Net immigration is falling and is actually zero when it comes to the EU8
Net migration is back to the 2014 levels. For EU citizens, that's one (net) permanent new UK resident every 5 minutes. Whether they come from EU8 or EU27 makes no difference to me.
In the main they are Polish so why don't you develop your theories about "proper checks" - perhaps a biometric ID card to be carried at all times. After all, a tattoo sounds a bit Nazi doesn't it?
No need post Brexit, the EU (Polish) passport will be stamped upon entry to the UK.
Vacancies are up by nearly 10% - thats 800,000 unfilled posts which could be supplying services, taxes and profits into the UK economy.
800,000 vacancies, but there is nowhere (generally) for new workers to live, and no guarantee that the vacancies exist in areas that have current housing capacity.
Nowhere to live? Interesting. Where is there nowhere to live where EU immigrants are flocking to?
Well, as I stated previously.......one (net) EU citizen arrives as a long term migrant every 5 minutes (ONS) and we need to build 300,000 homes EVERY year until the mid 2020's, to keep up with demand. (Philip Hammond).
Happy to clear that up for you.
So can you name a specific area of the country where there are no properties available for migrants to move into, where there is a demand for it?
So you're moaning about your incorrect perception that the EU forces us to accept uncontrolled migration, then when it is pointed out to you that there are reasonable controls available, you whinge it's a bit Nazi?
Is this a joke?
I imagine more or less every country has the power to deport people who do not keep to their requirements of staying. So are you accusing every country of being a bit Nazi?
My point was simply asking how you want these "reasonable controls" to be implemented in a practical way.
Still waiting for an answer - what should we do when a Frenchman breaks his leg and cannot look for work ? How quickly do we put him on the Eurostar ? Shall we pick his kids up at the school gate and take them straight to St Pancras ?
As you see, these "reasonable controls" are impractical / inhumane and a bit Nazi.
Finally, the EU freedom of movement rule, forces the UK to accept uncontrolled migration - no whingeng from me, let's just Brexit, then we can issue visas to anyone who wishes to work / reside permanently in the UK, based on our workforce needs and availability of housing. All simple stuff.
You've taken a very specific example, taken it to an implausible extreme and basing the entire system of that and calling it Nazi. Which you could do with more or less any law.
The fact is other EU countries exercise these controls and I doubt a situation as you are alluding to above has ever been close to occurring.
Also, once we leave the EU, there would be nothing stopping your ludicrous scenario from taking place anyway. So, once again since you appear to be incredibly slow at getting this, it has nothing to do with the EU.
OK, perhaps you are right about the implausibility and going to extremes, so please explain to me how these "powers that the UK already has in place" can be used in a practical way to control our population number, bearing in mind the EU free movement principle (which you claim has nothing to do with the EU).
In what set of circumstances would you be happy for an EU migrant to be deported from the UK under these powers that we already have? How should we define "burden on the state" (the point at which the powers are invoked)? What is the timescale of this burden? (anytime financial burden / a burden for a week/month/year) Who should do the rounding-up and dropping off at the detention centres ? Who should pay the cost of these deportations ? (British taxpayer or deduct from EU contribution) What should we do about dependents / children ?
Really hard to see how you can't see how the UK could do something about all of these things if they wanted to, but for political reasons it's easier to suggest it's out of their hands.
Freedom of movement to the UK is one of the basic principles of EU membership. Unless I am as thick as folk say.........this means any amount of EU citizens can come to the UK for any reason at any time.
Am I wrong ?
Countries were allowed to put limits on accession countries' citizens arriving after they join but the UK decided not to do that in 2004. For that, blame the Blair government rather than the EU for the open immigration to the UK.
2004 was a long time ago, and I have more serious things to blame Blair for. Folk who are here, are folk who are here - and they are welcome.
Brexit is now. How can we control the flow of EU migrants without Brexit.
So you're moaning about your incorrect perception that the EU forces us to accept uncontrolled migration, then when it is pointed out to you that there are reasonable controls available, you whinge it's a bit Nazi?
Is this a joke?
I imagine more or less every country has the power to deport people who do not keep to their requirements of staying. So are you accusing every country of being a bit Nazi?
My point was simply asking how you want these "reasonable controls" to be implemented in a practical way.
Still waiting for an answer - what should we do when a Frenchman breaks his leg and cannot look for work ? How quickly do we put him on the Eurostar ? Shall we pick his kids up at the school gate and take them straight to St Pancras ?
As you see, these "reasonable controls" are impractical / inhumane and a bit Nazi.
Finally, the EU freedom of movement rule, forces the UK to accept uncontrolled migration - no whingeng from me, let's just Brexit, then we can issue visas to anyone who wishes to work / reside permanently in the UK, based on our workforce needs and availability of housing. All simple stuff.
You've taken a very specific example, taken it to an implausible extreme and basing the entire system of that and calling it Nazi. Which you could do with more or less any law.
The fact is other EU countries exercise these controls and I doubt a situation as you are alluding to above has ever been close to occurring.
Also, once we leave the EU, there would be nothing stopping your ludicrous scenario from taking place anyway. So, once again since you appear to be incredibly slow at getting this, it has nothing to do with the EU.
OK, perhaps you are right about the implausibility and going to extremes, so please explain to me how these "powers that the UK already has in place" can be used in a practical way to control our population number, bearing in mind the EU free movement principle (which you claim has nothing to do with the EU).
In what set of circumstances would you be happy for an EU migrant to be deported from the UK under these powers that we already have? How should we define "burden on the state" (the point at which the powers are invoked)? What is the timescale of this burden? (anytime financial burden / a burden for a week/month/year) Who should do the rounding-up and dropping off at the detention centres ? Who should pay the cost of these deportations ? (British taxpayer or deduct from EU contribution) What should we do about dependents / children ?
Very interested to hear your answer.
I turn your question back on you.
Once we leave the EU, in all likelihood the UK will allow EU citizens to continue to enjoy all or most of the same privileges that they enjoy now just by showing their passport, as most did prior to 1992. Even if these privileges are tapered so the Western countries get slightly better access than those on Russia's doorstep, in all likelihood as the main parties have endorsed open door, visa-free movement between us and our neighbours on the continent since the end of the war, we would still have thousands of EU migrants entering the UK with indefinite stay to remain. No party has also indicated that they support introducing visas for the French, Polish, Germans etc. because they know our economy relies on these people.
