Will the government lose the vote on the right of EU citizens to remain in the UK when the bill returns to the Commons ?
Only if they want to...
Like Max, I will be very disappointed if the Govt cave on this because of the virtue signallers in The Other Place.
Michael Gove is a virtue signaller?
Is he a Lord now?
Well like the Lords he would like the mandate less Mrs May to unilaterally guarantee the rights of 3.2 million EU citizens to remain in the UK.
And when was Gove last on the wrong side of an argument? I am pretty certain in this instance that his wife has advised him that sticking up for these people will create the illusion that he has a human side to him. Sad.
As with so very many other things, Gove is absolutely right on this.
I disagree. Instead of putting pressure on the EU to make a quick and simple deal for both the UK and EU citizens, it turns the UK ex-pats into bargaining chips.
Well you are wrong. Simple. It is to the benefit of this country to ensure that EU citizens who already form a part of our society are absolutely clear on our commitment to them. Using them as bargaining chips helps no one.
I have been known to be wrong, but I don't think so on this issue. Your suggestion is similar to saying we should give up on the rebate so that the EU will reform CAP: It won't work.
I do believe the EU citizens rights should be guaranteed, but that's part of the whole deal, and should be negotiated as such.
The reality is that we're all bargaining chips now.
Will the government lose the vote on the right of EU citizens to remain in the UK when the bill returns to the Commons ?
Only if they want to...
Like Max, I will be very disappointed if the Govt cave on this because of the virtue signallers in The Other Place.
Michael Gove is a virtue signaller?
Is he a Lord now?
Well like the Lords he would like the mandate less Mrs May to unilaterally guarantee the rights of 3.2 million EU citizens to remain in the UK.
And when was Gove last on the wrong side of an argument? I am pretty certain in this instance that his wife has advised him that sticking up for these people will create the illusion that he has a human side to him. Sad.
As with so very many other things, Gove is absolutely right on this.
I disagree. Instead of putting pressure on the EU to make a quick and simple deal for both the UK and EU citizens, it turns the UK ex-pats into bargaining chips.
Well you are wrong. Simple. It is to the benefit of this country to ensure that EU citizens who already form a part of our society are absolutely clear on our commitment to them. Using them as bargaining chips helps no one.
I have been known to be wrong, but I don't think so on this issue. Your suggestion is similar to saying we should give up on the rebate so that the EU will reform CAP: It won't work.
I do believe the EU citizens rights should be guaranteed, but that's part of the whole deal, and should be negotiated as such.
The reality is that we're all bargaining chips now.
I agree and I am in favour of immigration to the UK, even at present levels if the economy requires it, but I am absolutely committed to the UK controlling immigration and for us to make our own laws hence why I am now a leaver
Will the government lose the vote on the right of EU citizens to remain in the UK when the bill returns to the Commons ?
Only if they want to...
Like Max, I will be very disappointed if the Govt cave on this because of the virtue signallers in The Other Place.
Michael Gove is a virtue signaller?
Is he a Lord now?
Well like the Lords he would like the mandate less Mrs May to unilaterally guarantee the rights of 3.2 million EU citizens to remain in the UK.
And when was Gove last on the wrong side of an argument? I am pretty certain in this instance that his wife has advised him that sticking up for these people will create the illusion that he has a human side to him. Sad.
As with so very many other things, Gove is absolutely right on this.
No he isn't. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and even if it wasn't, the UK government's most fundamental obligation is to put the interest of UK geese before those of foreign ganders.
..........Besides the duty of the Government is to do what is best for the country as a whole.........
That shouldn't result in guaranteeing the right to remain of all EU citizens.
The message should be that those who self fund will be fine along with those who are able to claim UK citizenship due to the length of residence.
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
Top gear - laughs more forced than a hostage reading the prepared statement of a terrorist.
They've managed to make it, arguably, even worse than the Chris Evans version.
They should have just completely reinvented it. Everything.
The only people laughing are clarkson and co who now get paid insane amounts of dosh to galavant around the world doing whatever the hell they like.
I thought, after a hopeful beginning, the Grand Tour was seriously flawed. Over scripted. Forced. But there were still moments of comic genius. And it has Clarkson. So there are grounds for optimism.
This new new Top Gear is unbearable. Euthanise
IMO The grand Tour was 1/3 episodes crap, 1/3 ok, 1/3 up there with best old top gear episodes ever...but 100% of them still better than new top gear.
As I haven't got round to watching it yet, but I have some time coming up where I will be sitting around at home waiting for some immunotherapy to kick in, which episodes would you recommend?
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
Will the government lose the vote on the right of EU citizens to remain in the UK when the bill returns to the Commons ?
Only if they want to...
Like Max, I will be very disappointed if the Govt cave on this because of the virtue signallers in The Other Place.
Michael Gove is a virtue signaller?
Is he a Lord now?
Well like the Lords he would like the mandate less Mrs May to unilaterally guarantee the rights of 3.2 million EU citizens to remain in the UK.
And when was Gove last on the wrong side of an argument? I am pretty certain in this instance that his wife has advised him that sticking up for these people will create the illusion that he has a human side to him. Sad.
As with so very many other things, Gove is absolutely right on this.
No he isn't. Any arrangement must be reciprocal. The UK acting unilaterally and then hoping for the best or hoping to shame the other side is an absolutely stupid idea.
Will the government lose the vote on the right of EU citizens to remain in the UK when the bill returns to the Commons ?
Only if they want to...
Like Max, I will be very disappointed if the Govt cave on this because of the virtue signallers in The Other Place.
Michael Gove is a virtue signaller?
Is he a Lord now?
Well like the Lords he would like the mandate less Mrs May to unilaterally guarantee the rights of 3.2 million EU citizens to remain in the UK.
