No, the UK government could revoke the Good Friday Agreement’s legal provisions in UK law. It is not compatible with the Brexit the government envisages.
Would you tell us where in the GFA that customs clearance centres are proscribed? You appear to be the expert.
It involves a change to the current status of the border against the wishes of the nationalist and non-aligned communities. In the same way, putting a border in the Irish Sea against the wishes of the Unionist community would not be compatible with the GFA.
I thought Cameron and Osborne ran good government. I thought the referendum was a bad idea. It's a shame that the EU Ref has destroyed Cameron's career and legacy.
But you can't put the lid back on Pandora's box and surreptitiously remain in the EU hoping no bugger notices, counting on a bit of finger-pointing at some bullshitting politicians to rectify the whole affair.
The problem has to be dealt with by leaving, and hopefully leaving in as orderly a manner as possible. Politicians on all sides need to be grown up about that.
Banging on about who lied and who misled for the next two decades is fine (and can remain the preserve of clever, wealthy people) but I'd suggest most of the country will reasonably-happily shrug their shoulders and get on with it. And I'd also aver that most ordinary people will consider Brexit to be a damn side less painful than the prospect of a Corbyn government.
That's why I hope Boris gets a deal and we can move on.
Next question - how does Boris get a deal through Parliament. Everyone will literally be following Steve Baker into whatever lobby he enters.
I don't think he will. But I hope he will. I also hope the ERG piss off to La La Land and that Boris returns to his old guise of generously-spirited libertarian.
Boris is an amoral, authoritarian, sociopath. Anyone who considers him libertarian, or even liberal, needs their head examining.
And a known racist too.
I like how he racially discriminated Patel and Javid into central roles.
One can often come across people who discriminate against people ‘except’ the people with whom they work.
That is so true, but I don't get how they don't get it. Two examples spring to mind in my life:
a) In the late 60s early 70s I worked in a factory as a summer job. The racism was extreme. The factory had a number of Asians, but for some reason they were different to all the other Asians and all the sterotypes did not apply to them. They were OK.
b) My father is a racists, yet he has a Nigerian neighbour whom he thinks is wonderful.
All the nasty stuff applies to all the other people you don't know. The people who look foreign that you do know are somehow OK,
Not so sure about energetic. Thought he was known to be lazy
Add to the negatives that he is racist homophobic a bumbler a pathological liar prioritises whats best for himself. A serial sexual predator a self promoter and a right wing danger.
Australia with its Australian style points system has double the migration rate per capita that we do. It doesn't run short of attracting the creme de la creme and neither will we.
The best and brightest will manage to get through our migration system. As they already can Australia's.
It make me sad that you obviously haven't read what I wrote yet still felt compelled to disagree with it. The more of a system there is to "get through", the more people don't bother. That's the part of the way such a system works to reduce immigration. It's not just about quotas, it's about the extra administrative burden, the financial and opportunity risks involved in applying. Barriers to entry affect competition which affects quality. Ask anyone who has set up a business. The more paperwork, the less incentive there is. And what Patel wants to do is vastly increase the burden for a large proportion of those who would and do apply here.
Meanwhile, the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, Australia has none.
It makes me sad that you are incapable of reading what I wrote. Yes there may be a barrier but people go through the barriers. We want the world's best and brightest to get through the barriers and if there are any obstructions to the world's best and brightest getting through then we need to address them. What Patel wants lowers barriers to the world's best and brightest and puts the world's best and brightest ahead of [primarily white Europeans] Europe's anyone, anywhere.
I'm glad you chose to introduce world's top universities into the conversation because . . .
Meanwhile the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, the EU27 have none.
Philip, your party has broken the immigration system with our unworkable points based system and has no viable plans to fix it. Instead, unbelievably, it wants to expand it. Your party has never addressed the problems. Why should we believe them now? The Conservative Party does not want the “best and the brightest” because it has spent 10 years in government deterring them with a useless points system that requires faceless bureaucrats in the Home Office to make value judgments (ie give them “points”)on people’s intrinsic worth. It doesn’t work. The fact a few get through the system doesn’t change that.
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
So the ideal is that everybody wants to come here - because we are the bees knees - but only a select few can make it.
A top top place reserved for top top people.
I get you - I think - but there is something a little 'off' about this vision. It smacks of something that is not healthy. I wish I could put my finger on it. Perhaps I will be able to after I've had some nuts.
Who said few?
As I said earlier, Australia with its Australian style points system has double the net migration per capita that we do.
If we get an Australian style points system and net migration increases as we let in more of the world's "top top people" as you put it, whether they be Asians, Africans, Australians or Europeans then I am perfectly fine with that.
Casual racism from Nico. She's British, sorry she's a bit brown and doesn't share your views.
What has being vile got to do with colour or race?
The introduction of the idea of deportation is racist. Nico would not have introduced it if P. Patel had been white.
Why not . The Home Secretary can make the final decision on deportation . I have no problem with where Patel is from or her colour . If she was white and was as vile I’d still be happy for her to deport herself .
Deport herself to where, London? Seriously, stop digging.
I’m not digging . And won’t take lectures from anyone who voted Leave after a horrendous anti immigrant ref campaign .
Racists gonna drag their heels I guess
I'd love to have seen their reaction had Farage told a British Asian woman to go and deport herself.
Nico, sorry, you got this wrong.
I don't agree, just snowflakes clutching their pearls, if he had said it about Johnson when he was there no-one would have batted an eyelid. Snowflakes are always looking to take offence.
It may come as a shock to some of my comrades from the hand-wringing Islington wing of the Labour Party, but I am confident that Priti Patel strikes a chord with many Labour voters, unlike Diane Abbott.
People in working class communities feel the effects of crime, and want the scrotes arrested and put away, not somehow to be considered as victims.
BTW, after last week in Italy, this week I'm in Middlesbrough. Swings & roundabouts.
That is the most shockingly racist thing I've read here, other than quotes from Trump. I suppose you wonder why she doesn't "go home to where she comes from"? Its London by the way you disgusting racist.
Really ! Spare me the lecture , it was not intended as you seem to imply . But I’m heartened though that so many Leavers are so anti racist !
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
So the ideal is that everybody wants to come here - because we are the bees knees - but only a select few can make it.
A top top place reserved for top top people.
I get you - I think - but there is something a little 'off' about this vision. It smacks of something that is not healthy. I wish I could put my finger on it. Perhaps I will be able to after I've had some nuts.
Who said few?
As I said earlier, Australia with its Australian style points system has double the net migration per capita that we do.
If we get an Australian style points system and net migration increases as we let in more of the world's "top top people" as you put it, whether they be Asians, Africans, Australians or Europeans then I am perfectly fine with that.
Leavers who voted leave because they don't like foreigners are always quick to say how much in favour of immigration they are.
Surely any poster on here knows the truism that 95% of the public are not aware of, let alone fully up to speed with, the details of Westminster politics.
is it therefore fanciful surely to try and argue that everyone who voted leave had absorbed and held in their head such detailed argument as is in the post header. Surely the vast majority of Leave voters had no interest in the details, they just wanted to Leave. they did not vote "Leave but only with a deal".
Almost everyone i speak to is fed up with this now. We need to leave, then we can go about negotiating trade deals, customs details and other things on which we can co-operate again. No it's not ideal, but ignoring the result is way worse.
+1
But in 10 years time clever, wealthy, sneery people will still be arguing over the small print of the Leave campaign... saying their European identity was stolen by a bunch of knucklescraping racists who can't think for themselves.
There were (and are) clever wealthy sneery people on the Leave side also.
Mr Viewcode, Farage used the n-word according to Alan Sked. Anyone know whether Farage ever denied it?
