We're not "out"-We're still in.

[jeremyp]

But we can't limit the EU migrants whenever we want.

No, but, if immigration is such a huge problem, why haven't we already stopped the immigrants we can stop?

And if they mirror each other, as someone said they do - and I don't understand the reasons, so am guessing here: then we need to be able to limit both in order to limit either of them.

The reason they mirror each other is because immigrants come here to get work. Immigration roughly follows the economy and we are not doing anything serious to stop any of it.

As I said, we could stop all non EU migrants coming in tomorrow, but we don't. Think on that.

[jeremyp]

Incidentally, if we stopped all non-EU immigration, we would actually reduce the total immigration from 333,000 to only 56,000 per year, at least for a year or two.

[Spud]

No, but, if immigration is such a huge problem, why haven't we already stopped the immigrants we can stop?

I would guess because we haven't tried? Perhaps we subconsciously apply the principle of free movement, which we have to adhere to with the EU, to the rest of the world?

The reason they mirror each other is because immigrants come here to get work. Immigration roughly follows the economy and we are not doing anything serious to stop any of it.

That doesn't explain why they are roughly the same, though?

As I said, we could stop all non EU migrants coming in tomorrow, but we don't. Think on that.

[jeremyp]

I would guess because we haven't tried?

Err, yes. But why haven't we tried?

Perhaps we subconsciously apply the principle of free movement, which we have to adhere to with the EU, to the rest of the world?

Immigration policy is set by a government minister. There's nothing subconscious about it.

[Spud]

52% voted against immigrants. Racist incidents have increased dramatically since Brexit. The perception of the English outside of the UK is that we are a bunch of nasty insular xenophobics. It doesn't matter that some Leave voters might have voted Leave for other reasons, the damage to our image has been done.

Remember the riots in 2011? People felt strongly about things like spending cuts, iirc. But people have a tendency to overreact, and if the riots that summer hadn't already damaged our reputation I would be surprised. Clearly some people have been affected by mass immigration, and some of them have used the Brexit vote as an excuse to vent their feelings.
The vote was not, I hope, against immigrants per se, but against uncontrolled immigration.

[wigginhall]

I think some economists argue that stopping immigration would collapse the economy.   Reducing it to 'tens of thousands' would be pretty disastrous.   Anyway, it will be interesting to see if they experiment with it.   I see a possible deal with an emergency break is being mooted.   I think they will have certain industries as exempt from restrictions, e.g. farming and construction and catering.   

[Spud]

Just read an Independent article from May, which says that before the post-communist Eastern European countries joined the EU in 2004, there was much less immigration. At the time, Labour decided we wouldn't apply any movement restrictions to these countries as other existing member states did; and so we had 50,000 coming in per year for the next 8 years, the initial estimate having been 13,000.

[Sassy]

This is nonsense. The Netherlands and Belgium both have significantly higher population densities than the UK

Belgium have a lot of Muslims. Isn't Brussels in Belgium the head of the EU?

Whatever we don't want any. We are British and we want to rule ourselves having ruled two thirds of the world almost at one point.  I think we know what is best for us.

I want to live in freedom to choose my religion or not. To make the decisions for our country ourselves and keep the freedom our ancestors died for.

We have a royal family and we can say who comes here and who can't.

So I don't see any reason for us being the EU.

[jeremyp]

Belgium have a lot of Muslims. Isn't Brussels in Belgium the head of the EU?

So?

Whatever we don't want any. We are British and we want to rule ourselves having ruled two thirds of the world almost at one point.  I think we know what is best for us.

If you want to live in the past, that's fine. I wish you wouldn't drag the rest of us back with you.

Also, the British Empire is finished. Get over it.

I want to live in freedom to choose my religion or not. To make the decisions for our country ourselves and keep the freedom our ancestors died for.

Good for you. So do I and being in the EU helps safeguard that freedom.

We have a royal family and we can say who comes here and who can't.

What has the Royal Family got to do with it? You realises it symbolises a time when we had no say in who made the decisions for our country?

So I don't see any reason for us being the EU.

That's because you are a small minded xenophobic inward looking person with no vision for a future encompassing more than this little island.

[Harrowby Hall]

Whatever we don't want any. We are British and we want to rule ourselves having ruled two thirds of the world almost at one point.  I think we know what is best for us.

I want to live in freedom to choose my religion or not. To make the decisions for our country ourselves and keep the freedom our ancestors died for.

I think I get it.

We were extremely successful at invading other countries, taking them over, subjugating the residents of those countries, removing local raw materials for our own benefit, imposing our religion and cultural values on the residents.

And because we were so good at doing all that we should be left in isolation so that we can congratulate ourselves at how rapacious and greedy we were and spend the rest of eternity living in the past.

[Udayana]

...
What has the Royal Family got to do with it? You realises it symbolises a time when we had no say in who made the decisions for our country?
...

I think she means we had the royal family from Europe, and we wouldn't want any more like them?

[Sebastian Toe]

Belgium have a lot of Muslims.

Belgium has about 600,000 Muslims.

The UK has about 2,700,000.

We win!

We have a royal family

...as does Belgium!

[jeremyp]

Belgium has about 600,000 Muslims.

The UK has about 2,700,000.

The population of Belgium is only 11 million in total. In terms of muslims per head, they win.

