit of self-destructing in a spectacular and mysterious fashion...
And if someone claims they are settled here but never bothered getting on the path to making an application for British citizenship, immigration officials should be very sceptical.
If you're talking about EU citizens I would strongly disagree with this. The whole point of EU citizenship is that you are a citizen of the union automatically so there should be no point in changing your citizenship just because you are a long term resident of another member state.
That's not the same as settled, though. If you are settled, you should want to have a vote in general elections even if you don't use it. Non-British EU citizens here who say they are settled and there was no reason for them to apply for British citizenship are treating the place as if it's somewhere they're on holiday or just staying for a while.
They do have a vote in the election that matters - for their MEP. Doesn't matter where they cast that vote. Nation states are regions of the EU.
Off Topic A magnificent Aurora tonight. Never seen it before at 55 degrees North and neither has my partner who grew up at these latitudes. If you have clear skies, worth a look at the horizon to the North.
So what is your question? I already told you why you should look up the data before pontificating.
FFS.
I don't have too,I see it with my own eyes in the area I am living.
Do you think it's right we are importing unemployment and the unemployable ?
The rate of employment among EU nationals living in the UK is 5pts higher than that of UK nationals. If we deported the 3m, as some on here wish to consider, the UK unemployment rate would rise.
I really think the Lords and their many opponents on this forum are missing the point. There's nothing to negotiate on residency at this point because it's a national not an EU competency, beyond the requirement that national governments must offer residence after five years under FoM rules. EU citizens who have been living in the UK for more than five years without formalising their indefinite leave to remain status because they haven't needed to before are catching up now. The same probably is happening with UK citizens in Spain etc. What needs to happen now is that the respective governments actually implement their existing immigration rules and legalise anyone who qualifies.
So I as a British citizen lose my EU citizenship while the British government tells non-British EU citizens here, most of whom have had no real interest in properly settling in this country, being able to vote in general elections, etc., because otherwise they would have got off their arses and applied for British citizenship, even if that meant losing their birth citizenship, "Sure, stay here forever and keep your EU citizenship too". If they can do what they like in Britain, I want to be able to do what I like in EU27.
@SeanT A sample of only three working class girls isn't all that much to conclude the views of an entire generation. Although I don't see why student loans etc would make one Thatcherite. Student loans, automation, and the gig economy are also issues that the Corbynite Millenials have to face after all.
Sure he wouldn't be averse to extending his sample!
So what is your question? I already told you why you should look up the data before pontificating.
FFS.
I don't have too,I see it with my own eyes in the area I am living.
Do you think it's right we are importing unemployment and the unemployable ?
The rate of employment among EU nationals living in the UK is 5pts higher than that of UK nationals. If we deported the 3m, as some on here wish to consider, the UK unemployment rate would rise.
Name who wants to deport the 3m nationals living here ? you just made that up haven't you.
And if someone claims they are settled here but never bothered getting on the path to making an application for British citizenship, immigration officials should be very sceptical.
If you're talking about EU citizens I would strongly disagree with this. The whole point of EU citizenship is that you are a citizen of the union automatically so there should be no point in changing your citizenship just because you are a long term resident of another member state.
That's not the same as settled, though. If you are settled, you should want to have a vote in general elections even if you don't use it. Non-British EU citizens here who say they are settled and there was no reason for them to apply for British citizenship are treating the place as if it's somewhere they're on holiday or just staying for a while.
That's overly prescriptive. If a French woman has lived here for 20 years and has children who have British passports I don't see why she should be made to feel any obligation to change her own nationality.
Indeed I would make it much harder to acquire a different nationality, full stop. Too many people treat passports like entitlement cards.
I fully agree with you on EU citizens not needing to get citizenship. Bear in mind it currently costs £950 to apply and involves sending your passport to the Home Office for 6 months. No sane EU citizen would have bothered pre-Brexit.
But I disagree about making it harder to gain nationality. If someone has been legally resident for many years, paid their taxes etc. then why shouldn't they be given a say in how the country is run?
Declaration of interest: my wife and 2 kids are dual UK/US citizens
So what is your question? I already told you why you should look up the data before pontificating.
FFS.
I don't have too,I see it with my own eyes in the area I am living.
Do you think it's right we are importing unemployment and the unemployable ?
