British Expats

British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)
-   Take it Outside! (https://britishexpats.com/forum/take-outside-67/)
-   -   Post EU Referendum (https://britishexpats.com/forum/take-outside-67/post-eu-referendum-879308/)

EMR Aug 30th 2016 12:34 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by mfesharne (Post 12038858)
Actually a majority of 1269501 & as a majority of just 1 is enough to win, that's a significant majority. :rofl:

Really ?? , so you would have disowned the brexiters who pre vote said that a 52,48 vote to remain would be too close to call and unfinished business.
A vote of 1 to remain would have ended the discussion would it ???

mfesharne Aug 30th 2016 12:39 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by EMR (Post 12038833)
A south African living in Portugal abusing the union flag.

Brexit may have won the referendum but it did not have anything in it about what brexit will mean, you are going to be one unhappy brexiter when the dust finally settles.
Says it all .

Only an absolute fidiot would think I'm a South African after the number of times I've told him I'm British by birth & English by the grace of God. (rolleyes)

The vote for Brexit was just that. The questions asked were do you want to leave or remain & the majority voted to leave. They voted for Brexit & that's exactly what they'll get.

The exit deals have yet to be started but I assure you, I'll be perfectly happy when the dust settles because the UK will be out of the EUSSR which is what I want, what I voted for & will be what I get. :ohmy:

Bipat Aug 30th 2016 12:42 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by mfesharne (Post 12038823)
I believe my previous comment is correct but feel free to think otherwise if it suits you.

Either way, I'm glad to say it doesn't alter the fact that I and a significant majority of the electorate that voted to leave won the referendum whether you & the minority that voted to remain like it or not.

So get over it because all the whinging in the world won't make an iota of difference.

:

No you are not correct---you are getting mixed up with the ECJ --European Court of Justice.

The ECHR --Court --administrates the ECHR --Convention.

The Human Rights Act--1998 was introduced by Tony Blair, to replicate the Convention (and save people the trouble and expense of going to Strasbourg). However people still have the right to go to Strasbourg.
(Still will, regardless of Brexit)

Red Eric Aug 30th 2016 12:43 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Bipat (Post 12038685)
How many times does it have to be said? The HRA and ECHR are not related to the EU.
Theresa May has complained many times that the ECHR (the Convention) needs to be updated or she would consider withdrawal. However it would cause other countries to mention hypocrisy when the UK criticises their human rights.

I don't know why you addressed that to me - I know perfectly well what the ECHR is and does. Perhaps you can join in trying to convince mfesharne because I and others have done so so often in the past that I gave up on even mentioning it on this occasion and just went straight for the "why it won't be happening". As he rightly says, though, facts to him are like water off a duck's back.

You may be right about Teresa May's own "softly softly" stance (although that's not how I recall it - no matter though) but in fact, it was a Tory manifesto pledge ie something they intended to put through in this term of office (take note mfesharne - further proof if it were needed that it is nothing to do with EU membership). Which makes it all the stranger that May has changed her mind due to opposition from her own party. They must be a very democratic lot, them Conservatives, writing up manifestos promising stuff even their own MPs can't support.

mfesharne Aug 30th 2016 12:44 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by EMR (Post 12038866)
Really ?? , so you would have disowned the brexiters who pre vote said that a 52,48 vote to remain would be too close to call and unfinished business.
A vote of 1 to remain would have ended the discussion would it ???

As I've said many times the rules are that the majority wins even if it's a majority of just one.

In this case it was a majority of 1269500 more than one.

You might not like it but that's the way it is so get used to it cos it ain't gonna change no matter how big a tantrum you throw.

Lion in Winter Aug 30th 2016 12:45 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by mfesharne (Post 12038858)
Actually a majority of 1269501 & as a majority of just 1 is enough to win, that's a significant majority. :rofl:

Sigh.

You said a significant majority of the electorate.

Perhaps you aren't clear on what the electorate is?

mfesharne Aug 30th 2016 12:47 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Red Eric (Post 12038875)
I don't know why you addressed that to me - I know perfectly well what the ECHR is and does. Perhaps you can join in trying to convince mfesharne because I and others have done so so often in the past that I gave up on even mentioning it on this occasion and just went straight for the "why it won't be happening". As he rightly says, though, facts to him are like water off a duck's back.

