Third - like the third referendum we'll have if we have a second
Bu.
No, the proportion of people who will care enough in your first scenario is a tiny minority, not 25%.
Rubbish. YouGov showed that if Brexit was cancelled, 24% would feel betrayed, a further 8% would be disappointed, while 6% would feel angry.
That's approximately quarter of the electorate voting for a hard brexit now party, with a small number of malcontents ready to go further take to the streets and start throwing stones.
For the purpose of the avoidance of any misunderstanding I would be in the former rather than the latter category.
But we have discussed this before and I fail to see how any party could govern under such circumstances without the support of a hard brexit party, either in coalition or by throwing them a bone (such as another referendum).
Enough of the country is dedicated to seeing the democratic mandate voted for in 2016 implemented to make the country ungovernable without them.
I reckon such a party would be pitching to the 6%. Particularly as many of the 'betrayed' have effectively been betrayed by their own commanders.
If we escape from this nightmare ride, appetite for going back to the kiosk to buy another ticket will be a niche obsession.
If you fancy rolling those dice, let's go for it.
UKIP were already on as much as 18% in the polls in the run up to the 2015 GE. I was a Con voter in 2015 and 2017 and would certainly vote UKIP/nuKIP/whoever if the government failed to implement the result of the 2016 referendum.
I state again. Enough people will demand that result, as voted for, and won, in 2016, be implemented, that the country will be ungovernable without them.
I state again. Enough people will demand that result, as voted for, and won, in 2016, be implemented, that the country Twitter will be ungovernable unbearable with them.
* Kevin [Keegan] is reluctantly supporting the Deal, I understand. Does not like the Backstop but is prepared to accept the need for it, given the troubled history of relations between the UK and Ireland.
You would arrest anyone driving without a driving licence. Are you going to deport anyone elderly who has been here for many years who had not applied for permission to remain? If not, you’re just frightening people and wasting everyone’s time.
If you have been resident in this country since the 1950s (as seems to be the case from the tweet), it does seem curious to me that you have not applied for British citizenship.
For a start, it seems to me to be part of your responsibility. I have on occasions thought about migrating to the US to take up various generous-sounding job offers, and if I did, I would want to become a US citizen so as to be able to vote and carry out other civic responsibilities (e.g., jury service).
After all, the individual in the tweet would have been able to vote in the Breixt referendum if he had held a British passport.
I think living in the UK since the 1950s means that you have some responsibilities to the UK, and acquiring British citizenship so as to be able to vote and participate in other civic duties is one of them.
I might have more sympathy if there was a good reason why the person did not acquire a British passport -- was there? The person seems to be an Israeli citizen, so it is perfectly possible to hold due Israeli-British citizenship
I state again. Enough people will demand that result, as voted for, and won, in 2016, be implemented, that the country Twitter will be ungovernable unbearable with them.
* Kevin [Keegan] is reluctantly supporting the Deal, I understand. Does not like the Backstop but is prepared to accept the need for it, given the troubled history of relations between the UK and Ireland.
* Kevin [Keegan] is reluctantly supporting the Deal, I understand. Does not like the Backstop but is prepared to accept the need for it, given the troubled history of relations between the UK and Ireland.
Pause.
Kevin Keegan???!!!
"I would love it if Theresa'a Deal get through! Love it!"
As was pointed out on the last thread, the Home Office statement that the application may be shared with domesitc and foreign public and private bodies seems to breach GDPR. I suppose they argue that applying constitutes acceptance of the sharing (though that's not how I read GDPR), but it does mean that unless you agree to nameless private bodies getting your details, you are not eligible to stay in Britain. That seems completely indefensible, surely? At least the bodies with whom the data will be shared should be listed, with the purpose of the sharing stated.
You can't presume consent any more, as I have had drummed into me by the school's data officer. So I would agree this looks fishy.
However, here is one thought that occurs - will GDPR not be one of the first things to go on withdrawal? It's not popular and it seems to create at least as many problems as it would solve. In which case, as the application only becomes live after the WA expires, it may be that it's a sign of what's coming.
I doubt it. It seems strongly defended by the Government and the specialists in the field of data protection (who by definition are gung ho for more). It's one of those things where zillions of people find it irritating but the people close to the decision are all in favour.
If, however, the Government is in fact planning to alter our data protection laws in 3 months' time, I think they'll find that organisations of every size, public and private, would be grateful for a more explicit statement of exactly what the new rules are going to be. Otherwise Boris's suggestion of what to do to business will become almost literally true as we all try to change our way of working overnight.
* Kevin [Keegan] is reluctantly supporting the Deal, I understand. Does not like the Backstop but is prepared to accept the need for it, given the troubled history of relations between the UK and Ireland.
Pause.
Kevin Keegan???!!!
"I would love it if Theresa'a Deal get through! Love it!"
* Kevin [Keegan] is reluctantly supporting the Deal, I understand. Does not like the Backstop but is prepared to accept the need for it, given the troubled history of relations between the UK and Ireland.
I state again. Enough people will demand that result, as voted for, and won, in 2016, be implemented, that the country Twitter will be ungovernable unbearable with them.
Corrected that for you. You're welcome.
Lol. We'll see. Fancy a bet on it?
Well as things stand the premise of Brexit not being delivered isn't yet in place. But when we get to that point, I'll hazard £100 if we can agree on a specific test of ungovernability. I take it that the unbearability of Twitter isn't the bit you are contesting.
Its going to be really handy his son being a political activist, he can spend ten minutes completing the online form with him.
The government are inviting some people to become political martyrs - serious mis-management on the govt's part here.
It's all going to be fine as long as the IT works, the Civil Service keeps it simple, the Minister isn't a cretin and people read the instructions.
Ah, hold on...
This goes back to the "Maybe TMay would much rather this whole Brexit thing was cancelled and she's just waiting for parliament to give her an out" line of thought. The government is already getting it in the neck for incompetence and cruelty and it hasn't even done brexit yet. Imagine what this would look like scaled up to every government department. And that's assuming the deal goes through. Now add that it may be No Deal, and (per the suggested strategy) nobody will know which of those is happening until right up to the wire. Aside from ideology, from the point of view of the PM and the individual ministers in charge of each department, wouldn't it seem attractive to have a few months' delay for a referendum?
As was pointed out on the last thread, the Home Office statement that the application may be shared with domesitc and foreign public and private bodies seems to breach GDPR. I suppose they argue that applying constitutes acceptance of the sharing (though that's not how I read GDPR), but it does mean that unless you agree to nameless private bodies getting your details, you are not eligible to stay in Britain. That seems completely indefensible, surely? At least the bodies with whom the data will be shared should be listed, with the purpose of the sharing stated.
You can't presume consent any more, as I have had drummed into me by the school's data officer. So I would agree this looks fishy.
However, here is one thought that occurs - will GDPR not be one of the first things to go on withdrawal? It's not popular and it seems to create at least as many problems as it would solve. In which case, as the application only becomes live after the WA expires, it may be that it's a sign of what's coming.