So the powers we will have to control and remove migrants from the continent will, in all likelihood, be exactly the same after we leave the EU as they are now, because whilst some politicians talk big on immigration, their actions continue to trend towards the status quo.
So the question isn't about whether I agree with removing those already here. It is if anything is going to change in practical terms after we leave. All the evidence points to that it will not, even if we technically have more flexibility to control our borders, the reality is that, just like we have for decades, we probably won't. So if we leave the EU, how would you answer your questions, since our controls would largely be the same.
Do you, in all seriousness, think after Brexit any party will endorse setting up a wide-ranging visa and border force scheme and all the costs, complications and controversies it will bring, or will they continue to endorse the same policy we have had for decades?
Really hard to see how you can't see how the UK could do something about all of these things if they wanted to, but for political reasons it's easier to suggest it's out of their hands.
Freedom of movement to the UK is one of the basic principles of EU membership. Unless I am as thick as folk say.........this means any amount of EU citizens can come to the UK for any reason at any time.
Am I wrong ?
Countries were allowed to put limits on accession countries' citizens arriving after they join but the UK decided not to do that in 2004. For that, blame the Blair government rather than the EU for the open immigration to the UK.
2004 was a long time ago, and I have more serious things to blame Blair for. Folk who are here, are folk who are here - and they are welcome.
Brexit is now. How can we control the flow of EU migrants without Brexit.
Nobody has come up with an answer so far.
The point is not about what happened in 2004 but that the UK government decide these things amongst the many others that people point out here and not the EU. You are buying into a huge smokescreen and allowing a massive get out clause for various UK governments for things they are responsible for.
Really hard to see how you can't see how the UK could do something about all of these things if they wanted to, but for political reasons it's easier to suggest it's out of their hands.
Freedom of movement to the UK is one of the basic principles of EU membership. Unless I am as thick as folk say.........this means any amount of EU citizens can come to the UK for any reason at any time.
Am I wrong ?
Countries were allowed to put limits on accession countries' citizens arriving after they join but the UK decided not to do that in 2004. For that, blame the Blair government rather than the EU for the open immigration to the UK.
2004 was a long time ago, and I have more serious things to blame Blair for. Folk who are here, are folk who are here - and they are welcome.
Brexit is now. How can we control the flow of EU migrants without Brexit.
Nobody has come up with an answer so far.
What is it you want to do with this flow? There is full (if on dodgy contractual terms) employment. Who is going to do the jobs all the EU migrants are doing? You haven't come up with an answer so far.
What we could have done is
1. Align benefits with other EU countries so that any freeloaders have no reason to choose the UK over Germany.
2. Get really tough with non-EU migration, and in particular illegals. We have done nothing about that. Absolutely nothing.
Really hard to see how you can't see how the UK could do something about all of these things if they wanted to, but for political reasons it's easier to suggest it's out of their hands.
Freedom of movement to the UK is one of the basic principles of EU membership. Unless I am as thick as folk say.........this means any amount of EU citizens can come to the UK for any reason at any time.
Am I wrong ?
Countries were allowed to put limits on accession countries' citizens arriving after they join but the UK decided not to do that in 2004. For that, blame the Blair government rather than the EU for the open immigration to the UK.
2004 was a long time ago, and I have more serious things to blame Blair for. Folk who are here, are folk who are here - and they are welcome.
Brexit is now. How can we control the flow of EU migrants without Brexit.
Nobody has come up with an answer so far.
What is it you want to do with this flow? There is full (if on dodgy contractual terms) employment. Who is going to do the jobs all the EU migrants are doing? You haven't come up with an answer so far.
What we could have done is
1. Align benefits with other EU countries so that any freeloaders have no reason to choose the UK over Germany.
2. Get really tough with non-EU migration, and in particular illegals. We have done nothing about that. Absolutely nothing.
We could also invest substantially in educating and skilling up the UK workforce, and invest in technology.
So you're moaning about your incorrect perception that the EU forces us to accept uncontrolled migration, then when it is pointed out to you that there are reasonable controls available, you whinge it's a bit Nazi?
Is this a joke?
I imagine more or less every country has the power to deport people who do not keep to their requirements of staying. So are you accusing every country of being a bit Nazi?
My point was simply asking how you want these "reasonable controls" to be implemented in a practical way.
Still waiting for an answer - what should we do when a Frenchman breaks his leg and cannot look for work ? How quickly do we put him on the Eurostar ? Shall we pick his kids up at the school gate and take them straight to St Pancras ?
As you see, these "reasonable controls" are impractical / inhumane and a bit Nazi.
Finally, the EU freedom of movement rule, forces the UK to accept uncontrolled migration - no whingeng from me, let's just Brexit, then we can issue visas to anyone who wishes to work / reside permanently in the UK, based on our workforce needs and availability of housing. All simple stuff.
You've taken a very specific example, taken it to an implausible extreme and basing the entire system of that and calling it Nazi. Which you could do with more or less any law.
The fact is other EU countries exercise these controls and I doubt a situation as you are alluding to above has ever been close to occurring.
Also, once we leave the EU, there would be nothing stopping your ludicrous scenario from taking place anyway. So, once again since you appear to be incredibly slow at getting this, it has nothing to do with the EU.
OK, perhaps you are right about the implausibility and going to extremes, so please explain to me how these "powers that the UK already has in place" can be used in a practical way to control our population number, bearing in mind the EU free movement principle (which you claim has nothing to do with the EU).
In what set of circumstances would you be happy for an EU migrant to be deported from the UK under these powers that we already have? How should we define "burden on the state" (the point at which the powers are invoked)? What is the timescale of this burden? (anytime financial burden / a burden for a week/month/year) Who should do the rounding-up and dropping off at the detention centres ? Who should pay the cost of these deportations ? (British taxpayer or deduct from EU contribution) What should we do about dependents / children ?
Very interested to hear your answer.
I turn your question back on you.