And when was Gove last on the wrong side of an argument? I am pretty certain in this instance that his wife has advised him that sticking up for these people will create the illusion that he has a human side to him. Sad.
As with so very many other things, Gove is absolutely right on this.
I disagree. Instead of putting pressure on the EU to make a quick and simple deal for both the UK and EU citizens, it turns the UK ex-pats into bargaining chips.
Well you are wrong. Simple. It is to the benefit of this country to ensure that EU citizens who already form a part of our society are absolutely clear on our commitment to them. Using them as bargaining chips helps no one.
I have been known to be wrong, but I don't think so on this issue. Your suggestion is similar to saying we should give up on the rebate so that the EU will reform CAP: It won't work.
I do believe the EU citizens rights should be guaranteed, but that's part of the whole deal, and should be negotiated as such.
The reality is that we're all bargaining chips now.
I agree and I am in favour of immigration to the UK, even at present levels if the economy requires it, but I am absolutely committed to the UK controlling immigration and for us to make our own laws hence why I am now a leaver
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
I hope we do but subject to work visas and immigration from anywhere
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
Will the government lose the vote on the right of EU citizens to remain in the UK when the bill returns to the Commons ?
Only if they want to...
Like Max, I will be very disappointed if the Govt cave on this because of the virtue signallers in The Other Place.
Michael Gove is a virtue signaller?
Is he a Lord now?
Well like the Lords he would like the mandate less Mrs May to unilaterally guarantee the rights of 3.2 million EU citizens to remain in the UK.
And when was Gove last on the wrong side of an argument? I am pretty certain in this instance that his wife has advised him that sticking up for these people will create the illusion that he has a human side to him. Sad.
As with so very many other things, Gove is absolutely right on this.
No he isn't. Any arrangement must be reciprocal. The UK acting unilaterally and then hoping for the best or hoping to shame the other side is an absolutely stupid idea.
Given that many of the French living in London are tax exiles from the socialist nirvana across the Channel I suspect the French government might be very glad if we sent them back to pay their taxes.
On topic, Carswell at 1-7 odds is generous. 1-1000 would be more accurate. But as no-one is going to tie up £100 for 3 years in the hope of getting £114 back it is irrelevant. Carswell is a respected, well-established MP with high local name recognition. Arron is ... a banker.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
Will the government lose the vote on the right of EU citizens to remain in the UK when the bill returns to the Commons ?
Only if they want to...
Like Max, I will be very disappointed if the Govt cave on this because of the virtue signallers in The Other Place.
Michael Gove is a virtue signaller?
Is he a Lord now?
Well like the Lords he would like the mandate less Mrs May to unilaterally guarantee the rights of 3.2 million EU citizens to remain in the UK.
And when was Gove last on the wrong side of an argument? I am pretty certain in this instance that his wife has advised him that sticking up for these people will create the illusion that he has a human side to him. Sad.
As with so very many other things, Gove is absolutely right on this.
No he isn't. Any arrangement must be reciprocal. The UK acting unilaterally and then hoping for the best or hoping to shame the other side is an absolutely stupid idea.
Given that many of the French living in London are tax exiles from the socialist nirvana across the Channel I suspect the French government might be very glad if we sent them back to pay their taxes.
It's very unlikely that we would send everyone back, most will be asked to apply for visas, said tax exiles would qualify. Romanian big issue sellers, on the other hand...
Top gear - laughs more forced than a hostage reading the prepared statement of a terrorist.
They've managed to make it, arguably, even worse than the Chris Evans version.
They should have just completely reinvented it. Everything.
The only people laughing are clarkson and co who now get paid insane amounts of dosh to galavant around the world doing whatever the hell they like.
I thought, after a hopeful beginning, the Grand Tour was seriously flawed. Over scripted. Forced. But there were still moments of comic genius. And it has Clarkson. So there are grounds for optimism.
This new new Top Gear is unbearable. Euthanise
IMO The grand Tour was 1/3 episodes crap, 1/3 ok, 1/3 up there with best old top gear episodes ever...but 100% of them still better than new top gear.
As I haven't got round to watching it yet, but I have some time coming up where I will be sitting around at home waiting for some immunotherapy to kick in, which episodes would you recommend?
IMO...off the top of my head.
Best Episodes - 1, 3, 9, 12
OK Episodes - 6, 7. 8, 11, 13
Avoid Episodes - 2, 4, 5, 10
And skip the Celebrity Brain Crash segment in every episode.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
I would be horrified if any were deported and that will not happen but I still believe TM will make it her first duty on serving A50, indeed I would expect her to make a speech at the time on her objectives and demanding an answer on this subject from the EU
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
So you'd be happy to see a million Brits be deported from the EU? It sure seems like it.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
May won't do it, until the EU guarantees the rights of UK expats abroad (many of whom are Tory voting retirees in Spain, France and Italy) she will not guarantee the rights of EU citizens in the UK
Carswell suggested a policy of accepting immigrants no questions asked if they had a job offer w wages over 24k. It's what I've been suggesting for ages, so obviously I agree w Dougie! ☺️
So it was Le Pen and Macron supporters filling Le Trocadero this afternoon and chanting for Fillon to stay in the race.
Macron supporters certainly, I think Le Pen would do better against Juppe than Macron but it seems Fillon is staying for now and Juppe will decline to run tomorrow, however give it another week and Fillon falls behind Hamon and he is a dead duck and Juppe may well change his mind
Carswell suggested a policy of accepting immigrants no questions asked if they had a job offer w wages over 24k. It's what I've been suggesting for ages, so obviously I agree w Dougie! ☺️
I'd make it higher than that, I think £30k is probably better because there is no qualification for any kind of welfare. I'd also take NHS bonds for the first three years as well. Otherwise, sure.