The rate of employment among EU nationals living in the UK is 5pts higher than that of UK nationals. If we deported the 3m, as some on here wish to consider, the UK unemployment rate would rise.
Name who wants to deport the 3m nationals living here ? you just made that up haven't you.
Okay so you want to guarantee them residency rights? Great. Then stop this grandstanding and we can all move on.
@RobD True. But surely this site is centred around opposing arguments, not people!
@HYUFD I agree that May is not a tyrant. But it's a statement that's way more critical of May than what I said. That's why I'm interested in the response to it.
I think that even if the EU27 could screw Britain to the floor it would be a huge mistake to try to do so, but the British government has hardly been saying anything that might make the EU27 look at this in a way that would develop a constructive post-Brexit relationship.
I disagree on the latter point. The UK government has been very clear that it wants a constructive relationship, whereas the EU27 have been sending out mixed messages (and mixed within individual EU27 countries). I don't think they have yet quite understood that we are leaving, and that therefore they need to negotiate with us not as naughty schoolchildren who have misbehaved and deserve to be punished, but as independent adults who want a friendly neighbourly relationship of equals.
They may well be making a catastrophic mistake, and certainly from a financial planning point of view it's best to assume that they might be, IMO.
The government's early post-Brexit rhetoric, and in particular May's rhetoric was quite aggressive towards the EU. I think she has softened it a bit recently probably because she realises there's a real risk of alienating partners who essentially control the timetable and the agenda, who owe us no favours and are pretty sore about the whole thing anyway. The aggressive tone was really for the UKIP supporters who she wants to co-opt into the Conservative Party and to keep the anti-EU wing in her own party onside. Those EU partners picked up on that unfriendliness.
@SeanT A sample of only three working class girls isn't all that much to conclude the views of an entire generation. Although I don't see why student loans etc would make one Thatcherite. Student loans, automation, and the gig economy are also issues that the Corbynite Millenials have to face after all.
Sure he wouldn't be averse to extending his sample!
I'm sure he wouldn't! At some point he'll meet a Corbynite girl!
@RobD True. But surely this site is centred around opposing arguments, not people!
@HYUFD I agree that May is not a tyrant. But it's a statement that's way more critical of May than what I said. That's why I'm interested in the response to it.
It was made by a LD, what do you expect? Tories are too classy to lower themselves to the level of the yellow peril!
@RobD True. But surely this site is centred around opposing arguments, not people!
@HYUFD I agree that May is not a tyrant. But it's a statement that's way more critical of May than what I said. That's why I'm interested in the response to it.
Mike rarely pops up below the line on here these days, except to dish out the odd bit of discipline, when required. I suspect however he is looking down on the thread - and your observation - with a wry smile! Keep up the good work
@RobD True. But surely this site is centred around opposing arguments, not people!
@HYUFD I agree that May is not a tyrant. But it's a statement that's way more critical of May than what I said. That's why I'm interested in the response to it.
Mike rarely pops up below the line on here these days, except to dish out the odd bit of discipline, when required. I suspect however he is looking down on the thread - and your observation - with a wry smile! Keep up the good work
So what is your question? I already told you why you should look up the data before pontificating.
FFS.
I don't have too,I see it with my own eyes in the area I am living.
Do you think it's right we are importing unemployment and the unemployable ?
The rate of employment among EU nationals living in the UK is 5pts higher than that of UK nationals. If we deported the 3m, as some on here wish to consider, the UK unemployment rate would rise.
Name who wants to deport the 3m nationals living here ? you just made that up haven't you.
Okay so you want to guarantee them residency rights? Great. Then stop this grandstanding and we can all move on.
And you have agreed that no residency rights of the unemployed and the unemployable is fine ?
And if someone claims they are settled here but never bothered getting on the path to making an application for British citizenship, immigration officials should be very sceptical.
If you're talking about EU citizens I would strongly disagree with this. The whole point of EU citizenship is that you are a citizen of the union automatically so there should be no point in changing your citizenship just because you are a long term resident of another member state.
That's not the same as settled, though. If you are settled, you should want to have a vote in general elections even if you don't use it. Non-British EU citizens here who say they are settled and there was no reason for them to apply for British citizenship are treating the place as if it's somewhere they're on holiday or just staying for a while.
