Re: EU Referendum
 

Here we go again. :) You could probably replace the EU with the name of any other country and keep on arguing this way...

Hmm, so stripping UK nationals of the right to work freely across the continent is really going to help us, isn't it?

Employment rates change along with economic conditions, what kind of argument is that? Aren't there entire neighbourhoods in the UK where the majority of residents are on social welfare? Analogously, does that mean the UK doesn't work?

And you're using Greece as an example? Like they should be blaming ANYONE else but themselves for unemployment? Are you serious here? :)

Also, nothing wrong with the Euro except for the British press brainwashing people with doomsday scenarios. In fact it's a way more solid currency than the Pound, which can get kicked around by global speculators like a football due to it being a dinky, little currency compared to something bigger that encompasses numerous countries in what is the world's most powerful economy.

Greece could have easily left the Eurozone. Go look at how they're doing everything to stay in. Luckily the people making decisions there are not getting their information from the Daily Mail and are not letting tabloids form their opinions.

I already have, ages ago. And I'm not trying my luck, just taking advantage of the fact that we are still European Union citizens.

You vote for MEPs and then they ultimately validate the European Commission members. The Council is mainly comprised of a single representative from every member state.

What on Earth are you bickering about? That you don't get to directly choose the European Council President, that there are no silly campaigns carried out across the EU as candidates parade themselves and start promising various states different things to win their votes (in which case they wouldn't even bother visiting low population places like Malta)?

The current system works very well. Trust me, much smarter people than yourself set this up and so far it's working better than any other country's political system.

Here we go again. :) Good for you, sit here... and by all means don't go back to terrible Europe. Embrace your new paradise. There's no need to renew your old passport since things are so bad over there, right? :)

Here you have a great political system with mining corporations able to depose a PM at a whim, where PMs keep back-stabbing each other and act as unelected leaders all the time (even Shakespeare couldn't have imagined the way things work here). Oh and what an innovative economy this is, 22nd in the world. And who makes up the global top 25? 16 of them are European nations.

Don't get me wrong, Australia is great in terms of wages, especially for job sectors that don't carry similar wages in other parts of the world. And during a resource boom cycle the currency can become tremendously overvalued to the point where it's almost comical, though it does allow Australians to get a lot of bang for their buck abroad during those times.

Re: EU Referendum
 

Aren't you the expert? Only military force or economic pressure can have any effect. Militarily, in terms of conventional warfare, it would hardly be an effort by NATO to swipe Russia and its backwards technology aside, which is why they have been blackmailing the West by threatening to wipe out a NATO capitol (one of the smaller ones, probably something from the Lithuania/Latvia/Estonia trio) should the West intervene.

I would have opted for arming the Ukrainians too, but the decision was made to strangle Russia financially. And so far Russia is trying to put on a brave face, but they are being bankrupted at an astounding pace. They have two large funds that were supposed to secure the dictatorship's future, and apparently one has already been wiped out. Things are looking much uglier there than they will admit, just give them time. Right now we have Russia exactly where we want them, sinking by the day and powerless to get out of this position.

Re: EU Referendum
 

The EU is clearly in decline and has pressed the self destruct button.
Uncompetitive, Endless waste, Endless bureaucracy, Corruption, Dictatorial, Undemocratic.........

The main aims were cast to one side in a desperate attempt to form a Federal Europe that no one wants, to save a Flawed currency which will inevitably run into much more trouble and an open border policy which is already up shit creek without a paddle.

The UKs expanding and profitable Global trade has already overtaken it's EU trade which shows an ever increasing massive deficit.

There's a great big world out there and the UK more than any other country has all that is required to exploit it.

The good ship EU is doomed to disaster with all hands on board.
I hope we are well clear when it goes under.

Re: EU Referendum
 

Sounds like you're describing most national governments more than anything.

I would love to hear about the endless waste... compared to the UK. Or the endless bureaucracy compared to the UK. Same with corruption or the whole dictatorial/undemocratic thing.

Last time I checked the only country in the world with a bigger mess in tax-related legislation than the UK... is India. And still big corporations are having a laugh whilst UK residents are treated in a dictatorial way.

Let's take a hypothetical situation: your parents hand over their property to you. It is now yours, the deeds are in your name etc. Can you do what you want with it? Can you even let your parents live there for free without any serious repercussions from the gov't?

Nope. Let me see, endless bureaucracy with the intention of screwing over the ordinary person, dictatorial style, corruption (how many politicians have squirmed away from their very own laws?)... seems a perfect fit.