You may be right about Teresa May's own "softly softly" stance (although that's not how I recall it - no matter though) but in fact, it was a Tory manifesto pledge ie something they intended to put through in this term of office (take note mfesharne - further proof if it were needed that it is nothing to do with EU membership). Which makes it all the stranger that May has changed her mind due to opposition from her own party. They must be a very democratic lot, them Conservatives, writing up manifestos promising stuff even their own MPs can't support.

I've never said that at all & as usual your comments are utter bollocks.

Red Eric Aug 30th 2016 1:15 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Red Eric (Post 12038650)
Do you mean that these visas should be obtained before travel? Or could they be dished out on arrival?


Originally Posted by mfesharne (Post 12038677)
Before travel....... one option would be similar to the US one where the applicant applies online ..... I'm sure you remember the case we discussed recently when a so called 'family group' of all males including a number of youngsters were refused travel at the last minute because one of them had an address that had registered to a dodgy (Taliban?) website.

If the Yanks can do it then can the UK.

So the visa application in that case didn't in fact highlight a security threat and prevent the visa being issued even if the family were subsequently prevented from travelling - on the day of travel, no less.

Presumably whatever threw up the alert which sparked the refusal was nothing to do with the visa application process and therefore the visa application could be dispensed with without compromising security.

I'm just talking in general terms here - this could be applied to any passenger and I'm not interested in going down the cul-de-sac of this particular case or being deluged with dozens of articles from the tabloids about it.


Originally Posted by Bipat (Post 12038687)
What is the problem with obtaining visas before travel? Those that travel around the world to or from the UK are used to this, it is no great difficulty!!
E-visas can be issued for particular countries.

I'm asking my questions from the opposite point of view, which is why insist on a visa if there's no good reason to do so? I got a little way through this discussion before but it was never really concluded properly (probably one of those software faults and a spurious error message again).

Someone else posted a list of several dozen non-EU countries whose citizens do not require a visa for a visit to the UK, so it's not just one of those "we have to do it because we're in the EU" things. We have Advance Passenger Information agreements in place (this was allowed WRT other EU states on a special agreement just for the UK on the basis that the information was being supplied to the UK on a voluntary basis. But it's actually compulsory. Who says the UK has no influence in the EU, again?) We have pooling of information with regard to persons regarded as potential security threats. We have passport and security checks on arrival in the UK. Why the visa? And why trash the presumably perfectly satisfactory arrangements with all the other non-EU countries as well?

If there's no very good reason to change the status quo for the worse, why bother?

Red Eric Aug 30th 2016 1:21 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by mfesharne (Post 12038882)
I've never said that at all & as usual your comments are utter bollocks.

Glad to see you're gradually coming around to my point of view ie that it's important to quote / paraphrase (and to attribute quotes) accurately.

jimenato Aug 30th 2016 1:58 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Bipat (Post 12038872)
No you are not correct---you are getting mixed up with the ECJ --European Court of Justice.

The ECHR --Court --administrates the ECHR --Convention.

The Human Rights Act--1998 was introduced by Tony Blair, to replicate the Convention (and save people the trouble and expense of going to Strasbourg). However people still have the right to go to Strasbourg.
(Still will, regardless of Brexit)

Aw! Bipat - I was going to toy with him a bit longer - you've spoiled my fun.:sneaky:

Problem is that most leavers are like mfesharne - they haven't got a clue about the EU, its institutions or Europe.

Leave is like a religion. Facts don't matter - it's all about faith. They go blindly on in their ignorance heading for some unattainable Nirvana led there by sheer ignorance and high priests who tell lies which they believe.

Trouble is that everyone else including us unbelievers are dragged into the jihad.

Bipat Aug 30th 2016 2:45 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by jimenato (Post 12038940)
Aw! Bipat - I was going to toy with him a bit longer - you've spoiled my fun.:sneaky:

Problem is that most leavers are like mfesharne - they haven't got a clue about the EU, its institutions or Europe.

Leave is like a religion. Facts don't matter - it's all about faith. They go blindly on in their ignorance heading for some unattainable Nirvana led there by sheer ignorance and high priests who tell lies which they believe.

Trouble is that everyone else including us unbelievers are dragged into the jihad.

How do you know "most"? There are valid arguments on both sides--that is why the result was close.
However as one who voted to 'leave' I would have been disappointed if the result of the referendum had been different but accepted it and hoped for some sort of 'reform' of the EU as Mr Cameron had previously promised but didn't achieve.

