the thing about scottish independence is the same as about whether the uk withdraws from the eu. geographically we are connected. scotland being independent or uk out of europe will not mean that we float half way round the world and start a new life. we will still be neighbours and will have deal with what that means, still trade, still be in security and defence agreements, still be linked together economically, and many other things. both salmond and forage and their followers live in an imaginary world where we will be truly independent. we will all still have to have shared legislation, much like we do now, to survive. and forage argument about trading around the world, we already do. that's why we have bits of american and chinese legislation (for example) built into ours.
the reality is if scotland go independent, or uk leave eu will mean that all we are doing is putting the uk at the bottom of the pile when it comes to making decisions, but whatever decisions are made we will have to abide by.
all this is based around the view that there is an 'us and them' view. in my mind there is only 'us' and we should work together.
Sorry mate but that is a load of rubbish.
The EU already dictates rules and regulations and we don't get much of a say. Unless we force powers back to the UK or leave the EU altogether (which is what I think we should do) then we can make our own decisions. Switzerland are coping well and has one of the strongest economies throughout Europe.
Sorry mate but this is a load of rubbish too. The EU does not dictate rules and regulations to us or any other EU member state. The rules and regulations are negotiated and agreed by all EU nations including the UK. It's not just about trade but other legislation too. As an example, would you be happy for the UK not to be notified by other EU countries about convicted criminals entering our country or for the UK to be excluded from European Arrest Warrants? These are the sorts of things that would happen if we leave the EU.
Lads! People people speak on here like they have a hotline to 10 Downing St. ! My influence over Westminster is not dissimilar to Brussels. Politicians like Farage and Salmond are not providing practical solutions - they simply seek to exploit a sense of crisis / disenfranchisement and perhaps entitlement to pay their way as they promote disentegration of centuries old structures which could, with some corrections, represent both our interests and solutions for this century.
As well as being a Charlton fan I'm a Londoner. My views and attitudes to Scotland and Europe have varied over the decades but it is very clear that Salmond wants his cake and to eat it.
Let's face it...we are part of the same family in an interesting and challenging world... the only power we have, albeit the ultimate democratic power, is to use the web to gather facts, exchange views and make the right decision in the 2015 general election.
My own take is that this election will be fairly important in shaping things to come, including maintaining the Union if only to avoid all of the unintended consequences of fracture.
Lads! People people speak on here like they have a hotline to 10 Downing St. ! My influence over Westminster is not dissimilar to Brussels. Politicians like Farage and Salmond are not providing practical solutions - they simply seek to exploit a sense of crisis / disenfranchisement and perhaps entitlement to pay their way as they promote disentegration of centuries old structures which could, with some corrections, represent both our interests and solutions for this century.
As well as being a Charlton fan I'm a Londoner. My views and attitudes to Scotland and Europe have varied over the decades but it is very clear that Salmond wants his cake and to eat it.
Let's face it...we are part of the same family in an interesting and challenging world... the only power we have, albeit the ultimate democratic power, is to use the web to gather facts, exchange views and make the right decision in the 2015 general election.
My own take is that this election will be fairly important in shaping things to come, including maintaining the Union if only to avoid all of the unintended consequences of fracture.
That election is a year after a referendum so there might only be 3/4 of a Union to maintain !
the thing about scottish independence is the same as about whether the uk withdraws from the eu. geographically we are connected. scotland being independent or uk out of europe will not mean that we float half way round the world and start a new life. we will still be neighbours and will have deal with what that means, still trade, still be in security and defence agreements, still be linked together economically, and many other things. both salmond and forage and their followers live in an imaginary world where we will be truly independent. we will all still have to have shared legislation, much like we do now, to survive. and forage argument about trading around the world, we already do. that's why we have bits of american and chinese legislation (for example) built into ours.
the reality is if scotland go independent, or uk leave eu will mean that all we are doing is putting the uk at the bottom of the pile when it comes to making decisions, but whatever decisions are made we will have to abide by.
all this is based around the view that there is an 'us and them' view. in my mind there is only 'us' and we should work together.
Sorry mate but that is a load of rubbish.
The EU already dictates rules and regulations and we don't get much of a say. Unless we force powers back to the UK or leave the EU altogether (which is what I think we should do) then we can make our own decisions. Switzerland are coping well and has one of the strongest economies throughout Europe.
Sorry mate but this is a load of rubbish too. The EU does not dictate rules and regulations to us or any other EU member state. The rules and regulations are negotiated and agreed by all EU nations including the UK. It's not just about trade but other legislation too. As an example, would you be happy for the UK not to be notified by other EU countries about convicted criminals entering our country or for the UK to be excluded from European Arrest Warrants? These are the sorts of things that would happen if we leave the EU.
There are 27 (soon to be 28) countries in the EU and the veto has been removed from those countries in nearly all cases so that qualified majority voting applies.
In other words, to put it simplistically, 26 countries can want one thing and the UK another and, as an EU member, the UK has to lump it.
EU single market rules prevent the UK controlling its borders and stopping the possible hordes invading from Romania and Bulgaria to give one topical example. That is why you hear politicians talk about "non-EU immigration."
Some may be pleased to see the diversity such immigration offers. That's fine and their right but don't brand those racist who find it a concern that a supposedly sovereign nation cannot determine who enters its borders. That is what many pro EU people do.
