EU referendum

[Sour Mash]

The US requires fingerprints.

 

Even with a modern passport you still have to check that the person matches the document. Have you tried the automatic system for machine readable passports at Gatwick? It uses facial recognition, takes forever and needs a supervisor to show how to use it. It's much quicker to go through the manned channels.

But we have that anyway, so none of that would make our processes slower. Glad we've got that clear.

[Whitey Grandad]

But we have that anyway, so none of that would make our processes slower. Glad we've got that clear.

 

Well I'm not any clearer.

 

All I was saying that we neither want nor need the American system here. That is far more rigorous than ours

 

As I said previously I can't see any serious problems with travel either in or out of the EU but I would expect it to take a little longer if we did not hold an EU passport.

 

We stopped actually keeping records of who came and left the country in the 1960s which is a shame. Nowadays over 250m international passengers use our airports each year and once they are in the UK, even on a limited-time visa there is no mechanism for tracing and ejecting those who overstay their allowed time.

[Sour Mash]

Well I'm not any clearer.

 

All I was saying that we neither want nor need the American system here. That is far more rigorous than ours

 

As I said previously I can't see any serious problems with travel either in or out of the EU but I would expect it to take a little longer if we did not hold an EU passport.

 

We stopped actually keeping records of who came and left the country in the 1960s which is a shame. Nowadays over 250m international passengers use our airports each year and once they are in the UK, even on a limited-time visa there is no mechanism for tracing and ejecting those who overstay their allowed time.

Having a visa waiver system wouldn't make any of our processes slower.

[Whitey Grandad]

Having a visa waiver system wouldn't make any of our processes slower.

 

There would be different queues for EU and non-EU.

[Nolan]

Well I'm not any clearer.

 

All I was saying that we neither want nor need the American system here. That is far more rigorous than ours

 

As I said previously I can't see any serious problems with travel either in or out of the EU but I would expect it to take a little longer if we did not hold an EU passport.

 

We stopped actually keeping records of who came and left the country in the 1960s which is a shame. Nowadays over 250m international passengers use our airports each year and once they are in the UK, even on a limited-time visa there is no mechanism for tracing and ejecting those who overstay their allowed time.

Why on earth do we not want a rigourous system?

Edited 6 April, 2016 by Nolan

[benjii]

I would suggest that pontificating over queues at airports and technological implementation of border control technologies is somewhat missing the bigger issues at stake.

[Sour Mash]

There would be different queues for EU and non-EU.

Why? Why would we even need visa or visa waivers for all EU countries?

 

Lets be serious - leaving the EU isn't going to make it harder for you to go on holiday to Spain; or for a German to come to London for a day for work.

[Millbrook Saint]

Why on earth do we not want a rigourous system?

 

Exactly, isn't part of the problem at the moment the fact that anyone can cross our borders from Europe without any real checks, moving out of the EU will allow us to have more rigorous checks and stop people we don't want coming in. Can only be a good thing in my opinion. So what if it takes a little longer to queue at airports and ports

[CB Saint]

The US requires fingerprints.

 

Even with a modern passport you still have to check that the person matches the document. Have you tried the automatic system for machine readable passports at Gatwick? It uses facial recognition, takes forever and needs a supervisor to show how to use it. It's much quicker to go through the manned channels.

 

Only for the cretins

[redkeith]

Exactly, isn't part of the problem at the moment the fact that anyone can cross our borders from Europe without any real checks, moving out of the EU will allow us to have more rigorous checks and stop people we don't want coming in. Can only be a good thing in my opinion. So what if it takes a little longer to queue at airports and ports

 

Moving out of the EU has nothing to do with it. When I flew from Paris to Norway, I didn't have my passport checked at Bergen, as they are part of the free movement agreement. When I come back to the UK from France I always have my passport checked, and sometimes see people taken away for further enquiries. People can cross from Spain to France with no passport control, but not into the UK.

[Whitey Grandad]

Only for the cretins

Unfortunately they are the ones ahead of you in the queue. And there's only a queue because they are in front of you.