It would be hoped now, that those who voted to remain would accept the democratic result of the referendum and give politicians the time to work out the post-Brexit negotiations before complaining.

(There are people on both sides who are a 'pain', that is not surprising among millions!)

Bipat Aug 30th 2016 2:51 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Red Eric (Post 12038912)
So the visa application in that case didn't in fact highlight a security threat and prevent the visa being issued even if the family were subsequently prevented from travelling - on the day of travel, no less.

Presumably whatever threw up the alert which sparked the refusal was nothing to do with the visa application process and therefore the visa application could be dispensed with without compromising security.

I'm just talking in general terms here - this could be applied to any passenger and I'm not interested in going down the cul-de-sac of this particular case or being deluged with dozens of articles from the tabloids about it.


I'm asking my questions from the opposite point of view, which is why insist on a visa if there's no good reason to do so? I got a little way through this discussion before but it was never really concluded properly (probably one of those software faults and a spurious error message again).

Someone else posted a list of several dozen non-EU countries whose citizens do not require a visa for a visit to the UK, so it's not just one of those "we have to do it because we're in the EU" things. We have Advance Passenger Information agreements in place (this was allowed WRT other EU states on a special agreement just for the UK on the basis that the information was being supplied to the UK on a voluntary basis. But it's actually compulsory. Who says the UK has no influence in the EU, again?) We have pooling of information with regard to persons regarded as potential security threats. We have passport and security checks on arrival in the UK. Why the visa? And why trash the presumably perfectly satisfactory arrangements with all the other non-EU countries as well?

If there's no very good reason to change the status quo for the worse, why bother?

Regarding visas it is not just for security.
I would agree that there would probably be no need to change the system for short visits.
However if you make the system equal for non-EU and EU migrants, work/student/employment/medical visas/permits would be necessary as it is with many other countries.

jimenato Aug 30th 2016 3:22 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Bipat (Post 12038983)
How do you know "most"? There are valid arguments on both sides--that is why the result was close.
However as one who voted to 'leave' I would have been disappointed if the result of the referendum had been different but accepted it and hoped for some sort of 'reform' of the EU as Mr Cameron had previously promised but didn't achieve.

It would be hoped now, that those who voted to remain would accept the democratic result of the referendum and give politicians the time to work out the post-Brexit negotiations before complaining.

(There are people on both sides who are a 'pain', that is not surprising among millions!)

I think the main reason that many remainers are finding it difficult accepting the decision is that there are many (in my experience MOST) leavers who, like mfesharne, voted based upon false beliefs - whether simple misunderstandings from not knowing enough or believing the blatant lies of the remain campaign.

If you base a conclusion on facts which you believe to be correct but are in fact wrong, then obviously the basis of the conclusion is invalid.

mfesharne admits that he believes that the ECHR is to do with the EU and it's not. Yet he voted for Brexit based upon that. This is very common - that Brexiteers voted through ignorance.

And frankly, it's sickening. What's even more sickening is that they're still displaying that ignorance and even crowing about a result born out it.

It's a shame that May is so principled. She obviously feels she now has to honour that decision based upon erroneous thinking and poor knowledge.

You can see why we don't do referenda very often.

Fredbargate Aug 30th 2016 3:36 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 
I think it is brilliant the simple way the British electorate can be divided into two parts.

Part 1

The clueless who voted Brexit

Part 2

The intelligent who are able to forecast the benefits and route of the EU for generations to come and therefore voted remain.

So simple

Mind you I do wonder about the remainers who voted simply so they could holiday in Europe and still enjoy the sun and their Bingo, fish n chips and pints of Guinness entertained by Brits without having to meet any of those foreign people or learn their silly languages

jimenato Aug 30th 2016 3:52 pm

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Fredbargate (Post 12039042)
I think it is brilliant the simple way the British electorate can be divided into two parts.

Part 1

The clueless who voted Brexit

Part 2

The intelligent who are able to forecast the benefits and route of the EU for generations to come and therefore voted remain.

So simple

Mind you I do wonder about the remainers who voted simply so they could holiday in Europe and still enjoy the sun and their Bingo, fish n chips and pints of Guinness entertained by Brits without having to meet any of those foreign people or learn their silly languages

Ha Ha!:lol:

I think you'll find that most people of that type will have voted to leave. :sneaky:


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:05 am.

Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.