Disco CAFC is therefore more correct than not in his assertion that the EU makes the rules.
the thing about scottish independence is the same as about whether the uk withdraws from the eu. geographically we are connected. scotland being independent or uk out of europe will not mean that we float half way round the world and start a new life. we will still be neighbours and will have deal with what that means, still trade, still be in security and defence agreements, still be linked together economically, and many other things. both salmond and forage and their followers live in an imaginary world where we will be truly independent. we will all still have to have shared legislation, much like we do now, to survive. and forage argument about trading around the world, we already do. that's why we have bits of american and chinese legislation (for example) built into ours.
the reality is if scotland go independent, or uk leave eu will mean that all we are doing is putting the uk at the bottom of the pile when it comes to making decisions, but whatever decisions are made we will have to abide by.
all this is based around the view that there is an 'us and them' view. in my mind there is only 'us' and we should work together.
Sorry mate but that is a load of rubbish.
The EU already dictates rules and regulations and we don't get much of a say. Unless we force powers back to the UK or leave the EU altogether (which is what I think we should do) then we can make our own decisions. Switzerland are coping well and has one of the strongest economies throughout Europe.
Sorry mate but this is a load of rubbish too. The EU does not dictate rules and regulations to us or any other EU member state. The rules and regulations are negotiated and agreed by all EU nations including the UK. It's not just about trade but other legislation too. As an example, would you be happy for the UK not to be notified by other EU countries about convicted criminals entering our country or for the UK to be excluded from European Arrest Warrants? These are the sorts of things that would happen if we leave the EU.
There are 27 (soon to be 28) countries in the EU and the veto has been removed from those countries in nearly all cases so that qualified majority voting applies.
In other words, to put it simplistically, 26 countries can want one thing and the UK another and, as an EU member, the UK has to lump it.
EU single market rules prevent the UK controlling its borders and stopping the possible hordes invading from Romania and Bulgaria to give one topical example. That is why you hear politicians talk about "non-EU immigration."
Some may be pleased to see the diversity such immigration offers. That's fine and their right but don't brand those racist who find it a concern that a supposedly sovereign nation cannot determine who enters its borders. That is what many pro EU people do.
Disco CAFC is therefore more correct than not in his assertion that the EU makes the rules.
Len. When you join a club you agree to abide by the rules and as a member of that club you help shape those rules to the benefit of everyone. When one of the rules changes by popular consent or a new rule is made by popular consent you abide by those rules even if you don't entirely agree with them. You try to have them changed by lobbying other members to show why you think they are wrong but ultimately you abide by those rules.
It called democracy.
If the rules or club become so disconnected from you and your views you walk. Walking would have consequences as in this particular analogy there is no other club to join and the club you just left will not have to talk about or listen to your ideas or even talk at all.
The world of the future will be about huge trading blocks. For the UK to be outside one of those would be effective suicide. I think having straight bananas is a small price to pay for the ecconomic security the EU provides.
Are these two of the not "nearly all cases" you mention?
I repeat what I wrote in a previous post, countries only follow the rules they want to - here in Portugal they constantly ignore rules that apply in the rest of the EU, and so does every other country.
the thing about scottish independence is the same as about whether the uk withdraws from the eu. geographically we are connected. scotland being independent or uk out of europe will not mean that we float half way round the world and start a new life. we will still be neighbours and will have deal with what that means, still trade, still be in security and defence agreements, still be linked together economically, and many other things. both salmond and forage and their followers live in an imaginary world where we will be truly independent. we will all still have to have shared legislation, much like we do now, to survive. and forage argument about trading around the world, we already do. that's why we have bits of american and chinese legislation (for example) built into ours.
the reality is if scotland go independent, or uk leave eu will mean that all we are doing is putting the uk at the bottom of the pile when it comes to making decisions, but whatever decisions are made we will have to abide by.
all this is based around the view that there is an 'us and them' view. in my mind there is only 'us' and we should work together.
Sorry mate but that is a load of rubbish.
The EU already dictates rules and regulations and we don't get much of a say. Unless we force powers back to the UK or leave the EU altogether (which is what I think we should do) then we can make our own decisions. Switzerland are coping well and has one of the strongest economies throughout Europe.
Sorry mate but this is a load of rubbish too. The EU does not dictate rules and regulations to us or any other EU member state. The rules and regulations are negotiated and agreed by all EU nations including the UK. It's not just about trade but other legislation too. As an example, would you be happy for the UK not to be notified by other EU countries about convicted criminals entering our country or for the UK to be excluded from European Arrest Warrants? These are the sorts of things that would happen if we leave the EU.
There are 27 (soon to be 28) countries in the EU and the veto has been removed from those countries in nearly all cases so that qualified majority voting applies.
In other words, to put it simplistically, 26 countries can want one thing and the UK another and, as an EU member, the UK has to lump it.
EU single market rules prevent the UK controlling its borders and stopping the possible hordes invading from Romania and Bulgaria to give one topical example. That is why you hear politicians talk about "non-EU immigration."
Some may be pleased to see the diversity such immigration offers. That's fine and their right but don't brand those racist who find it a concern that a supposedly sovereign nation cannot determine who enters its borders. That is what many pro EU people do.
Disco CAFC is therefore more correct than not in his assertion that the EU makes the rules.
Len. When you join a club you agree to abide by the rules and as a member of that club you help shape those rules to the benefit of everyone. When one of the rules changes by popular consent or a new rule is made by popular consent you abide by those rules even if you don't entirely agree with them. You try to have them changed by lobbying other members to show why you think they are wrong but ultimately you abide by those rules.
