ballaughbiker Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 Quote Nationalist? Too bloody right. And what's wrong with that? Depends.....if it is combined with contrived and constructed hatred for a start. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 5 minutes ago, ballaughbiker said: Depends.....if it is combined with contrived and constructed hatred for a start. Hate is a strong word but my hatred in this case is for the European Commission coupled with the SOB's who signed Maestricht and Lisbon. When it comes to those who obstructed the immediate implication of the referendum my feelings don't run to hate. Anger, frustration, annoyance, dislike sure. But hate? Nah. That's a reserved word in my vocabulary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 Quote Anger, frustration, annoyance, dislike sure. But hate? Others will arrive at their own conclusions based on what anyone chooses to post 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir nige Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 1 hour ago, ballaughbiker said: Nationalist and claptrap. 3+ million eu nationals have applied to stay in the england.... 90% now have the right to remain........ just a handful rejected..... intolerant england? meanwhile in the eu....... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51280617 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 2 minutes ago, sir nige said: meanwhile in the eu....... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51280617 "Mr Lawrence will still be able to stay as a resident and does not risk being deported" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 3 hours ago, woolley said: On many occasions. One example is free movement. Call Me Dave wanted to renegotiate this but had no joy. It is one of the four freedoms, so it is ordained at EU level and there is nothing anyone can do about it. Another is closer to home. We lost the IOM meat derogation - because the EU said so and the UK was powerless. The proportion of UK law that is foisted upon it by the EU is difficult to quantify precisely, but it is certainly substantial and certainly not tolerable. (It is far more than13%, PK). https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-law-what-proportion-influenced-eu/ Once more it has fallen to Britain to shine light into the darkness corrupting continental Europe. It can never be right that sovereign nations subcontract the enactment of a majority of their lawmaking to an outside, not properly accountable construct. This is the real difficulty of the European Union and "ever closer union". It isn't about trade at all. Trade is the convenient peg upon which they hang the political project. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/22/the-eus-court-is-picking-apart-our-laws/ It's a while ago now however Farage told the masses that 85% of UK law was legislation from Brussels. This was trumpeted by the UK rabid right wing press in thrall to the owners' agenda, which is to say pretty much all of it. The HoC Library was tasked with producing the real figure which came in at just 13%. So Farage's 85% was just another brexiteer lie of which there was no shortage. I believe the 13% figure because a lifelong friend of mine happens to work in the HoC Library. Which reminds me he retires at the end of this month. Call Me Dave wanted the UK to have "a special status" especially to push back on workers rights because that's what tory £donors wanted. The EU refused simply because freedom of movement to work across the EU should include having the same rights whichever member state you were working in. I mean, workers rights, the very idea! Isn't that right Roger and Woolster...? However do not forget that the tories at Maastricht in 1992 did not take on the Social Chapter because as a Sovereign State they didn't have to. But the bottom line is I'm not aware that the UK has ever had to push back on EU legislation. However I personally would prefer the EU to be in charge of food standards rather than our appalling government. Who can forget Gummer's photoshoot feeding his daughter with a burger at the height of the BSE problem. Twat. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 10 minutes ago, P.K. said: It's a while ago now however Farage told the masses that 85% of UK law was legislation from Brussels. This was trumpeted by the UK rabid right wing press in thrall to the owners' agenda, which is to say pretty much all of it. The HoC Library was tasked with producing the real figure which came in at just 13%. So Farage's 85% was just another brexiteer lie of which there was no shortage. I believe the 13% figure because a lifelong friend of mine happens to work in the HoC Library. Which reminds me he retires at the end of this month. Call Me Dave wanted the UK to have "a special status" especially to push back on workers rights because that's what tory £donors wanted. The EU refused simply because freedom of movement to work across the EU should include having the same rights whichever member state you were working in. I mean, workers rights, the very idea! Isn't that right Roger and Woolster...? However do not forget that the tories at Maastricht in 1992 did not take on the Social Chapter because as a Sovereign State they didn't have to. But the bottom line is I'm not aware that the UK has ever had to push back on EU legislation. However I personally would prefer the EU to be in charge of food standards rather than our appalling government. Who can forget Gummer's photoshoot feeding his daughter with a burger at the height of the BSE problem. Twat. Thank goodness you have no say in how we now progress. Nor do I, but at least I have the satisfaction of the camp that I and the majority of the population, especially the English population support do. Bringing the Gummer episode into this is a sign of the frustration that you and others are now feeling. Well suck it up - the majority of the UK population are now getting what we want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir nige Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 10 minutes ago, P.K. said: It's a while ago now however Farage told the masses that 85% of UK law was legislation from Brussels. This was trumpeted by the UK rabid right wing press in thrall to the owners' agenda, which is to say pretty much all of it. The HoC Library was tasked with producing the real figure which came in at just 13%. So Farage's 85% was just another brexiteer lie of which there was no shortage. I believe the 13% figure because a lifelong friend of mine happens to work in the HoC Library. Which reminds me he retires at the end of this month. Call Me Dave wanted the UK to have "a special status" especially to push back on workers rights because that's what tory £donors wanted. The EU refused simply because freedom of movement to work across the EU should include having the same rights whichever member state you were working in. I mean, workers rights, the very idea! Isn't that right Roger and Woolster...? However do not forget that the tories at Maastricht in 1992 did not take on the Social Chapter because as a Sovereign State they didn't have to. But the bottom line is I'm not aware that the UK has ever had to push back on EU legislation. However I personally would prefer the EU to be in charge of food standards rather than our appalling government. Who can forget Gummer's photoshoot feeding his daughter with a burger at the height of the BSE problem. Twat. bse that came from the eu........ all laws have to be compliant with eu law otherwse they can't be used....