Gibraltar
 

How ridiculous, British politicians insinuating war. If the Spainards want it back, Little England should return it forthwith. Admittedly the Brits in Gibraltar didn't vote that way, but if it's hard Brexit that the masses want, then losing the Rock is a fitting demonstration of the new order.

Re: Gibraltar
 

Brexit isn't why we're looking to move to Canada, but it's certainly not making it any less attractive. The idiocy is astounding - threatening war with one of our nearest allies, and a major member of our largest trading partner, just as we start the most complex trade and diplomatic negotiations every undertaken (in the shortest timeframe).

Re: Gibraltar
 

100% agree. Crazy.

Re: Gibraltar
 

Well, only 96% of Gibraltans (?) voted to stay in the EU. What better way than joining Spain for a change?

Re: Gibraltar
 

I imagine they are sensible enough to accede to that.

(Lack of clarity in my initial post: I meant that the Gibalterians didn't vote in the way the 'masses' voted. Although, in any other reality 52% is hardly a great mass in the first place.)

Re: Gibraltar
 

The slight problem is that when the UK held a referendum in 2002 about joint sovereignty with UK / Spain, it was 99% in favour of UK only!


Perhaps another referendum for Gibraltarians:


1. Become part of Spain but stay in the EU
2. Stay part of the UK and leave the EU


Pretty certain I know which way it would go.


Spain are hypocrites about this - they think it is potty the UK holding on to Gibraltar (which perhaps it is), but see no problem with Spain holding their enclaves of Ceuta, Melilla and the Canary Islands (rather than Morocco)!

Re: Gibraltar
 

To be fair, there are or have been many situations like this.

Re: Gibraltar
 

Absolutely! That is the point I am making. Look at all the parts of 'France' scattered around the globe, St Pierre Miquelon for one.


Wouldn't it be lovely if everyone just said 'you know what, every country just hands these weird enclaves over' - but it aint gonna happen.


Even the UN recognises the importance of self-determination.

Re: Gibraltar
 

I've been to Gibraltar.

The place is hole and the locals all have two heads.

I do wonder if the mass tax evasion by its "residents" would be allowed to continue if the UK let it go.

Re: Gibraltar
 

At least the PM didn't tweet about it :p

Re: Gibraltar
 

Evoking memories of the Falklands War, Lord Howard said: "There is no question whatever that our Government will stand by Gibraltar.

"Thirty-five years ago this week another woman Prime Minister sent a task force halfway across the world to defend the freedom of another small group of British people against another Spanish-speaking country.

"I am absolutely certain our current Prime Minister will show the same resolve in standing by the people of Gibraltar."

Re: Gibraltar
 

Gibraltarians are fiercly patriotic, more so than many living in Blighty are. I think its sad that they may well become a victim in all this.

Re: Gibraltar
 

My mother was born there. I have relatives living there who I'm going to visit in July. If you don't understand the politics and sentiments behind Gibraltarian feelings, I find it rather simplistic to comment on it.
HoweFamily is right. To you it may seem a contradiction in terms that people in Gibraltar want to remain British and remain in the EU but so do a lot of people living in the UK.

Re: Gibraltar
 

The wheels are turning.. in fits and starts.. but they. are turning.

Fred Jones, that man in the Bunch of Grapes, would surprisingly feel greatly upset if Gibraltar was sacrificed on the altar of political expediency. Won by force of arms and heroic in WW2 it's more british than the british, I would suggest that there would be a heavy political price to pay to go against the wishes of Gibraltarians.

This is just one of those boulders that have been unearthed by the Brexit redevelopment of the EU and like any redevelopment things will never be the same again. However unlike many redevelopments this one seeks to sweep away the ghettos and corrupt foreign slum landlords of the EU and replace them with the eutopia that will become Albion.

Fred Jones and his mates would crucify any politician who gave in to the spanish and there are no votes to be lost by uttering over the top rhetoric.

Re: Gibraltar
 

Oh, I agree, but Empress May forbids second thought.

Re: Gibraltar
 

Simply put, it is up to the people of Gibraltar, they are British citizens, and they have made it quite clear they still wish to remain a British overseas territory. So why should it be given to Spain?

What Spain wants doesn't come into it, as for the Brexit vote, this is a separate matter and has nothing to do with it.

Im sure Spain wouldn't pull a stupid stunt by trying to annex it, so its storm in a tea cup.

Re: Gibraltar
 

Thank you Paul. I know my relatives were really shocked by the Brexit vote. It could lead to all sorts of complications crossing the border. But that doesn't mean they would want to identify as anything other than British. As you state it's a separate thing and there a lot of history/politics there.
In the 70s 60s maybe I can't recall my grandfather lived in Spain. During one dispute when the border was closed for a long while he had to travel from Spain to Morocco to Gib monthly to get his UK pension.

Re: Gibraltar
 

It must have been 1969:

Spain would suffer if it vetoed a Brexit deal over Gibraltar | BrexitCentral

Re: Gibraltar
 

Why little? We have 60 million people and the 5th largest economy in the world.

Re: Gibraltar
 

It's a state of mind. Britain's economic success of the last 35 years has been because of EU membership, not in spite of it. We're diminishing our trade position with our primary economic partner, and sinking back into petty nationalism. IMO it's a retrograde step.