It called democracy.
If the rules or club become so disconnected from you and your views you walk. Walking would have consequences as in this particular analogy there is no other club to join and the club you just left will not have to talk about or listen to your ideas or even talk at all.
The world of the future will be about huge trading blocks. For the UK to be outside one of those would be effective suicide. I think having straight bananas is a small price to pay for the ecconomic security the EU provides.
We joined the ECC, we didn't sign up for 'the club' we now find ourselves a part of. No one in this country has had a say. That's not democracy. Scotland if they vote yes will be swapping their masters from Westminster to Brussels. In other words, they won't be getting independence.
I remember Salmond's mantra right from the start was always "An independent Scotland within the EU". Which I have always taken to mean "An independent Scotland propped up with money from Brussels rather than London", because for some reason that is a different dependency.
Straw poll of six Scots in the pub last night, all fiercely anti independence, and quite pissed off about children being able to vote on the issue.
the thing about scottish independence is the same as about whether the uk withdraws from the eu. geographically we are connected. scotland being independent or uk out of europe will not mean that we float half way round the world and start a new life. we will still be neighbours and will have deal with what that means, still trade, still be in security and defence agreements, still be linked together economically, and many other things. both salmond and forage and their followers live in an imaginary world where we will be truly independent. we will all still have to have shared legislation, much like we do now, to survive. and forage argument about trading around the world, we already do. that's why we have bits of american and chinese legislation (for example) built into ours.
the reality is if scotland go independent, or uk leave eu will mean that all we are doing is putting the uk at the bottom of the pile when it comes to making decisions, but whatever decisions are made we will have to abide by.
all this is based around the view that there is an 'us and them' view. in my mind there is only 'us' and we should work together.
Sorry mate but that is a load of rubbish.
The EU already dictates rules and regulations and we don't get much of a say. Unless we force powers back to the UK or leave the EU altogether (which is what I think we should do) then we can make our own decisions. Switzerland are coping well and has one of the strongest economies throughout Europe.
Sorry mate but this is a load of rubbish too. The EU does not dictate rules and regulations to us or any other EU member state. The rules and regulations are negotiated and agreed by all EU nations including the UK. It's not just about trade but other legislation too. As an example, would you be happy for the UK not to be notified by other EU countries about convicted criminals entering our country or for the UK to be excluded from European Arrest Warrants? These are the sorts of things that would happen if we leave the EU.
There are 27 (soon to be 28) countries in the EU and the veto has been removed from those countries in nearly all cases so that qualified majority voting applies.
In other words, to put it simplistically, 26 countries can want one thing and the UK another and, as an EU member, the UK has to lump it.
EU single market rules prevent the UK controlling its borders and stopping the possible hordes invading from Romania and Bulgaria to give one topical example. That is why you hear politicians talk about "non-EU immigration."
Some may be pleased to see the diversity such immigration offers. That's fine and their right but don't brand those racist who find it a concern that a supposedly sovereign nation cannot determine who enters its borders. That is what many pro EU people do.
Disco CAFC is therefore more correct than not in his assertion that the EU makes the rules.
Len. When you join a club you agree to abide by the rules and as a member of that club you help shape those rules to the benefit of everyone. When one of the rules changes by popular consent or a new rule is made by popular consent you abide by those rules even if you don't entirely agree with them. You try to have them changed by lobbying other members to show why you think they are wrong but ultimately you abide by those rules.
It called democracy.
If the rules or club become so disconnected from you and your views you walk. Walking would have consequences as in this particular analogy there is no other club to join and the club you just left will not have to talk about or listen to your ideas or even talk at all.
The world of the future will be about huge trading blocks. For the UK to be outside one of those would be effective suicide. I think having straight bananas is a small price to pay for the ecconomic security the EU provides.
We joined the ECC, we didn't sign up for 'the club' we now find ourselves a part of. No one in this country has had a say. That's not democracy. Scotland if they vote yes will be swapping their masters from Westminster to Brussels. In other words, they won't be getting independence.
We do have our say. We do every general election. This country has never be governed by popular concensus ie refereda on every topic. We elect a government to rightly or wrongly make decisions on our behalf. That my friend is democracy.
The X factor vote by a phone call is the way you want to go ?
the thing about scottish independence is the same as about whether the uk withdraws from the eu. geographically we are connected. scotland being independent or uk out of europe will not mean that we float half way round the world and start a new life. we will still be neighbours and will have deal with what that means, still trade, still be in security and defence agreements, still be linked together economically, and many other things. both salmond and forage and their followers live in an imaginary world where we will be truly independent. we will all still have to have shared legislation, much like we do now, to survive. and forage argument about trading around the world, we already do. that's why we have bits of american and chinese legislation (for example) built into ours.
the reality is if scotland go independent, or uk leave eu will mean that all we are doing is putting the uk at the bottom of the pile when it comes to making decisions, but whatever decisions are made we will have to abide by.
all this is based around the view that there is an 'us and them' view. in my mind there is only 'us' and we should work together.
Sorry mate but that is a load of rubbish.
The EU already dictates rules and regulations and we don't get much of a say. Unless we force powers back to the UK or leave the EU altogether (which is what I think we should do) then we can make our own decisions. Switzerland are coping well and has one of the strongest economies throughout Europe.