I doubt it. It seems strongly defended by the Government and the specialists in the field of data protection (who by definition are gung ho for more). It's one of those things where zillions of people find it irritating but the people close to the decision are all in favour.
If, however, the Government is in fact planning to alter our data protection laws in 3 months' time, I think they'll find that organisations of every size, public and private, would be grateful for a more explicit statement of exactly what the new rules are going to be. Otherwise Boris's suggestion of what to do to business will become almost literally true as we all try to change our way of working overnight.
It would be 24 months time - end of the transition.
Third - like the third referendum we'll have if we have a second
But how? If we vote to leave under the deal, the quest to rejoin will be set back for a generation. If we vote to remain, no-one will want to hear from the Brexiters again for a generation. I genuinely don't see how a people's vote won't settle the matter, in practice, unless there is a ridiculously narrow result.
The Conservatives will continue as a Leave-dominated party, or will be replaced by one.
Yes, but that was the case for decades past, during which we didn't take any meaningful steps in that direction.
Besides, if Brexit collapses, the Tories might find that their base is somewhat shrunken as a consequence.
But there is zero sign of Conservative voters from last time being interested in Labour or it's leader.
Pretty much right (though I know of a few exceptions), and vice versa too - the trenches are dug deep. But I'd suggest that there are plenty of signs of Tory voters unenthusiastic about turning out to vote for 5 more years of Conservative government, unless they pull themselves together.
You would arrest anyone driving without a driving licence. Are you going to deport anyone elderly who has been here for many years who had not applied for permission to remain? If not, you’re just frightening people and wasting everyone’s time.
If you have been resident in this country since the 1950s (as seems to be the case from the tweet), it does seem curious to me that you have not applied for British citizenship.
For a start, it seems to me to be part of your responsibility. I have on occasions thought about migrating to the US to take up various generous-sounding job offers, and if I did, I would want to become a US citizen so as to be able to vote and carry out other civic responsibilities (e.g., jury service).
After all, the individual in the tweet would have been able to vote in the Breixt referendum if he had held a British passport.
I think living in the UK since the 1950s means that you have some responsibilities to the UK, and acquiring British citizenship so as to be able to vote and participate in other civic duties is one of them.
I might have more sympathy if there was a good reason why the person did not acquire a British passport -- was there? The person seems to be an Israeli citizen, so it is perfectly possible to hold due Israeli-British citizenship
So someone who was here legally for a quarter of a century before freedom of movement is now at risk of deportation?
How exactly?
You haven’t been keeping up with Windrush I see.
Windrush is a disgrace - but there will be more "marginal" cases that might fall foul of the letter of the law than aged pensioners who have been legally resident for decades before we joined the EU. Silly shroud waving will distract from these.
Third - like the third referendum we'll have if we have a second
But how? If we vote to leave under the deal, the quest to rejoin will be set back for a generation. If we vote to remain, no-one will want to hear from the Brexiters again for a generation. I genuinely don't see how a people's vote won't settle the matter, in practice, unless there is a ridiculously narrow result.
If we vote to remain, I'll vote for any party that promises a third referendum or to take us out of the EU without one, regardless of how odious I find any of their other policies. I reckon such a party would gain the support of a quarter of the electorate, based on that YouGov poll of a couple of weeks ago. A second referendum will solve nothing. The country is ungovernable without the support of people who demand the result of the 2016 referendum is implemented.
The bulk of the leave vote were economically inactive people, like my father in law. He's a fine guy in his own way, but the country will certainly function without him.
That's a bold statement.
I would have said staff at my school were split 50/50.
Almost all the teachers and a handful of administrators went for Remain.
The other staff by and large went for Leave.
I appreciate it may vary by area.
He's right, though, I strongly suspect - drop out the retired, the obscenely wealthy, and the unemployed - and I would wager remain had a clear majority.
Students are not economically active, and they were about 80% Remain.
Multiply by the turnout percentage, though.
I was talking to my brother's youngest last night, who feels the older generation has stuffed his own. But he admitted he didn't vote in 2016, has never voted in any election, and - most peculiarly - probably wouldn't bother if there was a people's vote.
Which punches a hole in the 'you can't complain if you don't vote' line. It turns out people can and frequently do.
Still, once we become Singapore-on-Thames compulsory voting will probably be introduced as part of a swathe of Singaporean measures.
May has been PM for just 2.5 years and already seems to have the bunker mentality Thatcher had by ~1987. We should be grateful that she lost her majority. That's all that protects us from Lee Kwan May or Kim jong May.
So someone who was here legally for a quarter of a century before freedom of movement is now at risk of deportation?
How exactly?
Presumably if you had a work or marriage visa in 1968 it will have expired by now...
Then you might have considered getting Indefinite Leave to Remain.....
Dunno what the British rules were like back then but I know a fair few long-termers in Japan who have been here 20 years without applying for permanent residency. And then in Britain's case the EEC/EU made the whole thing moot.
I state again. Enough people will demand that result, as voted for, and won, in 2016, be implemented, that the country Twitter will be ungovernable unbearable with them.
Corrected that for you. You're welcome.
Lol. We'll see. Fancy a bet on it?
Well as things stand the premise of Brexit not being delivered isn't yet in place. But when we get to that point, I'll hazard £100 if we can agree on a specific test of ungovernability. I take it that the unbearability of Twitter isn't the bit you are contesting.
An interesting question, I was thinking a friendly one, loser to donate to charity of winner's choice.
If:
The result of the second referendum is reversed, either via a new referendum or via revocation of article 50 by Parliament without a referendum
Then
I am willing to bet that at the next GE (up to and including 2022), a party (or parties) with a manifesto commitment to either leave the EU without a subsequent referendum, or offer a third referendum will be able to either a) secure at least 24% of the vote in a GE, or b) will enter coalition with the winning party or c) force the winning party to offer a new vote on Europe (or less likely, leaving the EU without a referendum) as part of a confidence and supply deal.
I was thinking ten or twenty quid to a charity of our choice (or the PB coffers?), but happy to go a bit higher if you would like. Bet only to become active if the "if" condition is met.
So someone who was here legally for a quarter of a century before freedom of movement is now at risk of deportation?
How exactly?
You haven’t been keeping up with Windrush I see.
Windrush is a disgrace - but there will be more "marginal" cases that might fall foul of the letter of the law than aged pensioners who have been legally resident for decades before we joined the EU. Silly shroud waving will distract from these.
The system is not fit for purpose, has failed dismally in precisely these circumstances already and is about to be put under huge strain. You really think it’s shroud-waving to see an obvious risk coming down the track?
So someone who was here legally for a quarter of a century before freedom of movement is now at risk of deportation?
How exactly?
Presumably if you had a work or marriage visa in 1968 it will have expired by now...
Then you might have considered getting Indefinite Leave to Remain.....
Dunno what the British rules were like back then but I know a fair few long-termers in Japan who have been here 20 years without applying for permanent residency. And then in Britain's case the EEC/EU made the whole thing moot.
