Brexit

Goodbye EU still love Spain always will 

Very sorry it has all come to this 

I'm sure everything will eventually work out fine  

All our nations have suffered far worse situations and survived 

To improve is to change 

Blame the EU...not the UK all the EU had to do to stop the Brexit was to state that no EU citizen should become a burden on another EU member country...how come Spain can inforce this but the UK can't...this unfair treatment of member states caused the UK Brexit...Blame the pig head's that run the EU.

Let me see if I've got this right, just to get it clear in my mind, you understand.

The EU comes  out with a rule on residency that says you cannot be an unreasonable burden on the health or social security system of the country you are taking up residence in. So far so good.

Spain, and other EU countries, apply this rule. The UK doesn't apply this rule. Again, I understand.

So how come this is all the EU fault? That's the bit you lost me on. 

And how about all those from Somalia or Eritrea, or Pakistan or India or wherever. You know, all of those from outside the EU. And some are families of middle eastern terrorists (I'm sure you know some names) who get free housing in UK, benefits paid in UK even if their husband is in jail in America. I'm assuming you think that is all the fault of those who run the EU as well?
 

No, you say! How can that be. Everything is the fault of the EU isn't it? 

Oh, that bit where you said the all the EU had to do was state that no EU citizen should become a burden. Look it up, it does. Several times in its rules on residency for longer than 3 months. 

This has been debated before but maybe necessary to repeat if this detail relating to EU inequalities has been misunderstood.

Re mismanagement of freedom of movement by the EU....

Referring to the chart titled “ Establishment of rights of nationals of each EEA member state to work in each other member state” in the website below that shows the years when restrictions were lifted for the various EU member states, the major inequalities that led to problems for the UK become starkly apparent.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_for_workers_in_the_European_Union

For instance the EU only lifted restrictions for workers to work in Spain from Italy, France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands Luxembourg,Denmark in 1986 whereas for the UK the restriction was lifted in 1973, some 12 years earlier. Re restrictions for workers to work in Spain from Greece, it was 1986, whereas for the UK it was 1981, some 5 years earlier.

Likewise there was a two year delay for Spain by comparison to the UK for workers from Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland ,Hungary, Czech,Slovakia, Slovenia as restrictions were lifted in 2006 whereas for the UK it was 2004.

But the irony is that Germany and Austria’s restrictions from the Eastern European states were lifted in 2011 some 7 years after the UK and 5 years after Spain. And the restrictions from the Eastern European states were lifted in France in 2008, again some 4 years after the UK and 2 years after Spain.

So this is the point...there has been great inequality. And during these time differences, especially with regard to movements from the Eastern European states (when there were substantial swift movements to the UK), the volume of these final incoming migrants sadly completely tipped the balance in all manner of ways in terms of impact on infrastructure, social systems, housing, education, health etc, especially when you couple this with earlier years differences in the lifting of restrictions from the Northern EU states. Not to mention then subsequently allowing families to accompany migrant workers.

It’s all too easy to point fingers at UK mismanagement without comprehending the details relating to the EU Commission’s rules associated with the lifting of restrictions. Suffice to say the EU Commission have much to account for in terms of their failure to recognise the impact on the UK and not respond in a timely manner when pleas for fair consideration prior to the EU referendum were clinically discarded.

Having said all of the above ( and there were many other issues that led to the democratic decision to leave) it's now important to recognise the need to learn lessons from all sides but now seek to move forward with trade agreements that are mutually beneficial but not at the expense of further scapegoating great swathes of citizens who all deserve better from their politicians. But perhaps best to tone down divisive rhetoric, learn lessons, and try to focus on mutually beneficial ways forward.

