Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by southmartin

  1. All you need to do is remove the incentive - no free money, no free houses, deportation back to their country (or place we choose if they won't tell us where they're from) No need for sinking boats - or filling in tunnels, just take the cash away
  2. It's not the Vienna Convention, its the "Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties" https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%201155/volume-1155-I-18232-English.pdf The status of treaty rights acquired while a treaty is in force, when that treaty comes to an end, was dealt with in a 2013 Parliamentary briefing, and is covered in much more detail by UN lawyers. A clarification has even been issued via a House of Commons Library note, which stated: “Generally speaking, withdrawing from a treaty releases the parties from any future obligations to each other, but does not affect any rights or obligations acquired under it before withdrawal.”The (1969) Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties is clear, in article 70.1.b it states that a termination of a treaty: “Does not affect any right, obligation or legal situation of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to its termination.”To summarise, “acquired rights” – also known as “executed rights” or “vested rights” – do continue to apply to individuals. So firm are they embedded in the international order that they have acquired the status of “customary law”, which means the principle does not need to be anchored by any particularly treaty, but stands alone as a fundamental principle of international law. Thus, should it come to the UK leaving the EU, those persons who currently live in other EU member states, invoking the right to remain under the “freedom of movement” or “freedom of establishment” provisions of the treaties, will be able to retain that “acquired right”. There may be some details around the margins that have to be settled which will make up part of secession negotiations, in both informal talks that begin in the aftermath of a vote to leave, and formal talks that begin after our Article 50 notification.
  3. Can't do that i'm afraid. The 1969 Vienna Convention on Treaties states that people who are here legally whilst a treaty is in place have 'Acquired Rights'. Basically this means we would be unable to 'remove' people. However, what we could do is then change the benefits system to differentiate between UK citizens and foreigners (at the moment we're not allowed to). So all we'd need to do is say 'Benefits for UK people only' and then only those immigrants who are genuinely paying their own way would be able to afford to stay. Perhaps offering some discounted flights to people who wanted to return 'home' would be a nice thing to do so we didn't end up with even more beggars and crime.
  4. I think Edward Snowden summed it up best saying the election isn't Trump v Clinton, It's Trump v Goldman Sachs Given that choice i'd go for The Donald every time
  5. I agree with the OP - If we vote to leave then we have 2 years until we actually exit (unless we repeal ECA72 and exit immediately - which is unlikely to ever happen. Even UKIP don't favour this option) So we're left with a scenario where if the economy collapsed "due to Brexit" then the Government could simply say "we told you so" hold another referendum in a year's time to see if we give the right decision this time... and if we do then it' like we never left! - and at the same time would destroy UKIP and keep us locked int the EU forever I'd guarantee that this option is on the table... In a big office in Berlin (or a bunker in Dachau anyway)
  6. No I agree, it's win/win In a scenario where the referendum is lost, then all UKIP have to do is sit around for a couple of years while the situation from Europe gets worse and worse, e.g immigration Euro economic implosion Effects of TTIP terrorist attacks and then capitalise on that "we told you so" in the run up to the 2020 election. At that point the sensible thing to do would be to agree not to stand any UKIP candidate in a seat that was held by an Outer (other cons, lab or lib), and put all resources into the ones held by MPs who voted to remain It's be a purple & blue landslide... similar to the landslide the SNP had.. though i'd still estimate that the Cons would be the larger party with Boris in charge by then having deposed the useless Cameron a year or so after the public came to the conclusion that hitching our wagon to the EU was a profoundly stupid idea. Ironically if we vote to leave then there's the possibility that when the economy collapses (as we all know is coming) then Cameron and co will say "we told you so, it's the fault of us leaving the EU" rather than us chronically mismanaging the economy... A 'close lose' might actually be the best result in the medium and long term
  7. very true - it's not just the £55m a day (gross) that we pay. And don't forget the costs of regulation too.
  8. Ah sorry! skipped the word "Chilean" there - just saw "wine" and assumed you were talking about our cheese-loving neighbours. tariffs on Chilean goods would depend on their WTO status - or whatever trade agreement we could make with them (now that we'd be allowed to make our own tree agreements once outside the EU). Though I suspect they'd be happy to have a free trade agreement with 60m potential customers.