The cases cited, so far, have been of people resident in the UK up to a quarter of a century before we joined the EU.....
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
So someone who was here legally for a quarter of a century before freedom of movement is now at risk of deportation?
How exactly?
Presumably if you had a work or marriage visa in 1968 it will have expired by now...
Then you might have considered getting Indefinite Leave to Remain.....
Dunno what the British rules were like back then but I know a fair few long-termers in Japan who have been here 20 years without applying for permanent residency. And then in Britain's case the EEC/EU made the whole thing moot.
The cases cited, so far, have been of people resident in the UK up to a quarter of a century before we joined the EU.....
Like I say people don't always apply for / get permanent residency over that timescale, sometimes immigration rules make things like that hard, sometimes they just don't get around to it.
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
Yes. However, any system needs to have humanity. Would we put in prison an old person who refused to pay their council tax?
If the process was quite simple (the new online passport application process, the road tax application etc) then the sympathy would be less. But if they are just refusing as a matter of principal, send them back.
There is zero question that people such as the one mentioned in the tweet will be unaffected if they / loved ones spent a few minutes filling in the form.
And are you going to be deporting frail elderly people without loved ones? If not, why are you bothering any of them?
They already have to apply for things to remain on the right side of the law. Are we going to say well you say you are over 70, so we don’t need to worry about you ever filling in a form for eg driving licence or passport renewal.
Part of the reason we had the mess with windrush was because the state didn’t keep proper records.
You would arrest anyone driving without a driving licence. Are you going to deport anyone elderly who has been here for many years who had not applied for permission to remain? If not, you’re just frightening people and wasting everyone’s time.
Alastair, I'm getting the feeling you don't like Brexit. Fair enough. But surely, being a smart guy, you must realise that if Brexit happens the government has to get some grip on who is already here from the EU, and therefore who has a right to stay here (from the EU), as compared to those arriving after we Brexit.
Otherwise there could be chaos (and yes, I am sure you expect chaos anyway).
This is the government trying to mitigate against the worst possible Brexit scenarios. This is a government doing what the people asked (and you keep emphasising Brexit was all about immigration, even if for people like me it wasn't). The government was tasked to Take Back Control, including control of migration, citizenship and borders.
How can it do this without some irritating bureaucracy, and asking people questions, is beyond me. But maybe you have a better alternative, given that we are probably going to Brexit.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
So someone who was here legally for a quarter of a century before freedom of movement is now at risk of deportation?
How exactly?
You haven’t been keeping up with Windrush I see.
Windrush is a disgrace - but there will be more "marginal" cases that might fall foul of the letter of the law than aged pensioners who have been legally resident for decades before we joined the EU. Silly shroud waving will distract from these.
The system is not fit for purpose, has failed dismally in precisely these circumstances already and is about to be put under huge strain. You really think it’s shroud-waving to see an obvious risk coming down the track?
A system that isn't running yet is "not fit for purpose"?
I agree that the Home Office can easily screw it up.
However, citing the cases of people who have been resident for decades before we joined the EU is shroud waving.
I suspect the "hard" cases will be people who came here to settle, didn't get (EU mandated) Health Insurance,* have spent periods out of employment, extended periods in their home countries but still regard the UK as their home...
*Which the UK has said it will waive. Lets hope EU member states are as generous to UK residents.
* Kevin [Keegan] is reluctantly supporting the Deal, I understand. Does not like the Backstop but is prepared to accept the need for it, given the troubled history of relations between the UK and Ireland.
You don’t think that someone who has had to move country twice to flee tyranny might not be a little unsettled to be told, in his 80s and after 60 years in the country, that he has to apply to stay here or risk deportation? Given this country’s track record of creating a hostile environment even for those entitled to be here, it would be understandable to be stressed to high hell.
U There is zero question that people such as the one mentioned in the tweet will be unaffected if they / loved ones spent a few minutes filling in the form.
And are you going to be deporting frail elderly people without loved ones? If not, why are you bothering any of them?
Part of the reason we had the mess with windrush was because the state didn’t keep proper records.
You would arrest anyone driving without a driving licence. Are you going to deport anyone elderly who has been here for many years who had not applied for permission to remain? If not, you’re just frightening people and wasting everyone’s time.
Alastair, I'm getting the feeling you don't like Brexit. Fair enough. But surely, being a smart guy, you must realise that if Brexit happens the government has to get some grip on who is already here from the EU, and therefore who has a right to stay here (from the EU), as compared to those arriving after we Brexit.
Otherwise there could be chaos (and yes, I am sure you expect chaos anyway).
Over the years we weren't too bothered about who came in, so long as they were not obviously criminal; we could just give them leave to remain. Now for whatever reason we wish to tighten up the system and we are bound to meet some difficult cases, and it's to be hoped they would be treated sympathetically. However the Windrush scandal and several similar individual cases lead one to fear that civil servants, working in a culture which, if it doesn't default to 'refuse' is certainly encouraged by its political masters to do so. It would seem that unless great care is taken we are almost bound to see some very distressing cases.
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
Yes. However, any system needs to have humanity. Would we put in prison an old person who refused to pay their council tax?
If the process was quite simple (the new online passport application process, the road tax application etc) then the sympathy would be less. But if they are just refusing as a matter of principal, send them back.
Principle, not principal.
Good thing you’re not required to pass an English test.
There is zero question that people such as the one mentioned in the tweet will be unaffected if they / loved ones spent a few minutes filling in the form.
And are you going to be deporting frail elderly people without loved ones? If not, why are you bothering any of them?
They already have to apply for things to remain on the right side of the law. Are we going to say well you say you are over 70, so we don’t need to worry about you ever filling in a form for eg driving licence or passport renewal.
Part of the reason we had the mess with windrush was because the state didn’t keep proper records.
You would arrest anyone driving without a driving licence. Are you going to deport anyone elderly who has been here for many years who had not applied for permission to remain? If not, you’re just frightening people and wasting everyone’s time.
Alastair, I'm getting the feeling you don't like Brexit. Fair enough. But surely, being a smart guy, you must realise that if Brexit happens the government has to get some grip on who is already here from the EU, and therefore who has a right to stay here (from the EU), as compared to those arriving after we Brexit.
Otherwise there could be chaos (and yes, I am sure you expect chaos anyway).
This is the government trying to mitigate against the worst possible Brexit scenarios. This is a government doing what the people asked (and you keep emphasising Brexit was all about immigration, even if for people like me it wasn't). The government was tasked to Take Back Control, including control of migration, citizenship and borders.
How can it do this without some irritating bureaucracy, and asking people questions, is beyond me. But maybe you have a better alternative, given that we are probably going to Brexit.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
We could always introduce ID cards. That worked well last time....
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
Anyone who can show their ancestry in the Domesday Book can have the fee waived, else they are forriners and should be deported
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
Yes. However, any system needs to have humanity. Would we put in prison an old person who refused to pay their council tax?