It's a well known fact that any EU citizen can come into the UK..and take up a poorly paid job ...he / she can then apply for tax credit / housing benefit / family allowance for the family they have left back in the country they came from ..all the UK tax payers money goes straight back to the family back home..this is extremely common practice within the Eastern Europeans...Borris Johnson has made it a top priority to put a immediate stop to this so I guess we will se a mass exodus of Eastern Europeans and the likes from the UK... personally I don't understand why honest hard working EU citizens would want to come to a country like the UK ..that has no house's /no schools/no hospitals and so on to serve them ...if the likes of Tony Blair wants a uncontrollable open border to remain why on earth didn't they do something about expanding the UK infrastructure to accommodate these people ..all you hear about in the UK is no school places/no house's/no hospital beds /A&E with 8 hrs or more waiting time just to get emergency treatment ..... maybe things will improve now that the 480 million people across the EU will have no automatic right to DSS and free NHS treatment or any other UK tax payers money...the Remoaners that voted to stay in the EU said that the leave voters had been misled by lies ..I voted to leave the EU I made up my own mind ..just by looking around me and I guess everyone that voted leave done the same as me...so please stop trying to convince people they had been lied to ..I am also sick and tired of being classed as a uneducated Racists Bigot ..by the remain brigade Democracy will always win in the end.

I do not think the EU ever had and jurisdiction on the movement of non EU citizens to the UK. As mariedav quite rightly points out ‘’ how about all those from Somalia or Eritrea, or Pakistan or India or wherever.’’ Blame the EU not the British Goverment. 

Whilst some EU rules were annoying. Estimated NON-EU net migration, meanwhile, is 261,000 a year to UK—the highest level recorded since 2004. It has been almost consistently higher than EU migration for decades. Is that what is meant by border control? Does anyone know what the big attraction is, other than the superb weather climate?

 https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/

Kavanagh none EU citizens need to apply for a time ltd Visa ..or have a useful skill that is required in the UK they also have no automatic right to claim benefits and so forth.. anyone from the EU is free to come into the UK no questions asked and take up residence no skills required...just lately the UK has seen a very big influx of none EU illegal immigrants from the country's that Mariedav has pointed out ask yourself why they want to come to the UK and not stay in the likes of Spain.

Yes windy, if what you say is true about NON EU citizens, then what is the big attraction of the UK.

''just lately the UK has seen a very big influx of none EU illegal immigrants''

How can the UK authorities know how many NONE EU illegal immigrants it has?   Does it know their names, address’s, where they are working and what benefits they are claiming?

Winddtalker: anyone from the EU is free to come into the UK no questions asked and take up residence no skills required. 

British people were also free to do the same thing and many have. No longer possible. That fact is often forgotten. I wonder how many Brits now realise that retirement to Spain and Europe after the transition period will be also almost impossible? Long stay visitors will be limited to 90 days and travel insurance premiums for older people will rocket when the EHIC card disappears for Brits. Pet passports will be invalid so you cannot easily return to UK with pets after 2020.

Then in terms of trade it looks increasingly likely there will not be any deal whatsoever with the EU and trade tariffs will be imposed on goods and services. Controls on everything leaving and entering the UK are certain despite the dishonesty of British politicians.

British people are the principal Brexit losers but hey you can keep out all those pesky unskilled EU migrants. Not however the rest of the population of the world who only have to claim asylum and persecution. Great deal.

Oh, dear. Some people need to read things before they post.

Ads:
For instance the EU only lifted restrictions for workers to work in Spain from Italy, France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands Luxembourg,Denmark in 1986 whereas for the UK the restriction was lifted in 1973, some 12 years earlier. Re restrictions for workers to work in Spain from Greece, it was 1986, whereas for the UK it was 1981, some 5 years earlier.

Do you reckon that could have something, just a little something, about the fact that Spain didn't join the EU until 1986? Your statement is, quite honestly, laughable in that context.

Or that restrictions, transitional arrangements, on certain countries were put at 7 years by the EU but the UK decided they wouldn't have to wait that long? 

From the BBC at the time:
The UK was one of the three countries, along with Ireland and Sweden, to place no restrictions on workers from the 2004 entrants which were allowed under EU legislation.
No, just make things up to make it look like it's the nasty EU that are putting in these restrictions.