Will the government lose the vote on the right of EU citizens to remain in the UK when the bill returns to the Commons ?
Only if they want to...
Like Max, I will be very disappointed if the Govt cave on this because of the virtue signallers in The Other Place.
Michael Gove is a virtue signaller?
Is he a Lord now?
Well like the Lords he would like the mandate less Mrs May to unilaterally guarantee the rights of 3.2 million EU citizens to remain in the UK.
May has no more or less of a mandate than any other Prime Minister we have ever had. She has a mandate from being able to command a majority in Parliament which is exactly the same as any other PM.
TSE's misogyny is showing
Surely that isn't a viable jibe? If the leadership election had gone to a members' vote, there would have been a choice of two women.
TSE was the leading proponent of the epithet Andrea "Loathsome".
For once, he was spot on. "Only a mother can understand..........."
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
Ex pats abroad have not abandoned their Country and as the Father on one who lives in Canada I object to your generalisation
Will the government lose the vote on the right of EU citizens to remain in the UK when the bill returns to the Commons ?
Only if they want to...
Like Max, I will be very disappointed if the Govt cave on this because of the virtue signallers in The Other Place.
Michael Gove is a virtue signaller?
Is he a Lord now?
Well like the Lords he would like the mandate less Mrs May to unilaterally guarantee the rights of 3.2 million EU citizens to remain in the UK.
May has no more or less of a mandate than any other Prime Minister we have ever had. She has a mandate from being able to command a majority in Parliament which is exactly the same as any other PM.
TSE's misogyny is showing
Surely that isn't a viable jibe? If the leadership election had gone to a members' vote, there would have been a choice of two women.
TSE was the leading proponent of the epithet Andrea "Loathsome".
For once, he was spot on. "Only a mother can understand..........."
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
Aah, people like alistair Meeks and tyson
Surely those European citizens who have come here have "abandoned" their countries. And so their countries should abandon them - for the sake of a better deal with the UK.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
May won't do it, until the EU guarantees the rights of UK expats abroad (many of whom are Tory voting retirees in Spain, France and Italy) she will not guarantee the rights of EU citizens in the UK
The EU migrants here are from Poland and other East European countries. Even if the number of French nationals here is higher than , say, Lithuanians, as a percentage of their population far more are in the UK than from France.
On the other hand, our expats are in Spain, France, Portugal.
Carswell suggested a policy of accepting immigrants no questions asked if they had a job offer w wages over 24k. It's what I've been suggesting for ages, so obviously I agree w Dougie! ☺️
Preferential (rather than free and unlimited) access for EU citizens is one bargaining position, if we so choose.
In fairness, we can do what we like. Residency isn't an EU competency, it's determined at national level.
It's almost a given that the Irish will be granted absolute free access irrespective of other restrictions.
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
So it was Le Pen and Macron supporters filling Le Trocadero this afternoon and chanting for Fillon to stay in the race.
Macron supporters certainly, I think Le Pen would do better against Juppe than Macron but it seems Fillon is staying for now and Juppe will decline to run tomorrow, however give it another week and Fillon falls behind Hamon and he is a dead duck and Juppe may well change his mind
I think Baroin may yet be the answer to this conundrum.
Fillon is stubbornly refusing to stand down and his Party are pleading with him to do so. He said this afternoon that if the people wanted Juppe's policies they would have voted for him in the November Primaries. He very clearly will not stand down, voluntarily, in favour Juppe, reasonably arguing that it would give Le Pen even more chance of victory.
The two sides are at an impasse and Fillon has a strong hand, but must know his chances of winning, with this scandal hanging over him are not good. If the Party are desperate enough for him to depart the stage, they may allow Fillon to choose his successor to run on Fillon's policy platform. His closest friend and keenest supporter is Baroin and could still play a big part in this.
Mayor Khan saying minicab drivers should have a GCSE level of English is common sense surely.
It would be.. er... interesting to apply that to other jobs. Particularly to certain kinds of low level factory work.
Then again - in effect, a 2 year course to get a certificate that allows you to get a job. Why am I thinking of cuckoo clocks, chocolate, watches and bars of gold?
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
So you'd be happy to see a million Brits be deported from the EU? It sure seems like it.
The idea that that outcome can be best avoided by holding open the prospect of deporting 3 million EU citizens from the UK is eccentric to say the least.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
So you'd be happy to see a million Brits be deported from the EU? It sure seems like it.
The idea that that outcome can be best avoided by holding open the prospect of deporting 3 million EU citizens from the UK is eccentric to say the least.
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
Deciding to live abroad is not deciding to abandon your country.
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
The status quo was acceptable to 48% of a larger electorate than voted in any recent general election, and a good percentage of the remaining 52% did not want to prioritise changing the immigration rules.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
So you'd be happy to see a million Brits be deported from the EU? It sure seems like it.
The idea that that outcome can be best avoided by holding open the prospect of deporting 3 million EU citizens from the UK is eccentric to say the least.
Not at all. It's perfectly sensible. Your rose tinted glasses for the EU are completely blinding you to the logic, as always.
Top gear - laughs more forced than a hostage reading the prepared statement of a terrorist.
They've managed to make it, arguably, even worse than the Chris Evans version.
They should have just completely reinvented it. Everything.
The only people laughing are clarkson and co who now get paid insane amounts of dosh to galavant around the world doing whatever the hell they like.
I thought, after a hopeful beginning, the Grand Tour was seriously flawed. Over scripted. Forced. But there were still moments of comic genius. And it has Clarkson. So there are grounds for optimism.