They do have a vote in the election that matters - for their MEP. Doesn't matter where they cast that vote. Nation states are regions of the EU.
I've got no problem with them staying here so long as Britain remains in the EU.
Let's take EEA member Norway as an example, because Norway removes Norwegian citizenship from any Norwegian they know to have taken foreign citizenship. If a Norwegian person who has lived here for 10 years hasn't bothered applying for British citizenship, because they always considered that the political rights accorded to Norwegian citizens were the ones that mattered, their grounds for arguing that they as individuals should be allowed to stay here as long as they want are what exactly?
I really think the Lords and their many opponents on this forum are missing the point. There's nothing to negotiate on residency at this point because it's a national not an EU competency, beyond the requirement that national governments must offer residence after five years under FoM rules. EU citizens who have been living in the UK for more than five years without formalising their indefinite leave to remain status because they haven't needed to before are catching up now. The same probably is happening with UK citizens in Spain etc. What needs to happen now is that the respective governments actually implement their existing immigration rules and legalise anyone who qualifies.
So I as a British citizen lose my EU citizenship while the British government tells non-British EU citizens here, most of whom have had no real interest in properly settling in this country, being able to vote in general elections, etc., because otherwise they would have got off their arses and applied for British citizenship, even if that meant losing their birth citizenship, "Sure, stay here forever and keep your EU citizenship too". If they can do what they like in Britain, I want to be able to do what I like in EU27.
You can't lose your birth citizenship under EU rules, I believe. There was something about Germany which used not to allow dual citizenship IIRC. In any case they don't have to take out a UK passport, permanent residency is the important thing. You have the same nominal rights to residency in any particular EU country that citizens of those counties have here. You would need to live for five years in the other country, which might be a higher requirement than we ultimately want, but it should deal with those that have been living in the country for twenty years who have brought up families here etc.
@RobD True. But surely this site is centred around opposing arguments, not people!
@HYUFD I agree that May is not a tyrant. But it's a statement that's way more critical of May than what I said. That's why I'm interested in the response to it.
It was made by a LD, what do you expect? Tories are too classy to lower themselves to the level of the yellow peril!
@RobD True. But surely this site is centred around opposing arguments, not people!
@HYUFD I agree that May is not a tyrant. But it's a statement that's way more critical of May than what I said. That's why I'm interested in the response to it.
It was made by a LD, what do you expect? Tories are too classy to lower themselves to the level of the yellow peril!
LDs aren't that bad!
To see how much you should trust a LD, just look at their barcharts!
I fully agree with you on EU citizens not needing to get citizenship. Bear in mind it currently costs £950 to apply and involves sending your passport to the Home Office for 6 months. No sane EU citizen would have bothered pre-Brexit.
So staying in Britain for six months without going abroad would have hurt them so much, but they want permanent residence rights? And probably other documents would have enabled them to travel around the EU anyway.
The £950 and six months are the rules. I'm a British citizen and I can vote for a parliamentary candidate who wants to change the rules if I want. Foreigners can come here and it's OK if they don't like the rules, but it's not OK if they say they should be treated as if they had applied for citizenship given that the only reason that they didn't apply was because the rules were tough and they wanted to be able to swan about abroad for six months while the British authorities considered their citizenship application. Foreigners who aren't Irish or citizens of a Commonwealth state don't have a vote. There is massive simultaneous cake having and eating here.
But I disagree about making it harder to gain nationality. If someone has been legally resident for many years, paid their taxes etc. then why shouldn't they be given a say in how the country is run?
The requirement should be settlement and citizenship.
I really think the Lords and their many opponents on this forum are missing the point. There's nothing to negotiate on residency at this point because it's a national not an EU competency, beyond the requirement that national governments must offer residence after five years under FoM rules. EU citizens who have been living in the UK for more than five years without formalising their indefinite leave to remain status because they haven't needed to before are catching up now. The same probably is happening with UK citizens in Spain etc. What needs to happen now is that the respective governments actually implement their existing immigration rules and legalise anyone who qualifies.
