The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[aaron1867]

I'm voting to stay, but disappointed with Cameron today. Leaving EU might see us less secure by potentially sharing less information. But to suggest crap about going to war really was OTT. Let's keep it realistic.

[RickBFA]

I see the Brexit debate warmed up somewhat today.

Gove and Osborne over trade.

The security chiefs wheeled out to make the Remain case - seemed a rather tenuous case they made. They seem to ignore any security issues free movement of people may bring.

and what would those be?  Do you want everyone microchipped and tagged?

Free movement of EU citizens means anyone can come to the UK.

Whether they are model citizens or terrorists.

In the current world, you don't think that freedom of movement carries any additional risk that it's easier for terrorists?

We are talking about security risks here, not other benefits of free movement. No increased risk at all?

Last time I checked everyone entering the UK had to show a passport.  What exactly are we going to do extra in your post brexit world?  Go back to visas for everyone? 

Britain is going to be a f--king brilliant place post brexit - no tourism, no investment, no free trade, NK looking quite attractive really.

Answering the question with a question is the sort of trick you'd expect from a Politician.

You've ignore the question about free movement of people and increased security risks.

You made me smile comparing UK to North Korea. Pretty ridiculous comment.

I'm sure plenty of countries around the world demonstrate that you don't have to be part of the EU to be a thriving, successful country.

lol "question with a question"

You are the one saying that we are suffering "increased security risks" with the current situation.  It is up to you to explain what arrangements will be put in place post brexit that will mitigate these security risks.  Obviously this must be a further layer of information gathering ie like the USA esta system.  That would clearly be an utter disaster for tourism trade and investment.

I asked if free movement of people increased the security risk to our country.

That was in response to ex security chiefs being wheeled out in support of staying in EU.

I'm looking for a balanced argument about pro and cons. Being lectured by the current establishment is not a balanced debate.


You ignored the question and made some daft comments about a UK outside EU being like North Korea.

So taking security as the direct issue, is there an increased risk with free movement of people?

[MintTrav]

I'm voting to stay, but disappointed with Cameron today. Leaving EU might see us less secure by potentially sharing less information. But to suggest crap about going to war really was OTT. Let's keep it realistic.

Not in the short term, but no-one knows what will lead to what. It is easy to envisage our exit leading to other countries leaving and even to the disintegration of the EU. If that happens, wars are a lot more likely.

Even if that didn't happen, it is quite conceivable that something will lead to something in several years time, and that will lead on to something else. There is no end of possibilities that could knock on from each other. The probability of us becoming involved in war in the future is definitely higher if we leave the EU.

[Woodsey]

I see the Brexit debate warmed up somewhat today.

Gove and Osborne over trade.

The security chiefs wheeled out to make the Remain case - seemed a rather tenuous case they made. They seem to ignore any security issues free movement of people may bring.

and what would those be?  Do you want everyone microchipped and tagged?

Free movement of EU citizens means anyone can come to the UK.

Whether they are model citizens or terrorists.

In the current world, you don't think that freedom of movement carries any additional risk that it's easier for terrorists?

We are talking about security risks here, not other benefits of free movement. No increased risk at all?

Last time I checked everyone entering the UK had to show a passport.  What exactly are we going to do extra in your post brexit world?  Go back to visas for everyone? 

Britain is going to be a f--king brilliant place post brexit - no tourism, no investment, no free trade, NK looking quite attractive really.

No just stop people working apart from those we select for our needs......

[doubleup]

I see the Brexit debate warmed up somewhat today.

Gove and Osborne over trade.

The security chiefs wheeled out to make the Remain case - seemed a rather tenuous case they made. They seem to ignore any security issues free movement of people may bring.

and what would those be?  Do you want everyone microchipped and tagged?

Free movement of EU citizens means anyone can come to the UK.

Whether they are model citizens or terrorists.

In the current world, you don't think that freedom of movement carries any additional risk that it's easier for terrorists?

We are talking about security risks here, not other benefits of free movement. No increased risk at all?

Last time I checked everyone entering the UK had to show a passport.  What exactly are we going to do extra in your post brexit world?  Go back to visas for everyone? 