This new new Top Gear is unbearable. Euthanise
IMO The grand Tour was 1/3 episodes crap, 1/3 ok, 1/3 up there with best old top gear episodes ever...but 100% of them still better than new top gear.
As I haven't got round to watching it yet, but I have some time coming up where I will be sitting around at home waiting for some immunotherapy to kick in, which episodes would you recommend?
IMO...off the top of my head.
Best Episodes - 1, 3, 9, 12
OK Episodes - 6, 7. 8, 11, 13
Avoid Episodes - 2, 4, 5, 10
And skip the Celebrity Brain Crash segment in every episode.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
May won't do it, until the EU guarantees the rights of UK expats abroad (many of whom are Tory voting retirees in Spain, France and Italy) she will not guarantee the rights of EU citizens in the UK
The EU migrants here are from Poland and other East European countries. Even if the number of French nationals here is higher than , say, Lithuanians, as a percentage of their population far more are in the UK than from France.
On the other hand, our expats are in Spain, France, Portugal.
Who will we bargain with ?
We will be bargaining with the EU as a whole, which incorporates all those nations and there are significant numbers of French and Spanish in London just as there are large numbers of Brits in the Southern France and the Costas
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
The status quo was acceptable to 48% of a larger electorate than voted in any recent general election, and a good percentage of the 52% did not want to prioritise changing the immigration rules.
And a large proportion of the 48% wish to see immigration reduced.
The portion of the electorate that were Remain come hell or high water was a paltry 30%.
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
The status quo was acceptable to 48% of a larger electorate than voted in any recent general election, and a good percentage of the 52% did not want to prioritise changing the immigration rules.
And a large proportion of the 48% wish to see immigration reduced.
The portion of the electorate that were Remain come hell or high water was a paltry 30%.
That will halve once remain become rejoin as well.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
So you'd be happy to see a million Brits be deported from the EU? It sure seems like it.
The idea that that outcome can be best avoided by holding open the prospect of deporting 3 million EU citizens from the UK is eccentric to say the least.
Not at all. It's perfectly sensible. Your rose tinted glasses for the EU are completely blinding you to the logic, as always.
The Lords amendment only means the government has to come up with proposals. They could perfectly well come back and say, "Our proposal is to go into the negotiations offering a reciprocal guarantee."
So it was Le Pen and Macron supporters filling Le Trocadero this afternoon and chanting for Fillon to stay in the race.
Macron supporters certainly, I think Le Pen would do better against Juppe than Macron but it seems Fillon is staying for now and Juppe will decline to run tomorrow, however give it another week and Fillon falls behind Hamon and he is a dead duck and Juppe may well change his mind
I think Baroin may yet be the answer to this conundrum.
Fillon is stubbornly refusing to stand down and his Party are pleading with him to do so. He said this afternoon that if the people wanted Juppe's policies they would have voted for him in the November Primaries. He very clearly will not stand down, voluntarily, in favour Juppe, reasonably arguing that it would give Le Pen even more chance of victory.
The two sides are at an impasse and Fillon has a strong hand, but must know his chances of winning, with this scandal hanging over him are not good. If the Party are desperate enough for him to depart the stage, they may allow Fillon to choose his successor to run on Fillon's policy platform. His closest friend and keenest supporter is Baroin and could still play a big part in this.
Baroin could be worth a punt if he decides to run but I can't see him getting to the runoff v Le Pen as Juppe could
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
The status quo was acceptable to 48% of a larger electorate than voted in any recent general election, and a good percentage of the 52% did not want to prioritise changing the immigration rules.
And a large proportion of the 48% wish to see immigration reduced.
The portion of the electorate that were Remain come hell or high water was a paltry 30%.
Don't forget that the percentage of the electorate that was Leave come hell or high water, pace Cummings, was similar. Leave just happened to scrape over the line.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
So you'd be happy to see a million Brits be deported from the EU? It sure seems like it.
The idea that that outcome can be best avoided by holding open the prospect of deporting 3 million EU citizens from the UK is eccentric to say the least.
Not at all. It's perfectly sensible. Your rose tinted glasses for the EU are completely blinding you to the logic, as always.
This really is a perfect test case where we have europhilia persuading people that the principle must be upheld that UK bad, EU good, even if that commits you to arguing that six is a radically different thing from half a dozen.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
Ex pats abroad have not abandoned their Country and as the Father on one who lives in Canada I object to your generalisation
Object all you like. They have chosen to move elsewhere in the world for their own benefit. And most of them will have done so after receiving an education from the UK. I am not criticising them for that, , simply pointing out that, if a conflict of interests arises, then the duty of Government should be to look after the interests of the vast majority of people who remained to make their lives in Britain rather than moving elsewhere. It is very much in the interests of the country as a whole to make sure the resident EU citizens are secure in their futures here and continue to contribute to our economy and society even if that adversely effects those who have chosen to stop doing that.
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
A job offer requirement both encompasses leaving the EU and some control of free movement while limiting economic damage, it is the only way forward which is why May will go for it, if they want to go further they can vote UKIP, if they want to stay in the single market they can vote LD but most I think will be happy with that if May goes for it
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
The status quo was acceptable to 48% of a larger electorate than voted in any recent general election, and a good percentage of the remaining 52% did not want to prioritise changing the immigration rules.
So which independent organisation has announced those stats or is it another load of made up nonsense in your crusade of disinformation more popularly known as fake news
So it was Le Pen and Macron supporters filling Le Trocadero this afternoon and chanting for Fillon to stay in the race.
Macron supporters certainly, I think Le Pen would do better against Juppe than Macron but it seems Fillon is staying for now and Juppe will decline to run tomorrow, however give it another week and Fillon falls behind Hamon and he is a dead duck and Juppe may well change his mind
I think Baroin may yet be the answer to this conundrum.