Once we leave the EU, in all likelihood the UK will allow EU citizens to continue to enjoy all or most of the same privileges that they enjoy now just by showing their passport, as most did prior to 1992. Even if these privileges are tapered so the Western countries get slightly better access than those on Russia's doorstep, in all likelihood as the main parties have endorsed open door, visa-free movement between us and our neighbours on the continent since the end of the war, we would still have thousands of EU migrants entering the UK with indefinite stay to remain. No party has also indicated that they support introducing visas for the French, Polish, Germans etc. because they know our economy relies on these people.
So the powers we will have to control and remove migrants from the continent will, in all likelihood, be exactly the same after we leave the EU as they are now, because whilst some politicians talk big on immigration, their actions continue to trend towards the status quo.
So the question isn't about whether I agree with removing those already here. It is if anything is going to change in practical terms after we leave. All the evidence points to that it will not, even if we technically have more flexibility to control our borders, the reality is that, just like we have for decades, we probably won't. So if we leave the EU, how would you answer your questions, since our controls would largely be the same.
Do you, in all seriousness, think after Brexit any party will endorse setting up a wide-ranging visa and border force scheme and all the costs, complications and controversies it will bring, or will they continue to endorse the same policy we have had for decades?
Please don't avoid answering a question by turning it back on me. How do you want these EU migrants who fail the EU guidelines to be deported from UK ?
As I have said before on here - I am not in favour of deportations (in general) or instructing folk where exactly in the UK they should reside.
You post is about "likelihoods" and "probablys" - yet for weeks on here, folk have been asking for specifics about NI/ROI, trade deals, etc etc. You are either in the "wait and see" camp or you have specific plans on how these matters should be handled. Which is it ?
How we behaved in 1992 or 2004 is not going to be relevant post-Brexit, because we will have the power to grant visas and control the number of folk permanently residing in the UK. If folk wish to visit the UK post Brexit - no big deal, but if they wish to become long term migrants, then they will need an NI number and other documentation to make their stay legal. These things will be within our control and the Government will be fully accountable for the numbers, as they are currently for non EU migrants.
There is no "probably" or "likely" about it. Post Brexit, if we need 110,000 EU citizens to fill jobs and we have homes for them - we can make that fact public, and proceed from there.
Really hard to see how you can't see how the UK could do something about all of these things if they wanted to, but for political reasons it's easier to suggest it's out of their hands.
Freedom of movement to the UK is one of the basic principles of EU membership. Unless I am as thick as folk say.........this means any amount of EU citizens can come to the UK for any reason at any time.
Am I wrong ?
Countries were allowed to put limits on accession countries' citizens arriving after they join but the UK decided not to do that in 2004. For that, blame the Blair government rather than the EU for the open immigration to the UK.
2004 was a long time ago, and I have more serious things to blame Blair for. Folk who are here, are folk who are here - and they are welcome.
Brexit is now. How can we control the flow of EU migrants without Brexit.
Nobody has come up with an answer so far.
What is it you want to do with this flow? There is full (if on dodgy contractual terms) employment. Who is going to do the jobs all the EU migrants are doing? You haven't come up with an answer so far.
What we could have done is
1. Align benefits with other EU countries so that any freeloaders have no reason to choose the UK over Germany.
2. Get really tough with non-EU migration, and in particular illegals. We have done nothing about that. Absolutely nothing.
The same EU migrant workers that are doing them right now. What makes you think the EU migrant workers will leave ? The evidence is that the referendum only reduced the net number to 2014 levels, and as I said above, if we need more migrant workers we can issue work visas.
Really hard to see how you can't see how the UK could do something about all of these things if they wanted to, but for political reasons it's easier to suggest it's out of their hands.
Freedom of movement to the UK is one of the basic principles of EU membership. Unless I am as thick as folk say.........this means any amount of EU citizens can come to the UK for any reason at any time.
Am I wrong ?
Countries were allowed to put limits on accession countries' citizens arriving after they join but the UK decided not to do that in 2004. For that, blame the Blair government rather than the EU for the open immigration to the UK.
2004 was a long time ago, and I have more serious things to blame Blair for. Folk who are here, are folk who are here - and they are welcome.
Brexit is now. How can we control the flow of EU migrants without Brexit.
Nobody has come up with an answer so far.
The point is not about what happened in 2004 but that the UK government decide these things amongst the many others that people point out here and not the EU. You are buying into a huge smokescreen and allowing a massive get out clause for various UK governments for things they are responsible for.
It's a bit like the guy that decided to put lead in petrol - he probably had good intentions at the time, but no point in getting the hump with him many many years later.
The UK Gov can decide what it likes - but while in the EU, the 4 freedoms must remain in force. At present, UK cannot stop tens of millions of EU citizens who may decide to come to UK. If you feel (like I do) that the UK is over populated and getting worse - then there is nothing UK can do to allay my fears while we are a member of the EU.
So you're moaning about your incorrect perception that the EU forces us to accept uncontrolled migration, then when it is pointed out to you that there are reasonable controls available, you whinge it's a bit Nazi?
Is this a joke?
I imagine more or less every country has the power to deport people who do not keep to their requirements of staying. So are you accusing every country of being a bit Nazi?
My point was simply asking how you want these "reasonable controls" to be implemented in a practical way.
Still waiting for an answer - what should we do when a Frenchman breaks his leg and cannot look for work ? How quickly do we put him on the Eurostar ? Shall we pick his kids up at the school gate and take them straight to St Pancras ?
As you see, these "reasonable controls" are impractical / inhumane and a bit Nazi.
Finally, the EU freedom of movement rule, forces the UK to accept uncontrolled migration - no whingeng from me, let's just Brexit, then we can issue visas to anyone who wishes to work / reside permanently in the UK, based on our workforce needs and availability of housing. All simple stuff.
You've taken a very specific example, taken it to an implausible extreme and basing the entire system of that and calling it Nazi. Which you could do with more or less any law.
The fact is other EU countries exercise these controls and I doubt a situation as you are alluding to above has ever been close to occurring.
Also, once we leave the EU, there would be nothing stopping your ludicrous scenario from taking place anyway. So, once again since you appear to be incredibly slow at getting this, it has nothing to do with the EU.
OK, perhaps you are right about the implausibility and going to extremes, so please explain to me how these "powers that the UK already has in place" can be used in a practical way to control our population number, bearing in mind the EU free movement principle (which you claim has nothing to do with the EU).