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 @PK: It is only 13% if you ignore the majority of EU dictat which is introduced by regulation rather than law. Either way it is unavoidable and compliance is mandatory. You know this because you have been told repeatedly but you choose to ignore facts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir nige Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 (edited) 38 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: "Mr Lawrence will still be able to stay as a resident and does not risk being deported" "It's really not clear what's going to happen," he told the BBC. "It'll be a year before they decide and I'll get a citizen's permit so I can stay." can you imagine the uproar if england did this..... "We checked at the time of the request that the applicant for French nationality meets economic criteria, in other words makes a salary or has the resources to be economically independent and not in need of welfare benefits." Edited February 8, 2020 by sir nige Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 11 minutes ago, sir nige said: "It's really not clear what's going to happen," he told the BBC. "It'll be a year before they decide and I'll get a citizen's permit so I can stay." can you imagine the uproar if england did this..... "We checked at the time of the request that the applicant for French nationality meets economic criteria, in other words makes a salary or has the resources to be economically independent and not in need of welfare benefits." The EU Settlement scheme does not give British Citizenship just the right to remain after the transition period. An EU Citizen applying for British Citizenship will still be required to go through the application process. That means passing the 'life in the UK' test, passing an English test and to 'be of good character'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojomonkey Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 (edited) 47 minutes ago, sir nige said: can you imagine the uproar if england did this..... "We checked at the time of the request that the applicant for French nationality meets economic criteria, in other words makes a salary or has the resources to be economically independent and not in need of welfare benefits." At the risk of sounding like Rog, I can't see any reason for any uproar. If someone wants citizenship of another country it seems entirely reasonable that the prove they are financially independent. Hasn't loads of noise been made by many about benefit fraudsters coming from other countries to take advantage of the UK? I am not commenting on Mr Lawrence's particular circumstances but it has to cut both ways now the UK are not in the EU. It was always going to be one of the consequences. Edited February 8, 2020 by mojomonkey sphellin 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir nige Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 4 hours ago, manxman1980 said: The EU Settlement scheme does not give British Citizenship just the right to remain after the transition period. An EU Citizen applying for British Citizenship will still be required to go through the application process. That means passing the 'life in the UK' test, passing an English test and to 'be of good character'. i blame the eu..... 4 hours ago, mojomonkey said: At the risk of sounding like Rog, I can't see any reason for any uproar. If someone wants citizenship of another country it seems entirely reasonable that the prove they are financially independent. Hasn't loads of noise been made by many about benefit fraudsters coming from other countries to take advantage of the UK? I am not commenting on Mr Lawrence's particular circumstances but it has to cut both ways now the UK are not in the EU. It was always going to be one of the consequences. so you agree it was barbaric of the eu that the uk wasn't allowed to change it's immigration policy before it left and had to come up with another plan........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojomonkey Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, sir nige said: So you agree it was barbaric of the eu that the uk wasn't allowed to change it's immigration policy before it left and had to come up with another plan........ Pretty sure the EU have never stopped any member country from requiring proof of financial independence as part of gaining citizenship. It was certainly necessary when I did it here in Germany. Anyway, you seem rather upset by it all. Don't worry, the UK is out, all is good. Edited February 8, 2020 by mojomonkey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 6 hours ago, Rog said: Thank goodness you have no say in how we now progress. Nor do I, but at least I have the satisfaction of the camp that I and the majority of the population, especially the English population support do. Bringing the Gummer episode into this is a sign of the frustration that you and others are now feeling. Well suck it up - the majority of the UK population are now getting what we want. Don't be so ridiculous. I don't feel any frustration per se. I'm annoyed because the UK was doing very well as a member of the EU. You know, the bit about our membership that NEVER gets a mention. We've now lost that because economic arguments simply don't carry any weight when so many want shot of Johnny Foreigner whatever the cost. In 1992 when the Maastricht Treaty was signed in 1992 the GDP pecking order was US, Japan, Germany, France, Italy, UK. Prior to the referendum it was US, China, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy Now it is US, China, Japan, Germany, India, UK, France, Italy with the UK expected to fall further. And believe me Roger, I very very much want the brexiteers to get EXACTLY what they voted for.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.