[Whitey Grandad]

I would suggest that pontificating over queues at airports and technological implementation of border control technologies is somewhat missing the bigger issues at stake.

Exactly.

[Nolan]

Holy mother of god... £9.3 million on pro EU propoganda is a sign of a government in the throes of insanity. Absolutely ludicrous.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[trousers]

Holy mother of god... £9.3 million on pro EU propoganda is a sign of a government in the throes of insanity. Absolutely ludicrous.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

I wonder how much that cost compares to the information material (aka "propaganda") the government sent out to all households during the European referendum in 1975?

 

(Quite possibly irrelevant whataboutery on my part (for a change), but just curious to compare)

[solentstars]

I wonder how much that cost compares to the information material (aka "propaganda") the government sent out to all households during the European referendum in 1975?

 

(Quite possibly irrelevant whataboutery on my part (for a change), but just curious to compare)

properly cost more in 1975 with inflation and seems small beer to tell people information of the governments position of the national interest has there are a lot of people who do not have a clue of which way to vote .looks like history's repeating itself.

[Sour Mash]

Holy mother of god... £9.3 million on pro EU propoganda is a sign of a government in the throes of insanity. Absolutely ludicrous.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Crazy, desperate attempt from the government I guess http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35980571

[Lord Duckhunter]

I wonder how much that cost compares to the information material (aka "propaganda") the government sent out to all households during the European referendum in 1975?

 

(Quite possibly irrelevant whataboutery on my part (for a change), but just curious to compare)

 

The government have played fast and loose with this and are trying to gerrymander the vote . In 1975 there was no electrol commission , but Cameron has been playing from Wilsons play book from day one . At least Wilson had the balls to put his name to his " piece of paper " .

 

The electrol commission are producing a leaflet sent to everyone outlining certain facts. Each side get one mail shot each to put their interpretation on the facts and give their side , for the Governmemt to then produce this is pretty low . Then again did anyone ever think the Establishment would ever conduct themselves any different. I'm sure lefties would be up in arms if just outside the purdah period of a general election the Tories did this explaining " facts" around the Parliament 2015-2020 .

 

To me an independent mail shot from the electrol commission & one from each side is reasonable and fair .

[hutch]

I wonder how much that cost compares to the information material (aka "propaganda") the government sent out to all households during the European referendum in 1975?

 

(Quite possibly irrelevant whataboutery on my part (for a change), but just curious to compare)

 

£14 11/6^d

[aintforever]

Holy mother of god... £9.3 million on pro EU propoganda is a sign of a government in the throes of insanity. Absolutely ludicrous.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

Surely in the interests of democracy the only fair thing to do would be to give the out campaign the same amount?

 

I thought the purpose of a referendum was to gauge public opinion, not just a vehicle to get the public to do what the government want you to do.

Edited 7 April, 2016 by aintforever

[Nolan]

Let's hope that a "youre not telling me what to do attitude" will strengthen the Leave campaign.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[Batman]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/06/dutch-slow-to-polls-in-eu-ukraine-pact-vote/

[Trader]

Surely in the interests of democracy the only fair thing to do would be to give the out campaign the same amount?

 

I thought the purpose of a referendum was to gauge public opinion, not just a vehicle to get the public to do what the government want you to do.

 

What's democracy got to do with it? In fact, what's democracy got to do with the EU?

[van Hanegem]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/06/dutch-slow-to-polls-in-eu-ukraine-pact-vote/

 

This doesn't change anything as the EU will march on, no matter what the people think or feel. It's a good signal though but the one chance to end the madness is a Brexit. Well, at least it will be a start...

[Batman]

This doesn't change anything as the EU will march on, no matter what the people think or feel. It's a good signal though but the one chance to end the madness is a Brexit. Well, at least it will be a start...

 

this result will be at best, ignored as the march towards a united states of europe must not be stopped.

 

the UK will vote to stay in, the government here will throw the kitchen sink at it. Sadly

[van Hanegem]

this result will be at best, ignored as the march towards a united states of europe must not be stopped.