Fillon is stubbornly refusing to stand down and his Party are pleading with him to do so. He said this afternoon that if the people wanted Juppe's policies they would have voted for him in the November Primaries. He very clearly will not stand down, voluntarily, in favour Juppe, reasonably arguing that it would give Le Pen even more chance of victory.
The two sides are at an impasse and Fillon has a strong hand, but must know his chances of winning, with this scandal hanging over him are not good. If the Party are desperate enough for him to depart the stage, they may allow Fillon to choose his successor to run on Fillon's policy platform. His closest friend and keenest supporter is Baroin and could still play a big part in this.
Baroin could be worth a punt if he decides to run but I can't see him getting to the runoff v Le Pen as Juppe could
It's gonna be more difficult, for sure, but probably has more chance than Fillon of getting to the run-off. More to the point, it is a solution which saves face on both sides. The party get to ditch Fillon, Fillon gets to choose his successor to promote then policies he was elected on.
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
The status quo was acceptable to 48% of a larger electorate than voted in any recent general election, and a good percentage of the remaining 52% did not want to prioritise changing the immigration rules.
So which independent organisation has announced those stats or is it another load of made up nonsense in your crusade of disinformation more popularly known as fake news
We had a thing called a referendum. I accept that the fact there were rabid Eurosceptics like you who somehow found themselves voting Remain means that figures might be difficult to take at face value...
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
Ex pats abroad have not abandoned their Country and as the Father on one who lives in Canada I object to your generalisation
Object all you like. They have chosen to move elsewhere in the world for their own benefit. And most of them will have done so after receiving an education from the UK. I am not criticising them for that, , simply pointing out that, if a conflict of interests arises, then the duty of Government should be to look after the interests of the vast majority of people who remained to make their lives in Britain rather than moving elsewhere. It is very much in the interests of the country as a whole to make sure the resident EU citizens are secure in their futures here and continue to contribute to our economy and society even if that adversely effects those who have chosen to stop doing that.
I don't really think someone who has worked for 40 odd years in the UK and paid taxes here and then moves to Spain or the South of France for a bit more sun and less rain in their retirement years has exactly abandoned the country, abandoned the weather maybe!
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
Ex pats abroad have not abandoned their Country and as the Father on one who lives in Canada I object to your generalisation
Object all you like. They have chosen to move elsewhere in the world for their own benefit. And most of them will have done so after receiving an education from the UK. I am not criticising them for that, , simply pointing out that, if a conflict of interests arises, then the duty of Government should be to look after the interests of the vast majority of people who remained to make their lives in Britain rather than moving elsewhere. It is very much in the interests of the country as a whole to make sure the resident EU citizens are secure in their futures here and continue to contribute to our economy and society even if that adversely effects those who have chosen to stop doing that.
Government's first duty is to protect the interests of British born people.
Carswell suggested a policy of accepting immigrants no questions asked if they had a job offer w wages over 24k. It's what I've been suggesting for ages, so obviously I agree w Dougie! ☺️
I'd make it higher than that, I think £30k is probably better because there is no qualification for any kind of welfare. I'd also take NHS bonds for the first three years as well. Otherwise, sure.
Well if you set kit at 30K you can say goodbye to most of those EU nurses currently working in the NHS. They don't earn above 30K until half way through band 6 on the pay scale
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
Ex pats abroad have not abandoned their Country and as the Father on one who lives in Canada I object to your generalisation
Object all you like. They have chosen to move elsewhere in the world for their own benefit. And most of them will have done so after receiving an education from the UK. I am not criticising them for that, , simply pointing out that, if a conflict of interests arises, then the duty of Government should be to look after the interests of the vast majority of people who remained to make their lives in Britain rather than moving elsewhere. It is very much in the interests of the country as a whole to make sure the resident EU citizens are secure in their futures here and continue to contribute to our economy and society even if that adversely effects those who have chosen to stop doing that.
I take exception to the idea that a Romanian big issue seller contributes to the economy and I don't, despite having paid in 10 years worth of tax plus all of the money I've spent on goods and services and still do when I return to visit friends and relatives. As every, Richard, it's black and white. Not everyone fits exactly into your ideals.
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
The status quo was acceptable to 48% of a larger electorate than voted in any recent general election, and a good percentage of the 52% did not want to prioritise changing the immigration rules.
And a large proportion of the 48% wish to see immigration reduced.
The portion of the electorate that were Remain come hell or high water was a paltry 30%.
Don't forget that the percentage of the electorate that was Leave come hell or high water, pace Cummings, was similar. Leave just happened to scrape over the line.
Government's first duty is to protect the interests of British born people.
Oh dear, only true Aryans eh?
What you meant was Government's first duty is to protect the interests of British born people citizens, but of course that undermines your whole point.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
Ex pats abroad have not abandoned their Country and as the Father on one who lives in Canada I object to your generalisation
Object all you like. They have chosen to move elsewhere in the world for their own benefit. And most of them will have done so after receiving an education from the UK. I am not criticising them for that, , simply pointing out that, if a conflict of interests arises, then the duty of Government should be to look after the interests of the vast majority of people who remained to make their lives in Britain rather than moving elsewhere. It is very much in the interests of the country as a whole to make sure the resident EU citizens are secure in their futures here and continue to contribute to our economy and society even if that adversely effects those who have chosen to stop doing that.
Government's first duty is to protect the interests of British born people.
The vast majority of whom live and work in this country and would be far better served by allowing resident EU citizens to stay. You apparently want to put the good of UK expats above that of the rest of the UK.