Of course similarly to the migration issue it does rather suit the gov't very well that people are directing their attention and blaming the EU for everything as opposed to looking at their own leaders. :)

Re: EU Referendum
 

Actually no, there's plenty of countries doing just fine outside the EU.


It is one that says the European project is not creating jobs when other parts of the world are. Even David Cameron has said this.Perhaps you are a simpleton if you do not understand that.

and of course nothing to do with the economic straightjacket called the euro that prevents them from taking the economic action they need to take.Also, nothing wrong with the Euro except for....the fact it doesn't work for you unless you are a German

Apologies, I should be doffing my cap to my betters. After all politicians have such a great record on making decisions.


You are Right on this one (but even a broken clock is right twice a day). I actually barbequed my EU passport in front of 100 family and friends. It was entirely liberating. I dont want or need an EU passport.

Re: EU Referendum
 

If you are deleting part of a quoted post, could you make sure you don't delete the end quote part (looks like this [/quote] ) otherwise it messes up future quotes making things difficult to read. And if you are going to break up a quote please check before posting as that post of yours was not clear to see what was quoted and what was your post.

Ta muchly :)

Re: EU Referendum
 

.
(Especially) to Astera:

Link to

http://campaignforanindependentbrita...uros-a-Day.pdf

by Marta Andreason, who many will know as an MEP who was villified for years for daring to speak the truth about the incompetence and corruption permeating the EU.

And the best speech I can remember by an elected politician, Gove, who as Justice minister has seen it all:

For weeks now I have been wrestling with the most difficult decision of my political life. But taking difficult decisions is what politicians are paid to do. No-one is forced to stand for Parliament, no-one is compelled to become a minister. If you take on those roles, which are great privileges, you also take on big responsibilities.

I was encouraged to stand for Parliament by David Cameron and he has given me the opportunity to serve in what I believe is a great, reforming Government. I think he is an outstanding Prime Minister. There is, as far as I can see, only one significant issue on which we have differed.

And that is the future of the UK in the European Union.

It pains me to have to disagree with the Prime Minister on any issue. My instinct is to support him through good times and bad.

But I cannot duck the choice which the Prime Minister has given every one of us. In a few months time we will all have the opportunity to decide whether Britain should stay in the European Union or leave. I believe our country would be freer, fairer and better off outside the EU. And if, at this moment of decision, I didn’t say what I believe I would not be true to my convictions or my country.

I don’t want to take anything away from the Prime Minister’s dedicated efforts to get a better deal for Britain. He has negotiated with courage and tenacity. But I think Britain would be stronger outside the EU.

My starting point is simple. I believe that the decisions which govern all our lives, the laws we must all obey and the taxes we must all pay should be decided by people we choose and who we can throw out if we want change. If power is to be used wisely, if we are to avoid corruption and complacency in high office, then the public must have the right to change laws and Governments at election time.

But our membership of the European Union prevents us being able to change huge swathes of law and stops us being able to choose who makes critical decisions which affect all our lives. Laws which govern citizens in this country are decided by politicians from other nations who we never elected and can’t throw out. We can take out our anger on elected representatives in Westminster but whoever is in Government in London cannot remove or reduce VAT, cannot support a steel plant through troubled times, cannot build the houses we need where they’re needed and cannot deport all the individuals who shouldn’t be in this country. I believe that needs to change. And I believe that both the lessons of our past and the shape of the future make the case for change compelling.

The ability to choose who governs us, and the freedom to change laws we do not like, were secured for us in the past by radicals and liberals who took power from unaccountable elites and placed it in the hands of the people. As a result of their efforts we developed, and exported to nations like the US, India, Canada and Australia a system of democratic self-government which has brought prosperity and peace to millions.

Our democracy stood the test of time. We showed the world what a free people could achieve if they were allowed to govern themselves.

In Britain we established trial by jury in the modern world, we set up the first free parliament, we ensured no-one could be arbitrarily detained at the behest of the Government, we forced our rulers to recognise they ruled by consent not by right, we led the world in abolishing slavery, we established free education for all, national insurance, the National Health Service and a national broadcaster respected across the world.

By way of contrast, the European Union, despite the undoubted idealism of its founders and the good intentions of so many leaders, has proved a failure on so many fronts. The euro has created economic misery for Europe’s poorest people. European Union regulation has entrenched mass unemployment. EU immigration policies have encouraged people traffickers and brought desperate refugee camps to our borders.