 

the UK will vote to stay in, the government here will throw the kitchen sink at it. Sadly

 

I'm afraid you're right, too many people are getting fooled or do not really know what's at stake. In the end clowns like Farrage don't help either as they cause to much disgust.

[Verbal]

Those Brexiteers are real comedians. Now it seems one Brexit sect is threatening to sue now that the other sect has been made official.

 

Is this how they intend to negotiate all those treaties that will have to be agreed over the next decade or more to repair the damage from their economic vandalism?

[derry]

I received the government's leaflet a couple of days ago. I really don't get what the fuss is about. It is an absolute waste of money. The same tired conjecture that the politicians have been spouting for weeks. If that is the best the government can do with £9m+ they are in more trouble than I thought. It will lose them more votes than they gain. I posted mine back to the Conservatives by Freepost.

[buctootim]

I received the government's leaflet a couple of days ago. I really don't get what the fuss is about. It is an absolute waste of money. The same tired conjecture that the politicians have been spouting for weeks. If that is the best the government can do with £9m+ they are in more trouble than I thought. It will lose them more votes than they gain. I posted mine back to the Conservatives by Freepost.

 

So in order to protest about waste you wasted some more money sending it back. Brilliant. Brexit logic encapsulated.

Edited 15 April, 2016 by buctootim

[Johnny Bognor]

So in order to protest about waste you wasted some more money sending it back. Brilliant. Brexit logic encapsulated.

 

You could argue that's the logic for remaining. We send £xbn to the EU, only for them to provide £ybn back in grants and 'investment'.

[Lord Duckhunter]

So in order to protest about waste you wasted some more money sending it back. Brilliant. Brexit logic encapsulated.

 

Why don't you read what was written before jumping to your pathetic conclusions . He sent it back to The Tories not the government , therefore they pay for it , not the tax payer. Doh

[buctootim]

Why don't you read what was written before jumping to your pathetic conclusions . He sent it back to The Tories not the government , therefore they pay for it , not the tax payer. Doh

 

I read it. The post was about waste of money. Like most headbangers you werent able to comprehend what was written, reacting only to what you wish had been written.

[Lord Duckhunter]

I read it. The post was about waste of money. Like most headbangers you werent able to comprehend what was written, reacting only to what you wish had been written.

 

You clearly didn't read it correctly and thought you were being clever.

[holepuncture]

BBC radio 2 just reporting that 6000 of them have sailed across from Libya in the last three days, landing at Italy.

 

6000, three days :mcinnes:

 

The EU saying there is very little they can do about it, as Libya is a failed state with the coastline under isis control, there is effectively no state controlling the territory or borders.

 

What a hopeless situation, I really feel for the poor Italians getting this lot dumped on them like this.

 

Sentiment aside, the immigration crisis encapsulating the EU motivates me to vote OUT.

[derry]

The post was more about bureaucratic incompetence producing a document that said nothing that hadn't been repeated by numerous politicians recently. Getting a bit like a boring record. Still another £7m to look forward to. I can't wait.

[derry]

BBC radio 2 just reporting that 6000 of them have sailed across from Libya in the last three days, landing at Italy.

 

6000, three days :mcinnes:

 

The EU saying there is very little they can do about it, as Libya is a failed state with the coastline under isis control, there is effectively no state controlling the territory or borders.

 

What a hopeless situation, I really feel for the poor Italians getting this lot dumped on them like this.

 

Sentiment aside, the immigration crisis encapsulating the EU motivates me to vote OUT.

 

The Austrians are hacked off at the Italians waving them northwards and are talking about closing the routes from Italy. That'll be interesting. Poland refusing to now accept their 7000 quota. Not a club to be a member of.

[derry]

For anybody interested. Joanna George, Freepost RSBB-XRZT-ZTXE, The Conservative Party Foundation, 30 Millbank, London, SW1P 4DP. They should have a tidy pile by now.

[Nolan]

Why address it to the Tories? It is the government not the Conservative party who have sent the ludicrous leaflet. The majority of non government Conservatives are firmly on the 'out' side.