So I as a British citizen lose my EU citizenship while the British government tells non-British EU citizens here, most of whom have had no real interest in properly settling in this country, being able to vote in general elections, etc., because otherwise they would have got off their arses and applied for British citizenship, even if that meant losing their birth citizenship, "Sure, stay here forever and keep your EU citizenship too". If they can do what they like in Britain, I want to be able to do what I like in EU27.
You can't lose your birth citizenship under EU rules, I believe. There was something about Germany which used not to allow dual citizenship IIRC. In any case they don't have to take out a UK passport, permanent residency is the important thing. You have the same nominal rights to residency in any particular EU country that citizens of those counties have here. You would need to live for five years in the other country, which might be a higher requirement than we ultimately want, but it should deal with those that have been living in the country for twenty years who have brought up families here etc.
I know for a fact that EEA member Norway will remove Norwegian citizenship from any Norwegian they know to have obtained any other citizenship.
Austria is supposed to be quite strict too. Estonia will remove it from naturalised Estonians but not those who are Estonian by birth.
I really think the Lords and their many opponents on this forum are missing the point. There's nothing to negotiate on residency at this point because it's a national not an EU competency, beyond the requirement that national governments must offer residence after five years under FoM rules. EU citizens who have been living in the UK for more than five years without formalising their indefinite leave to remain status because they haven't needed to before are catching up now. The same probably is happening with UK citizens in Spain etc. What needs to happen now is that the respective governments actually implement their existing immigration rules and legalise anyone who qualifies.
So I as a British citizen lose my EU citizenship while the British government tells non-British EU citizens here, most of whom have had no real interest in properly settling in this country, being able to vote in general elections, etc., because otherwise they would have got off their arses and applied for British citizenship, even if that meant losing their birth citizenship, "Sure, stay here forever and keep your EU citizenship too". If they can do what they like in Britain, I want to be able to do what I like in EU27.
You can't lose your birth citizenship under EU rules, I believe. There was something about Germany which used not to allow dual citizenship IIRC. In any case they don't have to take out a UK passport, permanent residency is the important thing. You have the same nominal rights to residency in any particular EU country that citizens of those counties have here. You would need to live for five years in the other country, which might be a higher requirement than we ultimately want, but it should deal with those that have been living in the country for twenty years who have brought up families here etc.
I know for a fact that EEA member Norway will remove Norwegian citizenship from any Norwegian they know to have obtained any other citizenship.
Austria is supposed to be quite strict too. Estonia will remove it from naturalised Estonians but not those who are Estonian by birth.
You're right. On checking, just Germany changed its rules to allow dual nationality with EU citizens. I fall back on my other statement that residence is the important thing, not nationality.
Snap, owner of the Snapchat, has priced its shares for listing on the US stock market at $17 per share. The flotation values the business at $24bn, although Snap has never made a profit.
Snap, owner of the Snapchat, has priced its shares for listing on the US stock market at $17 per share. The flotation values the business at $24bn, although Snap has never made a profit.
Snap, owner of the Snapchat, has priced its shares for listing on the US stock market at $17 per share. The flotation values the business at $24bn, although Snap has never made a profit.
This board will be an absolute delight when the newly independent Scots start behaving to the RUK in the same high handed way we are behaving towards the other 27.
Snap, owner of the Snapchat, has priced its shares for listing on the US stock market at $17 per share. The flotation values the business at $24bn, although Snap has never made a profit.
F##king bonkers. There is nothing particularly unique about snapchat, its just the fad of the moment (and even then is slipping among the youngsters).
I really don't get these insane valuations on tech that doesn't make money and that can be easily replicated, unlike say Google or AWS.
I find that one of the disadvantages of investing via low-cost tracker funds and the like, is that you nevertheless end up holding stock that you highly suspect to be utter crud and wouldn't ever have actively sought to go long on.
Just a shame there is no Index of Proper Actual Companies With Proper Non-Fluffy Valuations to track.
In fairness to Snap: (1) network effects are hard to replicate (not that this saved MySpace, Bebo, Friends Reunited, Orkut - which was big in Brazil and India, Friendster - which had dominated SE Asia...) and (2) Snap has shown itself very willing and able to pivot its offering, in a way that eg Twitter hasn't.
I still haven't worked out why young people spend so much time on it, quite what they feel they are achieving by being on it, or how it's expected to make a profit out of them, mind.