If the process was quite simple (the new online passport application process, the road tax application etc) then the sympathy would be less. But if they are just refusing as a matter of principal, send them back.
Principle, not principal.
Good thing you’re not required to pass an English test.
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
Yes. However, any system needs to have humanity. Would we put in prison an old person who refused to pay their council tax?
If the process was quite simple (the new online passport application process, the road tax application etc) then the sympathy would be less. But if they are just refusing as a matter of principal, send them back.
Principle, not principal.
Good thing you’re not required to pass an English test.
I actually typed that twice because it autocorrected my initial mistyping. I should have double checked. Oh well.
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
Of course I wouldn't (unless he turns out to be some major criminal). But I do want my government to get a grasp of exactly who lives here, who is entitled to live here (and claim benefits etc), and who is not entitled and should be deported.
At the moment it seems like HMG has no clue. Indeed Windrush points to that. Finally, however HMG is trying to solve this lamentable disorganisation.
This means asking a few inconvenient questions, even of frail old men. It is a shame, but it is not exactly the Holocaust. And in the end it is better for everybody, and the far Right with their mad memes can be squashed by hard data.
"Finally, however HMG is trying to solve this..."
Not really. This is directed only at EU citizens who are not British citizens. It's not going to do anything to improve the government's overall "...grasp of exactly who lives here, who is entitled to live here (and claim benefits etc), and who is not entitled and should be deported."
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
I think many Jews who live in the UK and France are indeed worried. They are very worried.
They really do have something serious to be very worried about,
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
There is zero question that people such as the one mentioned in the tweet will be unaffected if they / loved ones spent a few minutes filling in the form.
And are you going to be deporting frail elderly people without loved ones? If not, why are you bothering any of them?
They already have to apply for things to remain on the right side of the law. Are we going to say well you say you are over 70, so we don’t need to worry about you ever filling in a form for eg driving licence or passport renewal.
Part of the reason we had the mess with windrush was because the state didn’t keep proper records.
You would arrest anyone driving without a driving licence. Are you going to deport anyone elderly who has been here for many years who had not applied for permission to remain? If not, you’re just frightening people and wasting everyone’s time.
Alastair, I'm getting the feeling you don't like Brexit. Fair enough. But surely, being a smart guy, you must realise that if Brexit happens the government has to get some grip on who is already here from the EU, and therefore who has a right to stay here (from the EU), as compared to those arriving after we Brexit.
Otherwise there could be chaos (and yes, I am sure you expect chaos anyway).
This is the government trying to mitigate against the worst possible Brexit scenarios. This is a government doing what the people asked (and you keep emphasising Brexit was all about immigration, even if for people like me it wasn't). The government was tasked to Take Back Control, including control of migration, citizenship and borders.
How can it do this without some irritating bureaucracy, and asking people questions, is beyond me. But maybe you have a better alternative, given that we are probably going to Brexit.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
We could always introduce ID cards. That worked well last time....
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
I think many Jews who live in the UK and France are indeed worried. They are very worried.
They really do have something serious to be very worried about,
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
Leave won by pandering to xenophobia. It made it acceptable to use race-baiting in everyday politics again.
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
Anyone who can show their ancestry in the Domesday Book can have the fee waived, else they are forriners and should be deported
That'll just leave @Charles posting on PB from the UK then.
How can it do this without some irritating bureaucracy, and asking people questions, is beyond me. But maybe you have a better alternative, given that we are probably going to Brexit.
Not extorting 60 quid out of them would be a start.
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
Of course I wouldn't (unless he turns out to be some major criminal). But I do want my government to get a grasp of exactly who lives here, who is entitled to live here (and claim benefits etc), and who is not entitled and should be deported.
At the moment it seems like HMG has no clue. Indeed Windrush points to that. Finally, however HMG is trying to solve this lamentable disorganisation.
This means asking a few inconvenient questions, even of frail old men. It is a shame, but it is not exactly the Holocaust. And in the end it is better for everybody, and the far Right with their mad memes can be squashed by hard data.
"Finally, however HMG is trying to solve this..."
Not really. This is directed only at EU citizens who are not British citizens. It's not going to do anything to improve the government's overall "...grasp of exactly who lives here, who is entitled to live here (and claim benefits etc), and who is not entitled and should be deported."
It's pathetically pointless.
No, it's a start. Imperfect, but a start. And we wait for a better alternative.
I state again. Enough people will demand that result, as voted for, and won, in 2016, be implemented, that the country Twitter will be ungovernable unbearable with them.
Corrected that for you. You're welcome.
Lol. We'll see. Fancy a bet on it?
Well as things stand the premise of Brexit not being delivered isn't yet in place. But when we get to that point, I'll hazard £100 if we can agree on a specific test of ungovernability. I take it that the unbearability of Twitter isn't the bit you are contesting.
An interesting question, I was thinking a friendly one, loser to donate to charity of winner's choice.
If:
The result of the second referendum is reversed, either via a new referendum or via revocation of article 50 by Parliament without a referendum
Then
I am willing to bet that at the next GE (up to and including 2022), a party (or parties) with a manifesto commitment to either leave the EU without a subsequent referendum, or offer a third referendum will be able to either a) secure at least 24% of the vote in a GE, or b) will enter coalition with the winning party or c) force the winning party to offer a new vote on Europe (or less likely, leaving the EU without a referendum) as part of a confidence and supply deal.
I was thinking ten or twenty quid to a charity of our choice (or the PB coffers?), but happy to go a bit higher if you would like. Bet only to become active if the "if" condition is met.
Feck. I was sidetracked by the point earlier about whether or not 2016 was the first or second referendum.
"If: the result of the 2016 referendum is reversed by a subsequent referendum". That makes sense now.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
I think many Jews who live in the UK and France are indeed worried. They are very worried.
They really do have something serious to be very worried about,
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
Leave won by pandering to xenophobia. It made it acceptable to use race-baiting in everyday politics again.
FFS the left was anti-Semitic long before Brexit. Sindyref was tinged with anti-English racism. Skinheads were, I am afraid to say, a known phenomenon before June 2016. And little English girls were called kaffir sluts by certain communities before the word Brexit was coined.
Get a grip.
The irrefutable 'everyone's at it so that makes it ok' argument, always a winner.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
I think many Jews who live in the UK and France are indeed worried. They are very worried.
They really do have something serious to be very worried about,
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
Leave won by pandering to xenophobia. It made it acceptable to use race-baiting in everyday politics again.
It’s not Leave who want to practise race based immigration apartheid. That belongs to you Remainers.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
I think many Jews who live in the UK and France are indeed worried. They are very worried.
They really do have something serious to be very worried about,
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
Leave won by pandering to xenophobia. It made it acceptable to use race-baiting in everyday politics again.
So, why are the Jews leaving France?
The Jews are leaving France in record numbers. Even the Guardian & the Independent have noticed:
How can it do this without some irritating bureaucracy, and asking people questions, is beyond me. But maybe you have a better alternative, given that we are probably going to Brexit.