Britain is going to be a f--king brilliant place post brexit - no tourism, no investment, no free trade, NK looking quite attractive really.

Answering the question with a question is the sort of trick you'd expect from a Politician.

You've ignore the question about free movement of people and increased security risks.

You made me smile comparing UK to North Korea. Pretty ridiculous comment.

I'm sure plenty of countries around the world demonstrate that you don't have to be part of the EU to be a thriving, successful country.

lol "question with a question"

You are the one saying that we are suffering "increased security risks" with the current situation.  It is up to you to explain what arrangements will be put in place post brexit that will mitigate these security risks.  Obviously this must be a further layer of information gathering ie like the USA esta system.  That would clearly be an utter disaster for tourism trade and investment.

I asked if free movement of people increased the security risk to our country.

That was in response to ex security chiefs being wheeled out in support of staying in EU.

I'm looking for a balanced argument about pro and cons. Being lectured by the current establishment is not a balanced debate.


You ignored the question and made some daft comments about a UK outside EU being like North Korea.

So taking security as the direct issue, is there an increased risk with free movement of people?

ffs "increased risk" compared to what?  AFAIK zero Islamist terrorists have come from the EU to the UK with the present arrangements.  Despite being asked twice, you fail to explain what the new post brexit arrangements might be.  If they involve visas of some kind for EU citizens, this would obviously allow for thorough vetting of anyone entering the country, but would have an enormously detrimental effect on tourism and business. 

 

[DungBeetle]

I see the Brexit debate warmed up somewhat today.

Gove and Osborne over trade.

The security chiefs wheeled out to make the Remain case - seemed a rather tenuous case they made. They seem to ignore any security issues free movement of people may bring.

and what would those be?  Do you want everyone microchipped and tagged?

Free movement of EU citizens means anyone can come to the UK.

Whether they are model citizens or terrorists.

In the current world, you don't think that freedom of movement carries any additional risk that it's easier for terrorists?

We are talking about security risks here, not other benefits of free movement. No increased risk at all?

Last time I checked everyone entering the UK had to show a passport.  What exactly are we going to do extra in your post brexit world?  Go back to visas for everyone? 

Britain is going to be a f--king brilliant place post brexit - no tourism, no investment, no free trade, NK looking quite attractive really.

I'm voting to stay in for what it's worth.  But if you are comparing leaving the EU with becoming North Korea you're probably not winning the argument.

[DungBeetle]

I'm voting to stay, but disappointed with Cameron today. Leaving EU might see us less secure by potentially sharing less information. But to suggest crap about going to war really was OTT. Let's keep it realistic.

Not in the short term, but no-one knows what will lead to what. It is easy to envisage our exit leading to other countries leaving and even to the disintegration of the EU. If that happens, wars are a lot more likely.

Even if that didn't happen, it is quite conceivable that something will lead to something in several years time, and that will lead on to something else. There is no end of possibilities that could knock on from each other. The probability of us becoming involved in war in the future is definitely higher if we leave the EU.

Cameron is being obviously daft and you only agree because it matches your viewpoint.  If Scotland had voted for independence do you think it was much more likely that we'd fire a nuclear warhead at them I n the future?  Of course not. Sometimes you just have to call out a politician for being stupid.

[david3103]

Yesterday's major speeches, read digest and consider.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-speech-on-the-uks-strength-and-security-in-the-eu-9-may-2016


http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/boris_johnson_the_liberal_cosmopolitan_case_to_vote_leave

[doubleup]

I see the Brexit debate warmed up somewhat today.

Gove and Osborne over trade.

The security chiefs wheeled out to make the Remain case - seemed a rather tenuous case they made. They seem to ignore any security issues free movement of people may bring.

and what would those be?  Do you want everyone microchipped and tagged?

Free movement of EU citizens means anyone can come to the UK.

Whether they are model citizens or terrorists.

In the current world, you don't think that freedom of movement carries any additional risk that it's easier for terrorists?

We are talking about security risks here, not other benefits of free movement. No increased risk at all?

Last time I checked everyone entering the UK had to show a passport.  What exactly are we going to do extra in your post brexit world?  Go back to visas for everyone? 