Sorry mate but this is a load of rubbish too. The EU does not dictate rules and regulations to us or any other EU member state. The rules and regulations are negotiated and agreed by all EU nations including the UK. It's not just about trade but other legislation too. As an example, would you be happy for the UK not to be notified by other EU countries about convicted criminals entering our country or for the UK to be excluded from European Arrest Warrants? These are the sorts of things that would happen if we leave the EU.
There are 27 (soon to be 28) countries in the EU and the veto has been removed from those countries in nearly all cases so that qualified majority voting applies.
In other words, to put it simplistically, 26 countries can want one thing and the UK another and, as an EU member, the UK has to lump it.
EU single market rules prevent the UK controlling its borders and stopping the possible hordes invading from Romania and Bulgaria to give one topical example. That is why you hear politicians talk about "non-EU immigration."
Some may be pleased to see the diversity such immigration offers. That's fine and their right but don't brand those racist who find it a concern that a supposedly sovereign nation cannot determine who enters its borders. That is what many pro EU people do.
Disco CAFC is therefore more correct than not in his assertion that the EU makes the rules.
Len. When you join a club you agree to abide by the rules and as a member of that club you help shape those rules to the benefit of everyone. When one of the rules changes by popular consent or a new rule is made by popular consent you abide by those rules even if you don't entirely agree with them. You try to have them changed by lobbying other members to show why you think they are wrong but ultimately you abide by those rules.
It called democracy.
If the rules or club become so disconnected from you and your views you walk. Walking would have consequences as in this particular analogy there is no other club to join and the club you just left will not have to talk about or listen to your ideas or even talk at all.
The world of the future will be about huge trading blocks. For the UK to be outside one of those would be effective suicide. I think having straight bananas is a small price to pay for the ecconomic security the EU provides.
We joined the ECC, we didn't sign up for 'the club' we now find ourselves a part of. No one in this country has had a say. That's not democracy. Scotland if they vote yes will be swapping their masters from Westminster to Brussels. In other words, they won't be getting independence.
We do have our say. We do every general election. This country has never be governed by popular concensus ie refereda on every topic. We elect a government to rightly or wrongly make decisions on our behalf. That my friend is democracy.
The X factor vote by a phone call is the way you want to go ?
the thing about scottish independence is the same as about whether the uk withdraws from the eu. geographically we are connected. scotland being independent or uk out of europe will not mean that we float half way round the world and start a new life. we will still be neighbours and will have deal with what that means, still trade, still be in security and defence agreements, still be linked together economically, and many other things. both salmond and forage and their followers live in an imaginary world where we will be truly independent. we will all still have to have shared legislation, much like we do now, to survive. and forage argument about trading around the world, we already do. that's why we have bits of american and chinese legislation (for example) built into ours.
the reality is if scotland go independent, or uk leave eu will mean that all we are doing is putting the uk at the bottom of the pile when it comes to making decisions, but whatever decisions are made we will have to abide by.
all this is based around the view that there is an 'us and them' view. in my mind there is only 'us' and we should work together.
Sorry mate but that is a load of rubbish.
The EU already dictates rules and regulations and we don't get much of a say. Unless we force powers back to the UK or leave the EU altogether (which is what I think we should do) then we can make our own decisions. Switzerland are coping well and has one of the strongest economies throughout Europe.
Sorry mate but this is a load of rubbish too. The EU does not dictate rules and regulations to us or any other EU member state. The rules and regulations are negotiated and agreed by all EU nations including the UK. It's not just about trade but other legislation too. As an example, would you be happy for the UK not to be notified by other EU countries about convicted criminals entering our country or for the UK to be excluded from European Arrest Warrants? These are the sorts of things that would happen if we leave the EU.
There are 27 (soon to be 28) countries in the EU and the veto has been removed from those countries in nearly all cases so that qualified majority voting applies.
In other words, to put it simplistically, 26 countries can want one thing and the UK another and, as an EU member, the UK has to lump it.
EU single market rules prevent the UK controlling its borders and stopping the possible hordes invading from Romania and Bulgaria to give one topical example. That is why you hear politicians talk about "non-EU immigration."
Some may be pleased to see the diversity such immigration offers. That's fine and their right but don't brand those racist who find it a concern that a supposedly sovereign nation cannot determine who enters its borders. That is what many pro EU people do.
Disco CAFC is therefore more correct than not in his assertion that the EU makes the rules.
Len we are not part of the Schengen area as we opted out. We, and Ireland are able to apply border controls to prevent illegal entry, whether EU or non-EU citizens into our countries. Even though we are outside of Schengen Agreement, we share data with other EU countries on wanted suspects and criminals moving between our borders. Because we are in the EU we are able to influence this. If we left the EU we would need to renegotiate with each state, many of whom, might not want to play ball with us.
Much of the work of the EU is unglamorous and mundane but would have consequences for us if we left. The same will be true if Scotland leaves the UK.
Lads! People people speak on here like they have a hotline to 10 Downing St. ! My influence over Westminster is not dissimilar to Brussels. Politicians like Farage and Salmond are not providing practical solutions - they simply seek to exploit a sense of crisis / disenfranchisement and perhaps entitlement to pay their way as they promote disentegration of centuries old structures which could, with some corrections, represent both our interests and solutions for this century.
As well as being a Charlton fan I'm a Londoner. My views and attitudes to Scotland and Europe have varied over the decades but it is very clear that Salmond wants his cake and to eat it.