Not extorting 60 quid out of them would be a start.
Yes, i have already agreed with this, A silly mistake by HMG.
The EU requires that any registration cost no more than a national's ID card. As we don't have ID cards this costs less than it costs UK Citizens to get passports.
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
Of course I wouldn't (unless he turns out to be some major criminal). But I do want my government to get a grasp of exactly who lives here, who is entitled to live here (and claim benefits etc), and who is not entitled and should be deported.
At the moment it seems like HMG has no clue. Indeed Windrush points to that. Finally, however HMG is trying to solve this lamentable disorganisation.
This means asking a few inconvenient questions, even of frail old men. It is a shame, but it is not exactly the Holocaust. And in the end it is better for everybody, and the far Right with their mad memes can be squashed by hard data.
"Finally, however HMG is trying to solve this..."
Not really. This is directed only at EU citizens who are not British citizens. It's not going to do anything to improve the government's overall "...grasp of exactly who lives here, who is entitled to live here (and claim benefits etc), and who is not entitled and should be deported."
It's pathetically pointless.
No, it's a start. Imperfect, but a start. And we wait for a better alternative.
ID cards is the answer.
I disagree. You shouldn't have to carry a card just to exist.
And be fined if you don't. As happens in some EU countries.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
I think many Jews who live in the UK and France are indeed worried. They are very worried.
They really do have something serious to be very worried about,
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
Leave won by pandering to xenophobia. It made it acceptable to use race-baiting in everyday politics again.
It’s not Leave who want to practise race based immigration apartheid. That belongs to you Remainers.
Leave won by stirring up untrue fears that millions of Muslims were poised to descend on Britain.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
I think many Jews who live in the UK and France are indeed worried. They are very worried.
They really do have something serious to be very worried about,
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
Leave won by pandering to xenophobia. It made it acceptable to use race-baiting in everyday politics again.
It’s not Leave who want to practise race based immigration apartheid. That belongs to you Remainers.
Leave won by stirring up untrue fears that millions of Muslims were poised to descend on Britain.
Still pandering to that untruth. Still, saves actually addressing the issue I suppose which is convenient for you. So why do you want to practise immigration apartheid.
You would arrest anyone driving without a driving licence. Are you going to deport anyone elderly who has been here for many years who had not applied for permission to remain? If not, you’re just frightening people and wasting everyone’s time.
If you have been resident in this country since the 1950s (as seems to be the case from the tweet), it does seem curious to me that you have not applied for British citizenship.
For a start, it seems to me to be part of your responsibility. I have on occasions thought about migrating to the US to take up various generous-sounding job offers, and if I did, I would want to become a US citizen so as to be able to vote and carry out other civic responsibilities (e.g., jury service).
You're entitled to your view, but it's not universal. When I worked abroad (in Switzerland) I knew lots of people who'd worked there for decades but never bothered to naturalise. Some (like me) still felt a degree of attachment to their home countries and didn't want to renounce it (many countries don't allow dual nationality), others just never got round to it. They paid their taxes and felt no special urge to vote - very much like people in this country who don't get round to registering to vote.
You may frown on this detached view, but we have accepted it without demur up to now, so we shouldn't suddenly start harassing people who followed it.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
I think many Jews who live in the UK and France are indeed worried. They are very worried.
They really do have something serious to be very worried about,
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
Leave won by pandering to xenophobia. It made it acceptable to use race-baiting in everyday politics again.
It’s not Leave who want to practise race based immigration apartheid. That belongs to you Remainers.
Leave won by stirring up untrue fears that millions of Muslims were poised to descend on Britain.
For millions of us who voted Leave, the bogeyman was not the movement of some unknown Muslim from Turkey.
It was Jean-Claude Juncker and his immoveable ilk.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
I think many Jews who live in the UK and France are indeed worried. They are very worried.
They really do have something serious to be very worried about,
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
Leave won by pandering to xenophobia. It made it acceptable to use race-baiting in everyday politics again.
It’s not Leave who want to practise race based immigration apartheid. That belongs to you Remainers.
Leave won by stirring up untrue fears that millions of Muslims were poised to descend on Britain.
Still pandering to that untruth. Still, saves actually addressing the issue I suppose which is convenient for you. So why do you want to practise immigration apartheid.
Calling something untrue does not make it untrue. Vote Leave untruly claimed that Turkey was joining the EU.
Last time you tried to argue the point you untruly claimed that Vote Leave made a more conditional claim. This time you’ve wisely taken to directly lying.
You would arrest anyone driving without a driving licence. Are you going to deport anyone elderly who has been here for many years who had not applied for permission to remain? If not, you’re just frightening people and wasting everyone’s time.
If you have been resident in this country since the 1950s (as seems to be the case from the tweet), it does seem curious to me that you have not applied for British citizenship.
For a start, it seems to me to be part of your responsibility. I have on occasions thought about migrating to the US to take up various generous-sounding job offers, and if I did, I would want to become a US citizen so as to be able to vote and carry out other civic responsibilities (e.g., jury service).
You're entitled to your view, but it's not universal. When I worked abroad (in Switzerland) I knew lots of people who'd worked there for decades but never bothered to naturalise. Some (like me) still felt a degree of attachment to their home countries and didn't want to renounce it (many countries don't allow dual nationality), others just never got round to it. They paid their taxes and felt no special urge to vote - very much like people in this country who don't get round to registering to vote.
You may frown on this detached view, but we have accepted it without demur up to now, so we shouldn't suddenly start harassing people who followed it.
i don't think I said people should be harassed.
I said I found the instance cited by Meeks as peculiar (a Jew who has fled Nazi Germany might for example be unusually aware of the serious advantages of holding passports for other countries).
I specifically pointed out that Israel permits dual citizenship, and asked whether there was a good reason for his decision not to acquire UK citizenship.
I did know that some countries (e.g. India) frown on dual citizenship, and I do understand why Indians might be reluctant to relinquish an Indian passport.
British citizenship (or American citizenship) entails responsibilities as well as privileges (such as Jury duty). It can also change your tax obligations, of course.
I do think if you have lived in this country since the 1950s, and you see this country as your home, then it is very peculiar not to have acquired citizenship by now (assuming that you can meet the modest fee).
It suggests a detachment to your obligations to your home country that I don't fully understand.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
I think many Jews who live in the UK and France are indeed worried. They are very worried.
They really do have something serious to be very worried about,
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
Leave won by pandering to xenophobia. It made it acceptable to use race-baiting in everyday politics again.
It’s not Leave who want to practise race based immigration apartheid. That belongs to you Remainers.
Leave won by stirring up untrue fears that millions of Muslims were poised to descend on Britain.
Still pandering to that untruth. Still, saves actually addressing the issue I suppose which is convenient for you. So why do you want to practise immigration apartheid.
Calling something untrue does not make it untrue. Vote Leave untruly claimed that Turkey was joining the EU.
