Brexit Referendum Superthread

catbear

who the fug wrote: »

So the current status quo is the way forward

The status quo was no Brexit but the DUP were against that.

Possibly the greatest irony is that the DUP by campaigning for Brexit may bring about the end of their own political and cultural identity.

steddyeddy

I hope the people of England know that a party of anti-homosexual, unionist hardliners helped to potentially destroy their economy.

who the fug

catbear wrote: »

The status quo was no Brexit but the DUP were against that.

Possibly the greatest irony is that the DUP by campaigning for Brexit may bring about the end of their own political and cultural identity.

The status quo is the six counties are part of the United Kingdom till the majority vote to leave, Brexit or no Brexit

Sam Russell

who the fug wrote: »

Sorry they be fixtures, you want the property you take them

Do you seriously think moving 250,000 people plus is ever going to happen.

About 30,000 Ugandan Asians left (were expelled) Uganda for the UK in 1972. It does happen. Kenya had a less severe event.

catbear

who the fug wrote: »

The status quo is the six counties are part of the United Kingdom till the majority vote to leave, Brexit or no Brexit

The status quo was the UK and Ireland both being in the EU and Northern Ireland and Scotland voted for that.

Brexit changes the status and only the most deluded believe otherwise.

Fratton Fred

Calina wrote: »

You might find this hard to believe, but actually, people have tried to swim the channel with a view to getting to the UK. They have not necessarily been successful but we are not talking about people who are content to be keyboard warriors here. We are talking about people who have put a great deal of effort and suffering into achieving their goals. They will not be stopped by you saying "so how will they get to Dover then?"

There are also things like small boats. You are probably underestimating the resourcefulness of people who have already made it to Calais from places that are not a busride from Calais if you cannot consider the possibility that they will find ways of getting to Dover that do not include buying a ticket on the Eurostar or Eurotunnel trains.

In the meantime, I suspect you don't understand the nature of the current agreement between France and the UK with respect to Calais. Effectively border control for the UK takes place in France rather than the UK. The French do not have to support that if they don't want to and the agreement as it exists benefits the UK far more than it benefits France. Perhaps if it were suspended the UK might actually start understanding how much they are losing by being pigheaded idiots as far as their neighbours in the EU are concerned.

That's nice and patronising, but doesn't answer the question.

Those that are prepared to swim, would do anyway, so that won't change. Those with passports and enough money to buy tickets would have done, providing they have the necessary travel documents which will be checked upon leaving the Schengen area.

So, rather than some patronising twaddle about a border crossing I have made personally scores of times, how about answering the question.

Lemming

Fratton Fred wrote: »

so how are all these refugees suddenly going to get to Dover, swim?

Is Macron also considering ignoring the rules of international travel, or will the French just remove all forms of security at the channel tunnel?

Fred, the obvious answer is that all of those refugees wont get to Dover. But some will regardless, and some do as it stands even with all of those heightened security checks. Any degradation in the current security measures on the French side of the channel will obviously affect those numbers that are currently still making it through for the worse (for the UK). Others will simply find other ways & means that may or may not involve Dover. Others will be caught, some will die, and some will simply give up and look elsewhere or go home.

Fratton Fred

Lemming wrote: »

Fred, the obvious answer is that all of those refugees wont get to Dover. But some will regardless, and some do as it stands even with all of those heightened security checks. Any degradation in the current security measures on the French side of the channel will obviously affect those numbers that are currently still making it through for the worse (for the UK). Others will simply find other ways & means that may or may not involve Dover. Others will be caught, some will die, and some will simply give up and look elsewhere or go home.

Which will ultimately cause a bigger problem for the French.

The talk of closing the refugee camps in Calais is just bluster and Macron playing to the right wing vote.

Nody

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Which will ultimately cause a bigger problem for the French.

The talk of closing the refugee camps in Calais is just bluster and Macron playing to the right wing vote.

He does not need to close the camp; he simply cancels the deal on UK border check in France and pull back the police and let them sort it out getting on the trucks in peace or walk through the tunnel. Camp gone; France happy and UK get to deal with it on their own soil.

Fratton Fred

Nody wrote: »

He does not need to close the camp; he simply cancels the deal on UK border check in France and pull back the police and let them sort it out getting on the trucks in peace or walk through the tunnel. Camp gone; France happy and UK get to deal with it on their own soil.