I went to a hustings in Pulborough about 20 years ago when I was studying year 1 politics A level and the UKIP candidate used the phrase 'n****r in the woodpile'. So it wouldn't surprise me.
The EU referendum saw BOTH sides talking in apocalyptic terms. Lots of hyperbole, lots of lies, lots of misleading statistics and lots of fear-mongering. For Boris's bus I raise you Osborne's emergency budget. Was one required? Was it bollocks. Was Boris's bus a paragon of hard facts? Was it bollocks.
But all political campaigns are riven with the same high-falutin pledges and nonsense. The difference with this one is that it cut jaggedly across party lines and created severe discomfort for politicians in the main parties. It also gave an opportunity for lots of poor working class people in safe seats to cast a vote that counted for something, for once. And the way they voted pissed off a lot of gilded, comfortably-placed people.
I thought Cameron and Osborne ran good government. I thought the referendum was a bad idea. It's a shame that the EU Ref has destroyed Cameron's career and legacy.
But you can't put the lid back on Pandora's box and surreptitiously remain in the EU hoping no bugger notices, counting on a bit of finger-pointing at some bullshitting politicians to rectify the whole affair.
The problem has to be dealt with by leaving, and hopefully leaving in as orderly a manner as possible. Politicians on all sides need to be grown up about that.
Banging on about who lied and who misled for the next two decades is fine (and can remain the preserve of clever, wealthy people) but I'd suggest most of the country will reasonably-happily shrug their shoulders and get on with it. And I'd also aver that most ordinary people will consider Brexit to be a damn side less painful than the prospect of a Corbyn government.
That's why I hope Boris gets a deal and we can move on.
Next question - how does Boris get a deal through Parliament. Everyone will literally be following Steve Baker into whatever lobby he enters.
I don't think he will. But I hope he will. I also hope the ERG piss off to La La Land and that Boris returns to his old guise of generously-spirited libertarian.
Boris is an amoral, authoritarian, sociopath. Anyone who considers him libertarian, or even liberal, needs their head examining.
Surely his negative qualities will be painstaking worked over in a GE campaign. As i said before i think his leadership ratings will slump in a GE campaign as will Tory support.....
As the 2008 and 2012 London Mayoral and 2016 EU referendum campaigns showed Boris is a winner and a brilliant campaigner so I doubt it
Is he brillant? He lost ground in 2012 iirc! Incumbancy should have meant he won by a greater margin. Not a deminished one!
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
So the ideal is that everybody wants to come here - because we are the bees knees - but only a select few can make it.
A top top place reserved for top top people.
I get you - I think - but there is something a little 'off' about this vision. It smacks of something that is not healthy. I wish I could put my finger on it. Perhaps I will be able to after I've had some nuts.
Who said few?
As I said earlier, Australia with its Australian style points system has double the net migration per capita that we do.
If we get an Australian style points system and net migration increases as we let in more of the world's "top top people" as you put it, whether they be Asians, Africans, Australians or Europeans then I am perfectly fine with that.
I repeat, loudly for the hard of understanding. WE ALREADY HAVE AN AUSTRALIAN STYLE POINTS SYSTEM! IT IS BROKEN! YET IT IS TO BE EXPANDED BY THE BRAINS TRUST IN OUR GOVERNMENT! Calling something “Australian” doesn’t automatically make it a good thing. We’ve tried it and it’s failed.
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
So the ideal is that everybody wants to come here - because we are the bees knees - but only a select few can make it.
A top top place reserved for top top people.
I get you - I think - but there is something a little 'off' about this vision. It smacks of something that is not healthy. I wish I could put my finger on it. Perhaps I will be able to after I've had some nuts.
Who said few?
As I said earlier, Australia with its Australian style points system has double the net migration per capita that we do.
If we get an Australian style points system and net migration increases as we let in more of the world's "top top people" as you put it, whether they be Asians, Africans, Australians or Europeans then I am perfectly fine with that.
Leavers who voted leave because they don't like foreigners are always quick to say how much in favour of immigration they are.
Are they? Or is that just something you've made up?
Meanwhile, the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, Australia has none.
It makes me sad that you are incapable of reading what I wrote. Yes there may be a barrier but people go through the barriers. We want the world's best and brightest to get through the barriers and if there are any obstructions to the world's best and brightest getting through then we need to address them. What Patel wants lowers barriers to the world's best and brightest and puts the world's best and brightest ahead of [primarily white Europeans] Europe's anyone, anywhere.
I'm glad you chose to introduce world's top universities into the conversation because . . .
Meanwhile the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, the EU27 have none.
You're right, the EU27 has none. The UK punches well above its weight. Testament, don't you think, that we're doing something right. Or were. Because Patel is looking to change that.
Still waiting for your apology, by the way.
We are doing something right yes and will continue to do so. The EU has nothing to do with what is right, which is why there's no EU27 universities in that list.
What apology? I've nothing to apologise for that I've seen, just hoping to convince you that letting in freely any [primarily white] European that wants to get here while keeping tight restrictions on Africans, Asians, North and South Americans and others is not the best or fairest solution.
It seems to me you couldn't care less about the many bright and great Africans and Asians etc that could come and improve our lot so long as Europeans get here freely. I wonder why that could be?
While there are no EU27 universities in the top 30 as you chose to choose there are top universities from Singapore, China, the USA and Canada as well as the UK. You think our universities are improved by restricting Singaporeans, Chinese etc while granting free movement to Europeans? If so, why?
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
So the ideal is that everybody wants to come here - because we are the bees knees - but only a select few can make it.
A top top place reserved for top top people.
I get you - I think - but there is something a little 'off' about this vision. It smacks of something that is not healthy. I wish I could put my finger on it. Perhaps I will be able to after I've had some nuts.
Who said few?
As I said earlier, Australia with its Australian style points system has double the net migration per capita that we do.
If we get an Australian style points system and net migration increases as we let in more of the world's "top top people" as you put it, whether they be Asians, Africans, Australians or Europeans then I am perfectly fine with that.
Leavers who voted leave because they don't like foreigners are always quick to say how much in favour of immigration they are.
Are they? Or is that just something you've made up?
If its true I honestly hope Boris grabs the offer and pushes it before parliament with some add ons e.g workers rights to get some labour MPs onboard.. That way he can claim to have taken us out of the EU and we can get back to normality..
I say this as a hard brexiteer at heart who would be OK with no deal.. I just think we need to compromise (something which is a dirty word these days) and this is the best way to do it
The WA is a hard Brexit, so no compromise at all. Further division, for years and a complete distortion of the very marginal referendum result
The EU referendum saw BOTH sides talking in apocalyptic terms. Lots of hyperbole, lots of lies, lots of misleading statistics and lots of fear-mongering. For Boris's bus I raise you Osborne's emergency budget. Was one required? Was it bollocks. Was Boris's bus a paragon of hard facts? Was it bollocks.
But all political campaigns are riven with the same high-falutin pledges and nonsense. The difference with this one is that it cut jaggedly across party lines and created severe discomfort for politicians in the main parties. It also gave an opportunity for lots of poor working class people in safe seats to cast a vote that counted for something, for once. And the way they voted pissed off a lot of gilded, comfortably-placed people.
I thought Cameron and Osborne ran good government. I thought the referendum was a bad idea. It's a shame that the EU Ref has destroyed Cameron's career and legacy.
But you can't put the lid back on Pandora's box and surreptitiously remain in the EU hoping no bugger notices, counting on a bit of finger-pointing at some bullshitting politicians to rectify the whole affair.