Last time you tried to argue the point you untruly claimed that Vote Leave made a more conditional claim. This time you’ve wisely taken to directly lying.
Still doesn’t address why you want to continue to practise race based immigration apartheid especially as you profess to be concerned about xenophobia. I suppose that’s just a useful place you park your resentment that the referendum didn’t go your way.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
I think many Jews who live in the UK and France are indeed worried. They are very worried.
They really do have something serious to be very worried about,
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
Leave won by pandering to xenophobia. It made it acceptable to use race-baiting in everyday politics again.
It’s not Leave who want to practise race based immigration apartheid. That belongs to you Remainers.
Leave won by stirring up untrue fears that millions of Muslims were poised to descend on Britain.
Still pandering to that untruth. Still, saves actually addressing the issue I suppose which is convenient for you. So why do you want to practise immigration apartheid.
Calling something untrue does not make it untrue. Vote Leave untruly claimed that Turkey was joining the EU.
Last time you tried to argue the point you untruly claimed that Vote Leave made a more conditional claim. This time you’ve wisely taken to directly lying.
Still doesn’t address why you want to continue to practise race based immigration apartheid especially as you profess to be concerned about xenophobia. I suppose that’s just a useful place you park your resentment that the referendum didn’t go your way.
Following the rules of a club designed to treat internal migration within that club as just that, internal, is not “race based immigration apartheid” and only someone determined to put forward disingenuous nonsense to deflect from his own complicity with a campaign won by pandering to xenophobia would think it a remotely interesting debating point. Leavers did not vote for more immigration. They voted to clamp down on it.
Good book, allegedly. But no, we don't. My fault for mentioning him in the first place.
Although I saw a poll a while back (was it in the Mirror?) that listed the 10 most trusted people in Britain and Kevin Keegan was on it. Martin Lewis, the TV money guru, was number 1 - no surprise there, I guess.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
Leave won by pandering to xenophobia. It made it acceptable to use race-baiting in everyday politics again.
It’s not Leave who want to practise race based immigration apartheid. That belongs to you Remainers.
Leave won by stirring up untrue fears that millions of Muslims were poised to descend on Britain.
Still pandering to that untruth. Still, saves actually addressing the issue I suppose which is convenient for you. So why do you want to practise immigration apartheid.
.
Still doesn’t address why you want to continue to practise race based immigration apartheid especially as you profess to be concerned about xenophobia. I suppose that’s just a useful place you park your resentment that the referendum didn’t go your way.
Following the rules of a club designed to treat internal migration within that club as just that, internal, is not “race based immigration apartheid” and only someone determined to put forward disingenuous nonsense to deflect from his own complicity with a campaign won by pandering to xenophobia would think it a remotely interesting debating point. Leavers did not vote for more immigration. They voted to clamp down on it.
If the rules of the club you to belong to require the practise of race based immigration apartheid, then you subscribe to the view that race based immigration apartheid is what you want. It’s disingenuous to argue otherwise.
Indeed restricting previously unrestricted immigration was what a lot of Leavers wanted. Despite the untruth of the straw you keep clutching to about Turkey, it was an issue with numbers not the race based immigration apartheid you want to see perpetuated.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
The only evidence you have provided of "frightening them and harassing them" is a retweet of someone who claims his Israeli/Argentinian father who has lived in the UK since the 1950s is worried.
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
Leave won by pandering to xenophobia. It made it acceptable to use race-baiting in everyday politics again.
It’s not Leave who want to practise race based immigration apartheid. That belongs to you Remainers.
Leave won by stirring up untrue fears that millions of Muslims were poised to descend on Britain.
Still pandering to that untruth. Still, saves actually addressing the issue I suppose which is convenient for you. So why do you want to practise immigration apartheid.
.
Still doesn’t address why you want to continue to practise race based immigration apartheid especially as you profess to be concerned about xenophobia. I suppose that’s just a useful place you park your resentment that the referendum didn’t go your way.
Following the rules of a club designed to treat internal migration within that club as just that, internal, is not “race based immigration apartheid” and only someone determined to put forward disingenuous nonsense to deflect from his own complicity with a campaign won by pandering to xenophobia would think it a remotely interesting debating point. Leavers did not vote for more immigration. They voted to clamp down on it.
If the rules of the club you to belong to require the practise of race based immigration apartheid, then you subscribe to the view that race based immigration apartheid is what you want. It’s disingenuous to argue otherwise.
The EU practices Nationality based immigration. An ethnic Indian of German nationality is automatically entitled to work in the U.K. an ethnic Indian of Indian nationality is not, it is “race” blind.
I said I found the instance cited by Meeks as peculiar (a Jew who has fled Nazi Germany might for example be unusually aware of the serious advantages of holding passports for other countries).
I specifically pointed out that Israel permits dual citizenship, and asked whether there was a good reason for his decision not to acquire UK citizenship.
I did know that some countries (e.g. India) frown on dual citizenship, and I do understand why Indians might be reluctant to relinquish an Indian passport.
British citizenship (or American citizenship) entails responsibilities as well as privileges (such as Jury duty). It can also change your tax obligations, of course.
I do think if you have lived in this country since the 1950s, and you see this country as your home, then it is very peculiar not to have acquired citizenship by now (assuming that you can meet the modest fee).
It suggests a detachment to your obligations to your home country that I don't fully understand.
Mmm, I agree that I was unfairly paraphrasing you by using the word "harassed" - sorry. I believe, though, that allowing dual citizenship is the exception rather than the rule globally, though others may know more, and in general I'm small-c conservative enough to feel that major changes in state policy should avoid introducing sudden complications to individual lives where possible.
I think most people see their responsibilities to the country where they live primarily in terms of general loyalty (not attempting to undermine its interests, including accepting military service where it arises), obeying the law and paying taxes, and all of those can be fulfilled irrespective of the passport held. You see it as going further, and why not, but I don't think you should assume that everyone does, or should.
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
Good book, allegedly. But no, we don't. My fault for mentioning him in the first place.
Although I saw a poll a while back (was it in the Mirror?) that listed the 10 most trusted people in Britain and Kevin Keegan was on it. Martin Lewis, the TV money guru, was number 1 - no surprise there, I guess.
I used to have the occasional pint in a bar where the late Jim Baxter held court while having his pie, beans & chips & a fizzy water (it was after his liver transplants). He told a scurrilous story about K.K. which cannot be repeated...
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
Anyone who can show their ancestry in the Domesday Book can have the fee waived, else they are forriners and should be deported
The fee is also waived for anyone who already has a permanent resident card.
I did know that some countries (e.g. India) frown on dual citizenship, and I do understand why Indians might be reluctant to relinquish an Indian passport.
Yeah, ask my mum
But India does confer so-called "Overseas Citizen of India" (OCI) status to anyone wot can prove Indian ancestry or Indian ancestry of their parents or spouse. It is NOT dual citizenship by any means, but is in effect a life-long Indian visa.