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
A job offer requirement both encompasses leaving the EU and some control of free movement while limiting economic damage, it is the only way forward which is why May will go for it, if they want to go further they can vote UKIP, if they want to stay in the single market they can vote LD but most I think will be happy with that if May goes for it
I know quite a lot of people who cite low paid, transient working as a problem for falls/suppression in their wage level and ability to find the type of housing they prefer.
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
A job offer requirement both encompasses leaving the EU and some control of free movement while limiting economic damage, it is the only way forward which is why May will go for it, if they want to go further they can vote UKIP, if they want to stay in the single market they can vote LD but most I think will be happy with that if May goes for it
I know quite a lot of people who cite low paid, transient working as a problem for falls/suppression in their wage level and ability to find the type of housing they prefer.
UKIP will rocket if May isn't firm on this.
A job offer requirement would actually do a fair bit to reduce migration from Eastern Europe, which is what most Leave voters want, even if it is not the full points system UKIP want. Yes she may lose a few percentage to UKIP but she has already picked up enough switchers from Corbyn Labour to almost make that up so she can afford to
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
The status quo was acceptable to 48% of a larger electorate than voted in any recent general election, and a good percentage of the remaining 52% did not want to prioritise changing the immigration rules.
So which independent organisation has announced those stats or is it another load of made up nonsense in your crusade of disinformation more popularly known as fake news
We had a thing called a referendum. I accept that the fact there were rabid Eurosceptics like you who somehow found themselves voting Remain means that figures might be difficult to take at face value...
I know quite a lot of people who cite low paid, transient working as a problem for falls/suppression in their wage level and ability to find the type of housing they prefer.
UKIP will rocket if May isn't firm on this.
The collapse of UKIP means that the headbanging right of the Tory party will have no more leverage over May. Get used to having your views ignored once negotiations start.
Government's first duty is to protect the interests of British born people.
Oh dear, only true Aryans eh?
What you meant was Government's first duty is to protect the interests of British born people citizens, but of course that undermines your whole point.
Oops.
That is just unacceptable - British born includes all races and creeds born in the UK
Carswell suggested a policy of accepting immigrants no questions asked if they had a job offer w wages over 24k. It's what I've been suggesting for ages, so obviously I agree w Dougie! ☺️
I'd make it higher than that, I think £30k is probably better because there is no qualification for any kind of welfare. I'd also take NHS bonds for the first three years as well. Otherwise, sure.
Well if you set kit at 30K you can say goodbye to most of those EU nurses currently working in the NHS. They don't earn above 30K until half way through band 6 on the pay scale
Just out of interest rather than hollowing out other countries health systems why can't we train our own staff?
Whilst I'll win a lot if Dupont-Aignan takes the Elysée, there's undoubtedly some comedic value in his presentation. When asked who he'll back in the second round, he used to reply "I'll be in the second round". But he has changed his tune. Now he replies "I intend to avoid the second round; I'm the candidate that French people can vote for if they don't want there to be a second round"!
As my mother used to say, if you don't believe in yourself you can't expect anyone else to believe in you!
So it was Le Pen and Macron supporters filling Le Trocadero this afternoon and chanting for Fillon to stay in the race.
Macron supporters certainly, I think Le Pen would do better against Juppe than Macron but it seems Fillon is staying for now and Juppe will decline to run tomorrow, however give it another week and Fillon falls behind Hamon and he is a dead duck and Juppe may well change his mind
I think Baroin may yet be the answer to this conundrum.
Fillon is stubbornly refusing to stand down and his Party are pleading with him to do so. He said this afternoon that if the people wanted Juppe's policies they would have voted for him in the November Primaries. He very clearly will not stand down, voluntarily, in favour Juppe, reasonably arguing that it would give Le Pen even more chance of victory.
The two sides are at an impasse and Fillon has a strong hand, but must know his chances of winning, with this scandal hanging over him are not good. If the Party are desperate enough for him to depart the stage, they may allow Fillon to choose his successor to run on Fillon's policy platform. His closest friend and keenest supporter is Baroin and could still play a big part in this.
Baroin could be worth a punt if he decides to run but I can't see him getting to the runoff v Le Pen as Juppe could
It's gonna be more difficult, for sure, but probably has more chance than Fillon of getting to the run-off. More to the point, it is a solution which saves face on both sides. The party get to ditch Fillon, Fillon gets to choose his successor to promote then policies he was elected on.
He might do a little better than Fillon but unless Juppe gets back in it will almost certainly be a Le Pen v Macron runoff in my view
Mayor Khan saying minicab drivers should have a GCSE level of English is common sense surely.
It would be.. er... interesting to apply that to other jobs. Particularly to certain kinds of low level factory work.
Then again - in effect, a 2 year course to get a certificate that allows you to get a job. Why am I thinking of cuckoo clocks, chocolate, watches and bars of gold?
factory workers don't have much contact with the public whilst at work.
But it should be standard for everyone who wants to settle here. Grade C GCSE English (or equvalent) atleast.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
And what then if the EU says, thank you very much, we won't be doing the same? Almost a million British citizens will be looking on very confused at this kind of thinking. A government which puts the rights of non-citizens above the rights of citizens. Odd indeed. Decency, as you like to call it, can take a hike in favour of cold hard realism.
They would be putting the best interests of the country as a whole above that of those who decided to abandon it.
Ex pats abroad have not abandoned their Country and as the Father on one who lives in Canada I object to your generalisation
Object all you like. They have chosen to move elsewhere in the world for their own benefit. And most of them will have done so after receiving an education from the UK. I am not criticising them for that, , simply pointing out that, if a conflict of interests arises, then the duty of Government should be to look after the interests of the vast majority of people who remained to make their lives in Britain rather than moving elsewhere. It is very much in the interests of the country as a whole to make sure the resident EU citizens are secure in their futures here and continue to contribute to our economy and society even if that adversely effects those who have chosen to stop doing that.