In what set of circumstances would you be happy for an EU migrant to be deported from the UK under these powers that we already have? How should we define "burden on the state" (the point at which the powers are invoked)? What is the timescale of this burden? (anytime financial burden / a burden for a week/month/year) Who should do the rounding-up and dropping off at the detention centres ? Who should pay the cost of these deportations ? (British taxpayer or deduct from EU contribution) What should we do about dependents / children ?
Very interested to hear your answer.
You are asking for practical responses for the points you raise, yet when I asked you for a practical response about stamping passports on the Irish border you said 'we'll have to wait and see'. It would seem fairer to either provide practical answers yourself, or if you can't do so, not to demand such answers from others.
Net immigration is falling and is actually zero when it comes to the EU8
Net migration is back to the 2014 levels. For EU citizens, that's one (net) permanent new UK resident every 5 minutes. Whether they come from EU8 or EU27 makes no difference to me.
In the main they are Polish so why don't you develop your theories about "proper checks" - perhaps a biometric ID card to be carried at all times. After all, a tattoo sounds a bit Nazi doesn't it?
No need post Brexit, the EU (Polish) passport will be stamped upon entry to the UK.
Vacancies are up by nearly 10% - thats 800,000 unfilled posts which could be supplying services, taxes and profits into the UK economy.
800,000 vacancies, but there is nowhere (generally) for new workers to live, and no guarantee that the vacancies exist in areas that have current housing capacity.
Whereabouts on the Irish border will that happen?
We will have to wait and see the detail, but you would be ill-advised to make permanent residence in the UK without the required entry documents, which ever way you crossed any border - this would be illegal, and folk could be detained, deported, or both.
Net immigration is falling and is actually zero when it comes to the EU8
Net migration is back to the 2014 levels. For EU citizens, that's one (net) permanent new UK resident every 5 minutes. Whether they come from EU8 or EU27 makes no difference to me.
In the main they are Polish so why don't you develop your theories about "proper checks" - perhaps a biometric ID card to be carried at all times. After all, a tattoo sounds a bit Nazi doesn't it?
No need post Brexit, the EU (Polish) passport will be stamped upon entry to the UK.
Vacancies are up by nearly 10% - thats 800,000 unfilled posts which could be supplying services, taxes and profits into the UK economy.
800,000 vacancies, but there is nowhere (generally) for new workers to live, and no guarantee that the vacancies exist in areas that have current housing capacity.
Whereabouts on the Irish border will that happen?
We will have to wait and see the detail, but you would be ill-advised to make permanent residence in the UK without the required entry documents, which ever way you crossed any border - this would be illegal, and folk could be detained, deported, or both.
Net immigration is falling and is actually zero when it comes to the EU8
Net migration is back to the 2014 levels. For EU citizens, that's one (net) permanent new UK resident every 5 minutes. Whether they come from EU8 or EU27 makes no difference to me.
In the main they are Polish so why don't you develop your theories about "proper checks" - perhaps a biometric ID card to be carried at all times. After all, a tattoo sounds a bit Nazi doesn't it?
No need post Brexit, the EU (Polish) passport will be stamped upon entry to the UK.
Vacancies are up by nearly 10% - thats 800,000 unfilled posts which could be supplying services, taxes and profits into the UK economy.
800,000 vacancies, but there is nowhere (generally) for new workers to live, and no guarantee that the vacancies exist in areas that have current housing capacity.
Whereabouts on the Irish border will that happen?
We will have to wait and see the detail, but you would be ill-advised to make permanent residence in the UK without the required entry documents, which ever way you crossed any border - this would be illegal, and folk could be detained, deported, or both.
You can’t be detained and deported.
Detained for 24 hours while the authorities make enquiries and then deported.
Detained and found to be wanted for crime by another country, and then deported.
Net immigration is falling and is actually zero when it comes to the EU8
Net migration is back to the 2014 levels. For EU citizens, that's one (net) permanent new UK resident every 5 minutes. Whether they come from EU8 or EU27 makes no difference to me.
In the main they are Polish so why don't you develop your theories about "proper checks" - perhaps a biometric ID card to be carried at all times. After all, a tattoo sounds a bit Nazi doesn't it?
No need post Brexit, the EU (Polish) passport will be stamped upon entry to the UK.
Vacancies are up by nearly 10% - thats 800,000 unfilled posts which could be supplying services, taxes and profits into the UK economy.
800,000 vacancies, but there is nowhere (generally) for new workers to live, and no guarantee that the vacancies exist in areas that have current housing capacity.
Whereabouts on the Irish border will that happen?
We will have to wait and see the detail, but you would be ill-advised to make permanent residence in the UK without the required entry documents, which ever way you crossed any border - this would be illegal, and folk could be detained, deported, or both.
Net immigration is falling and is actually zero when it comes to the EU8
Net migration is back to the 2014 levels. For EU citizens, that's one (net) permanent new UK resident every 5 minutes. Whether they come from EU8 or EU27 makes no difference to me.
In the main they are Polish so why don't you develop your theories about "proper checks" - perhaps a biometric ID card to be carried at all times. After all, a tattoo sounds a bit Nazi doesn't it?
No need post Brexit, the EU (Polish) passport will be stamped upon entry to the UK.
Vacancies are up by nearly 10% - thats 800,000 unfilled posts which could be supplying services, taxes and profits into the UK economy.
800,000 vacancies, but there is nowhere (generally) for new workers to live, and no guarantee that the vacancies exist in areas that have current housing capacity.
Whereabouts on the Irish border will that happen?
We will have to wait and see the detail, but you would be ill-advised to make permanent residence in the UK without the required entry documents, which ever way you crossed any border - this would be illegal, and folk could be detained, deported, or both.
You can’t be detained and deported.
Detained for 24 hours while the authorities make enquiries and then deported.
Detained and found to be wanted for crime by another country, and then deported.
So, yes you can.
You mean detained then deported. If you are being detained you ain’t going anywhere.
So you're moaning about your incorrect perception that the EU forces us to accept uncontrolled migration, then when it is pointed out to you that there are reasonable controls available, you whinge it's a bit Nazi?
Is this a joke?
I imagine more or less every country has the power to deport people who do not keep to their requirements of staying. So are you accusing every country of being a bit Nazi?
My point was simply asking how you want these "reasonable controls" to be implemented in a practical way.