Let's face it...we are part of the same family in an interesting and challenging world... the only power we have, albeit the ultimate democratic power, is to use the web to gather facts, exchange views and make the right decision in the 2015 general election.
My own take is that this election will be fairly important in shaping things to come, including maintaining the Union if only to avoid all of the unintended consequences of fracture.
That election is a year after a referendum so there might only be 3/4 of a Union to maintain !
Given that the latest polls are 32-37% in favour with the rest against or undecided I figure we will have a Union in 2015
Len Farage and his imaginary hordes! Any cursory research would show that it is unlikely that 25m Romanians and Bulgarians are preparing to up sticks and wander over here.
This is a side show designed to win votes which the Tories are afraid/unwilling to fight and Labour are either watching the right self destruct or haven't found an answer yet. Perhaps they are waiting until January 2014 numbers come out?
I enjoy living in a country that others want to come to - would you prefer we were a place that people didnt want to go?
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO yes lets remember how many time we were told only 6,000 would come here under othe open borders policy---and anyone who said differant was a racist bigot (Mr Browns own words). 5 millionnew comers later we get the same old Gaurdianista bollox. Now of course its "unlikely". "Others to come" -----------genuine asylum from persecution ----100% yes. Immigration yes (as we always have)--------------mass immigration as a policy hidden and covered up by OUR government NO.
As long as they come and want to work, get on, pay taxes and contribute to our country I have no problem. I have more of a problem with the four million British who have never had. Job since leaving school. That's more than the entire population of Wales. I would rather they come here and we ship out these useless feckers.
Remember the EU is about the free movements of goods, services (including labour) and capital which should lead to more efficient (& wealthier) continent... I take your point Gooner - so lets see what the numbers are.
My point is that Farage has a strategy which is leveraging fear for political gain AND that no one is addressing the problems with honest solutions which voters can buy into. Salmon is doing something similar but has hit the buffers at a point in the polls which Farage can only dream of.
But this is a thread about Scottish independence not feckless foreigners trying to get a free ride!
the thing about scottish independence is the same as about whether the uk withdraws from the eu. geographically we are connected. scotland being independent or uk out of europe will not mean that we float half way round the world and start a new life. we will still be neighbours and will have deal with what that means, still trade, still be in security and defence agreements, still be linked together economically, and many other things. both salmond and forage and their followers live in an imaginary world where we will be truly independent. we will all still have to have shared legislation, much like we do now, to survive. and forage argument about trading around the world, we already do. that's why we have bits of american and chinese legislation (for example) built into ours.
the reality is if scotland go independent, or uk leave eu will mean that all we are doing is putting the uk at the bottom of the pile when it comes to making decisions, but whatever decisions are made we will have to abide by.
all this is based around the view that there is an 'us and them' view. in my mind there is only 'us' and we should work together.
Sorry mate but that is a load of rubbish.
The EU already dictates rules and regulations and we don't get much of a say. Unless we force powers back to the UK or leave the EU altogether (which is what I think we should do) then we can make our own decisions. Switzerland are coping well and has one of the strongest economies throughout Europe.
Sorry mate but this is a load of rubbish too. The EU does not dictate rules and regulations to us or any other EU member state. The rules and regulations are negotiated and agreed by all EU nations including the UK. It's not just about trade but other legislation too. As an example, would you be happy for the UK not to be notified by other EU countries about convicted criminals entering our country or for the UK to be excluded from European Arrest Warrants? These are the sorts of things that would happen if we leave the EU.
There are 27 (soon to be 28) countries in the EU and the veto has been removed from those countries in nearly all cases so that qualified majority voting applies.
In other words, to put it simplistically, 26 countries can want one thing and the UK another and, as an EU member, the UK has to lump it.
EU single market rules prevent the UK controlling its borders and stopping the possible hordes invading from Romania and Bulgaria to give one topical example. That is why you hear politicians talk about "non-EU immigration."
Some may be pleased to see the diversity such immigration offers. That's fine and their right but don't brand those racist who find it a concern that a supposedly sovereign nation cannot determine who enters its borders. That is what many pro EU people do.
Disco CAFC is therefore more correct than not in his assertion that the EU makes the rules.
Len we are not part of the Schengen area as we opted out. We, and Ireland are able to apply border controls to prevent illegal entry, whether EU or non-EU citizens into our countries. Even though we are outside of Schengen Agreement, we share data with other EU countries on wanted suspects and criminals moving between our borders. Because we are in the EU we are able to influence this. If we left the EU we would need to renegotiate with each state, many of whom, might not want to play ball with us.
Much of the work of the EU is unglamorous and mundane but would have consequences for us if we left. The same will be true if Scotland leaves the UK.
Schengen is not relevant here.
It is single market freedom of movement legislation which entitles the Romanians and Bulgarians to come here.
The only "concession" to delaying their arrival was a negotiated delay to 1 January 2014.
The Europhiles ridiculed and branded as racist those who expressed concerns last time the borders were opened back in 2004 for various Eastern European countries and even the most europhiliac have had to acknowledge that they under estimated the number of arrivals.
History has a habit of repeating itself.
This annoys me as we are friends with a Costa Rican family whose visa has just run out. They work and pay taxes yet are almost certainly going to have to leave. The slight ray of hope is that he has highly specialised skills which might save him.
There are many "EU" immigrants more worthy of deportation than my friends yet we cannot do it as EU members.