Government's first duty is to protect the interests of British born people.
The vast majority of whom live and work in this country and would be far better served by allowing resident EU citizens to stay. You apparently want to put the good of UK expats above that of the rest of the UK.
Not at all - both should be treated equally and have their rights protected
Carswell suggested a policy of accepting immigrants no questions asked if they had a job offer w wages over 24k. It's what I've been suggesting for ages, so obviously I agree w Dougie! ☺️
I'd make it higher than that, I think £30k is probably better because there is no qualification for any kind of welfare. I'd also take NHS bonds for the first three years as well. Otherwise, sure.
Well if you set kit at 30K you can say goodbye to most of those EU nurses currently working in the NHS. They don't earn above 30K until half way through band 6 on the pay scale
Just out of interest rather than hollowing out other countries health systems why can't we train our own staff?
If Hammond restored the bursary for domestically trained nurses that would certainly help on that score, that is a rare instance where Corbyn actually has a point
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
You're preempting the negotiations somewhat. If we end up agreeing to continuing free movement (in our own interests) then the whole thing is academic.
We won't, the Tory right would go mad and UKIP would see a faster revival than Lazarus, a job offer requirement maybe but May will not agree free movement as now
A job offer will not be enough. A 'no recourse to public funds' restriction is almost certain to apply as well.
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
A job offer requirement is what May will likely go for, how far that depends on a salary threshold and 'no recourse to public funds' depends on how willing the EU is to agree and accept bilateral agreements in key economic sectors
There is nothing that remotely resembles status quo that will prove acceptable to the electorate.
The status quo was acceptable to 48% of a larger electorate than voted in any recent general election, and a good percentage of the remaining 52% did not want to prioritise changing the immigration rules.
So which independent organisation has announced those stats or is it another load of made up nonsense in your crusade of disinformation more popularly known as fake news
We had a thing called a referendum. I accept that the fact there were rabid Eurosceptics like you who somehow found themselves voting Remain means that figures might be difficult to take at face value...
Did you take a peek at the pew poll results on views on the EU in various EU member states.
Very few feel as positive about the EU as you do it seems.
I take exception to the idea that a Romanian big issue seller contributes to the economy and I don't, despite having paid in 10 years worth of tax plus all of the money I've spent on goods and services and still do when I return to visit friends and relatives.
You don't. You did, but now you don't. When you visit friends and relatives, you pay as much tax as tourists do: arguably less, since you don't spend as much when here. I can't take your national identity from you (and nor would I want to) but you do now contribute considerably less than what you did, and arguably less than the Romanian Big Issue seller.
You left to earn stacks of cash. Good for you, and I hope one day to do the same. But it does have a cost, and one of those costs is that you can no longer claim to be contributing to the British economy.
Deciding to live abroad is not deciding to abandon your country.
Unless the word "abandon" has changed its meaning, yes it is.
A shockingly silly post. "Give up for ever" is the core meaning of the word. It doesn't fit anyone who retains a UK passport.
If I may counter-argue for a moment. If somebody decides to leave a relationship and make no further commitment to it or service towards it, then surely "abandon" is an appropriate word.
Government's first duty is to protect the interests of British born people.
The vast majority of whom live and work in this country and would be far better served by allowing resident EU citizens to stay.
Except that not wanting them to stay was one reason that so many voted Leave.
The British government's duty is to look after the interests of British people, wherever they happen to live or be, and regardless of whether they were born British or have been naturalised. Foreign citizens who are on British territory can expect a general level of protection, of course, but not in terms of an inalienable "right" to live here they can't. They have their own governments to look after their permanent residence rights, namely their permanent right to live in their own countries. Anyone who lives here and doesn't have a foreign government to look after those interests is a refugee.
Except that not wanting them to stay was one reason that so many voted Leave.
The British government's duty is to look after the interests of British people, wherever they happen to live or be, and regardless of whether they were born British or have been naturalised.
And regardless of whether they understand their own interests.
Government's first duty is to protect the interests of British born people.
The vast majority of whom live and work in this country and would be far better served by allowing resident EU citizens to stay.
Except that not wanting them to stay was one reason that so many voted Leave.
The British government's duty is to look after the interests of British people, wherever they happen to live or be, and regardless of whether they were born British or have been naturalised. Foreign citizens who are on British territory can expect a general level of protection, of course, but not in terms of an inalienable "right" to live here they can't. They have their own governments to look after their permanent residence rights, namely their permanent right to live in their own countries. Anyone who lives here and doesn't have a foreign government to look after those interests is a refugee.
I think the point Richard is making is that the forced repatriation of millions of EU citizens, the vast majority of which are productive members of society, would be (a) have negative economic consequences, as firms would suddenly find themselves without employees; and (b) would have a long-lived impact on firms willingness to invest in the UK. There is a clear difference between how we would want to treat future people coming to the UK, and those already here and in employment.
Furthermore, the EU referendum was solely about whether we remained part of the EU. It was not about immigration, or the EEA, or anything else. The government's duty is not to make sure than 51% of the Leave voters are happy, but to come up with a solution that maximises the outcome and opportunities of all British citizens.
I take exception to the idea that a Romanian big issue seller contributes to the economy and I don't, despite having paid in 10 years worth of tax plus all of the money I've spent on goods and services and still do when I return to visit friends and relatives.
You don't. You did, but now you don't. When you visit friends and relatives, you pay as much tax as tourists do: arguably less, since you don't spend as much when here. I can't take your national identity from you (and nor would I want to) but you do now contribute considerably less than what you did, and arguably less than the Romanian Big Issue seller.
