As opposed to the dire warnings from the out campaign (well more on here) about the UK being swamped by immigrants and the myriad of other negative stories?
"Project fear" is alive and well on both sides of the argument.
Poll: The EU Referendum: How Will You Vote? (May Poll)
- Thread starter Burnsy2023
- Start date
- Status
As opposed to the dire warnings from the out campaign (well more on here) about the UK being swamped by immigrants and the myriad of other negative stories?
"Project fear" is alive and well on both sides of the argument.
But we know that's happening, you can't plan with an open door can you, so it's reality not a scare tactic the immigration levels rising at an alarming rate, even if you believe the "official" government figures it's out of control.
I believe the national insurance numbers, since we stopped counting folk out, I suggest you Google them to realise it's a truth.
I've linked it before but here's the ONS take on the NNI count. National Insurance numbers are not a measure of immigration and the difference between the NNI figures and the immigration figures is largely, or completely, explained by short term migration (<12 months).
It's said that EEA countries outside the EU could 'unilaterally' apply some kind of emergency brake to curb immigration, and they cite Article 112 of the EEA Agreement.
Unfortunately, no they can't. As a member of the EEA outside the EU we would be bound by the EJC decisions rather than the EEC, but one of the EJC's primary roles is to ensure consistency on how the EEA Agreement is implemented with regard to EU countries. The EJC are going to use the same criteria on whether our safeguards are acceptable as the EEC for that reason. If they don't agree on our curbs, they'll refer it to arbitration and possibly ultimately the European Court of Justice.
The question has to be asked, since even EU countries are signatories to the EEA Agreement and therefore so are we, why haven't we taken the arbitration or ECJ route already? Could it be that the EEC have rejected our claim that we could apply safeguards, and any legal challenge would fail because the ECJ would uphold the EEC's decision?
Any arguments that say that we have some kind of immigration control while being out of the EU while a member of the EEA are fundamentally flawed.
Unfortunately, no they can't. As a member of the EEA outside the EU we would be bound by the EJC decisions rather than the EEC, but one of the EJC's primary roles is to ensure consistency on how the EEA Agreement is implemented with regard to EU countries. The EJC are going to use the same criteria on whether our safeguards are acceptable as the EEC for that reason. If they don't agree on our curbs, they'll refer it to arbitration and possibly ultimately the European Court of Justice.
The question has to be asked, since even EU countries are signatories to the EEA Agreement and therefore so are we, why haven't we taken the arbitration or ECJ route already? Could it be that the EEC have rejected our claim that we could apply safeguards, and any legal challenge would fail because the ECJ would uphold the EEC's decision?
Any arguments that say that we have some kind of immigration control while being out of the EU while a member of the EEA are fundamentally flawed.
I really wish they wouldn't use that figure; it's simply a misrepresentation of the data.
Both sides do it. I really dislike this propaganda from both sides
Aye, but it annoys me more when "my" side does it.
The EEA is the single market though isn't it, which is part of the EU. Norway, although not part of the EU is governed by the EEA and therefore has to conform to the freedom of movement. I don't think it is suggested by most that we would have access to the single market and have control over immigration. It has been made absolutely clear that the EU would not allow us to cherry pick the parts of the EEA that best suit us?
It is clear to me that the UK would have to negotiate new trade deals with the rest of the world should we leave and that is primarily what the focus of the trade argument is about. No ones saying that we can't trade in the EU either. It is just that we would have to negotiate with all 27 nations and incur a tariff imposed on us for the benefit of trading in the EU, and I don't feel we would we be paying 10%+ tariffs on exporting our goods to the EU, nor do I think the UK economy would collapse if we were paying those tariffs. It is worth remembering that a lot of our import comes from Germany, France and Italy and that amounts to a lot of jobs and commerce on their part, so there would be room to negotiate a better deal from my understanding. Any talk of the EU wanting to penalise us for leaving, and setting an example to the rest of the nations need to tread carefully as some of the biggest nations have a lot of goods exported to the UK market that could cause big loss of jobs and money.
Of course the EU accounts for 50% of our trade (actually think it is less than 50%), with the rest being global trade deals accounting for 56% of our trade. My opinion is that if other countries can successfully negotiate trade deals outside of the EU, then so too can the UK. It is clear however that there would be a financial hit to the economy, but for how long is the question.
Bottom line is, we would have control over immigration, but not on the single market, which is essentially what the EEA is.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 6,316
Puzzlingly for some Brexiteers, tis precisely why materials from the EU bookshop do better than leaflets or the government's booklet.
http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/bundles/top-10-cbU3Cep2OwY8MAAAFK4rFgxy6N/
They literally fly off the stalls!
Refugees and the current migrant crisis are irrelevant, as have been mentioned multiple times in this thread. It is scare tactics, but bias views mean it doesn't seem like it.
I do apologise, I don't sit on this thread all day and it moves fast.
Thanks for the image though.
Last edited:
I thought this was a good piece from the Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...-the-eu-referendum-here-is-a-simple-solution/
Quote "My strong advice to the undecided is that if you cannot discern the truth from the facts, instead apply the old adage of “judging a person by the company they keep”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...-the-eu-referendum-here-is-a-simple-solution/
Quote "My strong advice to the undecided is that if you cannot discern the truth from the facts, instead apply the old adage of “judging a person by the company they keep”.
Eh? How is the migration crisis irrelevant?
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Because it's not an EU thing, it's a Europe as a continent thing. It's affecting both EU and non EU countries. The 'free movement' within the EU aspect of it only affects Schengen signatories, of which we are not (and of which some non EU states are).
Essentially, nothing much is going to change about the migration crisis as a result of us either being in or out of the EU.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 7,613
Because it's bad for Remain, so doesn't count.
I'm sure it will be back in the news again shortly after a remain vote.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 7,613
I suppose one consolation of Remain will be to demonstrate how utterly naive the self-appointed EU intelligentsia are.
- Status