And, of course, there are "illegal" immigrants in UK. An illegal cannot claim any benefits whatsoever as they are, in fact, illegal.  Of course, now we've left the EU, there won't be any more "illegals" entering UK, will there.

Another laughable assumption.

Micky, it is remarkable that you are so informed and already know the exact situation after the transition period. We all truly believe you; please keep us up to date on any new facts.

Mariedav,

Oh dear this is classic misinterpretation of how the definition of EU restrictions has been played out.

EU restrictions and their rules I hasten to add. Not UK rules but EU rules intended to control the movement of people across different member states. To then make out that the UK had any choice in the matter is wrong. The UK had no control over these early movements. Lifting of EU restrictions basically equates to lack of control here. This is the important factor when reviewing the circumstances relating to free movements of EU citizens across member states.

Of course Spain didn't join until 1986 that is exactly the point here. Spain did not have to suffer any lack of control put in place by the EU, in those earlier years. They had the choice. The UK according to these rules did not have any choice to prevent such movements and what's more for the EU not to recognise these earlier years lack of control ( free movements) by comparison to the likes of Spain, just as one example, is a manipulative attempt to ignore EU controls and the impacts over many years thereafter.

Moreover, when you compare Germany and other member states with the UK's lack of control it becomes obvious that the UK, when requesting later consideration (I.e.  pleas for respite to take into account the pressures from swift movements on the UK infrastructure and its systems prior to the referendum) it becomes apparent that the inequality over so many years was conveniently ignored. 

It was in the interests of the EU to ignore these facts and not make play of them. Especially given the fact that Germany and the like were benefactors by comparison to the UK, in so much as the high unemployment rates across so many member states following the 2008 crash, were being accommodated by those like the UK who had their controls taken away in earlier years by comparison, as demonstrated in the chart (and highlighted in my earlier post).

And what's more the EUs failures to establish a workable strategy for growth ( commonly recognised now for the earlier years) only exacerbated the problems of unemployment and stripped member states of their work forces with all the subsequent citizen disillusionment that sadly led to the growth of more extreme political elements. Division and disillusionment were allowed to grow, so long as the EU remained intransigent and in denial of what was happening through their own decision making.

 Likewise there have been many other factors that have been debated at length on EOS where such decisions and inequalities had major impact. Not least the failure and impact from Germany benefitting to the tune of 2.9 billion euros off the back of Greece's debt. To scapegoat citizens in this manner and allow the turning of blind eyes to EU stability mechanisms ironically supposedly put in place to prevent one member state benefitting at the great expense of another, is yet another uncomfortable reality. 

What's more the genuine call for reform and recognition of all manner of compromising issues of this nature, in an attempt to learn lessons and adapt, remain flexible, and listen to the concerns of citizens, were also sadly being ignored.

But much of this has already been debated long and hard on EOS. 

We all need to learn lessons from this and recognise the need to make politicians across the board listen to genuine citizens concerns....their first hand experiences.....make them recognise their failings in an attempt to improve. 

Which brings us back to the OP who reflected " to improve is to change".

What a load of rubbish. How could the EU put into place freedom of movement on a country that isn't even a member of the EU?
Go back and think what you are saying. Spain didn't have the problems of freedom of movement? Because they weren't a member, that's why.
The year UK joined they accepted freedom of movement from the countries who were already members. When Spain joined, in 1986, they accepted freedom of movement from the countries who were already members.

You are making it seem, and really it is tripe, that Spain should have accepted freedom of movement 15 years before they joined which is codswallop.

You are also making it seem as if the EU said some countries must accept freedom of  movement from new joiners after 2004 whilst others can wait. Another load of out and out tripe. The EU said countries could wait 7 years before allowing freedom of movement. To all members, not just some. UK and two others allowed the transition period to be less whilst others didn't. The EU didn't force them to do that, the UK made that decision.