Still waiting for an answer - what should we do when a Frenchman breaks his leg and cannot look for work ? How quickly do we put him on the Eurostar ? Shall we pick his kids up at the school gate and take them straight to St Pancras ?
As you see, these "reasonable controls" are impractical / inhumane and a bit Nazi.
Finally, the EU freedom of movement rule, forces the UK to accept uncontrolled migration - no whingeng from me, let's just Brexit, then we can issue visas to anyone who wishes to work / reside permanently in the UK, based on our workforce needs and availability of housing. All simple stuff.
You've taken a very specific example, taken it to an implausible extreme and basing the entire system of that and calling it Nazi. Which you could do with more or less any law.
The fact is other EU countries exercise these controls and I doubt a situation as you are alluding to above has ever been close to occurring.
Also, once we leave the EU, there would be nothing stopping your ludicrous scenario from taking place anyway. So, once again since you appear to be incredibly slow at getting this, it has nothing to do with the EU.
OK, perhaps you are right about the implausibility and going to extremes, so please explain to me how these "powers that the UK already has in place" can be used in a practical way to control our population number, bearing in mind the EU free movement principle (which you claim has nothing to do with the EU).
In what set of circumstances would you be happy for an EU migrant to be deported from the UK under these powers that we already have? How should we define "burden on the state" (the point at which the powers are invoked)? What is the timescale of this burden? (anytime financial burden / a burden for a week/month/year) Who should do the rounding-up and dropping off at the detention centres ? Who should pay the cost of these deportations ? (British taxpayer or deduct from EU contribution) What should we do about dependents / children ?
Very interested to hear your answer.
You are asking for practical responses for the points you raise, yet when I asked you for a practical response about stamping passports on the Irish border you said 'we'll have to wait and see'. It would seem fairer to either provide practical answers yourself, or if you can't do so, not to demand such answers from others.
I will answer your point but note that we are talking about a situation that currently exists (uk law for deportation of migrants who burden the state) - as opposed to post Brexit procedures for obtaining permanent residence in the U.K. (Yet to be detailed)
My suggestion would be: Given that there will be no border posts, should you wish to cross the border, then you should report to the relevant civic office in NI as soon as possible and register your entry to UK. I guess you will get 90 days unrestricted entry. Maybe the ROI will put some mechanism in place to deal with the reverse issue, say when the UK has given a residents visa to a non-EU citizen.
If you want to cross into UK and permanently remain, then you should make your application within the 90 days. If folk from the EU 27 want to take a chance and cross the border and start living/working in the UK without the required paperwork/stamp - then that's a chance they take. The law is already in place to deal with illegal immigrants into U.K.
It's not perfect - but it answers your question. Let's wait and see if Mrs May copies any of it !
Yes it is an answer. I don't know if entry first, application second will work though. Somehow I doubt it, but if you're willing to pay for it then give it a try. The thought occurs to me that the authorities wouldn't know when the 90 days starts, if they caught up with somebody they could say they arrived the day before and have 89 days left to register. Or someone could have a weekend at home (gathering evidence for having been there) four times a year and the 90 days is re-set each time.
Net immigration is falling and is actually zero when it comes to the EU8
Net migration is back to the 2014 levels. For EU citizens, that's one (net) permanent new UK resident every 5 minutes. Whether they come from EU8 or EU27 makes no difference to me.
In the main they are Polish so why don't you develop your theories about "proper checks" - perhaps a biometric ID card to be carried at all times. After all, a tattoo sounds a bit Nazi doesn't it?
No need post Brexit, the EU (Polish) passport will be stamped upon entry to the UK.
Vacancies are up by nearly 10% - thats 800,000 unfilled posts which could be supplying services, taxes and profits into the UK economy.
800,000 vacancies, but there is nowhere (generally) for new workers to live, and no guarantee that the vacancies exist in areas that have current housing capacity.
Whereabouts on the Irish border will that happen?
We will have to wait and see the detail, but you would be ill-advised to make permanent residence in the UK without the required entry documents, which ever way you crossed any border - this would be illegal, and folk could be detained, deported, or both.
Net immigration is falling and is actually zero when it comes to the EU8
Net migration is back to the 2014 levels. For EU citizens, that's one (net) permanent new UK resident every 5 minutes. Whether they come from EU8 or EU27 makes no difference to me.
In the main they are Polish so why don't you develop your theories about "proper checks" - perhaps a biometric ID card to be carried at all times. After all, a tattoo sounds a bit Nazi doesn't it?
No need post Brexit, the EU (Polish) passport will be stamped upon entry to the UK.
Vacancies are up by nearly 10% - thats 800,000 unfilled posts which could be supplying services, taxes and profits into the UK economy.
800,000 vacancies, but there is nowhere (generally) for new workers to live, and no guarantee that the vacancies exist in areas that have current housing capacity.
Whereabouts on the Irish border will that happen?
We will have to wait and see the detail, but you would be ill-advised to make permanent residence in the UK without the required entry documents, which ever way you crossed any border - this would be illegal, and folk could be detained, deported, or both.
You can’t be detained and deported.
Detained for 24 hours while the authorities make enquiries and then deported.
Detained and found to be wanted for crime by another country, and then deported.
So, yes you can.
You mean detained then deported. If you are being detained you ain’t going anywhere.
Yes it is an answer. I don't know if entry first, application second will work though. Somehow I doubt it, but if you're willing to pay for it then give it a try. The thought occurs to me that the authorities wouldn't know when the 90 days starts, if they caught up with somebody they could say they arrived the day before and have 89 days left to register. Or someone could have a weekend at home (gathering evidence for having been there) four times a year and the 90 days is re-set each time.
Yes, agreed. The USA have a system for the second scenario you mention, called "Establishing a patten of residency" They pulled a pal of mine for this when he arrived in USA trying the method you mention.
Really hard to see how you can't see how the UK could do something about all of these things if they wanted to, but for political reasons it's easier to suggest it's out of their hands.
Freedom of movement to the UK is one of the basic principles of EU membership. Unless I am as thick as folk say.........this means any amount of EU citizens can come to the UK for any reason at any time.
Am I wrong ?
Countries were allowed to put limits on accession countries' citizens arriving after they join but the UK decided not to do that in 2004. For that, blame the Blair government rather than the EU for the open immigration to the UK.