Re: Gibraltar
 

Precisely!


I was a firm 'remainer', but I am not now a 'remoaner'.


I think Cameron was crazy playing Russian Roulette just to paper over the cracks in his own party. I also believe that referendums for major change (e.g. BREXIT, Scottish Independence etc.) should not be based on simple majority, but should be based on 'clear majority' - at least 60%, probably 2/3rds (sound familiar?).


But hey, Britain is where it is and must (and is) get on with it. There is no doubt at all the fifth biggest economy in the world can 'go it alone', it is just the uncertainty that this transition period creates over then next few years that a lot of people could live without (myself included).

Re: Gibraltar
 

Maybe its more that we want to engage with the wider global comuunity as an independent and authentic actor rather than be constrained and controlled by the narrow confines of a European paradigm?

Re: Gibraltar
 

I don't know a great deal of the (recent) history of Gibraltar's spats with Spain, but it seems to me that membership of the EU has not exactly made a huge difference to Spain's ability to make the border crossing difficult for people going in either direction. The Gibraltar issue has always been raised as a proxy by governments in Madrid to distract attention from other, domestic, issues - I suppose this is what is happening now, and Brexit has provided a convenient context for Alfonso Dastis to persuade Donald Tusk to stir the pot.

It's not helpful on either side - either for Tusk to have called out Gibraltar as needing special consideration, of of Michael Howard to have invoked the spirit of Thatcher and the Falklands. It'll simmer down long before the Brexit negotiations are completed.

Re: Gibraltar
 

Personally I don't believe that. Events in the UK post the ref last June lead me to conclude the basis of the vote was a desire to stop immigration. I don't think (but clearly I cannot prove it) that the motivating desire was to reach out globally in a different way. But of course, the UK (government) is forced to present this as a desire now having turned its back on the single market (the largest market).

Re: Gibraltar
 

Could you please elaborate on this narrow European paradigm? Oh, and who is "we"?

Re: Gibraltar
 

+1

Re: Gibraltar
 

On the contrary, we now have the ability to create an immigration policy that is open to the global community, very much like Canada.

Isn't it better to trade in multiple markets?

Re: Gibraltar
 

The UK can benefit from bi and multilateral trade agreements that best suit our national interests. We don't need the unnecessary bureaucracy of the European Commission to that.

The UK as a nation state.

Re: Gibraltar
 

When the one on your doorstep is the largest by far, that would seem the obvious place to start.

But this isn't about the economic health of the country: this is about the UK government staying in power by delivering "the will of [some of] the people". The UK government isn't concerned about the economics or it would be doing everything it could to retain access to the single market. This isn't about the UK either: it's about England.

I see there's been a call to return to Imperial measurements.

I don't want to get into a further debate about it because I'm horrified by what's happened and is happening as project Brexit unfolds. It makes me very sad.

Re: Gibraltar
 

Of course we'll trade with our European neighbours.

Re: Gibraltar
 

Are you able to explain why Canada, when agreeing upon movement of goods between it and the EU, didn't allow unbridled movement of workers between the two?

Re: Gibraltar
 

Or the US and Mexico.

Re: Gibraltar
 

I'm in favour of free movement in Europe.

Canada's immigrant population is a significantly higher percentage of the population than that of the UK. I can't recall exactly but it's something like 12% versus 24% or similar. Immigration is handled differently in Canada and I don't just mean the Economic Class. To give an example: family class sponsorship (spouse/dependents) process is far cheaper and far less onerous in terms of the requirements.

Re: Gibraltar
 

.

Re: Gibraltar
 

Are you in favour of free movement in North America?

Re: Gibraltar
 

It's a different context and I don't know enough to comment.

Within North America and Mexico there is NAFTA (for certain professionals). Within North America it is easier (generally speaking) for Canadians/US citizens to cross the border. The US and Canada do not share other organizational structures that are shared within the EU. So free movement is one of the shared principles of the EU: there are others. Free movement can't be discussed in isolation (except in the UK as a cause of the referendum).

Re: Gibraltar
 

Do you realise that free movement of goods, services and people didn't exist in the EU prior to 1992. People were able to immigrate from one now EU country to another back then, they will continue to be able to move to and from the UK to members of the EU post Brexit.

Out of interest, do you know the numbers of people in the UK that are likely to be affected by such a scenario post Brexit (I appreciate you could say all but, clearly, the whole of the UK did not intend to move to another EU state pre-Brexit)?

Re: Gibraltar
 

Re: Gibraltar
 

What a strange way of thinking.

Perhaps we should also change the conditions on which Canadians can visit the US. What do you reckon, a special visa that takes a year to come through? A $20k security deposit needed?

I mean you could say it might affect all Canadians but clearly the whole of Canada would not intend to go to the US but for such a change in accessibility. :lol:

Re: Gibraltar
 

I have no idea. But we could suggest that lots of future generations will essentially be denied that choice. My children for example.


21 per cent of the pop in Canada in 2011 was foreign born:

150 years of immigration in Canada

Seems to be 12.7% in the UK in 2011:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreig...United_Kingdom