Far from providing security in an uncertain world, the EU’s policies have become a source of instability and insecurity. Razor wire once more criss-crosses the continent, historic tensions between nations such as Greece and Germany have resurfaced in ugly ways and the EU is proving incapable of dealing with the current crises in Libya and Syria. The former head of Interpol says the EU’s internal borders policy is “like hanging a sign welcoming terrorists to Europe” and Scandinavian nations which once prided themselves on their openness are now turning in on themselves. All of these factors, combined with popular anger at the lack of political accountability, has encouraged extremism, to the extent that far-right parties are stronger across the continent than at any time since the 1930s.

The EU is an institution rooted in the past and is proving incapable of reforming to meet the big technological, demographic and economic challenges of our time. It was developed in the 1950s and 1960s and like other institutions which seemed modern then, from tower blocks to telexes, it is now hopelessly out of date. The EU tries to standardise and regulate rather than encourage diversity and innovation. It is an analogue union in a digital age.

The EU is built to keep power and control with the elites rather than the people. Even though we are outside the euro we are still subject to an unelected EU commission which is generating new laws every day and an unaccountable European Court in Luxembourg which is extending its reach every week, increasingly using the Charter of Fundamental Rights which in many ways gives the EU more power and reach than ever before. This growing EU bureaucracy holds us back in every area. EU rules dictate everything from the maximum size of containers in which olive oil may be sold (five litres) to the distance houses have to be from heathland to prevent cats chasing birds (five kilometres).

Individually these rules may be comical. Collectively, and there are tens of thousands of them, they are inimical to creativity, growth and progress. Rules like the EU clinical trials directive have slowed down the creation of new drugs to cure terrible diseases and ECJ judgements on data protection issues hobble the growth of internet companies. As a minister I’ve seen hundreds of new EU rules cross my desk, none of which were requested by the UK Parliament, none of which I or any other British politician could alter in any way and none of which made us freer, richer or fairer.

It is hard to overstate the degree to which the EU is a constraint on ministers’ ability to do the things they were elected to do, or to use their judgment about the right course of action for the people of this country. I have long had concerns about our membership of the EU but the experience of Government has only deepened my conviction that we need change. Every single day, every single minister is told: ‘Yes Minister, I understand, but I’m afraid that’s against EU rules’. I know it. My colleagues in government know it. And the British people ought to know it too: your government is not, ultimately, in control in hundreds of areas that matter.

But by leaving the EU we can take control. Indeed we can show the rest of Europe the way to flourish. Instead of grumbling and complaining about the things we can’t change and growing resentful and bitter, we can shape an optimistic, forward-looking and genuinely internationalist alternative to the path the EU is going down. We can show leadership. Like the Americans who declared their independence and never looked back, we can become an exemplar of what an inclusive, open and innovative democracy can achieve.

We can take back the billions we give to the EU, the money which is squandered on grand parliamentary buildings and bureaucratic follies, and invest it in science and technology, schools and apprenticeships. We can get rid of the regulations which big business uses to crush competition and instead support new start-up businesses and creative talent. We can forge trade deals and partnerships with nations across the globe, helping developing countries to grow and benefiting from faster and better access to new markets.

We are the world’s fifth largest economy, with the best armed forces of any nation, more Nobel Prizes than any European country and more world-leading universities than any European country. Our economy is more dynamic than the Eurozone, we have the most attractive capital city on the globe, the greatest “soft power” and global influence of any state and a leadership role in NATO and the UN. Are we really too small, too weak and too powerless to make a success of self-rule? On the contrary, the reason the EU’s bureaucrats oppose us leaving is they fear that our success outside will only underline the scale of their failure.

This chance may never come again in our lifetimes, which is why I will be true to my principles and take the opportunity this referendum provides to leave an EU mired in the past and embrace a better future.
.