The problem has to be dealt with by leaving, and hopefully leaving in as orderly a manner as possible. Politicians on all sides need to be grown up about that.
That's why I hope Boris gets a deal and we can move on.
Next question - how does Boris get a deal through Parliament. Everyone will literally be following Steve Baker into whatever lobby he enters.
I don't think he will. But I hope he will. I also hope the ERG piss off to La La Land and that Boris returns to his old guise of generously-spirited libertarian.
Boris is an amoral, authoritarian, sociopath. Anyone who considers him libertarian, or even liberal, needs their head examining.
And a known racist too.
I like how he racially discriminated Patel and Javid into central roles.
Racism is not a zero sum game. Harry Truman desegregated the US military but was openly racist with senate colleagues and hostile to the civil rights movement towards the end of his life.
Indeed. Used the "n" word in conversation, IIRC
Once again though it was in common use then even in the UK, it was not seen as offensive. Just as the Spanish burning Protestants at the stake was once not seen as a bad thing to do. Times change but snowflakes harking back is just pathetic.
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
So the ideal is that everybody wants to come here - because we are the bees knees - but only a select few can make it.
A top top place reserved for top top people.
I get you - I think - but there is something a little 'off' about this vision. It smacks of something that is not healthy. I wish I could put my finger on it. Perhaps I will be able to after I've had some nuts.
Who said few?
As I said earlier, Australia with its Australian style points system has double the net migration per capita that we do.
If we get an Australian style points system and net migration increases as we let in more of the world's "top top people" as you put it, whether they be Asians, Africans, Australians or Europeans then I am perfectly fine with that.
Leavers who voted leave because they don't like foreigners are always quick to say how much in favour of immigration they are.
Are they? Or is that just something you've made up?
It may come as a shock to some of my comrades from the hand-wringing Islington wing of the Labour Party, but I am confident that Priti Patel strikes a chord with many Labour voters, unlike Diane Abbott.
People in working class communities feel the effects of crime, and want the scrotes arrested and put away, not somehow to be considered as victims.
BTW, after last week in Italy, this week I'm in Middlesbrough. Swings & roundabouts.
The Tories are now seeking to appeal to humanity at its worst.
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
You really are a thick twat aren't you?
At no point did I say that Europeans are the creme de la creme. I said reducing the talent pool of easy hires from 28 to 1 country will be detrimental to attracting the creme de la creme here. As far as I can tell, the proposals won't change the barriers to those coming from outside the EU, but will significantly increase the barriers for those from within the rest of the EU. That is an increase in the difficulty of hiring.
Meanwhile, other EU countries are not raising their barrier to hiring, which means they will become more competitive in terms of hiring and investment.
It's sad that you had to make a baseless accusation based on what you thought I was saying rather than what I actually said. But I forgive you, because it looks a lot like you were being a cretin rather than being malicious. But you should still apologise.
We are not reducing the talent pool from 28 to 1 country. We are taking steps to liberalise migration in the right areas to expand the talent pool to 195 countries.
28 countries do not trump 195 countries. Until you come to me with a reason why we need to discriminate against Singaporeans and Chinese in order to get the world's best people, all I detect from you is racism.
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
So the ideal is that everybody wants to come here - because we are the bees knees - but only a select few can make it.
A top top place reserved for top top people.
I get you - I think - but there is something a little 'off' about this vision. It smacks of something that is not healthy. I wish I could put my finger on it. Perhaps I will be able to after I've had some nuts.
Who said few?
As I said earlier, Australia with its Australian style points system has double the net migration per capita that we do.
If we get an Australian style points system and net migration increases as we let in more of the world's "top top people" as you put it, whether they be Asians, Africans, Australians or Europeans then I am perfectly fine with that.
Leavers who voted leave because they don't like foreigners are always quick to say how much in favour of immigration they are.
Are they? Or is that just something you've made up?
Making something up on PB for dolts like you?
LOL.
Look up quotes by Gove et al during the referendum campaign.
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
So the ideal is that everybody wants to come here - because we are the bees knees - but only a select few can make it.
A top top place reserved for top top people.
I get you - I think - but there is something a little 'off' about this vision. It smacks of something that is not healthy. I wish I could put my finger on it. Perhaps I will be able to after I've had some nuts.
Who said few?
As I said earlier, Australia with its Australian style points system has double the net migration per capita that we do.
If we get an Australian style points system and net migration increases as we let in more of the world's "top top people" as you put it, whether they be Asians, Africans, Australians or Europeans then I am perfectly fine with that.
Leavers who voted leave because they don't like foreigners are always quick to say how much in favour of immigration they are.
Are they? Or is that just something you've made up?
I think it is a pretty reasonable assumption. It is hardly stretching belief to realise that if you were to take a sample of leavers, it is highly likely that a large number will have xenophobic or even racist tendencies. Remember Farage's poster? I am sure you disagreed with it, but I think it might have had a teensyweeniest little bit of impact.
Meanwhile, the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, Australia has none.
It makes me sad that you are incapable of reading what I wrote. Yes there may be a barrier but people go through the barriers. We want the world's best and brightest to get through the barriers and if there are any obstructions to the world's best and brightest getting through then we need to address them. What Patel wants lowers barriers to the world's best and brightest and puts the world's best and brightest ahead of [primarily white Europeans] Europe's anyone, anywhere.
I'm glad you chose to introduce world's top universities into the conversation because . . .
Meanwhile the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, the EU27 have none.
You're right, the EU27 has none. The UK punches well above its weight. Testament, don't you think, that we're doing something right. Or were. Because Patel is looking to change that.
Still waiting for your apology, by the way.
We are doing something right yes and will continue to do so. The EU has nothing to do with what is right, which is why there's no EU27 universities in that list.
What apology? I've nothing to apologise for that I've seen, just hoping to convince you that letting in freely any [primarily white] European that wants to get here while keeping tight restrictions on Africans, Asians, North and South Americans and others is not the best or fairest solution.
It seems to me you couldn't care less about the many bright and great Africans and Asians etc that could come and improve our lot so long as Europeans get here freely. I wonder why that could be?
While there are no EU27 universities in the top 30 as you chose to choose there are top universities from Singapore, China, the USA and Canada as well as the UK. You think our universities are improved by restricting Singaporeans, Chinese etc while granting free movement to Europeans? If so, why?
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
We are European. Australians prioritise people from the Australian continent over Europeans so I don’t see why there is a problem with us prioritising our own continent in the same way. You wouldn’t ask an Australian employer to prioritise a Brit over an Australian
If its true I honestly hope Boris grabs the offer and pushes it before parliament with some add ons e.g workers rights to get some labour MPs onboard.. That way he can claim to have taken us out of the EU and we can get back to normality..
I say this as a hard brexiteer at heart who would be OK with no deal.. I just think we need to compromise (something which is a dirty word these days) and this is the best way to do it
The WA is a hard Brexit, so no compromise at all. Further division, for years and a complete distortion of the very marginal referendum result
But... We can then negotiate any kind of brexit we want which I appreciate is a big ask with these muppets, or the other lot for that matter, in charge but we theoretically could negotiate a very sensible deal.
Meanwhile, the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, Australia has none.
It makes me sad that you are incapable of reading what I wrote. Yes there may be a barrier but people go through the barriers. We want the world's best and brightest to get through the barriers and if there are any obstructions to the world's best and brightest getting through then we need to address them. What Patel wants lowers barriers to the world's best and brightest and puts the world's best and brightest ahead of [primarily white Europeans] Europe's anyone, anywhere.
I'm glad you chose to introduce world's top universities into the conversation because . . .
Meanwhile the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, the EU27 have none.