Britain is going to be a f--king brilliant place post brexit - no tourism, no investment, no free trade, NK looking quite attractive really.

I'm voting to stay in for what it's worth.  But if you are comparing leaving the EU with becoming North Korea you're probably not winning the argument.

I was comparing the idea that we will completely shut our borders to NK - obviously exaggerating for effect perhaps we should have a smiley for that.....

In any case I still await details of the post brexit border arrangements from Rickbfa.

[david3103]

I see the Brexit debate warmed up somewhat today.

Gove and Osborne over trade.

The security chiefs wheeled out to make the Remain case - seemed a rather tenuous case they made. They seem to ignore any security issues free movement of people may bring.

and what would those be?  Do you want everyone microchipped and tagged?

Free movement of EU citizens means anyone can come to the UK.

Whether they are model citizens or terrorists.

In the current world, you don't think that freedom of movement carries any additional risk that it's easier for terrorists?

We are talking about security risks here, not other benefits of free movement. No increased risk at all?

Last time I checked everyone entering the UK had to show a passport.  What exactly are we going to do extra in your post brexit world?  Go back to visas for everyone? 

Britain is going to be a f--king brilliant place post brexit - no tourism, no investment, no free trade, NK looking quite attractive really.

I'm voting to stay in for what it's worth.  But if you are comparing leaving the EU with becoming North Korea you're probably not winning the argument.

I was comparing the idea that we will completely shut our borders to NK - obviously exaggerating for effect perhaps we should have a smiley for that.....

In any case I still await details of the post brexit border arrangements from Rickbfa.

Whatever border arrangements are made in a post Brexit reality can you accept that the current situation is not in the best interests of the U.K.?

I know there are many who will not want to accept BoJo as a voice of reason, but this is part what he said yesterday

"  It is deeply corrosive of popular trust in democracy that every year UK politicians tell the public that they can cut immigration to the tens of thousands – and then find that they miss their targets by hundreds of thousands, so that we add a population the size of Newcastle every year, with all the extra and unfunded pressure that puts on the NHS and other public services.

  In our desperation to meet our hopeless so-called targets, we push away brilliant students from Commonwealth countries, who want to pay to come to our universities; we find ourselves hard pressed to recruit people who might work in our NHS, as opposed to make use of its services – because we have absolutely no power to control the numbers who are coming with no job offers and no qualifications from the 28 EU countries. I am in favour of immigration; but I am also in favour of control, and of politicians taking responsibility for what is happening; and I think it bewilders people to be told that this most basic power of a state – to decide who has the right to live and work in your country – has been taken away and now resides in Brussels."

[doubleup]

I see the Brexit debate warmed up somewhat today.

Gove and Osborne over trade.

The security chiefs wheeled out to make the Remain case - seemed a rather tenuous case they made. They seem to ignore any security issues free movement of people may bring.

and what would those be?  Do you want everyone microchipped and tagged?

Free movement of EU citizens means anyone can come to the UK.

Whether they are model citizens or terrorists.

In the current world, you don't think that freedom of movement carries any additional risk that it's easier for terrorists?

We are talking about security risks here, not other benefits of free movement. No increased risk at all?

Last time I checked everyone entering the UK had to show a passport.  What exactly are we going to do extra in your post brexit world?  Go back to visas for everyone? 

Britain is going to be a f--king brilliant place post brexit - no tourism, no investment, no free trade, NK looking quite attractive really.

I'm voting to stay in for what it's worth.  But if you are comparing leaving the EU with becoming North Korea you're probably not winning the argument.

I was comparing the idea that we will completely shut our borders to NK - obviously exaggerating for effect perhaps we should have a smiley for that.....

In any case I still await details of the post brexit border arrangements from Rickbfa.

Whatever border arrangements are made in a post Brexit reality can you accept that the current situation is not in the best interests of the U.K.?

I know there are many who will not want to accept BoJo as a voice of reason, but this is part what he said yesterday

"  It is deeply corrosive of popular trust in democracy that every year UK politicians tell the public that they can cut immigration to the tens of thousands – and then find that they miss their targets by hundreds of thousands, so that we add a population the size of Newcastle every year, with all the extra and unfunded pressure that puts on the NHS and other public services.