If May gets her deal through Parliament, we certainly will leave next March. If she does, no doubt Remain will further demonstrate their contempt for the referendum result and contempt for democracy. Tory Remain MPs can’t really complain about Corbyn’s antics in Parliament when they themselves show such blatant disregard for 52% of the electorate.
I can’t see a need for a second referendum. We haven’t honoured the first yet.
Hang on - I thought you were against May's deal?
I am against May’s deal. The prospects of leaving with no deal however are virtually nil given the antics of Tory Remain MPs
You sound disappointed. You'd rather the country suffer serious economic dislocation and a few 1000 people die because of lack of meds?
The first claim is debateable. The second is utter bullshit which has been proved to be bollocks on multiple occasions and is only repeated by those dumb enough or dishonest enough to believe they can get away with it.
Shame you seem to fall into one of those categories.
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
Yawn - tell us what hungary does?
At least we don't have Viktor Orban's "slave law"!
I think I may have heard the same story. If it is that one. If it isn't, gosh, then that is not good.
Still, he will be remembered not for such tittle tattle but as perhaps the most industrious English footballer of his generation. Also the first to strike a deal on image rights, so an innovator too.
You don’t think that someone who has had to move country twice to flee tyranny might not be a little unsettled to be told, in his 80s and after 60 years in the country, that he has to apply to stay here or risk deportation? Given this country’s track record of creating a hostile environment even for those entitled to be here, it would be understandable to be stressed to high hell.
Unless the government are telling massive lies it is going to be akin to filling in a form for a passport or driving licence renewal, not applying for a us green card.
There is zero question that people such as the one mentioned in the tweet will be unaffected if they / loved ones spent a few minutes filling in the form.
And are you going to be deporting frail elderly people without loved ones? If not, why are you bothering any of them?
They already have to apply for things to remain on the right side of the law. Are we going to say well you say you are over 70, so we don’t need to worry about you ever filling in a form for eg driving licence or passport renewal.
Part of the reason we had the mess with windrush was because the state didn’t keep proper records.
You would arrest anyone driving without a driving licence. Are you going to deport anyone elderly who has been here for many years who had not applied for permission to remain? If not, you’re just frightening people and wasting everyone’s time.
You didn’t answer the reply I gave you last thread with the 4 options. Discourteous but I suppose you prefer to carp from the sidelines than think practically.
The fundamental issue is how do you differentiate between an EU citizen who is here legally before Brexit Day (and therefore either has Permanent Leave to Remain or Settled Status if they don’t qualify for LtR) and a citizen of the EU who enters the U.K. after Brexit Day and therefore doesn’t have any rights beyond their visa.
Of course you don’t have to register if you don’t want to. But if someone then - for example - asks you for your visa as proof of your right to work (and I know most of the cases you have posted are of people in their 80s+ but this is just an example) and you don’t have one then you have an issue.
You would arrest anyone driving without a driving licence. Are you going to deport anyone elderly who has been here for many years who had not applied for permission to remain? If not, you’re just frightening people and wasting everyone’s time.
If you have been resident in this country since the 1950s (as seems to be the case from the tweet), it does seem curious to me that you have not applied for British citizenship.
For a start, it seems to me to be part of your responsibility. I have on occasions thought about migrating to the US to take up various generous-sounding job offers, and if I did, I would want to become a US citizen so as to be able to vote and carry out other civic responsibilities (e.g., jury service).
After all, the individual in the tweet would have been able to vote in the Breixt referendum if he had held a British passport.
I think living in the UK since the 1950s means that you have some responsibilities to the UK, and acquiring British citizenship so as to be able to vote and participate in other civic duties is one of them.
I might have more sympathy if there was a good reason why the person did not acquire a British passport -- was there? The person seems to be an Israeli citizen, so it is perfectly possible to hold due Israeli-British citizenship
My wife doesn’t intend to get British citizenship. She loves the place* but remains an American in her heart
Meanwhile, none of our plucky band of Brexiteers has yet confirmed whether they would deport anyone who had been in the country for decades who was in their 80s.
No. But what do they do when they want to rent a flat and their landlord asks them for a passport/proof of their right to be in the country
Am I the only person who finds it risible that Sajid Javid is “cutting short his holiday” to attend to the refugees in the English Channel?
The situation is serious, but it is not a “major incident”, and I expect the government to handle it calmly and confidently.
Javid comes across as a panicky courter of tomorrow’s headlines - not a leader-in-waiting.
Is he? Oh dear.
One would hope that sort of thing does not work (in its painfully obvious objective of improving his next leader chances) but I guess it does, given that he's doing it.
There is zero question that people such as the one mentioned in the tweet will be unaffected if they / loved ones spent a few minutes filling in the form.
And are you going to be deporting frail elderly people without loved ones? If not, why are you bothering any of them?
They already have to apply for things to remain on the right side of the law. Are we going to say well you say you are over 70, so we don’t need to worry about you ever filling in a form for eg driving licence or passport renewal.
Part of the reason we had the mess with windrush was because the state didn’t keep proper records.
You would arrest anyone driving without a driving licence. Are you going to deport anyone elderly who has been here for many years who had not applied for permission to remain? If not, you’re just frightening people and wasting everyone’s time.
Alastair, I'm getting the feeling you don't like Brexit. Fair enough. But surely, being a smart guy, you must realise that if Brexit happens the government has to get some grip on who is already here from the EU, and therefore who has a right to stay here (from the EU), as compared to those arriving after we Brexit.
Otherwise there could be chaos (and yes, I am sure you expect chaos anyway).
This is the government trying to mitigate against the worst possible Brexit scenarios. This is a government doing what the people asked (and you keep emphasising Brexit was all about immigration, even if for people like me it wasn't). The government was tasked to Take Back Control, including control of migration, citizenship and borders.
How can it do this without some irritating bureaucracy, and asking people questions, is beyond me. But maybe you have a better alternative, given that we are probably going to Brexit.
Oh this is the rigorous playing out of the shrivelling of this country’s moral heart, as dictated by Brexit.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
That’s almost exactly what we are doing!
(Settled status is for people who don’t qualify for ILR because they haven’t been here 5 years).
I did know that some countries (e.g. India) frown on dual citizenship, and I do understand why Indians might be reluctant to relinquish an Indian passport.
Yeah, ask my mum
But India does confer so-called "Overseas Citizen of India" (OCI) status to anyone wot can prove Indian ancestry or Indian ancestry of their parents or spouse. It is NOT dual citizenship by any means, but is in effect a life-long Indian visa.
As I understand it from friends, lack of Indian citizenship can create problems with the inheritance of certain types of real estate in India. I know people who are waiting for parents to die before giving up Indian citizenship.
Comments
Ah, hold on...
Kevin Keegan???!!!
For a start, it seems to me to be part of your responsibility. I have on occasions thought about migrating to the US to take up various generous-sounding job offers, and if I did, I would want to become a US citizen so as to be able to vote and carry out other civic responsibilities (e.g., jury service).
After all, the individual in the tweet would have been able to vote in the Breixt referendum if he had held a British passport.