Re: EU Referendum
 

I personally believe that the UK should be outside the EU and never have joined it in the first place - in doing so they broke the bonds with the countries that had made them great. Yet another example of the UK snaking the people that had always came to their side in their hour of need

but

It's now too late to leave as the UK is too intertwined with Europe. Leaving will cause more harm than good and the best that they can do is to keep renegotiating their terms of membership

They should do an Ireland and become a low-tax haven for business within the EU

I also think Gove needs to really see the capabilities of the UK for what they are in the early 21st century - 'the best armed forces of any nation'? The 6 submarine, 19 surface combatant, 7 fast jet squadrons, no MR/ASW aircraft, 80000 troops, 250 Main Battle Tanks armed forces the best in the world? Keep kidding yourself Gove, your nation cannot defend itself. End of

Re: EU Referendum
 

>> It's now too late to leave as the UK is too intertwined with Europe. Leaving will cause more harm than good and the best that they can do is to keep renegotiating their terms of membership > I also think Gove needs to really see the capabilities of the UK for what they are in the early 21st century - 'the best armed forces of any nation'? The 6 submarine, 19 surface combatant, 7 fast jet squadrons, no MR/ASW aircraft, 80000 troops, 250 Main Battle Tanks armed forces the best in the world? Keep kidding yourself Gove, your nation cannot defend itself. End of

(EDITED) :MODERATOR For several days now my posts have been drastically truncated - this is an example: most of it has not appeared. I don't know what is going on!
__________________

Re: EU Referendum
 

Are you by any chance using a combination of less than and more than symbols?

For some reason, text between these symbols disappears so mods have stopped using them when we snip and replaced with stars. There is a thread about it in site feedback.

Re: EU Referendum
 

All you EU haters need to just get hold of the facts that DC has said, that leaving the EU means we would have to rejoin EFTA to keep our trading links with Europe and not suffer financial penalties, however one of the basic tenets of joining EFTA is that and country doing so HAS to accept the 'freedom of movement' rules, something that Norway and Iceland have agrred to before they joined. SO the much vaunted argument of 'stopping migration' just doesn't apply, it will continue.

Re: EU Referendum
 

How does Japan trade with Europe? Or the USA? China? I think they all manage it without allowing freedom of movement. But in any case, there is a lot more to it than "stopping immigration". Why don't you try reading Gove's statement to get a better idea of the concerns of other people.

Re: EU Referendum
 

A bit hypercritical methinks considering you and Astera were the first to bring immigration into this discussion at posts #3 & 5.

Now why would 2 EU exponents wish to do that?
Must have been uppermost in your minds.

As Bermuda says. That is only a part of the concern.

Re: EU Referendum
 

I suspect that in the majority of british people immigration is top of their list of concerns, everything else is likely to be ignored, and that's down to the tabloids always going on about them coming over here, piching our jobs, getting benefits etc.

Re: EU Referendum
 

Immigration is only a small part of it. The key thing is self determination, which in the EU that goes out the window.

Re: EU Referendum
 

:thumbsup: For a number of people, yes immigration will be at the forefront. And they may be misguided to an extent, but it is still their right to vote as they see fit. Because the UK is a democracy, unlike the EU. But for the majority of the "Leave" camp, there is an awful lot more to this than immigration.

Great news that Boris has joined Brexit this evening.

Re: EU Referendum
 

Excellent! Thanks - I do use double morethan and lessthan quotes to make my posts' quotes clear. That explains it, but why? It only seemed to start a week or two ago. Perhaps the ASCII gets confused?

Re: EU Referendum
 

I think this references access to so called Free Trade Agreements between countries, rather than just general trade.


S

Re: EU Referendum
 

I've never really worked out how freedom of trade should imply freedom of movement. The two seem perfectly separate to me.

My guess is that if the UK dumps the EU, then the EU will refuse to allow a trade treaty between the UK and the EU. The whole 'european integration' shtick is an ideology thing, and I think they'd have their nose out of joint if the UK actually did dump them and what for them is a shiny target of a federated europe. They'd turn bunny boiler.

The smart move would have been to just do a france and give only lip service to the the EU, ignoring anything the UK didn't like. Sure they might have had to push the EU dictates and courts to the side, carefully, but that's what you have a civil service for.

Re: EU Referendum
 

Free Trade Agreements.

Tend to favour the party with cheap labour.

Re: EU Referendum
 

My question is this: Does dumping the EU equate to dumping EFTA? Could they argue that EFTA could remain in place if they walked away from the EU?

The Ballot Paper is only asking the question as to whether the UK should remain a member of the European Union, not if it should also remain a member of the EFTA. The two are certainly not the same thing.


S

Re: EU Referendum
 

Ah, I have answerd my own question. It appears that EFTA membership is no longer operating for the UK since they joined the EEC in 1973, as full EU membership appears to trump EFTA.

UK would need to re-apply to join EFTA again as Astera suggested above.