You're right, the EU27 has none. The UK punches well above its weight. Testament, don't you think, that we're doing something right. Or were. Because Patel is looking to change that.
Still waiting for your apology, by the way.
We are doing something right yes and will continue to do so. The EU has nothing to do with what is right, which is why there's no EU27 universities in that list.
What apology? I've nothing to apologise for that I've seen, just hoping to convince you that letting in freely any [primarily white] European that wants to get here while keeping tight restrictions on Africans, Asians, North and South Americans and others is not the best or fairest solution.
It seems to me you couldn't care less about the many bright and great Africans and Asians etc that could come and improve our lot so long as Europeans get here freely. I wonder why that could be?
While there are no EU27 universities in the top 30 as you chose to choose there are top universities from Singapore, China, the USA and Canada as well as the UK. You think our universities are improved by restricting Singaporeans, Chinese etc while granting free movement to Europeans? If so, why?
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
We are European. Australians prioritise people from the Australian continent over Europeans so I don’t see why there is a problem with us prioritising our own continent in the same way. You wouldn’t ask an Australian employer to prioritise a Brit over an Australian
As we're leaving the EU, I would like to see prisons for the most violent of criminals built in a friendly country in Sub-saharan Africa. Somewhere that is significantly cheaper than boarding someone at Eton. Prisons within the UK should be built outside London, in areas where they can benefit deprived communities, thus freeing up prime London real estate. I feel Patel is the one to get this done.
The UK has already lost out when it comes to Academia. As soon as the Brexit vote happened, the large EU-funded projects started to dry up, The UK just couldn't bid for EU money, and the large, trans-national research projects that they fund, because 1) it was unclear if they'd be entitled tot he money and 2) the difficulty of recruiting.
1) This is just incorrect. The UK is still in, & is leading, large EU-funded projects -- just as Israel, Norway, & Switzerland are.
2) There is some truth in this. I am aware of some academics who are reluctant to apply for positions in the UK on the grounds of uncertainty. However, almost all research jobs are over-subscribed by a large ratio, so I am not sure there had been any substantial effect of UK research.
You're incorrect with 1). Mrs Tabman is a senior academic at a well-known and prestigious UK university, working on large EU funded projects, and the lifecycle for these is typically 3-5 years. Consequently as soon as Brexit was announced, UK-led consortia just aren't winning these sorts of research grants any more. They've been frozen out.
Ongoing projects will finish up; there aren't new ones replacing them.
No, I am correct.
I guess Mrs Tabman has just been unsuccessful in peer review.
Meanwhile, the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, Australia has none.
It makes me sad that you are incapable of reading what I wrote. Yes there may be a barrier but people go through the barriers. We want the world's best and brightest to get through the barriers and if there are any obstructions to the world's best and brightest getting through then we need to address them. What Patel wants lowers barriers to the world's best and brightest and puts the world's best and brightest ahead of [primarily white Europeans] Europe's anyone, anywhere.
I'm glad you chose to introduce world's top universities into the conversation because . . .
Meanwhile the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, the EU27 have none.
You're right, the EU27 has none. The UK punches well above its weight. Testament, don't you think, that we're doing something right. Or were. Because Patel is looking to change that.
Still waiting for your apology, by the way.
We are doing something right yes and will continue to do so. The EU has nothing to do with what is right, which is why there's no EU27 universities in that list.
What apology? I've nothing to apologise for that I've seen, just hoping to convince you that letting in freely any [primarily white] European that wants to get here while keeping tight restrictions on Africans, Asians, North and South Americans and others is not the best or fairest solution.
It seems to me you couldn't care less about the many bright and great Africans and Asians etc that could come and improve our lot so long as Europeans get here freely. I wonder why that could be?
While there are no EU27 universities in the top 30 as you chose to choose there are top universities from Singapore, China, the USA and Canada as well as the UK. You think our universities are improved by restricting Singaporeans, Chinese etc while granting free movement to Europeans? If so, why?
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
We are European. Australians prioritise people from the Australian continent over Europeans so I don’t see why there is a problem with us prioritising our own continent in the same way. You wouldn’t ask an Australian employer to prioritise a Brit over an Australian
Culturally we have more in common with Australia than most European countries.
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
The Lib Dems have, meanwhile, said they will not back an interim government headed by Mr Corbyn, with leader Jo Swinson saying the Labour leader had to make clear who else he would support to temporarily take charge.
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
You really are a thick twat aren't you?
At no point did I say that Europeans are the creme de la creme. I said reducing the talent pool of easy hires from 28 to 1 country will be detrimental to attracting the creme de la creme here. As far as I can tell, the proposals won't change the barriers to those coming from outside the EU, but will significantly increase the barriers for those from within the rest of the EU. That is an increase in the difficulty of hiring.
Meanwhile, other EU countries are not raising their barrier to hiring, which means they will become more competitive in terms of hiring and investment.
It's sad that you had to make a baseless accusation based on what you thought I was saying rather than what I actually said. But I forgive you, because it looks a lot like you were being a cretin rather than being malicious. But you should still apologise.
We are not reducing the talent pool from 28 to 1 country. We are taking steps to liberalise migration in the right areas to expand the talent pool to 195 countries.
28 countries do not trump 195 countries. Until you come to me with a reason why we need to discriminate against Singaporeans and Chinese in order to get the world's best people, all I detect from you is racism.
Singaporeans discriminate against people not from Singapore. Australians discriminate against people not from Australia. Why should we, being European, not discriminate against people or from Europe?
Johnson is doing in his negotiations exactly what May should have done all along. Shame that it has taken this long to get here.
If the EU want to insist no deal is better than a permanent backstop it is entirely appropriate and reasonable to discuss where the customs posts the EU are demanding are put. Because that is logically what they are insisting if they continue to demand the backstop unicorn we will never give.
Suddenly a time limited backstop doesn't seem such a bad idea.
Johnson is turning the tables on their nonsense and moving the Overton Window. Good for him!
As we're leaving the EU, I would like to see prisons for the most violent of criminals built in a friendly country in Sub-saharan Africa. Somewhere that is significantly cheaper than boarding someone at Eton. Prisons within the UK should be built outside London, in areas where they can benefit deprived communities, thus freeing up prime London real estate. I feel Patel is the one to get this done.
I am surprised you don't advocate a more, how shall I put it, final, solution to your perceived problem.
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
So the ideal is that everybody wants to come here - because we are the bees knees - but only a select few can make it.
A top top place reserved for top top people.
I get you - I think - but there is something a little 'off' about this vision. It smacks of something that is not healthy. I wish I could put my finger on it. Perhaps I will be able to after I've had some nuts.
Who said few?
As I said earlier, Australia with its Australian style points system has double the net migration per capita that we do.
If we get an Australian style points system and net migration increases as we let in more of the world's "top top people" as you put it, whether they be Asians, Africans, Australians or Europeans then I am perfectly fine with that.
Leavers who voted leave because they don't like foreigners are always quick to say how much in favour of immigration they are.
Are they? Or is that just something you've made up?
I think it is a pretty reasonable assumption. It is hardly stretching belief to realise that if you were to take a sample of leavers, it is highly likely that a large number will have xenophobic or even racist tendencies. Remember Farage's poster? I am sure you disagreed with it, but I think it might have had a teensyweeniest little bit of impact.
I'm sure you're right, but I don't see why those people would wax lyrical about immigration. They're usually fairly forthright I'd have said.
Meanwhile, the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, Australia has none.
It makes me sad that you are incapable of reading what I wrote. Yes there may be a barrier but people go through the barriers. We want the world's best and brightest to get through the barriers and if there are any obstructions to the world's best and brightest getting through then we need to address them. What Patel wants lowers barriers to the world's best and brightest and puts the world's best and brightest ahead of [primarily white Europeans] Europe's anyone, anywhere.