 

Best bet should be to send it to the stronger in campaign hq. That way any cost world hopefully come off what they have for fear propoganda.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[Lord Duckhunter]

Good to see Angus Robertson making a proper defense of the EU on QT last night. Admitted you cant control borders when a member, saying the leaflet was wrong ,saying the remain side is playing on people's fears. Basically saying there's a lot wrong with the EU , but on balance the positives outweigh the negatives and he'll campaign on the positives . What a difference from the stay or Domesday approach from most of the remain liars .

 

One telling exchange was during the question about tax. An audiance member stated vat hit the poorest the hardest and should be abolished . The Labour plum said " hear hear" . Dan Hannan ( as impressive as ever) then pointed out that it's against EU law to abolish vat and the only way to do so would to be to leave. Dimble cut him off saying " not everything is about Europe . Now , people claim they want facts. That is a fact , yet a top presenter on the tax payer funded bbc , wouldn't let that fact be discussed. Shameful .

[Hockey_saint]

Totally unbiased report on the referendum from Fred the skate Dinage I see....Not a hint of a clue that his daughter's part of the out campaign at all honest

[trousers]

Good to see Angus Robertson making a proper defense of the EU on QT last night. Admitted you cant control borders when a member, saying the leaflet was wrong ,saying the remain side is playing on people's fears. Basically saying there's a lot wrong with the EU , but on balance the positives outweigh the negatives and he'll campaign on the positives . What a difference from the stay or Domesday approach from most of the remain liars .

 

I am still in the undecided camp. Am I alone in wanting to hear both the positives *and* negatives for either eventuality?

 

I know the SNP like to pedal their holier than thou "Project Fear" mantra against anyone who dares point out the potential bad stuff, but surely only painting a positive picture is just as unbalanced as those who choose to only highlight the negatives?

 

If anything, I want to hear more about the perceived negatives as I have a pretty good idea what the positives are.

 

Let's here the positives and negatives in equal measure from both sides I say. A balanced approach is the best way to furnish us undecideds with all the arguments for and against. I don't just want the sugar coated view, from either side.

[Lord Duckhunter]

I am still in the undecided camp. Am I alone in wanting to hear both the positives *and* negatives for either eventuality?

 

I know the SNP like to pedal their holier than thou "Project Fear" mantra against anyone who dares point out the potential bad stuff, but surely only painting a positive picture is just as unbalanced as those who choose to only highlight the negatives?

 

If anything, I want to hear more about the perceived negatives as I have a pretty good idea what the positives are.

 

Let's here the positives and negatives in equal measure from both sides I say. A balanced approach is the best way to furnish us undecideds with all the arguments for and against. I don't just want the sugar coated view, from either side.

 

But there's negatives and then there's OTT nonsense bordering on lies .

 

A few short months ago Cameron said if he didn't obtain substantial reform he'd vote to leave . Now he claims there will be meltdown if we leave . It's just not credible . What is credible is saying we're quite capable of going it alone , can do well , but will be better off in for xyz reasons. Robertson did say that in his opinion there will be job loses, but he didn't make nonsense claims around 3 million jobs .

 

Just to get a leave supporter to admit you can't control your borders when you're in the Eu, is near on impossible , so it was refreshing to hear him saying " you can not control your borders " but this or that out weighs that particular negative . The other leave half bakes will not say " we can't control our borders in the EU" even though it is a blatant fact .

Edited 15 April, 2016 by Lord Duckhunter

[Hockey_saint]

But there's negatives and then there's OTT nonsense bordering on lies .

 

A few short months ago Cameron said if he didn't obtain substantial reform he'd vote to leave . Now he claims there will be meltdown if we leave . It's just not credible . What is credible is saying we're quite capable of going it alone , can do well , but will be better off in for xyz reasons. Robertson did say that in his opinion there will be job loses, but he didn't make nonsense claims around 3 million jobs .

 

Just to get a leave supporter to admit you can't control your borders when you're in the Eu, is near on impossible , so it was refreshing to hear him saying " you can not control your borders " but this or that out weighs that particular negative . The other leave half bakes will not say " we can't control our borders in the EU" even though it is a blatant fact .