S

Re: EU Referendum
 

Reading this thread, I think we should be careful about labeling anyone who wants out, as anything other than an individual with his/her own reasons. Sure you've got the people that are just going with what they read in the papers, but ultimately the onus is on the 'in' brigade to make their point in easy to relate to , and inclusive language. If they can't do that then perhaps they're no good at their job.

Re: EU Referendum
 

.
The problem for the "outers" is that quite a large proportion of the voters have no interest in sovereignty - it's a nebulous concept and not as important to them as shorter queues at the arrival desk and whether they get cheaper roaming.

Yet it is the single most important issue regarding the EU. Having the ability of parliament to govern its voters whittled away, year by year, treaty by treaty is an affront to a thousand years of rule by consent.

Many Continental countries have almost within living memory been subjected to dictatorships, revolution, rule by the unelected and so forth, and - rather like the ex-communist countries' populations - have grown accustomed to just keeping quiet and letting "them" get on with it.

Forget about Napoleonic law v common law and all the other things which divide the UK and those cut off by fog. The fact of the matter is that the EU is almost at the point of complete rule by a group of (possibly) well meaning elites who know better than the peasantry what is best for them. In my book it is the equivalent of a dictatorship, not by an individual but by committees.

Go to any capital; Washington, Luxembourg, Brussels and it is creepy: everyone you see is in some way or another connected with the industry of governing others. All that's missing is the funny handshake (and that is probably there as well if you look.)

The EUSSR is by any accounts a failure of democracy - as the Justice minister says. If it gets to its "leaders'" now open endgame - federation - those who vote "in" will live to see results which are not going to be pretty.
.

Re: EU Referendum
 

http://imgur.com/download/quOsIVj

(Not sure if this will work, BE doesn't do gifv so this is a hack)

Re: EU Referendum
 

Hi guys,

I've snuck in from the Canada forum to see what's being discussed regarding the EU referendum.

I mailed my voter registration form to Kettering this week. I last lived there in 2005. I'm very keen not to miss out on my opportunity to vote on the issue.

Sarah

Re: EU Referendum
 

I'm trying to find out how to make an effective vote: voting papers are mailed out too late for overseas voters to get them back in time, usually. And we don't know anyone now in our old UK area to make a proxy.

Re: EU Referendum
 

Hi Wol,

Our ballot papers arrived one week to the day before the UK General Election in 2015. They just made it back to Kettering in time.

Mail to the UK from Australia would take longer I imagine. I hope you can dredge up someone in the UK who will make the journey for you to do a proxy vote in your old manor.

I was thinking of making my parents do the proxy vote, but they're in Wiltshire and it's a couple of hours to Kettering, Northants. So I'm sticking with the mailed ballot.

Cheers,

Sarah

(In Canada!)

Re: EU Referendum
 

Don't forget, Auspost have gotten significantly more sh*t since then.

You'd have to leave at least 2 week nowadays, judging by the late arrival of birthday cards.

Why they couldn't allow pre-voting at the commission, then bundle up and courier to the UK makes no sense to me. Well, actually, not allowing online voting make no sense. Blockchain is more secure than slips of paper.

Re: EU Referendum
 

They're probably too busy counting the scanned and copied votes in Rotherham to be concerned, anyway.

Re: EU Referendum
 

I have to warn other readers that I'm about to very loosely explain how EU legislation is drafted so at this point I'm recommending several No Doz washed down with Red Bull or just skipping this post if you are happy you understand the legislative process or actually are satisfied that this isn't really an issue.

The College of Commissioners (who are all appointees from a national government, much like Lords but without the hereditary peerages and a fixed number of seats) take advice from a range of governments and organisations (in much the same way a Parliamentary select committee would at a national level) as well as national governments on what legislation to put forwards for deliberation. Legislation is then sent to both the European Council where national governments can offer input to any proposal and the European Parliament where your locally elected MEP can also make clear their position on the draft proposals. The committee representing the College of Commissionaires will then debate and vote on any draft (which is a formal check and balance on draft legislation). Then the legislation then goes forwards to plenary debate where MEPs will either opt to adopt a law or send it back for further amendments (much the same function as Lords provides at a national level). However the draft isn't law yet because it goes off again to the European Council who can either adopt it or send it back to MEPs to make amendments. Either way MEPs will have to have a second reading to enact, reject or amend the resulting legislation. If they vote to enact...then it can move on to the Conciliation to hash out a text that's actually acceptable to both the national governments (representing themselves via the European Council) and EP within six weeks. If no compromise is reached Between the EC and EP then the legislation is rejected but if it is then accepted MEPs again get to vote in a third reading but no further amendments can be made. Hopefully this has clearly elaborated on why I don’t see the EU as fundamentally undemocratic and articulates why think most of those who do often appear so ignorant to the rest of us. From a personal perspective I want to avoid an unproductive cyclical and binary conversation boiling down to “Yes it is” or “No it isn’t” and actually properly open this issue up to debate.