Pulls back the police from a high profile terrorist target?

Ain't. Gonna. Happen.

ambro25

Fratton Fred wrote: »

ambro25 wrote: »

Save for a cataclysm, Macron is France's next head of state.

Do I hear an "Ooops" from the Leave side?

Should that renegotiation happen and result in refugee camps effectively shifting from Calais to Dover (and beyond), then it'll be just another predicted consequence of Brexit become reality.

so how are all these refugees suddenly going to get to Dover, swim?

Is Macron also considering ignoring the rules of international travel, or will the French just remove all forms of security at the channel tunnel?

Someone's not travelled to France via the Chunnel very often in the past few years :pac:

ambro25

Nody wrote: »

ambro25 wrote: »

Should that renegotiation happen and result in refugee camps effectively shifting from Calais to Dover (and beyond), then it'll be just another predicted consequence of Brexit become reality.

Honestly I'd look more at the deal on UK border control on French soil; if that goes Lorry transports to UK through France is royally screwed (it's really REALLY bad now as a reference with the controls in place) and would cause all kinds of havoc. I can't really think of any alternate route that would work either (Dutch/Belgium ports are already being used as are south of France etc. and they all would add hundreds of km in cost along with traffic issues).

except that, with a Brexited UK and the Sangatte/LeTouquet agreements trap-door'd, all controls would take place on the UK side. Too late by then, the critters are over, in the hands and care of the UK-based Albanian/Serb mafia.

Fratton Fred

ambro25 wrote: »

Someone's not travelled to France via the Chunnel very often in the past few years :pac:

Not for about three years, admittedly. What's changed?

PopePalpatine

ambro25 wrote: »

<source>

Save for a cataclysm, Macron is France's next head of state.

Do I hear an "Ooops" from the Leave side?

Should that renegotiation happen and result in refugee camps effectively shifting from Calais to Dover (and beyond), then it'll be just another predicted consequence of Brexit become reality.

I can't wait for the frog-like squealing from Northcliffe House and 10 Lower Thames Street.

Fratton Fred

ambro25 wrote: »

except that, with a Brexited UK and the Sangatte/LeTouquet agreements trap-door'd, all controls would take place on the UK side. Too late by then, the critters are over, in the hands and care of the UK-based Albanian/Serb mafia.

No, they get stopped at UK immigration and shipped back to the country they first landed in.

But it's just scaremongering. Marcon is pulling the immigrant card to win a few votes.

Most of these refugees are penniless, they can't afford train or ferry tickets. Closing the camps would just lead to refugees wandering around northern France.

Lemming

Fratton Fred wrote: »

No, they get stopped at UK immigration and shipped back to the country they first landed in.

And here's where your argument falls over Fred; "prove it" as the saying goes. The UK decides to ship a load of asylum seekers* off to the "first country they landed in". The first question thrown at the UK authorities will be to prove that these particular asylum seekers landed in the country of destination for which the UK is trying to hand them off to. And so begins the merry-go-round of political expediency.

If the French withdraw from the agreement to allow British police operate on French soil, it will cause the UK a world of hurt, both logistically and financially, with not an awful lot of real blowback on the French.


* Whether they are or are not genuine is another matter.

demfad

CrabRevolution wrote: »

That's a fairly huge assumption to make. The world has changed unimaginably since the days of Ulster being Ireland's most productive region. By the same logic South Korea should be a poor agrarian state and Saudi Arabia a poor loose crowd of desert clans.

I don't get your point. We can see the causes of NIs relative demise: outside Irish market and offshore to Britain. We can still see it's entrepreneurial spirit albeit diminished by dependency. If NI companies are registered in Dublin NI now benefits from FDI we can assume that it should match average Irish GDP. High standard of education.. what hindrance now for FDIs?

demfad

The IT referred to a huge coup for Ireland in Brexit this weekend. I think the Irish unification story hides more than it seems:
The EU has said that Ireland, money and EU citizens have to be advanced before any talk of future relationship.
What this says to me is that the Irish border question has to be given a satisfactory solution or no trade deal.
That's a significant hurdle for the UK. And significant for Ireland if true.
NI academics looked into NI staying in EEA, this might be close to a solution

catbear

demfad wrote: »

We can still see it's entrepreneurial spirit albeit diminished by dependency.