2004 was a long time ago, and I have more serious things to blame Blair for. Folk who are here, are folk who are here - and they are welcome.
Brexit is now. How can we control the flow of EU migrants without Brexit.
Nobody has come up with an answer so far.
What is it you want to do with this flow? There is full (if on dodgy contractual terms) employment. Who is going to do the jobs all the EU migrants are doing? You haven't come up with an answer so far.
What we could have done is
1. Align benefits with other EU countries so that any freeloaders have no reason to choose the UK over Germany.
2. Get really tough with non-EU migration, and in particular illegals. We have done nothing about that. Absolutely nothing.
The same EU migrant workers that are doing them right now. What makes you think the EU migrant workers will leave ? The evidence is that the referendum only reduced the net number to 2014 levels, and as I said above, if we need more migrant workers we can issue work visas.
I was answering the question about how immigration could have been reduced without doing Brexit. You are making a different point about what is going to happen after Brexit.
Which of the two points would you like to discuss further?
EU migrants are already leaving, especially Poles.
Bringing benefits in line with other EU nations - tricky because you can't treat EU citizens in an EU country any different to how you treat your own nationals. This is the "paying child benefit to Polish workers while their children are in Poland" discussion. Although there are some exceptions as have been listed before, but this is not just about freeloaders (for me). We have a housing shortage, and my view on this is that we either build more houses on this island or take steps to control the population. We cannot do the former indefinitely, and we cannot do the latter while we have an open door. If we do the former - and later regret it, we cannot do anything about it. If we do the latter - and later regret it, we can open the door again.
Non-EU migrants is a fully controllable figure, and the Gov't can be called to account any time we feel the system is not being run properly. I figure that the 110,000 who were granted visas last year could prove their status/reasons for coming, or were joining other family members already here.
Post Brexit, is not much of a discussion, partly because we don't know exactly what the rules are going to be yet, but again, the Gov't will be fully accountable for the number of visas issued.
As for Poles leaving - I am not fussed about any particular EU nationality, but the numbers don't lie: 110,000 (net) long term EU migrants came to UK in the year after the referendum vote. Net being the key word.
Net migration is 246,000, roughly 50/50 between EU and non-EU, whilst birth rate is around 700,000. Benefits can be adjusted, as other EU nations have done, to lower the roughly 110,000 EU migrants down, but it won't make a massive difference as the vast majority aren't claiming any benefits. Same can be said of non-EU migrants. The Daily Mail may like to claim there's a flood of eastern Europeans robbing our benefits system blind, but in reality it is both a tiny number of people and a relatively tiny amount of money.
The reality is very few if anybody comes here for the benefits, you can't even claim most of them until you've been resident 3 months or longer, and simply changes to the law would make other benefits non-applicable without falling foul of any EU rulings, there simply isn't the will in government to tackle these issues. There Tory mantra, at least in my life time, has always seemed to be lowering social expenditure by simply cutting benefits, as that's simple and easy. Real savings would be made by intelligent changes to the benefits system and better targeting/testing of benefits payments.
Yes agreed, that's why talk of benefits and net migration in the same sentence often clouds the discussion with emotion.
Interesting poll by Open Europe (Independent body) in the paper today, asking what are the most important factors about an incoming migrant.
Top answer (in a Family Fortunes stylee) was criminal record history, second was UK job offer, third was moving to an area where there is a skills shortage, then likelihood of claiming benefits, and number of dependents.
The bottom 3 factors were race, religion and sexuality.
The latest figures show that the number of EU immigrants who don't have a job already in place has fallen to almost nothing, in fact that's been the biggest change. Can the government legally change the job market to prevent jobs going to those in the EU (assuming for a second the government wanted to reduce immigration, which I actually doubt) and to British people instead? I honestly can't see net immigration falling all that substantially for a long time to come
Net immigration is falling and is actually zero when it comes to the EU8
Net migration is back to the 2014 levels. For EU citizens, that's one (net) permanent new UK resident every 5 minutes. Whether they come from EU8 or EU27 makes no difference to me.
In the main they are Polish so why don't you develop your theories about "proper checks" - perhaps a biometric ID card to be carried at all times. After all, a tattoo sounds a bit Nazi doesn't it?
No need post Brexit, the EU (Polish) passport will be stamped upon entry to the UK.
Vacancies are up by nearly 10% - thats 800,000 unfilled posts which could be supplying services, taxes and profits into the UK economy.
800,000 vacancies, but there is nowhere (generally) for new workers to live, and no guarantee that the vacancies exist in areas that have current housing capacity.
Some are obsessed by EU immigration - that is plain for all to see. There are 32 million people in employment in the UK. And yet just 7% of those people come from the EU. The reality is that net immigration from the EU27 will vapourize if we exit the EU without a trade deal.
The view propagated by IDS and Farage is that it's the rate of immigration is to blame for housing shortages, queues at the NHS and bulging class sizes. But how can just 7% of the population cause all these issues? Especially when they are net contributors to the economy. What about the lack of infrastructure planning and spending over decades plus failure of government regional policy.
It seems more likely to me that the likes of Farage, IDS, Trump, Le Pen and AfD prefer to blame immigrants and Islam as a populist way to explain why some people haven't benefited from decades of growth.
Fortunately this agenda doesn't have a majority backing in the country and only a handful of MPs support these views, let alone deportation and all the other fine explanations. End of the day blaming immigrants and Islam is fundamentally divisive as a tactic.
And leaving the single market and customs union doesn't solve anything.
The reality is that a thriving economy attracts foreign labour and skills which in turn contributes effort, taxes and consumption to the UK economy. The number of foreign born people in the UK is around seven million or 11% of the population. That's almost identical to France, Germany, Spain, and Benelux - countries which continue to thrive and grow.
For sure every country has areas which are left behind and they also have far right parties which target a certain type of voter with stories about immigrant populations. Parties such as AfD and Le Front Nationale which espouse the same views about immigrants, the EU and Islam.
IDS and Farage follow this line and are the same people who wanted us to walk away from EU talks recently with no deal. People who dismiss the Irish border and associated peace framework as irrelevant. And they also blame the "liberal establishment" for thwarting their extreme view of Brexit which incidentally is estimated to cost 500,000 jobs and 5% of UK GDP. The Hard Brexit position is totally prepared for that as long as immigration falls! In fact they would probably blame the EU and immigrants for crashing the economy!
