orly

They have the right to vote just as much as anyone else. Just because you might not like what the majority likes doesn't mean there shouldn't be a vote.

That's highly sloppy from an intellectual standpoint.

London Mike

The UK has benefitted enormously from European (and wider) immigration for centuries. I'd say you can't really think about modern Britain without considering how migrants have hugely contributed to it.

However, rather than being overly concerned about uncontrolled immigration which is just the juice that UKIP is injecting into 10s of 1000s of fearful Daily Mail readers, I think Britain should be worried about falling net migration levels - largely down to fewer overseas students coming to British universities. Many UK (and other) universities could be on their knees in five years time anyway but if overseas students reduce their numbers in the UK much further it could be a major problem much sooner. Without healthy UK universities, in or out of the EU, the economic situation of the country will suffer - a lot.

Britain needs to be part of Europe but not dictated by it. This is eminently possible. Europe needs to be a bigger player on the global stage in the coming decade(s) and it will be better for it with Britain being central here - financially, environmentally, foreign-policy wise. Furthermore, Britain needs more housing anyway, to kick-start the economy, which I'm sure would give lots of construction jobs to UK and non-UK workers.

So, definitely say in the EU and don't buy UKIP's bullshit!

Come on Spurs tomorrow!

Shard

Falling net migration levels? Are you joking or simply extrapolating wildly from the reduced admissions of overseas university applicants. Annual net migration remains above 200,000 persons per year (the government's target was in tens of thousands). The UK's population is already heading for 75 million by 2035 so the argument for increased immigration is muted.

If you haven't noticed, there's a massive housing shortage already, with every government of the day not knowing quite how or where or when to permit new development.

A couple of days ago it was announced that the country is short 250,000 primary school places, and again, in case you haven't noticed, there isn't a great deal of extra cash swilling about to build new schools at present.

It's become quite a fashion to dismiss any debate about immigration as being "Daily Mail" or "UKIP" scaremongering, but very little attention is paid to whether there is a kernel of truth in these (scare) stories or not.

London Mike

Stating a fact:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21614086
Cheers,
M.

Shard

I see I am a bit out of date on my stats. Last June 247,000 more people came on board in the previous year, this June its 168,000 more people (not quite the ten's of thousands targetted by the government). Britain should be worried about this kind of fall? Not enough people coming here? It will be interesting to see next June's stats, once the Romanians and Bulgarians have an open door.

jimf

Mrs Merkel rejected the idea that her country was seeking "hegemony" in the European Union, and pledged to seek consensus.

She said: "Germany has a ... sometimes complicated role because we are the largest economy - we are not the richest, but we are the largest. Therefore Germany will only act together with the others - hegemony is totally foreign to me."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/e...ain-areas.html

Shard

A common language would also be beneficial and more efficient, I wonder if Frau Merkel has one in mind?

jimf

So who's correct - would the negative impact be minor or would it lead to the loss of 3m jobs?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...n-8605355.html

Shard

The tide is definitely shifting. First UKIP gaining 24% of the local elections, and now Nigel Lawson of all people admitting that it is time to go. The idea of 3 million job losses seems a bit far fetched. Even so, I can't see Britain signing up for fiscal union which is where the project is heading. I mean come on, we're Britain ! Not some subsidiary German protectorate. Fiscal union would be a tough sell even if the EU were in excellent economic health, but in it's current wretched state, there is no possibility (of us joining) at all.

READ THIS!:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...l-Barroso.html

Mikeypm

Austrian?

jimf

Previously it seemed as though the default position was that it was probably worth staying in the EU and it was for the skeptics to make the case to leave. Now it seems the common default opinion is that it's probably better to leave and it's up to the pro EU advocates to make the case to stay. They seem to have been increasingly quiet the last few years.

Shard

I think the outlook on the project has changed considerably in the last two decades. The financial crisis of the five years has in a sense exposed all the cracks, and the Northern states are having to reconsider whether supporting the spendthrift and at times corrupt Southern states is sustainable. It is interesting that while Britain used to be the one skeptic in the club, skepticism is now growing amongst the Germans, Dutch and Swedes too. The support of the general public is not necessarily being mirrored by the EU politicians that are becoming increasingly elite.

Mikeypm

I think the Scandinavians were always skeptical about the EU after all Sweden, Denmark and Norway kept the krone currency and only Denmark and Sweden are in the EU. Norway decided it was best to keep all their oil and gas money to themselves rather than support the likes of Greece etc spend like it was going out of fashion.

Cape Blue

Although Norway are a significant net contributor to the EU budget.

Shard

Are they?

Wikipedia suggest their contribution is E188 MN which is insignificant compared to net contributions Sweden E1,259 MN or Britain at E5,445 MN. Hardly surprising given that Norway is not an EU member.