Belfast was prosperous in the industrial revolution as a spillover from shipbuilding in the Clyde, which at its height at its height accounted for 50% of production of global tonnage, but pardoning the pun that boat sailed loooooooong ago and the mindset favouring towards heavy industry has been more of an inhibitor than an enabler in modern global economics.

Zubeneschamali

Nody wrote: »

This in turn would make an acceptable Brexit deal even less likely to pass simply because they get grouped up in the trouble maker category

Acceptable to who? Johnny Englishman?

Who cares - that's an internal Uk matter now.

And of course the UK are troublemakers - the entire Brexit mess is an accident. No party bar the fringe ukip was in favour of it, yet here they are pushing it through against their and the eus best interests, all because of internal tory party rivalries. Mad stuff.

Zubeneschamali

Fratton Fred wrote: »

No, they get stopped at UK immigration and shipped back to the country they first landed in

First country? Do yo mean first Eu country? With the UK outside the eu, what agreement are you relying on here?

stefanovich

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No party bar the fringe ukip was in favour of it, yet here they are pushing it through against their and the eus best interests, all because of internal tory party rivalries. Mad stuff.

They decided to hold a referendum on the matter as a large section of the population wanted to leave the EU. Referendum happened and the result is respected. Mad stuff alright.

Zubeneschamali

stefanovich wrote: »

They decided to hold a referendum on the matter as a large section of the population wanted to leave the EU.

Next, a referendum on deporting all Muslims and bringing back hanging.

steddyeddy

The EU 27 have agreed to the negotiating guidelines. This includes absolutely no cherry picking. I.E no special deal for the financial sector. From the BBC. Absolute madness.

oscarBravo

Lemming wrote: »

The UK decides to ship a load of asylum seekers* off...

I get that the concept of human rights is one that a lot of Brexit supporters seem to have an issue with, but wholesale shipping off of asylum seekers is frowned upon under internationally-recognised refugee conventions.

Water John

Maybe Brexiteers want to emulate Australia and find some remote island for them. We're claiming Rockall, they can't use that.

steddyeddy

Water John wrote: »

Maybe Brexiteers want to emulate Australia and find some remote island for them. We're claiming Rockall, they can't use that.

Both Rockall and Loch Foyle are set to become issues post Brexit. The Irish position on the loch is joint ownership while the British one seems to be we want all of it.

These colonial remnants are going to be a real headache. Argentina even hinted they could block Britain's entry to WTO terms because of the Falklands.

Jim2007

demfad wrote: »

NI academics looked into NI staying in EEA, this might be close to a solution

In that case they are clueless, since you can't joint the EEA without being either a member of either EFTA or EU and all that requires. The obvious but less palatable solution would be to do what is already done in the case of EU borders on mainland Europe - NI to enter into a customs union with Ireland and NI legal framework to be synced with Irish legal framework rather than the UK.

Lemming

oscarBravo wrote: »

I get that the concept of human rights is one that a lot of Brexit supporters seem to have an issue with, but wholesale shipping off of asylum seekers is frowned upon under internationally-recognised refugee conventions.

Poor turn of phrase, but you get the thrust of the point I'm sure.

The matter of the migrants amassing at Calais is a fine example of theory vs. 'facts on the ground'. The reality is that if the French choose to rescind the agreement with Britain over having British law enforcement on French soil, local political & social/law enforcement expediency is to let those numbers become somebody else's problem. That somebody would be Britain. And whilst I am sure that the French would still police the tunnel to ensure that there isn't desperate migrants running along the track lines and therefore holding up the trains, I doubt they'd give anything more thourough than that lip-service.

As an aside given that the current government seem to have no problems engaging in treating both EU nationals living in Britain and their own in the EU as collateral to be expended, and Darth Mayder's absolutely irrational disregard for the ECHR (not being an EU institution and all that .... ) I really don't see the current government blinking at the prospect of the international community getting uppity about their treatment of refugees. If anything, it would probably only stiffen spines as the red-top rags get to indulgen in outrage headlines about how the world is being mean and how dare they tell the UK what to do, etc. etc. And we all know that May would appear to be terrified of upsetting the red-tops.

Jim2007

Fratton Fred wrote: »

No, they get stopped at UK immigration and shipped back to the country they first landed in.

Oh dear A50 again! The UK will not have any agreements to ship them any where after BREXIT. Those rights are associated with EU membership.