 

I'm a In voter but when I read that "we can control our borders within the EU and stop even EU nationals from entering" in the booklet through the post I thought "what an absolute lie".

[CB Fry]

I'm a In voter but when I read that "we can control our borders within the EU and stop even EU nationals from entering" in the booklet through the post I thought "what an absolute lie".

I know you don't like "absolute lies" so can you tell me which page of the booklet that sentence is from?

[Hockey_saint]

I know you don't like "absolute lies" so can you tell me which page of the booklet that sentence is from?

 

Since it's not numbered, I'd say 9. But it's a little more vague than I put above (the above statement was from memory) it goes as follows:

 

"we control our own borders which gives us the right to check everyone, including EU nationals"....Doesn't say we can stop them from entering however I suppose but it's very suggestive and kinda alludes to it.

[Lord Duckhunter]

The remain camp are redefining " control of our borders " to mean we check everyone's passport upon entry. To me control of our borders means letting in who we want in the numbers we want. We can not control how many Welsh or Scottish passport holders come to work in England & nobody will claim we can, in fact you would be laughed at if you claimed we could. Equally you can't stop anyone with a Polish, Romanian or Greek passport doing the same. That is a simple fact, why most remain bods won't concede it, I really don't know.

[Hockey_saint]

The remain camp are redefining " control of our borders " to mean we check everyone's passport upon entry. To me control of our borders means letting in who we want in the numbers we want. We can not control how many Welsh or Scottish passport holders come to work in England & nobody will claim we can, in fact you would be laughed at if you claimed we could. Equally you can't stop anyone with a Polish, Romanian or Greek passport doing the same. That is a simple fact, why most remain bods won't concede it, I really don't know.

 

I have to agree. What is a nation if it can't control it's borders in that way?

 

I mean, I can understand why a lot of the eastern Europeans came here (better pay and standard of living....and benefits of course) but they do need to understand that we were told there would be "no more than 200,000 arrivals" which was either a lie or stupidity on the part of the labour party and in my honest opinion, I think it's what's changed this from a more minor irritating arguement to quite a massive one. But the question is, if we leave what would ask of the ones that are here?

[CB Fry]

Since it's not numbered, I'd say 9. But it's a little more vague than I put above (the above statement was from memory) it goes as follows:

 

"we control our own borders which gives us the right to check everyone, including EU nationals"....Doesn't say we can stop them from entering however I suppose but it's very suggestive and kinda alludes to it.

And thats not an "absolute lie" is it? I came through an airport the other day and I was checked and I weren't even a greasy dago, frog or kraut or a brown person or nothing.

[Hockey_saint]

And thats not an "absolute lie" is it? I came through an airport the other day and I was checked and I weren't even a greasy dago, frog or kraut or a brown person or nothing.

 

I did say it was from memory but the implication is that they have the power to stop EU nationals from entering and settling on mass (vis-a-vi the main ideal of the EU).

 

You also clearly know that's what I mean.

[Verbal]

I did say it was from memory but the implication is that they have the power to stop EU nationals from entering and settling on mass (vis-a-vi the main ideal of the EU).

 

You also clearly know that's what I mean.

 

I'm baffled by this too. Where is the "implication...that they have the power to stop EU nationals from entering and settling en masse"? It's surely a statement about controlling and monitoring borders in a way that works against things like terrorism.

 

I don't know how true that it, but terrorist incidents in the UK in the last decade have been carried by by home-grown dimwits, not those racing back and forth across open, unmonitored borders.

[Hockey_saint]

I'm baffled by this too. Where is the "implication...that they have the power to stop EU nationals from entering and settling en masse"? It's surely a statement about controlling and monitoring borders in a way that works against things like terrorism.

 

I don't know how true that it, but terrorist incidents in the UK in the last decade have been carried by by home-grown dimwits, not those racing back and forth across open, unmonitored borders.

 

Why are you baffled? My point is that even the smallest mention of "controlling borders" is clearly aimed to appease those who want out of the EU mainly due to mass migration.

 

I don't know what world you'd have to live in not to know that most of the terrorists in Britain have been home-grown though so I took it for granted that wasn't the issue they were alluding to.