And I  can't believe that someone like you, who normally thinks things through and comes up with reasoned arguments, are coming up with that.

How about, Australia isn't in the EU. If it joins in, say, 2030, would it be unfair that they didn't allow freedom of movement from 1971? That's precisely what you are arguing and it's rubbish. Taking the "the EU are picking on us" line. 

Now I shan't even bother answering anything else as it's really, really a facetious and fallacious argument.

Freedom from the EUSSR dictatorship easily trumps Freedom of movement....

No Mariedav

You sadly once again misinterpret what I wrote. I have thought it through, that's the whole point.

The point being that Spain had control up to 1986. The UK lost control from the moment it joined the EU AND restriction rules were lifted for the UK.
It goes without saying that all movements without UK control from that point  onward should be taken into account when making assessments of how the numbers grew and grew, finally resulting in even further swift movements from the Eastern European states that exacerbated a system that had already taken in more than its fair share of citizens when making comparisons with other member states such as Germany, or Austria etc. No one is suggesting that Spain should have accepted movements prior to 1986!!!! The comparison made with Spain is to demonstrate that they were not exposed to the same degree ( total number of years without control) as the UK. 
Nobody is wishing for other member states to be exposed so unfairly as the UK, without taking the whole picture into account. It was bound to cause disillusionment so long as the EU refused to review the whole picture re the UK.
It's the assessment of the whole picture relating to the total number of years that the UK lost control that has to be taken into account when reviewing the need for respite in any fair manner.

As for the detail re 7 years vs 13 years that Cameron requested, the following article explains the circumstances which related to migrants and welfare benefits. And still the EU refused to consider this plea for 13 years consideration. If the truth be known the trouble was this levelling up exercise came far too late in the day and all too many citizens were already distrusting of a Commission that in effect had failed to appreciate the first hand compromising realities and major impacts associated with their decision making....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105
 

P.s . I sincerely don't wish this to become and us and them scenario by any means and was pushing for EU reform for many years, moreover the point now being made is how unfair EU decision making has created unnecessary division and disharmony, upon which those extreme political elements have sadly taken advantage.

IMHO EU reform and greater flexibility with due regard to major inequalities and failures to abide by structures such as stability mechanisms intended to protect from widening inequalities that ultimately harmed citizens best interests, is essential if they wish to combat further disillusionment within member states. It will require EU citizens coming together going forward to effect change from their politicians, and not allow divisive rhetoric to " divide and rule" so to speak.

This message was last edited by ads on 03/02/2020.

Hi guys thanks for hijacking a heartfelt thread and turning it into a bunch of political rants as per usual 

"To improve is to change".....your simple heartfelt message speaks reams Riverestates. If only life were that simple however!
"Very sorry it has all come to this "....couldn't agree more.

Apologies. Didn't mean to undermine your good intent.

I would agree that improvement is a desirable thing but the word is in itself subjective. The "improvement" is always in the eye of the beholder. Also, change is also not always for the better and often a backward step. Change always comes at a cost to someone or something.

Britain has gained separation from the collective rules and treaties of the EU. Created and designed to improve peoples lives, stimulate prosperity and create fairness in an unfair dog eat dog world.

Britain now intends to set its own rules outside the established order without regulation. In a globalised world with China, USA and the EU operating closed trade blocks the country is going to find improvement from what it previously enjoyed very difficult if not impossible to achieve.

The improvement where your economy does better than others and you are punished with a demand to pay 1 billion extra into their coffers....

Britain now intends to set its own rules outside the established order without regulation. In a globalised world with China, USA and the EU operating closed trade blocks the country is going to find improvement from what it previously enjoyed very difficult if not impossible to achieve.

So Mickyfinn it seems to me that you are saying if the USA, China and the EU have a company with a million items to sell at a million Pounds, Dollars, Euros each item, and the UK wants to buy these items, they wont sell them to us...

Is that what you are saying?