[Sebastian Toe]

The population of Belgium is only 11 million in total. In terms of muslims per head, they win.

I am aware of that but Her Sassyness didn't mention anything about population density!

[Harrowby Hall]

I am aware of that but Her Sassyness didn't mention anything about population density!

That would have involved using numbers. Numbers imply precision and accuracy. Precision and accuracy are characteristics of objectivity.

Objectivity has no place in any Sassy diatribe.

[Sassy]

So?

A needle pulling thread.

If you want to live in the past, that's fine. I wish you wouldn't drag the rest of us back with you.

Without the past there would be no present. We don't want to forget those who gave their lives for the freedom we now
enjoy and we should cherish.

Also, the British Empire is finished. Get over it.

The truth is that relations still exist between Britain and some countries from the empire now in the commonwealth.
So the results are still evident in the relations it formed.

Good for you. So do I and being in the EU helps safeguard that freedom.

In your dreams you talking about the EU? We would have lost the right to make decisions over who came into our Country.
Get your head out of the sand. Seems you got the fairytale and not the reality.

What has the Royal Family got to do with it? You realises it symbolises a time when we had no say in who made the decisions for our country?

Now whose living in the past? The Royal Family our Queen symbolises something more important in this day and age.
The relationship we have with other Countries has a lot to do with her entertaining foreign dignitaries and keeping good relations going.

That's because you are a small minded xenophobic inward looking person with no vision for a future encompassing more than this little island.

Talk about small, narrowed and closed minded. You've got the hat-trick.   Xenophobic not at all. A realist that we cannot let people who consider life disposable (even the innocent) for their cause come into our country. Nor the reality that we do not have the means to support all those people. Given the fact that the  poor, impoverished, disabled, mentally ill and the elderly have been crippled financially because of this Government, then I don't believe it is worth the cost for foreigner of any race outside our own to be accommodated in GB unless they can financially support themselves and are not of a terrorist group or known terrorist active religion.

I really don't have time for brown nosed opinions of those who are simply thinking of their own gain and not the affect of those poor in our nation.

[jeremyp]

Without the past there would be no present.

Without the Sun there would be no life on Earth, but I don't want to live in that either.

The truth is that relations still exist between Britain and some countries from the empire now in the commonwealth.
So the results are still evident in the relations it formed.

But note how the EU doesn't prevent us from having those relations.

In your dreams you talking about the EU? We would have lost the right to make decisions over who came into our Country.

Who is this "we" you are talking about? Are you under the impression that you personally will have a say in who comes into this country?

Talk about small, narrowed and closed minded. You've got the hat-trick.   Xenophobic not at all. A realist that we cannot let people who consider life disposable (even the innocent) for their cause come into our country.

The last major terrorist attack in this country was perpetrated by British citizens.

Nor the reality that we do not have the means to support all those people.

Yes we do. As a proportion of the total population, the current level of immigration is tiny and easily managed.

Given the fact that the  poor, impoverished, disabled, mentally ill and the elderly have been crippled financially because of this Government

That's the same government that you want to give more control to.

I really don't have time for brown nosed opinions of those who are simply thinking of their own gain and not the affect of those poor in our nation.

What about the poor people in other nations?

[jeremyp]

Without the past there would be no present. We don't want to forget those who gave their lives for the freedom we now
enjoy and we should cherish.

This deserves a separate reply.

In the last few hundred years, Europe has been beset by internal conflict. In many cases Britain, although on the sidelines, has not turned its back on its European neighbours but has stepped in, usually on the side perceived to be morally right.

In the Napoleonic wars we fought against the political hegemony of France with other countries in Europe and helped overthrow a dictator in control of the most powerful army in history. Many British people gave their lives.

In the Crimean War we fought with France and Turkey against Russian land grabbing. Many British people gave their lives.

In the First World War, we threw in our lot with France again. Many British lives were lost.

In the Second World War, we fought against Hitler's empire building. Many British lives were lost.

Britain has a history of facing up to crises in continental Europe, often at great cost. Now, nobody would claim that the EU is in a crisis rivalling that of the Second World War (except Jack Knave), but it has its problems that need to be sorted out. And here we are running away.

Sassy, contrary to forgetting about the British people who gave their lives for the cause in the past, we shame them by running away from the current challenge.

[Spud]

Err, yes. But why haven't we tried?
Immigration policy is set by a government minister. There's nothing subconscious about it.

Spoke to someone today who said (I haven't checked this) that non-EU immigration is high because people from the rest of the world are using EU human rights laws to get into the country. So the EU tells Britain who, from the rest of the world, it has to allow in.

[L.A.]

Spoke to someone today who said (I haven't checked this) that non-EU immigration is high because people from the rest of the world are using EU human rights laws to get into the country. So the EU tells Britain who, from the rest of the world, it has to allow in.

No, the Human Rights Act was set up by Blair in 1998 specifically as a 'nice little earner' for his missus.

[jeremyp]

Spoke to someone today who said (I haven't checked this) that non-EU immigration is high because people from the rest of the world are using EU human rights laws to get into the country.

But that is obviously bollocks.

[floo]

Spoke to someone today who said (I haven't checked this) that non-EU immigration is high because people from the rest of the world are using EU human rights laws to get into the country. So the EU tells Britain who, from the rest of the world, it has to allow in.

That sounds like total garbage to me!