Fortunately today, a hard Brexit is far less likely. The Brexit process is separating reality from dreamland quite effectively and separating the alt-right from pragmatic policies. We can now see that there are at least 12 Tory MPs willing to vote for a sane path for 2018. That vote was the beginning of the end for the Mail / UKIP line which clearly echoes Trump, Le Pen and AfD in terms of it's hatred of the EU and immigrants. That's why Farage and Oakeshott are so shrill these days.
So these people carry on about all the "problems" associated with immigration while the rest of us are concerned about the UK as a whole. The days of dog whistle politics appear to be in the past - perhaps we might move on to another topic? Something less toxic?
Net immigration is falling and is actually zero when it comes to the EU8
Net migration is back to the 2014 levels. For EU citizens, that's one (net) permanent new UK resident every 5 minutes. Whether they come from EU8 or EU27 makes no difference to me.
In the main they are Polish so why don't you develop your theories about "proper checks" - perhaps a biometric ID card to be carried at all times. After all, a tattoo sounds a bit Nazi doesn't it?
No need post Brexit, the EU (Polish) passport will be stamped upon entry to the UK.
Vacancies are up by nearly 10% - thats 800,000 unfilled posts which could be supplying services, taxes and profits into the UK economy.
800,000 vacancies, but there is nowhere (generally) for new workers to live, and no guarantee that the vacancies exist in areas that have current housing capacity.
Some are obsessed by EU immigration - that is plain for all to see. There are 32 million people in employment in the UK. And yet just 7% of those people come from the EU. The reality is that net immigration from the EU27 will vapourize if we exit the EU without a trade deal.
The view propagated by IDS and Farage is that it's the rate of immigration is to blame for housing shortages, queues at the NHS and bulging class sizes. But how can just 7% of the population cause all these issues?
If you have approximately and potentially, an extra 3.6 million people in front of you at A&E , I think you may have an issue. Ditto, the classroom and housing queue.
Really hard to see how you can't see how the UK could do something about all of these things if they wanted to, but for political reasons it's easier to suggest it's out of their hands.
Freedom of movement to the UK is one of the basic principles of EU membership. Unless I am as thick as folk say.........this means any amount of EU citizens can come to the UK for any reason at any time.
Am I wrong ?
Countries were allowed to put limits on accession countries' citizens arriving after they join but the UK decided not to do that in 2004. For that, blame the Blair government rather than the EU for the open immigration to the UK.
2004 was a long time ago, and I have more serious things to blame Blair for. Folk who are here, are folk who are here - and they are welcome.
Brexit is now. How can we control the flow of EU migrants without Brexit.
Nobody has come up with an answer so far.
As I understand the benefit situation, JSA cannot be claimed if you voluntarily leave employment. Similar with housing benefit. If the Daily Mail stories are true we merely need to tighten up existing legislation. The reality is that EU nationals come here to work because there is a need for them. The strain on housing, public services and infrastructure isn't caused by tax paying Europeans but by under-investment by austerity Tories.
Comments
OK, perhaps you are right about the implausibility and going to extremes, so please explain to me how these "powers that the UK already has in place" can be used in a practical way to control our population number, bearing in mind the EU free movement principle (which you claim has nothing to do with the EU).
In what set of circumstances would you be happy for an EU migrant to be deported from the UK under these powers that we already have?
How should we define "burden on the state" (the point at which the powers are invoked)?
What is the timescale of this burden? (anytime financial burden / a burden for a week/month/year)
Who should do the rounding-up and dropping off at the detention centres ?
Who should pay the cost of these deportations ? (British taxpayer or deduct from EU contribution)
What should we do about dependents / children ?
Very interested to hear your answer.
Folk who are here, are folk who are here - and they are welcome.
Brexit is now. How can we control the flow of EU migrants without Brexit.
Nobody has come up with an answer so far.
Once we leave the EU, in all likelihood the UK will allow EU citizens to continue to enjoy all or most of the same privileges that they enjoy now just by showing their passport, as most did prior to 1992. Even if these privileges are tapered so the Western countries get slightly better access than those on Russia's doorstep, in all likelihood as the main parties have endorsed open door, visa-free movement between us and our neighbours on the continent since the end of the war, we would still have thousands of EU migrants entering the UK with indefinite stay to remain. No party has also indicated that they support introducing visas for the French, Polish, Germans etc. because they know our economy relies on these people.
So the powers we will have to control and remove migrants from the continent will, in all likelihood, be exactly the same after we leave the EU as they are now, because whilst some politicians talk big on immigration, their actions continue to trend towards the status quo.
So the question isn't about whether I agree with removing those already here. It is if anything is going to change in practical terms after we leave. All the evidence points to that it will not, even if we technically have more flexibility to control our borders, the reality is that, just like we have for decades, we probably won't. So if we leave the EU, how would you answer your questions, since our controls would largely be the same.
Do you, in all seriousness, think after Brexit any party will endorse setting up a wide-ranging visa and border force scheme and all the costs, complications and controversies it will bring, or will they continue to endorse the same policy we have had for decades?
What we could have done is
1. Align benefits with other EU countries so that any freeloaders have no reason to choose the UK over Germany.
2. Get really tough with non-EU migration, and in particular illegals. We have done nothing about that. Absolutely nothing.
How do you want these EU migrants who fail the EU guidelines to be deported from UK ?
As I have said before on here - I am not in favour of deportations (in general) or instructing folk where exactly in the UK they should reside.
You post is about "likelihoods" and "probablys" - yet for weeks on here, folk have been asking for specifics about NI/ROI, trade deals, etc etc. You are either in the "wait and see" camp or you have specific plans on how these matters should be handled. Which is it ?
How we behaved in 1992 or 2004 is not going to be relevant post-Brexit, because we will have the power to grant visas and control the number of folk permanently residing in the UK.
If folk wish to visit the UK post Brexit - no big deal, but if they wish to become long term migrants, then they will need an NI number and other documentation to make their stay legal. These things will be within our control and the Government will be fully accountable for the numbers, as they are currently for non EU migrants.
There is no "probably" or "likely" about it.