I think living in the UK since the 1950s means that you have some responsibilities to the UK, and acquiring British citizenship so as to be able to vote and participate in other civic duties is one of them.
I might have more sympathy if there was a good reason why the person did not acquire a British passport -- was there? The person seems to be an Israeli citizen, so it is perfectly possible to hold due Israeli-British citizenship
If, however, the Government is in fact planning to alter our data protection laws in 3 months' time, I think they'll find that organisations of every size, public and private, would be grateful for a more explicit statement of exactly what the new rules are going to be. Otherwise Boris's suggestion of what to do to business will become almost literally true as we all try to change our way of working overnight.
How exactly?
But I think you were just signalling your belief that British training would see us through.
You seem to be on the right lines.
If:
The result of the second referendum is reversed, either via a new referendum or via revocation of article 50 by Parliament without a referendum
Then
I am willing to bet that at the next GE (up to and including 2022), a party (or parties) with a manifesto commitment to either leave the EU without a subsequent referendum, or offer a third referendum will be able to either a) secure at least 24% of the vote in a GE, or b) will enter coalition with the winning party or c) force the winning party to offer a new vote on Europe (or less likely, leaving the EU without a referendum) as part of a confidence and supply deal.
I was thinking ten or twenty quid to a charity of our choice (or the PB coffers?), but happy to go a bit higher if you would like. Bet only to become active if the "if" condition is met.
If the process was quite simple (the new online passport application process, the road tax application etc) then the sympathy would be less. But if they are just refusing as a matter of principal, send them back.
The idea of automatic and pre-emptive granting indefinite leave to remain to anyone aged over, say, 75 who had been in Britain since, say, the date of the referendum would be far too liberal. We must frighten them and harass them.
I agree that the Home Office can easily screw it up.
However, citing the cases of people who have been resident for decades before we joined the EU is shroud waving.
I suspect the "hard" cases will be people who came here to settle, didn't get (EU mandated) Health Insurance,* have spent periods out of employment, extended periods in their home countries but still regard the UK as their home...
*Which the UK has said it will waive. Lets hope EU member states are as generous to UK residents.
That is what is wrong with the Tory proposal.
I fully expect people to refuse to play ball, and then it is up to the Home Office how they want to proceed.
Will they really separate our EU neighbour from her husband and children?
However the Windrush scandal and several similar individual cases lead one to fear that civil servants, working in a culture which, if it doesn't default to 'refuse' is certainly encouraged by its political masters to do so.
It would seem that unless great care is taken we are almost bound to see some very distressing cases.
Good thing you’re not required to pass an English test.
If they’re unemployed we should be using the opportunity to send them on their way.
Not really. This is directed only at EU citizens who are not British citizens. It's not going to do anything to improve the government's overall "...grasp of exactly who lives here, who is entitled to live here (and claim benefits etc), and who is not entitled and should be deported."
It's pathetically pointless.
I think many Jews who live in the UK and France are indeed worried. They are very worried.
They really do have something serious to be very worried about,
They are worried about the violent anti-semitism that has become ingrained in our countries, primarily caused by ..,.... oh, yes, Brexit, it will be caused by Brexit in Meeksworld..
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/irish_social_welfare_system/public_services_card.html
"If: the result of the 2016 referendum is reversed by a subsequent referendum". That makes sense now.
The Jews are leaving France in record numbers. Even the Guardian & the Independent have noticed:
https://tinyurl.com/y8lb2gng
https://tinyurl.com/y7jfhdga
Ethnic cleansing is taking place in the EU-loving France, right now, on a scale greater than anything in the UK or anywhere else in Europe.
Let's see ... it's due to Brexit, I guess.
You may frown on this detached view, but we have accepted it without demur up to now, so we shouldn't suddenly start harassing people who followed it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travel-truths/why-do-planes-still-have-ashtrays-/
It was Jean-Claude Juncker and his immoveable ilk.
Last time you tried to argue the point you untruly claimed that Vote Leave made a more conditional claim. This time you’ve wisely taken to directly lying.
I said I found the instance cited by Meeks as peculiar (a Jew who has fled Nazi Germany might for example be unusually aware of the serious advantages of holding passports for other countries).
I specifically pointed out that Israel permits dual citizenship, and asked whether there was a good reason for his decision not to acquire UK citizenship.
I did know that some countries (e.g. India) frown on dual citizenship, and I do understand why Indians might be reluctant to relinquish an Indian passport.
British citizenship (or American citizenship) entails responsibilities as well as privileges (such as Jury duty). It can also change your tax obligations, of course.
I do think if you have lived in this country since the 1950s, and you see this country as your home, then it is very peculiar not to have acquired citizenship by now (assuming that you can meet the modest fee).
It suggests a detachment to your obligations to your home country that I don't fully understand.
Importantly, I won at Scrabble.
Although I saw a poll a while back (was it in the Mirror?) that listed the 10 most trusted people in Britain and Kevin Keegan was on it. Martin Lewis, the TV money guru, was number 1 - no surprise there, I guess.
Indeed restricting previously unrestricted immigration was what a lot of Leavers wanted. Despite the untruth of the straw you keep clutching to about Turkey, it was an issue with numbers not the race based immigration apartheid you want to see perpetuated.
I think most people see their responsibilities to the country where they live primarily in terms of general loyalty (not attempting to undermine its interests, including accepting military service where it arises), obeying the law and paying taxes, and all of those can be fulfilled irrespective of the passport held. You see it as going further, and why not, but I don't think you should assume that everyone does, or should.
The situation is serious, but it is not a “major incident”, and I expect the government to handle it calmly and confidently.
Javid comes across as a panicky courter of tomorrow’s headlines - not a leader-in-waiting.
But India does confer so-called "Overseas Citizen of India" (OCI) status to anyone wot can prove Indian ancestry or Indian ancestry of their parents or spouse. It is NOT dual citizenship by any means, but is in effect a life-long Indian visa.
Shame you seem to fall into one of those categories.
I think I may have heard the same story. If it is that one. If it isn't, gosh, then that is not good.
Still, he will be remembered not for such tittle tattle but as perhaps the most industrious English footballer of his generation. Also the first to strike a deal on image rights, so an innovator too.
The fundamental issue is how do you differentiate between an EU citizen who is here legally before Brexit Day (and therefore either has Permanent Leave to Remain or Settled Status if they don’t qualify for LtR) and a citizen of the EU who enters the U.K. after Brexit Day and therefore doesn’t have any rights beyond their visa.
Of course you don’t have to register if you don’t want to. But if someone then - for example - asks you for your visa as proof of your right to work (and I know most of the cases you have posted are of people in their 80s+ but this is just an example) and you don’t have one then you have an issue.
* except between Dec 15 and Mar 1.
One would hope that sort of thing does not work (in its painfully obvious objective of improving his next leader chances) but I guess it does, given that he's doing it.
(Settled status is for people who don’t qualify for ILR because they haven’t been here 5 years).