Many of you probably are happy with that but it is not the free trade arrangement that Heath deceived the electorate that we were joining in 1972.
If you want to be a citizen of a country called EU rather than a subject of the UK that is your right but don't try and pretend that the UK's independence hasn't been ceded.
Len Farage and his imaginary hordes! Any cursory research would show that it is unlikely that 25m Romanians and Bulgarians are preparing to up sticks and wander over here.
This is a side show designed to win votes which the Tories are afraid/unwilling to fight and Labour are either watching the right self destruct or haven't found an answer yet. Perhaps they are waiting until January 2014 numbers come out?
I enjoy living in a country that others want to come to - would you prefer we were a place that people didnt want to go?
I would rather we lived in a country where people wanted to come, but couldn't because decent laws were put in place to limit immigration. Seems to work for Australia. Why should we be the solution for a better life for everybody?
Len Farage and his imaginary hordes! Any cursory research would show that it is unlikely that 25m Romanians and Bulgarians are preparing to up sticks and wander over here.
This is a side show designed to win votes which the Tories are afraid/unwilling to fight and Labour are either watching the right self destruct or haven't found an answer yet. Perhaps they are waiting until January 2014 numbers come out?
I enjoy living in a country that others want to come to - would you prefer we were a place that people didnt want to go?
UKIP states that in 2014 the EU will allow 25m Romanians and Bulgarians to come into the UK. They obviously do not mean that 25m will come to the UK!
Of course we all want the best people to come and contribute to the UK but we make it far too attractive to them because of many reasons. If I was a Romanian and Bulgarian, I would be packing my bags now wanting to come and work in the UK.
In the end, when we have youth unemployment increasing, schools are getting too full etc etc we can't take anymore in and we need to put the British people first.
We joined the ECC, we didn't sign up for 'the club' we now find ourselves a part of. No one in this country has had a say. That's not democracy.
You are wrong, the UK parliament has debated and passed each stage in the growth of the EU from joining in 1972 (the European Communities Act) up to and including the most recent Lisbon treaty. Constitutionally we elect these people to take decisions on our behalf and the votes to ratify the various treaties have survived all legal challenges seeking to overturn them on grounds of constitutionality - so over the years plenty of people have had a say. If your MP votes in favour of these treaties you are at liberty to vote against him/her at the next election.
As for the argument that we only joined the EEC - again you are wrong. There were several stages to the EEC/EU project - the first being to get it off the ground and into existence - which was achieved with the Treaty of Rome in 1957. That for example mandated that there would be a freeze on custom duties between the Member States and those duties were then gradually reduced to zero. The next stages in the roadmap included gradual enlargement as more nations joined in and also an increase in powers/a development of the institutions and their scope so on including monetary union etc. All this was widely known/set out in the 1950s and it was accepted and understood by us when we signed on that we were not just joining a free customs union (which in any case would be impractical given the need to police it) and that the EEC would evolve over the years.
All subsequent stages were agreed in a series of treaties - the SEA, Maastricht, Nice etc and as above all these treaties were debated and passed into law by the UK parliament and given Royal Assent. For example, the Lisbon Treaty was passed in a bill called the EU Amendment Act 2008. Other nations have the right to hold referendums, but that's not something we do in the UK, other than on one occasion.
Furthermore by the time we joined there had already been a number of ECJ cases which established that EU law took precedence over national law. If you are interested look up Van Gend en Los and Costa v Enel.
Len Farage and his imaginary hordes! Any cursory research would show that it is unlikely that 25m Romanians and Bulgarians are preparing to up sticks and wander over here.
This is a side show designed to win votes which the Tories are afraid/unwilling to fight and Labour are either watching the right self destruct or haven't found an answer yet. Perhaps they are waiting until January 2014 numbers come out?
I enjoy living in a country that others want to come to - would you prefer we were a place that people didnt want to go?
UKIP states that in 2014 the EU will allow 25m Romanians and Bulgarians to come into the UK. They obviously do not mean that 25m will come to the UK!
Of course we all want the best people to come and contribute to the UK but we make it far too attractive to them because of many reasons. If I was a Romanian and Bulgarian, I would be packing my bags now wanting to come and work in the UK.
In the end, when we have youth unemployment increasing, schools are getting too full etc etc we can't take anymore in and we need to put the British people first.
If they don't mean that why was Farage saying that on the night of the Eastbourne bye election? And why did it take Newsnight three weeks later and not the major political parties to challenge this?
We want the best so why do the Tories launch an attack on overseas students who bring revenue and some who succeed may stay? I heard recently (not a fact) that overseas student numbers down by 50,000+
Schools (and other vital services) will pay for themselves if we get the mix on the economy right and collect tax from corporations who make profits in these isles.
The distribution of underachievement has shifted. Twenty or thirty years ago, the problems were in the big cities. Inner London schools were the best funded and worst achieving in the country. Now, schools in inner and outer London are the best performing, and performance in parts of Birmingham, Greater Manchester, Liverpool and Leicester has also improved. The areas where the most disadvantaged children are being let down by the education system in 2013 are no longer deprived inner city areas, instead the focus has shifted to deprived coastal towns and rural, less populous regions of the country, particularly down the East and South-East of England. These are places that have felt little impact from national initiatives designed to drive up standards for the poorest children.
So guess where Farage goes campaigning blaming Romanians who have yet to arrive?!
In 2003 a new financial advisor looked at my pension, mortgage and investments and recommended that I set up a Family Trust for my children.