  In our desperation to meet our hopeless so-called targets, we push away brilliant students from Commonwealth countries, who want to pay to come to our universities; we find ourselves hard pressed to recruit people who might work in our NHS, as opposed to make use of its services – because we have absolutely no power to control the numbers who are coming with no job offers and no qualifications from the 28 EU countries. I am in favour of immigration; but I am also in favour of control, and of politicians taking responsibility for what is happening; and I think it bewilders people to be told that this most basic power of a state – to decide who has the right to live and work in your country – has been taken away and now resides in Brussels."

a) this debate is about security

b) I don't believe a word Johnston says

[nirvana]

Cameron was going to be a Brexiteer if he didn't get concessions about er.. what, anyone remember/anyone's life change for the better ?

Now war is the logical extreme of an exit that he was going to propound. Wanker/nutter/joker - delete as takes yr fancy.

Obviously I'm above the fray but the level of debate here might be lowering to the level outside

[RickBFA]

I see the Brexit debate warmed up somewhat today.

Gove and Osborne over trade.

The security chiefs wheeled out to make the Remain case - seemed a rather tenuous case they made. They seem to ignore any security issues free movement of people may bring.

and what would those be?  Do you want everyone microchipped and tagged?

Free movement of EU citizens means anyone can come to the UK.

Whether they are model citizens or terrorists.

In the current world, you don't think that freedom of movement carries any additional risk that it's easier for terrorists?

We are talking about security risks here, not other benefits of free movement. No increased risk at all?

Last time I checked everyone entering the UK had to show a passport.  What exactly are we going to do extra in your post brexit world?  Go back to visas for everyone? 

Britain is going to be a f--king brilliant place post brexit - no tourism, no investment, no free trade, NK looking quite attractive really.

Answering the question with a question is the sort of trick you'd expect from a Politician.

You've ignore the question about free movement of people and increased security risks.

You made me smile comparing UK to North Korea. Pretty ridiculous comment.

I'm sure plenty of countries around the world demonstrate that you don't have to be part of the EU to be a thriving, successful country.

lol "question with a question"

You are the one saying that we are suffering "increased security risks" with the current situation.  It is up to you to explain what arrangements will be put in place post brexit that will mitigate these security risks.  Obviously this must be a further layer of information gathering ie like the USA esta system.  That would clearly be an utter disaster for tourism trade and investment.

I asked if free movement of people increased the security risk to our country.

That was in response to ex security chiefs being wheeled out in support of staying in EU.

I'm looking for a balanced argument about pro and cons. Being lectured by the current establishment is not a balanced debate.


You ignored the question and made some daft comments about a UK outside EU being like North Korea.

So taking security as the direct issue, is there an increased risk with free movement of people?

ffs "increased risk" compared to what?  AFAIK zero Islamist terrorists have come from the EU to the UK with the present arrangements.  Despite being asked twice, you fail to explain what the new post brexit arrangements might be.  If they involve visas of some kind for EU citizens, this would obviously allow for thorough vetting of anyone entering the country, but would have an enormously detrimental effect on tourism and business. 

 

Bit delayed in replying, been a busy day.

"increased risk" when comparing a policy of free movement of EU citizens to work/live in UK and a policy of not having free movement of people to work/live here.

I have never said the policy of not having free movement doesn't have problems in its application, I was asking for an acknowledgment that our current policy carries a higher risk of unknown/undetected terrorists from the EU countries coming to the UK.

This is a radio interview with Frank Gardner which makes the point about a balanced view on the EU and security, which I was trying to do originally - the point is Cameron rolled out the ex security chiefs in his attempt to rail road/frighten the public into voting to stay. They are trying to play on people's fears.


http://www.tfa.net/frank-gardner-dispels-the-myth-that-leaving-the-eu-would-be-a-threat-to-national-security/

[doubleup]

Well that is marvellous that security won't get worse, but I thought you were saying that the present arrangements were riskier than something or other that you won't reveal.

[david3103]

Political debate reduced to the act of evoking Hilaire Belloc,
 
Always keep a-hold of Nurse,
for fear of finding something worse.

Sadly the Nurse in this case is a bloated slattern who is raddled with disease and has no moral compass.