I'm glad you chose to introduce world's top universities into the conversation because . . .
Meanwhile the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, the EU27 have none.
You're right, the EU27 has none. The UK punches well above its weight. Testament, don't you think, that we're doing something right. Or were. Because Patel is looking to change that.
Still waiting for your apology, by the way.
We are doing something right yes and will continue to do so. The EU has nothing to do with what is right, which is why there's no EU27 universities in that list.
What apology? I've nothing to apologise for that I've seen, just hoping to convince you that letting in freely any [primarily white] European that wants to get here while keeping tight restrictions on Africans, Asians, North and South Americans and others is not the best or fairest solution.
It seems to me you couldn't care less about the many bright and great Africans and Asians etc that could come and improve our lot so long as Europeans get here freely. I wonder why that could be?
While there are no EU27 universities in the top 30 as you chose to choose there are top universities from Singapore, China, the USA and Canada as well as the UK. You think our universities are improved by restricting Singaporeans, Chinese etc while granting free movement to Europeans? If so, why?
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
We are European. Australians prioritise people from the Australian continent over Europeans so I don’t see why there is a problem with us prioritising our own continent in the same way. You wouldn’t ask an Australian employer to prioritise a Brit over an Australian
Culturally we have more in common with Australia than most European countries.
Not sure that's true. For example, I've never seen anyone wearing a hat with corks dangling from it either in the UK or anywhere in Europe.
It may come as a shock to some of my comrades from the hand-wringing Islington wing of the Labour Party, but I am confident that Priti Patel strikes a chord with many Labour voters, unlike Diane Abbott.
People in working class communities feel the effects of crime, and want the scrotes arrested and put away, not somehow to be considered as victims.
BTW, after last week in Italy, this week I'm in Middlesbrough. Swings & roundabouts.
I'd agree with that. To get a criminal.justice system that truly works, it needs to work best for the NEXT victim of a person's crime and accept that, even in the toughest systems we can muster, 90%+ of everyone going to jail is going to be released.
Those are the hard truths, and liberals should be seeking to repaint themselves as the hard nosed bastards, and the likes of Priti Patel as the bleeding hearts, albeit acknowledging that if your heart should bleed anywhere, the victim of a crime is a good place to start.
If its true I honestly hope Boris grabs the offer and pushes it before parliament with some add ons e.g workers rights to get some labour MPs onboard.. That way he can claim to have taken us out of the EU and we can get back to normality..
I say this as a hard brexiteer at heart who would be OK with no deal.. I just think we need to compromise (something which is a dirty word these days) and this is the best way to do it
The WA is a hard Brexit, so no compromise at all. Further division, for years and a complete distortion of the very marginal referendum result
But... We can then negotiate any kind of brexit we want which I appreciate is a big ask with these muppets, or the other lot for that matter, in charge but we theoretically could negotiate a very sensible deal.
Hmm, I don't think you are any more optimistic on that than I am
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
Meanwhile, the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, Australia has none.
It makes me sad that you are incapable of reading what I wrote. Yes there may be a barrier but people go through the barriers. We want the world's best and brightest to get through the barriers and if there are any obstructions to the world's best and brightest getting through then we need to address them. What Patel wants lowers barriers to the world's best and brightest and puts the world's best and brightest ahead of [primarily white Europeans] Europe's anyone, anywhere.
I'm glad you chose to introduce world's top universities into the conversation because . . .
Meanwhile the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, the EU27 have none.
You're right, the EU27 has none. The UK punches well above its weight. Testament, don't you think, that we're doing something right. Or were. Because Patel is looking to change that.
Still waiting for your apology, by the way.
We are doing something right yes and will continue to do so. The EU has nothing to do with what is right, which is why there's no EU27 universities in that list.
What apology? I've nothing to apologise for that I've seen, just hoping to convince you that letting in freely any [primarily white] European that wants to get here while keeping tight restrictions on Africans, Asians, North and South Americans and others is not the best or fairest solution.
It seems to me you couldn't care less about the many bright and great Africans and Asians etc that could come and improve our lot so long as Europeans get here freely. I wonder why that could be?
While there are no EU27 universities in the top 30 as you chose to choose there are top universities from Singapore, China, the USA and Canada as well as the UK. You think our universities are improved by restricting Singaporeans, Chinese etc while granting free movement to Europeans? If so, why?
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
We are European. Australians prioritise people from the Australian continent over Europeans so I don’t see why there is a problem with us prioritising our own continent in the same way. You wouldn’t ask an Australian employer to prioritise a Brit over an Australian
Culturally we have more in common with Australia than most European countries.
For now but that is rapidly diverging and Europe will still be there long after Australia becomes culturally very distant from us.
Meanwhile, the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, Australia has none.
It makes me sad that you are incapable of reading what I wrote. Yes there may be a barrier but people go through the barriers. We want the world's best and brightest to get through the barriers and if there are any obstructions to the world's best and brightest getting through then we need to address them. What Patel wants lowers barriers to the world's best and brightest and puts the world's best and brightest ahead of [primarily white Europeans] Europe's anyone, anywhere.
I'm glad you chose to introduce world's top universities into the conversation because . . .
Meanwhile the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, the EU27 have none.
You're right, the EU27 has none. The UK punches well above its weight. Testament, don't you think, that we're doing something right. Or were. Because Patel is looking to change that.
Still waiting for your apology, by the way.
We are doing something right yes and will continue to do so. The EU has nothing to do with what is right, which is why there's no EU27 universities in that list.
What apology? I've nothing to apologise for that I've seen, just hoping to convince you that letting in freely any [primarily white] European that wants to get here while keeping tight restrictions on Africans, Asians, North and South Americans and others is not the best or fairest solution.
It seems to me you couldn't care less about the many bright and great Africans and Asians etc that could come and improve our lot so long as Europeans get here freely. I wonder why that could be?
While there are no EU27 universities in the top 30 as you chose to choose there are top universities from Singapore, China, the USA and Canada as well as the UK. You think our universities are improved by restricting Singaporeans, Chinese etc while granting free movement to Europeans? If so, why?
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
We are European. Australians prioritise people from the Australian continent over Europeans so I don’t see why there is a problem with us prioritising our own continent in the same way. You wouldn’t ask an Australian employer to prioritise a Brit over an Australian
Culturally we have more in common with Australia than most European countries.
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
We are European. Australians prioritise people from the Australian continent over Europeans so I don’t see why there is a problem with us prioritising our own continent in the same way. You wouldn’t ask an Australian employer to prioritise a Brit over an Australian
So Brits being European makes the Greek and Germans and Poles etc better than Singaporeans and Chinese. Wow . . .
So you are a Trump fanboy? I mean he wants America first and American employers to prioritise Americans - you want Europe first and European employers to prioritise Europeans? What's the difference between you and Trump?
I'd expect the Australian employer to want to get the best candidate they can get for the job. If that's an Australian so be it. If it is not an Australian I would expect Brits to be treated on a level playing field as Australia's nearby neighbours* like Singapore. I wouldn't expect them to put Brits behind 27 of their nearest neighbours just because of geography.
* Not New Zealand. New Zealand and Australia have a unique special relationship, like we do with Ireland.
"Many travellers rationally use the European Health Insurance Card (Ehic) as a substitute for insurance. From midnight on 31 October, in the event of no-deal, these will cease to be valid."
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
And the LDs have rejected a Corbyn-led government. So that means both options are off the table.