The reason for setting up such trusts is to avoid the complications of inheritance tax that often prove to be a burden on grieving families.
At the time this was common practice, indeed several cabinet ministers and leading opposition figures have family trusts. All of this was, and still remains 100% legal.
However, this vehicle proved to be completely unsuitable for me as I am far from wealthy enough for it to be relevant. Furthermore, I began to feel very uncomfortable about having such a trust as attitudes towards tax management changed. I decided in time to close it down, resulting in a substantial financial loss. Apart from the initial capital, no other income of any type went into the account and I have the statement to prove this.
In hindsight, following advice to set up the trust was a mistake. The vehicle was unused and has now been closed for some years.
In 2004 I decided I would play no further active part in the activities of Farage Ltd which was set up in 2003, as I was too busy with politics. My shares were transferred to the trust, but only after I had signed a dividend waiver, which I have the records for.
From 2004 until 2011 I continued to act as Company Secretary for my brother without receiving any payment. When the trust was closed down the shares were given to my brother free of charge.
I have always paid all of my tax and never had any intention to avoid tax.
As I said in my last speech in the European Parliament, people only seek to avoid taxes if they feel they are unfair. Inheritance tax is an example of a tax that is certainly unfair and results in the double taxation of money. UKIP will continue to campaign for the abolition of this tax while upholding the importance of stamping out tax evasion.
Dude...he made a speech about tax avoidance in the full knowledge that he had set up a trust to avoid tax. That he didn't actually avoid paying tax is irrelevant.
Comments
People people speak on here like they have a hotline to 10 Downing St. ! My influence over Westminster is not dissimilar to Brussels.
Politicians like Farage and Salmond are not providing practical solutions - they simply seek to exploit a sense of crisis / disenfranchisement and perhaps entitlement to pay their way as they promote disentegration of centuries old structures which could, with some corrections, represent both our interests and solutions for this century.
As well as being a Charlton fan I'm a Londoner. My views and attitudes to Scotland and Europe have varied over the decades but it is very clear that Salmond wants his cake and to eat it.
Let's face it...we are part of the same family in an interesting and challenging world... the only power we have, albeit the ultimate democratic power, is to use the web to gather facts, exchange views and make the right decision in the 2015 general election.
My own take is that this election will be fairly important in shaping things to come, including maintaining the Union if only to avoid all of the unintended consequences of fracture.
In other words, to put it simplistically, 26 countries can want one thing and the UK another and, as an EU member, the UK has to lump it.
EU single market rules prevent the UK controlling its borders and stopping the possible hordes invading from Romania and Bulgaria to give one topical example. That is why you hear politicians talk about "non-EU immigration."
Some may be pleased to see the diversity such immigration offers. That's fine and their right but don't brand those racist who find it a concern that a supposedly sovereign nation cannot determine who enters its borders. That is what many pro EU people do.
Disco CAFC is therefore more correct than not in his assertion that the EU makes the rules.
It called democracy.
If the rules or club become so disconnected from you and your views you walk. Walking would have consequences as in this particular analogy there is no other club to join and the club you just left will not have to talk about or listen to your ideas or even talk at all.
The world of the future will be about huge trading blocks. For the UK to be outside one of those would be effective suicide. I think having straight bananas is a small price to pay for the ecconomic security the EU provides.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/13/eu-free-trade-talks-france
And this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9855211/David-Cameron-threatens-to-veto-EU-budget-that-is-too-high.html
Are these two of the not "nearly all cases" you mention?
I repeat what I wrote in a previous post, countries only follow the rules they want to - here in Portugal they constantly ignore rules that apply in the rest of the EU, and so does every other country.
Straw poll of six Scots in the pub last night, all fiercely anti independence, and quite pissed off about children being able to vote on the issue.
The X factor vote by a phone call is the way you want to go ?
Much of the work of the EU is unglamorous and mundane but would have consequences for us if we left. The same will be true if Scotland leaves the UK.
This is a side show designed to win votes which the Tories are afraid/unwilling to fight and Labour are either watching the right self destruct or haven't found an answer yet. Perhaps they are waiting until January 2014 numbers come out?
I enjoy living in a country that others want to come to - would you prefer we were a place that people didnt want to go?
"Others to come" -----------genuine asylum from persecution ----100% yes. Immigration yes (as we always have)--------------mass immigration as a policy hidden and covered up by OUR government NO.
My point is that Farage has a strategy which is leveraging fear for political gain AND that no one is addressing the problems with honest solutions which voters can buy into. Salmon is doing something similar but has hit the buffers at a point in the polls which Farage can only dream of.
But this is a thread about Scottish independence not feckless foreigners trying to get a free ride!
It is single market freedom of movement legislation which entitles the Romanians and Bulgarians to come here.
The only "concession" to delaying their arrival was a negotiated delay to 1 January 2014.
The Europhiles ridiculed and branded as racist those who expressed concerns last time the borders were opened back in 2004 for various Eastern European countries and even the most europhiliac have had to acknowledge that they under estimated the number of arrivals.
History has a habit of repeating itself.
This annoys me as we are friends with a Costa Rican family whose visa has just run out. They work and pay taxes yet are almost certainly going to have to leave. The slight ray of hope is that he has highly specialised skills which might save him.
There are many "EU" immigrants more worthy of deportation than my friends yet we cannot do it as EU members.