“While our prime minister has been quite clear that we wish to resolve the issue of UK citizens in the EU and EU citizens in the UK as soon as possible, it is regrettable that Germany and France are using UK citizens in their countries as bargaining chips for the Brexit negotiations.”
Emmanuel Macron: I am a hard Brexiter. I think that Europe has made a mistake negotiating the inter-governmental accord [the “special status” deal David Cameron struck with the EU in February last year]. It created a precedent, which is that a single state can twist the European debate to its own interests. Cameron was toying with Europe and we agreed to go along with it, which was a big mistake.
Britain must understand that our interest in the medium to long term is to have clear rules. So if Britain wants to trade with Europe it has to choose a model, such as the Swiss, Norwegian or Canadian. We have to accept that there are losses. But it’s the British who will lose the most. You cannot enjoy rights in Europe if you are not a member – otherwise it will fall apart. Europe is what has enabled us since 1945, in an unprecedented way, to preserve peace, security, freedom and prosperity in our continent. The British are making a serious mistake over the long term. Boris Johnson enjoys giving flamboyant speeches but has no strategic vision; the turmoil he created the day after Brexit proves it. Nigel Farage and Mr Johnson are responsible for this crime: they sailed the ship into battle and jumped overboard at the moment of crisis. Theresa May has handled it but what has been happening since then? On the geopolitical level as well as on the financial, realignment and submission to the US. What is going to happen is not “taking back control”: it’s servitude.
The new wonder child of French politics is just 39. He has never run for parliament nor any elected office. His political experience is limited to two years as an adviser to the president and another two years as the economy minister in the government of ex-prime minister Manuel Valls. Before that Macron was making very good money as an investment banker at Rothschild.
Comments
I'd suggest you get the landing net.
@AnneJGP Tbf, I think some members of the general public who referred to Ed as David did it because they were genuinely confused which brother is which. However I agree with you that those referring to Hunt as the C word were out of line.
I think that even if the EU27 could screw Britain to the floor it would be a huge mistake to try to do so, but the British government has hardly been saying anything that might make the EU27 look at this in a way that would develop a constructive post-Brexit relationship.
https://twitter.com/mshelicat/status/837067935558615040
They may well be making a catastrophic mistake, and certainly from a financial planning point of view it's best to assume that they might be, IMO.
?
I didn't say that all those who disagreed with me were right-wing. You've just mentioned this place is right-leaning: well that is what it was a comment on.
Secondly, I didn't say you were right-wing specifically either.
Thirdly, I didn't typify the alternative view as a right-wing together either. It was in response to someone who wasn't engaging with my argument at all by providing an alternative view, but dismissed my argument entirely. The dismissive attitude, and the idea that my alternative view should not be put forward was what caused the 'right-wing get together comment.' I thought that was fairly obvious, given that in my exchanges with you I never actually characterised your disagreement with me as 'right-wing'. Nor did I ever explicitly define terms of this debate in ideological terms. Your reply to me is filled with accusations of things I never actually said.
Nor did I said that my argument wasn't my opinion. The difference is, is that I did not dismiss all other arguments, but I tried to make my case. (And again I'm not accusing YOU of dismissing my opinion).
As for your last question: because politicians do stupid things. It was a dumb thing for May to do, but it was hardly the crime of the century. If I disliked a politician over this one thing, then I'd probably hate most of them, given they have all made silly comments over the years. Indeed I didn't actually intend to get into a heated argument over this. A similar observation in regard to May's comment was made previously, and funnily enough there wasn't all that much debate about it. Yet there is now....
Really, if people are going to disagree with me, disagree with me on things I actually say. This is not the first time on this site that criticisms have been brought my way on statements I've never said.
I am amazed the EU don't regard that as constructive...
Sorry, try as I might, I can't distort my view of Theresa May into being in the tiniest bit like Putin.
Indeed I would make it much harder to acquire a different nationality, full stop. Too many people treat passports like entitlement cards.
We're equals... You must respect us... We are not schoolchildren... We can hurt you if you mess us around...
The Article 50 talks will deal with the tricky issues like welfare rights and special cases. There's no need for any binding on the Article 50 law. Equally, talk of early settlement is a red herring.