Totally unneccesary now Boris has all but got his deal. Boris has said all along that the EU would fold at the 11th hour if he played hardball. I thought his brinkmanship would end in tears, looks like we doubters were wrong.
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
And the LDs have rejected a Corbyn-led government. So that means both options are off the table.
Corbyn promised he would be prepared to stop No Deal Brexit by any means.
Liar.
He wants No-deal. It creates chaos. Plus a full exit from the EU means he is free to carry out Venezuelan economics experiments on the UK without the inconvenience of EU constraints. If Corbyn gets in the blame lies at the door of the reactionary end of the Conservative Party and Boris Johnson.
We are doing something right yes and will continue to do so. The EU has nothing to do with what is right, which is why there's no EU27 universities in that list.
What apology? I've nothing to apologise for that I've seen, just hoping to convince you that letting in freely any [primarily white] European that wants to get here while keeping tight restrictions on Africans, Asians, North and South Americans and others is not the best or fairest solution.
It seems to me you couldn't care less about the many bright and great Africans and Asians etc that could come and improve our lot so long as Europeans get here freely. I wonder why that could be?
While there are no EU27 universities in the top 30 as you chose to choose there are top universities from Singapore, China, the USA and Canada as well as the UK. You think our universities are improved by restricting Singaporeans, Chinese etc while granting free movement to Europeans? If so, why?
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
You need to apologise for calling me a bigot. You are attacking straw men: "while keeping tight restrictions on Africans, Asians, North and South Americans", "restricting Singaporeans, Chinese". I've said nothing of the sort. I've said the increase in barriers is detrimental. Indeed, if Patel were proposing something like Trump's "Muslim ban", stopping immigration wholesale from certain countries, that would be objectionable. We should be working in the opposite direction, making it easier for people to move around for work. Not harder. As it happens, I think that the focus should be on making it easier for the rest of the world. But making it harder for Europeans under the banner of equality is rather like saying we should seize the homes of the wealthy and give them to the homeless. Yes, it's "fairer" in a weird way, but it's also breathtakingly missing the point and enormously stupid.
You, too, are breathtakingly missing the point and enormously stupid.
You went off on a rant about what you imagined I believed, and you got it wrong. I regret that you didn't stop to take the time to think about how much your mind was contributing to what you thought I was saying rather than just reading what I said, but it's ok because you've only embarrassed yourself. Again. I will accept your apology, if you're man enough to offer it.
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
We are European. Australians prioritise people from the Australian continent over Europeans so I don’t see why there is a problem with us prioritising our own continent in the same way. You wouldn’t ask an Australian employer to prioritise a Brit over an Australian
So Brits being European makes the Greek and Germans and Poles etc better than Singaporeans and Chinese. Wow . . .
So you are a Trump fanboy? I mean he wants America first and American employers to prioritise Americans - you want Europe first and European employers to prioritise Europeans? What's the difference between you and Trump?
I'd expect the Australian employer to want to get the best candidate they can get for the job. If that's an Australian so be it. If it is not an Australian I would expect Brits to be treated on a level playing field as Australia's nearby neighbours* like Singapore. I wouldn't expect them to put Brits behind 27 of their nearest neighbours just because of geography.
* Not New Zealand. New Zealand and Australia have a unique special relationship, like we do with Ireland.
How to spectacularly shoot your own argument down. Impressive.
That is the most shockingly racist thing I've read here, other than quotes from Trump. I suppose you wonder why she doesn't "go home to where she comes from"? Its London by the way you disgusting racist.
Really ! Spare me the lecture , it was not intended as you seem to imply . But I’m heartened though that so many Leavers are so anti racist !
I've been anti-racist my entire life. I would never dare suggest eg that Diane Abbott should be deported just because she isn't white. You are sickening and should apologise but you won't because racists like you never understand what is wrong with their racism.
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
And the LDs have rejected a Corbyn-led government. So that means both options are off the table.
Totally unneccesary now Boris has all but got his deal. Boris has said all along that the EU would fold at the 11th hour if he played hardball. I thought his brinkmanship would end in tears, looks like we doubters were wrong.
Oh dear, are you not concerned you might be slightly jumping the gun here? Or have CCO flooded PB with HYUFD clone Bozo fan-boys?
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
And the LDs have rejected a Corbyn-led government. So that means both options are off the table.
Corbyn option is only option that gets close.
Swinson option about 300 short #bolloxtostoppingnodeal
YinYang.
It's true, Corbyn's stated position on No Deal actually outflanks Swinson's Meatloaf position (Corbyn would do anything to stop No Deal, Swinson won't do that)
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
So the ideal is that everybody wants to come here - because we are the bees knees - but only a select few can make it.
A top top place reserved for top top people.
I get you - I think - but there is something a little 'off' about this vision. It smacks of something that is not healthy. I wish I could put my finger on it. Perhaps I will be able to after I've had some nuts.
Who said few?
As I said earlier, Australia with its Australian style points system has double the net migration per capita that we do.
If we get an Australian style points system and net migration increases as we let in more of the world's "top top people" as you put it, whether they be Asians, Africans, Australians or Europeans then I am perfectly fine with that.
Leavers who voted leave because they don't like foreigners are always quick to say how much in favour of immigration they are.
I'm all in favour of immigration, I don't dislike foreigners. Immigration wasn't a major factor for me either way.
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
And the LDs have rejected a Corbyn-led government. So that means both options are off the table.
Corbyn promised he would be prepared to stop No Deal Brexit by any means.
Liar.
He wants No-deal. It creates chaos. Plus a full exit from the EU means he is free to carry out Venezuelan economics experiments on the UK without the inconvenience of EU constraints. If Corbyn gets in the blame lies at the door of the reactionary end of the Conservative Party and Boris Johnson.
Johnson is doing in his negotiations exactly what May should have done all along. Shame that it has taken this long to get here.
If the EU want to insist no deal is better than a permanent backstop it is entirely appropriate and reasonable to discuss where the customs posts the EU are demanding are put. Because that is logically what they are insisting if they continue to demand the backstop unicorn we will never give.
Suddenly a time limited backstop doesn't seem such a bad idea.
Johnson is turning the tables on their nonsense and moving the Overton Window. Good for him!
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
Boris looks seriously dodgy over this Arcuri business. The line that they won tech funding without having a tech product is pretty damning. Bit like Graylings ferries
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
You really are a thick twat aren't you?
At no point did I say that Europeans are the creme de la creme. I said reducing the talent pool of easy hires from 28 to 1 country will be detrimental to attracting the creme de la creme here. As far as I can tell, the proposals won't change the barriers to those coming from outside the EU, but will significantly increase the barriers for those from within the rest of the EU. That is an increase in the difficulty of hiring.
Meanwhile, other EU countries are not raising their barrier to hiring, which means they will become more competitive in terms of hiring and investment.
It's sad that you had to make a baseless accusation based on what you thought I was saying rather than what I actually said. But I forgive you, because it looks a lot like you were being a cretin rather than being malicious. But you should still apologise.
We are not reducing the talent pool from 28 to 1 country. We are taking steps to liberalise migration in the right areas to expand the talent pool to 195 countries.
28 countries do not trump 195 countries. Until you come to me with a reason why we need to discriminate against Singaporeans and Chinese in order to get the world's best people, all I detect from you is racism.
Singaporeans discriminate against people not from Singapore. Australians discriminate against people not from Australia. Why should we, being European, not discriminate against people or from Europe?
Our country is the United Kingdom not "Europe". The comparison for Singapore isn't Singapore, it is Asia.
Singaporeans don't discriminate against people not from Asia in the way racists like you advocate. That would be the comparison. If Singaporeans said we'll welcome any Asians but non-Asians aren't that welcome.