Many of you probably are happy with that but it is not the free trade arrangement that Heath deceived the electorate that we were joining in 1972.
If you want to be a citizen of a country called EU rather than a subject of the UK that is your right but don't try and pretend that the UK's independence hasn't been ceded.
It has. Big time.
Of course we all want the best people to come and contribute to the UK but we make it far too attractive to them because of many reasons. If I was a Romanian and Bulgarian, I would be packing my bags now wanting to come and work in the UK.
In the end, when we have youth unemployment increasing, schools are getting too full etc etc we can't take anymore in and we need to put the British people first.
We joined the ECC, we didn't sign up for 'the club' we now find ourselves a part of. No one in this country has had a say. That's not democracy.
Not this again...
First, we did have a say, there was a referendum and an overwhelming majority voted in favour of staying in the EU.
Prior to that the European Communities Act 1972 was passed by parliament.
Well what do they mean then?
Not this again...
First, we did have a say, there was a referendum and an overwhelming majority voted in favour of staying in the EU.
Prior to that the European Communities Act 1972 was passed by parliament.
they actually voted to stay in the EEC, there has been no referendum on the EU despite the numerous promises
You are wrong, the UK parliament has debated and passed each stage in the growth of the EU from joining in 1972 (the European Communities Act) up to and including the most recent Lisbon treaty. Constitutionally we elect these people to take decisions on our behalf and the votes to ratify the various treaties have survived all legal challenges seeking to overturn them on grounds of constitutionality - so over the years plenty of people have had a say. If your MP votes in favour of these treaties you are at liberty to vote against him/her at the next election.
As for the argument that we only joined the EEC - again you are wrong. There were several stages to the EEC/EU project - the first being to get it off the ground and into existence - which was achieved with the Treaty of Rome in 1957. That for example mandated that there would be a freeze on custom duties between the Member States and those duties were then gradually reduced to zero. The next stages in the roadmap included gradual enlargement as more nations joined in and also an increase in powers/a development of the institutions and their scope so on including monetary union etc. All this was widely known/set out in the 1950s and it was accepted and understood by us when we signed on that we were not just joining a free customs union (which in any case would be impractical given the need to police it) and that the EEC would evolve over the years.
All subsequent stages were agreed in a series of treaties - the SEA, Maastricht, Nice etc and as above all these treaties were debated and passed into law by the UK parliament and given Royal Assent. For example, the Lisbon Treaty was passed in a bill called the EU Amendment Act 2008. Other nations have the right to hold referendums, but that's not something we do in the UK, other than on one occasion.
Furthermore by the time we joined there had already been a number of ECJ cases which established that EU law took precedence over national law. If you are interested look up Van Gend en Los and Costa v Enel.
We want the best so why do the Tories launch an attack on overseas students who bring revenue and some who succeed may stay? I heard recently (not a fact) that overseas student numbers down by 50,000+
Schools (and other vital services) will pay for themselves if we get the mix on the economy right and collect tax from corporations who make profits in these isles.
ofsted.gov.uk/news/ofsted-too-many-of-englands-poorest-children-continue-be-let-down-education-system
The distribution of underachievement has shifted. Twenty or thirty years ago, the problems were in the big cities. Inner London schools were the best funded and worst achieving in the country. Now, schools in inner and outer London are the best performing, and performance in parts of Birmingham, Greater Manchester, Liverpool and Leicester has also improved.
The areas where the most disadvantaged children are being let down by the education system in 2013 are no longer deprived inner city areas, instead the focus has shifted to deprived coastal towns and rural, less populous regions of the country, particularly down the East and South-East of England. These are places that have felt little impact from national initiatives designed to drive up standards for the poorest children.
So guess where Farage goes campaigning blaming Romanians who have yet to arrive?!
Back to scare mongering...
Anyway speaking of Nigel Farage:
Nige on why tax avoidance is a bad thing:
Nige apologising for setting up a tax avoidance scheme:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-leader-nigel-farage-admits-tax-haven-fund-was-a-mistake-8668098.html
In 2003 a new financial advisor looked at my pension, mortgage and investments and recommended that I set up a Family Trust for my children.
The reason for setting up such trusts is to avoid the complications of inheritance tax that often prove to be a burden on grieving families.
At the time this was common practice, indeed several cabinet ministers and leading opposition figures have family trusts. All of this was, and still remains 100% legal.
However, this vehicle proved to be completely unsuitable for me as I am far from wealthy enough for it to be relevant. Furthermore, I began to feel very uncomfortable about having such a trust as attitudes towards tax management changed. I decided in time to close it down, resulting in a substantial financial loss. Apart from the initial capital, no other income of any type went into the account and I have the statement to prove this.
In hindsight, following advice to set up the trust was a mistake. The vehicle was unused and has now been closed for some years.
In 2004 I decided I would play no further active part in the activities of Farage Ltd which was set up in 2003, as I was too busy with politics. My shares were transferred to the trust, but only after I had signed a dividend waiver, which I have the records for.
From 2004 until 2011 I continued to act as Company Secretary for my brother without receiving any payment. When the trust was closed down the shares were given to my brother free of charge.
I have always paid all of my tax and never had any intention to avoid tax.
As I said in my last speech in the European Parliament, people only seek to avoid taxes if they feel they are unfair. Inheritance tax is an example of a tax that is certainly unfair and results in the double taxation of money. UKIP will continue to campaign for the abolition of this tax while upholding the importance of stamping out tax evasion.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23155533