You left to earn stacks of cash. Good for you, and I hope one day to do the same. But it does have a cost, and one of those costs is that you can no longer claim to be contributing to the British economy.
I picked the Romanian big issue seller on purpose because they are a literal net drain on the economy, they pay no tax and receive huge amounts of welfare money.
In your rush to label those of us who have temporarily left as non-contributors you have forgotten that a very large number of EU migrants are not net-contributors and survive through various welfare subsidies because they do low paid work and many work part time in order to qualify for the maximum amount of welfare. In the 10 years of my serious working life I paid over £200k in tax and NI. When I eventually return I'm sure it will be much more, asking for the UK government to represent my interests above the interests of non-citizens is not something I thought I'd have to argue about, but I guess the Brexit vote has made for strange bedfellows. The Lib Dems suddenly support the unelected Lords, right wing Tories looking for low end workers to get a pay rise and lifelong Labour voters doing the opposite.
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOc7ezwcJjI
Cardiff Met Uni watch and learn...
I have been known to be wrong, but I don't think so on this issue. Your suggestion is similar to saying we should give up on the rebate so that the EU will reform CAP: It won't work.
I do believe the EU citizens rights should be guaranteed, but that's part of the whole deal, and should be negotiated as such.
The reality is that we're all bargaining chips now.
But he is brilliant in muddying the waters. His cult followers will buy anything he says.
The message should be that those who self fund will be fine along with those who are able to claim UK citizenship due to the length of residence.
The more recent arrivals (ultimately 2014 to date, given the negotiation period) need to pass the self sufficiency test.
Best Episodes - 1, 3, 9, 12
OK Episodes - 6, 7. 8, 11, 13
Avoid Episodes - 2, 4, 5, 10
And skip the Celebrity Brain Crash segment in every episode.
No one is saying we should not control migration in this argument. All we are saying is that those EU citizens who are already resident in the country should be allowed to stay. It gives security to.both them and us. It puts a line in the sand that says we are a reasonable civilised country. And by the way it also.fulfills a promise made by Vote Leave that we would not deport those EU citizens who are already here. Something that was made explicit on many occasions.
I would be horrified if any were deported and that will not happen but I still believe TM will make it her first duty on serving A50, indeed I would expect her to make a speech at the time on her objectives and demanding an answer on this subject from the EU
The job will need to be of a certain standard - probably salary determined. I'd expect it to be higher than the foreign spouse requirement because being the husband/wife of a British citizen should get some preferential treatment in the form of a lower earnings threshold to gain access.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/2017/03/05/top-gear-series-24-did-matt-leblanc-take-sneaky-jab-grand-tour/
Or have I got that wrong?
On the other hand, our expats are in Spain, France, Portugal.
Who will we bargain with ?
In fairness, we can do what we like. Residency isn't an EU competency, it's determined at national level.
It's almost a given that the Irish will be granted absolute free access irrespective of other restrictions.
Fillon is stubbornly refusing to stand down and his Party are pleading with him to do so. He said this afternoon that if the people wanted Juppe's policies they would have voted for him in the November Primaries. He very clearly will not stand down, voluntarily, in favour Juppe, reasonably arguing that it would give Le Pen even more chance of victory.
The two sides are at an impasse and Fillon has a strong hand, but must know his chances of winning, with this scandal hanging over him are not good. If the Party are desperate enough for him to depart the stage, they may allow Fillon to choose his successor to run on Fillon's policy platform. His closest friend and keenest supporter is Baroin and could still play a big part in this.
Then again - in effect, a 2 year course to get a certificate that allows you to get a job. Why am I thinking of cuckoo clocks, chocolate, watches and bars of gold?
The portion of the electorate that were Remain come hell or high water was a paltry 30%.
What you meant was Government's first duty is to protect the interests of British
born peoplecitizens, but of course that undermines your whole point.Oops.
UKIP will rocket if May isn't firm on this.
This is why throwing more and more cash at NHS can never be the answer
As my mother used to say, if you don't believe in yourself you can't expect anyone else to believe in you!
But it should be standard for everyone who wants to settle here. Grade C GCSE English (or equvalent) atleast.
Or are you going to tell BoJo to F off home?
Very few feel as positive about the EU as you do it seems.
Shocked I tell you.
You left to earn stacks of cash. Good for you, and I hope one day to do the same. But it does have a cost, and one of those costs is that you can no longer claim to be contributing to the British economy.
The British government's duty is to look after the interests of British people, wherever they happen to live or be, and regardless of whether they were born British or have been naturalised. Foreign citizens who are on British territory can expect a general level of protection, of course, but not in terms of an inalienable "right" to live here they can't. They have their own governments to look after their permanent residence rights, namely their permanent right to live in their own countries. Anyone who lives here and doesn't have a foreign government to look after those interests is a refugee.
Furthermore, the EU referendum was solely about whether we remained part of the EU. It was not about immigration, or the EEA, or anything else. The government's duty is not to make sure than 51% of the Leave voters are happy, but to come up with a solution that maximises the outcome and opportunities of all British citizens.
In your rush to label those of us who have temporarily left as non-contributors you have forgotten that a very large number of EU migrants are not net-contributors and survive through various welfare subsidies because they do low paid work and many work part time in order to qualify for the maximum amount of welfare. In the 10 years of my serious working life I paid over £200k in tax and NI. When I eventually return I'm sure it will be much more, asking for the UK government to represent my interests above the interests of non-citizens is not something I thought I'd have to argue about, but I guess the Brexit vote has made for strange bedfellows. The Lib Dems suddenly support the unelected Lords, right wing Tories looking for low end workers to get a pay rise and lifelong Labour voters doing the opposite.