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
We are European. Australians prioritise people from the Australian continent over Europeans so I don’t see why there is a problem with us prioritising our own continent in the same way. You wouldn’t ask an Australian employer to prioritise a Brit over an Australian
So Brits being European makes the Greek and Germans and Poles etc better than Singaporeans and Chinese. Wow . . .
So you are a Trump fanboy? I mean he wants America first and American employers to prioritise Americans - you want Europe first and European employers to prioritise Europeans? What's the difference between you and Trump?
I'd expect the Australian employer to want to get the best candidate they can get for the job. If that's an Australian so be it. If it is not an Australian I would expect Brits to be treated on a level playing field as Australia's nearby neighbours* like Singapore. I wouldn't expect them to put Brits behind 27 of their nearest neighbours just because of geography.
* Not New Zealand. New Zealand and Australia have a unique special relationship, like we do with Ireland.
An Australian employer will prioritise the Australian. That’s the way it is. So you want a completely open border policy where there is global free movement? Your party doesn’t. I would be happy with that.
That is the most shockingly racist thing I've read here, other than quotes from Trump. I suppose you wonder why she doesn't "go home to where she comes from"? Its London by the way you disgusting racist.
Really ! Spare me the lecture , it was not intended as you seem to imply . But I’m heartened though that so many Leavers are so anti racist !
I've been anti-racist my entire life. I would never dare suggest eg that Diane Abbott should be deported just because she isn't white. You are sickening and should apologise but you won't because racists like you never understand what is wrong with their racism.
If you were an anti-racist you would be far more critical of Brexit as a concept and the tactics used by Farage in particular and the Leave campaign. No genuine anti-racist could be such a Brexit fan-boy, it just does not stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
And the LDs have rejected a Corbyn-led government. So that means both options are off the table.
Corbyn option is only option that gets close.
Swinson option about 300 short #bolloxtostoppingnodeal
Is Swinson thick?
Does she seriously think Labour Leave MPs (more than the total LD and Change UK total) Will support any interim PM but Jezza.
PLP Unanimously supported Jezza apparently 18 MPs need to decide do they want to halt No Deal or not
I'm sure John Mann will be interested to hear he unanimously supports Corbyn, Kate hoey too. Your daily reminder that Lab plus SNP plus Plaid plus green plus LD isn't enough
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
And the LDs have rejected a Corbyn-led government. So that means both options are off the table.
Totally unneccesary now Boris has all but got his deal. Boris has said all along that the EU would fold at the 11th hour if he played hardball. I thought his brinkmanship would end in tears, looks like we doubters were wrong.
People from across the world still get here so something must be working even if other bits can be improved. If we can stop relying upon the crutch of free movement then we will be better motivated to fix any flaws with our system that impede the creme de la creme from coming.
Its rather bigoted of @Noo to consider [primarily white] Europeans to be the "creme de la creme" we need to be attracting, rather than the creme de la creme of the entire world whether that be Asians, North or South Americans, Africans or indeed Europeans.
You really are a thick twat aren't you?
At no point did I say that Europeans are the creme de la creme. I said reducing the talent pool of easy hires from 28 to 1 country will be detrimental to attracting the creme de la creme here. As far as I can tell, the proposals won't change the barriers to those coming from outside the EU, but will significantly increase the barriers for those from within the rest of the EU. That is an increase in the difficulty of hiring.
Meanwhile, other EU countries are not raising their barrier to hiring, which means they will become more competitive in terms of hiring and investment.
It's sad that you had to make a baseless accusation based on what you thought I was saying rather than what I actually said. But I forgive you, because it looks a lot like you were being a cretin rather than being malicious. But you should still apologise.
We are not reducing the talent pool from 28 to 1 country. We are taking steps to liberalise migration in the right areas to expand the talent pool to 195 countries.
28 countries do not trump 195 countries. Until you come to me with a reason why we need to discriminate against Singaporeans and Chinese in order to get the world's best people, all I detect from you is racism.
Singaporeans discriminate against people not from Singapore. Australians discriminate against people not from Australia. Why should we, being European, not discriminate against people or from Europe?
Our country is the United Kingdom not "Europe". The comparison for Singapore isn't Singapore, it is Asia.
Singaporeans don't discriminate against people not from Asia in the way racists like you advocate. That would be the comparison. If Singaporeans said we'll welcome any Asians but non-Asians aren't that welcome.
I’m a European Union citizen actually. So are you.
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
And the LDs have rejected a Corbyn-led government. So that means both options are off the table.
Corbyn option is only option that gets close.
Swinson option about 300 short #bolloxtostoppingnodeal
The LibDem strategy seems odd - rather than say "We won't vote for it because the numbers aren't there" why not challenge Corbyn to put himself forward and see if the numbers are there? If they aren't, then we can see about other possibilities. But as things stand, they just seem to be putting party interest (attracting dissident Tory voters) ahead of actually stopping Brexit. It's not a good look, it's weird that Swinson is more reluctant than some of the dissident Tories, and I know LibDem party members who are very uncomfortable about it.
Boris looks seriously dodgy over this Addis I business. The line that they won tech funding without having a tech product is pretty damning. Bit like Graylings ferries
To be fair, that sums up lots of tech start-ups these days. No or crap product, with no sustainable business model...and they still get funded.
That is the most shockingly racist thing I've read here, other than quotes from Trump. I suppose you wonder why she doesn't "go home to where she comes from"? Its London by the way you disgusting racist.
Really ! Spare me the lecture , it was not intended as you seem to imply . But I’m heartened though that so many Leavers are so anti racist !
I've been anti-racist my entire life. I would never dare suggest eg that Diane Abbott should be deported just because she isn't white. You are sickening and should apologise but you won't because racists like you never understand what is wrong with their racism.
Philip, go and lie down in a darkened room for an hour or two, you are losing the plot, imagining racists everywhere.
Boris looks seriously dodgy over this Addis I business. The line that they won tech funding without having a tech product is pretty damning. Bit like Graylings ferries
Except that had nothing whatsoever to do with Johnson
Meanwhile, the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, Australia has none.
It makes me sad that you are incapable of reading what I wrote. Yes there may be a barrier but people go through the barriers. We want the world's best and brightest to get through the barriers and if there are any obstructions to the world's best and brightest getting through then we need to address them. What Patel wants lowers barriers to the world's best and brightest and puts the world's best and brightest ahead of [primarily white Europeans] Europe's anyone, anywhere.
I'm glad you chose to introduce world's top universities into the conversation because . . .
Meanwhile the UK has 6 universities in the world's top 30, the EU27 have none.
You're right, the EU27 has none. The UK punches well above its weight. Testament, don't you think, that we're doing something right. Or were. Because Patel is looking to change that.
Still waiting for your apology, by the way.
We are doing something right yes and will continue to do so. The EU has nothing to do with what is right, which is why there's no EU27 universities in that list.
What apology? I've nothing to apologise for that I've seen, just hoping to convince you that letting in freely any [primarily white] European that wants to get here while keeping tight restrictions on Africans, Asians, North and South Americans and others is not the best or fairest solution.
It seems to me you couldn't care less about the many bright and great Africans and Asians etc that could come and improve our lot so long as Europeans get here freely. I wonder why that could be?
While there are no EU27 universities in the top 30 as you chose to choose there are top universities from Singapore, China, the USA and Canada as well as the UK. You think our universities are improved by restricting Singaporeans, Chinese etc while granting free movement to Europeans? If so, why?