So I guess my criticism of the EU is that it's much too fair and democratic and slow, it lacks the executive power required to pass legislation in an expedient fashion because there is far too much consultation and national governments have too much power to block, veto and opt out of legislation to act effectively as a federal government even when that would be highly beneficial. Power is still much too devolved to national governments.

Would I change things? Sure as said above I'd prefer it if the College of Commissioners where directly elected in a revolving manner on very long terms (much akin to US senate representatives) rather than participatory but national governments would object because it would give the EU more importance and power in national politics. National governments fear that if they release a hold over the EU they will be sidelined.

However there are many things I'd change about the UKs legislative and electoral systems given the chance but clearly this isn't a high priority for UK right now. We examine the EU in great detail to avoid difficult questions at a national level about the state of the UKs archaic legislative and electoral systems which, I think it should be said, is remarkably convenient for those benefiting from current arrangements (Labour and the Conservatives for example).

Re: EU Referendum
 

Tell us how much scrutiny the *ELECTED* MEPs do on the thousands of pages of legislation that are proposed by the commission each year.

It doesn't matter how much spin you put on it, the EU system is at best unwieldy and incapable of reacting in timely manner (cf migrants etc) and at worst autocratic and intrusive to national interests.
.

Re: EU Referendum
 

That's because some people like yourself were living in some fantasy world in which the EU accounted for the majority of our immigration, whereas the truth is that each and every year the majority of people coming in are actually from outside the EU.

In other words: you're just following the tabloids and barking up the wrong tree.

I wish you were right though, I really do. I wish the majority of all incomers were actually from Europe and not from outside Europe. Honestly, I really do. Sadly my wishes are futile and most people flooding into Britain are non-Europeans.

So by all means, knock yourself out and have a ball. Vote against the EU and then those coming in from outside the EU will not just be the majority (as they are now) but the vast, humongous, overwhelming majority.

Re: EU Referendum
 

What an extraordinary conclusion!

The EU has conclusively shown itself to be incapable of preventing hundreds of thousands from Africa, Afghanistan and the rest getting across borders, potentially receiving passports and therefore being allowed entry into any EU country.

Whether an elected, UK government can now stop this mass immigration or not, at least the electorate will not be beholden to other countries' lax border controls.
.

Re: EU Referendum
 

Oh, but the UK government is already agreeing to share the burden, so those will be allowed in regardless. And will continue to be let in regardless of EU status or dinky-little-have-no-say-in-any-global-issues status.

You are talking about asylum seekers too, that is not the same as the majority of immigration that is flowing into this country which happens to be from outside the EU and which the gov't is knowingly letting in whilst they divert your attention towards Europeans.

Re: EU Referendum
 

You claim to have introduced the matter of immigration for my benefit yet you did not even know my point of view at that stage so should I add mind reader to your superior talents?

I quoted figures from the ONS; you don't agree with them. Tuff.
Not going over it again.....see post #65.

Re: EU Referendum
 

Whatever you're smoking, please feel free to share. :) Uhhhrrmmm, then again, maybe not...

I quoted migration statistics straight from the ONS. Not you.

You simply deflected the issue because it didn't suit your default, preset fundamentalist setting which would have overloaded your processor.

Instead you started looking at people's origins, not at migration. Personally I don't care about where people's roots are if they came over in the 1800s, 1900s or any other time. If they happen to be European, then GREAT.

As mentioned, I quoted ONS migration statistics and I suggest you do the same if it doesn't overload your logic board.

Re: EU Referendum
 

http://i.imgur.com/FqR0g1s.jpg

People have different attitudes I guess...

Re: EU Referendum
 

Okay, you choose to ignore post #65 so I'll assume silence is consent and you have no logical explanation. Means my ONS figures are as valid as yours.

Why is it that if someone states a different opinion you react with snide responses?

Did you learn that at play school?

Re: EU Referendum
 

Jeez, I can't believe you posted that here.

You have exhibited 6 of the 9 red ones on this thread alone.

Perhaps you should relax and watch some TV.