Was it only UKIP that had a clear plan on post Brexit Britain? They were asked about it more than anyone else obviously
https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-static/static/enhanced/webdr03/2013/7/24/10/enhanced-buzz-16876-1374675676-0.jpg
Nah, not me!
I don't have too,I see it with my own eyes in the area I am living.
Do you think it's right we are importing unemployment and the unemployable ?
Why on Earth then would we defend Europe through NATO in that scenario? We would pull up the drawbridge, hug the Anglosphere and anybody else willing very tight, invite the Russian navy to joint exercises in the North Sea and turn a blind eye when uncle Vlad rolls his tanks right though Ukraine Belarus Moldova and the Baltics.
I hasten to add I do not want the above outcome at all, but, listen to yourself: you seem to want the utter destruction and destitution of the UK for daring to leave a club according to its rules.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/837041309324017665
https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/837067851467010049
But I disagree about making it harder to gain nationality. If someone has been legally resident for many years, paid their taxes etc. then why shouldn't they be given a say in how the country is run?
Declaration of interest: my wife and 2 kids are dual UK/US citizens
@HYUFD I agree that May is not a tyrant. But it's a statement that's way more critical of May than what I said. That's why I'm interested in the response to it.
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/837076768355979268
Great.
Let's take EEA member Norway as an example, because Norway removes Norwegian citizenship from any Norwegian they know to have taken foreign citizenship. If a Norwegian person who has lived here for 10 years hasn't bothered applying for British citizenship, because they always considered that the political rights accorded to Norwegian citizens were the ones that mattered, their grounds for arguing that they as individuals should be allowed to stay here as long as they want are what exactly?
The £950 and six months are the rules. I'm a British citizen and I can vote for a parliamentary candidate who wants to change the rules if I want. Foreigners can come here and it's OK if they don't like the rules, but it's not OK if they say they should be treated as if they had applied for citizenship given that the only reason that they didn't apply was because the rules were tough and they wanted to be able to swan about abroad for six months while the British authorities considered their citizenship application. Foreigners who aren't Irish or citizens of a Commonwealth state don't have a vote. There is massive simultaneous cake having and eating here. The requirement should be settlement and citizenship.
Austria is supposed to be quite strict too. Estonia will remove it from naturalised Estonians but not those who are Estonian by birth.
http://peilingwijzer.tomlouwerse.nl/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39135278
F##king bonkers. There is nothing particularly unique about snapchat, its just the fad of the moment (and even then is slipping among the youngsters).
I really don't get these insane valuations on tech that doesn't make money and that can be easily replicated, unlike say Google or AWS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Dutch_general_election,_2017
Just a shame there is no Index of Proper Actual Companies With Proper Non-Fluffy Valuations to track.
In fairness to Snap: (1) network effects are hard to replicate (not that this saved MySpace, Bebo, Friends Reunited, Orkut - which was big in Brazil and India, Friendster - which had dominated SE Asia...) and (2) Snap has shown itself very willing and able to pivot its offering, in a way that eg Twitter hasn't.
I still haven't worked out why young people spend so much time on it, quite what they feel they are achieving by being on it, or how it's expected to make a profit out of them, mind.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/01/lords-defeat-government-over-rights-of-eu-citizens-in-uk-brexit-bill
Britain must understand that our interest in the medium to long term is to have clear rules. So if Britain wants to trade with Europe it has to choose a model, such as the Swiss, Norwegian or Canadian. We have to accept that there are losses. But it’s the British who will lose the most. You cannot enjoy rights in Europe if you are not a member – otherwise it will fall apart. Europe is what has enabled us since 1945, in an unprecedented way, to preserve peace, security, freedom and prosperity in our continent. The British are making a serious mistake over the long term. Boris Johnson enjoys giving flamboyant speeches but has no strategic vision; the turmoil he created the day after Brexit proves it. Nigel Farage and Mr Johnson are responsible for this crime: they sailed the ship into battle and jumped overboard at the moment of crisis. Theresa May has handled it but what has been happening since then? On the geopolitical level as well as on the financial, realignment and submission to the US. What is going to happen is not “taking back control”: it’s servitude.
https://monocle.com/magazine/issues/101/eyes-on-the-elysee/
edit: and to you too, @williamglenn
This will end well........
Good morning too - don't worry, its a big club:
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/836913723101040640