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
We are European. Australians prioritise people from the Australian continent over Europeans so I don’t see why there is a problem with us prioritising our own continent in the same way. You wouldn’t ask an Australian employer to prioritise a Brit over an Australian
Culturally we have more in common with Australia than most European countries.
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
And the LDs have rejected a Corbyn-led government. So that means both options are off the table.
Corbyn option is only option that gets close.
Swinson option about 300 short #bolloxtostoppingnodeal
This is the kind of contemptible rubbish we've come to expect from the Labour Party under Corbyn. Close isn't good enough. The MPs who would put Corbyn over the top, quite legitimately, refuse to make a man they believe to be an antisemitic crank, Prime Minister.
Therefore the only option with a chance is a Labour-backed unity PM. If that doesn't happen it's because Labour thought they had a God-given right to force a PM even a lot of people who'd normally be Labour voters (like myself, a member until last year), believe is offensively unfit to become Prime Minister.
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
Labour has rejected the idea of a "government of national unity" - headed by a figure like Ken Clarke or Margaret Beckett - to prevent a no-deal Brexit.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
And the LDs have rejected a Corbyn-led government. So that means both options are off the table.
Corbyn option is only option that gets close.
Swinson option about 300 short #bolloxtostoppingnodeal
YinYang.
It's true, Corbyn's stated position on No Deal actually outflanks Swinson's Meatloaf position (Corbyn would do anything to stop No Deal, Swinson won't do that)
"I am determined to stop No Deal but Chukka and Lucianna won't let me support the only realistic chance to stop it"
Of course if Boris gets a better Deal all options to stop BREXIT have gone forever
Comments
a) In the late 60s early 70s I worked in a factory as a summer job. The racism was extreme. The factory had a number of Asians, but for some reason they were different to all the other Asians and all the sterotypes did not apply to them. They were OK.
b) My father is a racists, yet he has a Nigerian neighbour whom he thinks is wonderful.
All the nasty stuff applies to all the other people you don't know. The people who look foreign that you do know are somehow OK,
Add to the negatives that he is racist homophobic a bumbler a pathological liar prioritises whats best for himself. A serial sexual predator a self promoter and a right wing danger.
Apart from that you were right
As I said earlier, Australia with its Australian style points system has double the net migration per capita that we do.
If we get an Australian style points system and net migration increases as we let in more of the world's "top top people" as you put it, whether they be Asians, Africans, Australians or Europeans then I am perfectly fine with that.
People in working class communities feel the effects of crime, and want the scrotes arrested and put away, not somehow to be considered as victims.
BTW, after last week in Italy, this week I'm in Middlesbrough. Swings & roundabouts.
But I’m heartened though that so many Leavers are so anti racist !
What apology? I've nothing to apologise for that I've seen, just hoping to convince you that letting in freely any [primarily white] European that wants to get here while keeping tight restrictions on Africans, Asians, North and South Americans and others is not the best or fairest solution.
It seems to me you couldn't care less about the many bright and great Africans and Asians etc that could come and improve our lot so long as Europeans get here freely. I wonder why that could be?
While there are no EU27 universities in the top 30 as you chose to choose there are top universities from Singapore, China, the USA and Canada as well as the UK. You think our universities are improved by restricting Singaporeans, Chinese etc while granting free movement to Europeans? If so, why?
Why are Europeans so much better than Singaporeans or Chinese in your eyes?
Hmmm.
Compromise was reached on 2026!
28 countries do not trump 195 countries. Until you come to me with a reason why we need to discriminate against Singaporeans and Chinese in order to get the world's best people, all I detect from you is racism.
LOL.
Look up quotes by Gove et al during the referendum campaign.
p.s.
I guess Mrs Tabman has just been unsuccessful in peer review.
Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said any interim government - formed after the removal of Boris Johnson - must be headed by Jeremy Corbyn.
The Lib Dems have, meanwhile, said they will not back an interim government headed by Mr Corbyn, with leader Jo Swinson saying the Labour leader had to make clear who else he would support to temporarily take charge.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49891500
If the EU want to insist no deal is better than a permanent backstop it is entirely appropriate and reasonable to discuss where the customs posts the EU are demanding are put. Because that is logically what they are insisting if they continue to demand the backstop unicorn we will never give.
Suddenly a time limited backstop doesn't seem such a bad idea.
Johnson is turning the tables on their nonsense and moving the Overton Window. Good for him!
(I'm getting flashbacks...
Those are the hard truths, and liberals should be seeking to repaint themselves as the hard nosed bastards, and the likes of Priti Patel as the bleeding hearts, albeit acknowledging that if your heart should bleed anywhere, the victim of a crime is a good place to start.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/01/revealed-jennifer-arcuri-got-visa-from-scheme-run-by-former-johnson-official
This isn’t about stopping people from outside Europe , simply why should the UK give special access if it’s not reciprocated.
Swinson option about 300 short #bolloxtostoppingnodeal
Liar.
I have just read, connected to Black history month.
Do not know who will be standing in for Johnson ?
Hope Abbott asks about Dover.
So you are a Trump fanboy? I mean he wants America first and American employers to prioritise Americans - you want Europe first and European employers to prioritise Europeans? What's the difference between you and Trump?
I'd expect the Australian employer to want to get the best candidate they can get for the job. If that's an Australian so be it. If it is not an Australian I would expect Brits to be treated on a level playing field as Australia's nearby neighbours* like Singapore. I wouldn't expect them to put Brits behind 27 of their nearest neighbours just because of geography.
* Not New Zealand. New Zealand and Australia have a unique special relationship, like we do with Ireland.
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/brexit-no-deal-travel-passport-visa-holiday-advice-ehic-mobile-roaming-a9127431.html
You are attacking straw men:
"while keeping tight restrictions on Africans, Asians, North and South Americans", "restricting Singaporeans, Chinese". I've said nothing of the sort.
I've said the increase in barriers is detrimental. Indeed, if Patel were proposing something like Trump's "Muslim ban", stopping immigration wholesale from certain countries, that would be objectionable.
We should be working in the opposite direction, making it easier for people to move around for work. Not harder.
As it happens, I think that the focus should be on making it easier for the rest of the world. But making it harder for Europeans under the banner of equality is rather like saying we should seize the homes of the wealthy and give them to the homeless. Yes, it's "fairer" in a weird way, but it's also breathtakingly missing the point and enormously stupid.
You, too, are breathtakingly missing the point and enormously stupid.
You went off on a rant about what you imagined I believed, and you got it wrong. I regret that you didn't stop to take the time to think about how much your mind was contributing to what you thought I was saying rather than just reading what I said, but it's ok because you've only embarrassed yourself. Again. I will accept your apology, if you're man enough to offer it.
It's true, Corbyn's stated position on No Deal actually outflanks Swinson's Meatloaf position (Corbyn would do anything to stop No Deal, Swinson won't do that)
Does she seriously think Labour Leave MPs (more than the total LD and Change UK total) Will support any interim PM but Jezza.
PLP Unanimously supported Jezza apparently 18 MPs need to decide do they want to halt No Deal or not
The line that they won tech funding without having a tech product is pretty damning. Bit like Graylings ferries
Singaporeans don't discriminate against people not from Asia in the way racists like you advocate. That would be the comparison. If Singaporeans said we'll welcome any Asians but non-Asians aren't that welcome.
Your daily reminder that Lab plus SNP plus Plaid plus green plus LD isn't enough
Evidence please
Therefore the only option with a chance is a Labour-backed unity PM. If that doesn't happen it's because Labour thought they had a God-given right to force a PM even a lot of people who'd normally be Labour voters (like myself, a member until last year), believe is offensively unfit to become Prime Minister.
Of course if Boris gets a better Deal all options to stop BREXIT have gone forever