Post Brexit, if we need 110,000 EU citizens to fill jobs and we have homes for them - we can make that fact public, and proceed from there.
What makes you think the EU migrant workers will leave ?
The evidence is that the referendum only reduced the net number to 2014 levels, and as I said above, if we need more migrant workers we can issue work visas.
The UK Gov can decide what it likes - but while in the EU, the 4 freedoms must remain in force.
At present, UK cannot stop tens of millions of EU citizens who may decide to come to UK.
If you feel (like I do) that the UK is over populated and getting worse - then there is nothing UK can do to allay my fears while we are a member of the EU.
It would seem fairer to either provide practical answers yourself, or if you can't do so, not to demand such answers from others.
Detained and found to be wanted for crime by another country, and then deported.
So, yes you can.
My suggestion would be:
Given that there will be no border posts, should you wish to cross the border, then you should report to the relevant civic office in NI as soon as possible and register your entry to UK.
I guess you will get 90 days unrestricted entry. Maybe the ROI will put some mechanism in place to deal with the reverse issue, say when the UK has given a residents visa to a non-EU citizen.
If you want to cross into UK and permanently remain, then you should make your application within the 90 days.
If folk from the EU 27 want to take a chance and cross the border and start living/working in the UK without the required paperwork/stamp - then that's a chance they take. The law is already in place to deal with illegal immigrants into U.K.
It's not perfect - but it answers your question. Let's wait and see if Mrs May copies any of it !
The thought occurs to me that the authorities wouldn't know when the 90 days starts, if they caught up with somebody they could say they arrived the day before and have 89 days left to register. Or someone could have a weekend at home (gathering evidence for having been there) four times a year and the 90 days is re-set each time.
The USA have a system for the second scenario you mention, called
"Establishing a patten of residency"
They pulled a pal of mine for this when he arrived in USA trying the method you mention.
Which of the two points would you like to discuss further?
EU migrants are already leaving, especially Poles.
Bringing benefits in line with other EU nations - tricky because you can't treat EU citizens in an EU country any different to how you treat your own nationals. This is the "paying child benefit to Polish workers while their children are in Poland" discussion. Although there are some exceptions as have been listed before, but this is not just about freeloaders (for me). We have a housing shortage, and my view on this is that we either build more houses on this island or take steps to control the population. We cannot do the former indefinitely, and we cannot do the latter while we have an open door. If we do the former - and later regret it, we cannot do anything about it. If we do the latter - and later regret it, we can open the door again.
Non-EU migrants is a fully controllable figure, and the Gov't can be called to account any time we feel the system is not being run properly. I figure that the 110,000 who were granted visas last year could prove their status/reasons for coming, or were joining other family members already here.
Post Brexit, is not much of a discussion, partly because we don't know exactly what the rules are going to be yet, but again, the Gov't will be fully accountable for the number of visas issued.
As for Poles leaving - I am not fussed about any particular EU nationality, but the numbers don't lie:
110,000 (net) long term EU migrants came to UK in the year after the referendum vote.
Net being the key word.
As a country we’re embarrassing ourselves on our conduct since the vote imo
The reality is very few if anybody comes here for the benefits, you can't even claim most of them until you've been resident 3 months or longer, and simply changes to the law would make other benefits non-applicable without falling foul of any EU rulings, there simply isn't the will in government to tackle these issues. There Tory mantra, at least in my life time, has always seemed to be lowering social expenditure by simply cutting benefits, as that's simple and easy. Real savings would be made by intelligent changes to the benefits system and better targeting/testing of benefits payments.
Interesting poll by Open Europe (Independent body) in the paper today, asking what are the most important factors about an incoming migrant.
Top answer (in a Family Fortunes stylee) was criminal record history, second was UK job offer, third was moving to an area where there is a skills shortage, then likelihood of claiming benefits, and number of dependents.
The bottom 3 factors were race, religion and sexuality.
https://egypttoday.com/Article/3/37068/Britain-looking-at-distinct-trade-deal-with-EU-finance-minister
The view propagated by IDS and Farage is that it's the rate of immigration is to blame for housing shortages, queues at the NHS and bulging class sizes. But how can just 7% of the population cause all these issues? Especially when they are net contributors to the economy. What about the lack of infrastructure planning and spending over decades plus failure of government regional policy.
It seems more likely to me that the likes of Farage, IDS, Trump, Le Pen and AfD prefer to blame immigrants and Islam as a populist way to explain why some people haven't benefited from decades of growth.
Fortunately this agenda doesn't have a majority backing in the country and only a handful of MPs support these views, let alone deportation and all the other fine explanations. End of the day blaming immigrants and Islam is fundamentally divisive as a tactic.
And leaving the single market and customs union doesn't solve anything.
The reality is that a thriving economy attracts foreign labour and skills which in turn contributes effort, taxes and consumption to the UK economy. The number of foreign born people in the UK is around seven million or 11% of the population. That's almost identical to France, Germany, Spain, and Benelux - countries which continue to thrive and grow.
For sure every country has areas which are left behind and they also have far right parties which target a certain type of voter with stories about immigrant populations. Parties such as AfD and Le Front Nationale which espouse the same views about immigrants, the EU and Islam.
IDS and Farage follow this line and are the same people who wanted us to walk away from EU talks recently with no deal. People who dismiss the Irish border and associated peace framework as irrelevant. And they also blame the "liberal establishment" for thwarting their extreme view of Brexit which incidentally is estimated to cost 500,000 jobs and 5% of UK GDP. The Hard Brexit position is totally prepared for that as long as immigration falls! In fact they would probably blame the EU and immigrants for crashing the economy!
Fortunately today, a hard Brexit is far less likely. The Brexit process is separating reality from dreamland quite effectively and separating the alt-right from pragmatic policies. We can now see that there are at least 12 Tory MPs willing to vote for a sane path for 2018. That vote was the beginning of the end for the Mail / UKIP line which clearly echoes Trump, Le Pen and AfD in terms of it's hatred of the EU and immigrants. That's why Farage and Oakeshott are so shrill these days.
So these people carry on about all the "problems" associated with immigration while the rest of us are concerned about the UK as a whole. The days of dog whistle politics appear to be in the past - perhaps we might move on to another topic? Something less toxic?
Ditto, the classroom and housing queue.