  9. but that's if the French choose to levy it on their exports... Something which (I suspect) they would not be willing to do Besides, from have Iceland (in the far north west of Europe) all the way to the Russian border - there are no tariffs and full access to the single market. It's simply impossible that they'd make an exception for us as country that has a trade imbalance with them.
  10. the EU and UK are both WTO signatories (well the EU signed on our behalf but on exiting the EU we'd sign up again as we used to be). In this case both countries would be subject to the MFN (Most Favoured Nations) tariff, which is set at a measly 1% for most goods, with the exception of a few agricultural goods and cars. 1% is less than the weekly currency fluctuations - not even worth worrying about As for cars - anyone thinking Germany industry will allow Merkel to increase the cost of it's exports by 10% to it's biggest external market has never been in business. Likewise Citroen, Peugeot, Renault etc We have almost nothing to lose, and a hell of a lot to gain.
  11. Original Brexit The Movie removed by YouTube within 24 hrs.. Here's 2 updated links
  12. So the question really is: If these figures are as bad as they should be (twice the official limit is probably a conservative estimate)... then what will be the 'big news' story to knock the immigration stats off all the front pages? I note the NI terror threat was raised to the second highest level... It was well known in the past that some of the Irish semtext monkeys were being instructed from our side (still, that taught Lord Mountbatten to do as he was told eh?) My point being - these figures could put an end to the IN side... it's going to have to be something big to drown it out Can't be islamic terrorist either (as that strengthens the OUT side's argument) I suppose HRH popping her clogs would do the trick...
  13. I imagine the "GDP Per Capita" would increase dramatically ...
  14. Wrong (again) Manufacturing makes up 11% of UK GVA and 54% of UK exports and directly employs 2.6 million people. Despite the decline since the 1970s, when manufacturing contributed 25% of UK GDP, the UK is currently the 11th largest manufacturing nation in the world.
  15. So let me just get this right... You think that the Euro is a more stable currency than Sterling. Where have you been for the last 15 years? I have no doubt there might be a correction in Sterling, but it'll be short-term and nothing to do with membership of a political customs union - more to do with the fact that our economy is built on debt, and backed by nothing. However the Euro is in even worse shape! Besides, pound goes down = great for exports!
  16. My money's on Godzilla rearing up from the English Channel and using his fiery breath to burn London to a crisp. Definitely voting OUT now then!
  17. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.POP.DNST Englands population density is 419 per square kilometre. • For Germany it is 228/sq.km • Poland 130. • France 105. • Spain 94. To match England's population density - • Germany would need to take 68.8 million immigrants. • Poland 86 million • France 197 million **ONE HUNDRED AND NINETY SEVEN MILLION** • Spain 161 million. Let's see if he'd be happy hosting an extra 197 million people...
  18. It's particularly short-sighted, as due to the 1969 Vienna Convention on Treaties, anyone who moved abroad while a treaty was legally in force, will have gained something called "Acquired rights" and can't be ejected from the host nation.
  19. Top comments on the BBC article: This is serious. 4 days ago it was £850 and now it's £4,300. I calculate at this compound rate of increase by 24 June (the day after the referendum) each family will be £4,002,307,597,389,970 a year worse off. So a bunch of economists who failed to predicted and prepare the UK for the 2008 recession are making accurate predictions about our membership of the EU 14 years in advance. Really?
  20. Because it hasn't negotiated anything of the sort. All it has done is get someone to say that's what might happen. It still needs to be ratified by the EU Parliament The Vice-President of the European Parliament says Cameron’s deal is not binding Alexander Graf Lambsdorff is Vice-President of the European Parliament and an MEP with the liberal ALDE group, and in this interview with Euractiv, he becomes the latest voice to expose David Cameron’s lie that he came back from Brussels with a legally binding, irreversible deal. As I have said before, this lie must be exposed and shouted about at every opportunity. ‘At the moment, the whole thing is nothing more than a deal that has been hammered out down the local bazaar. The European Union, however, is a community of law, in which there are regulated responsibilities. If the British are going to put all their eggs in one basket, in a promise made like this, which has not yet complied with our clean process of law, then, for me, this process of law is more important and preferable.’ Can this be said any clearer? The renegotiation was a total failure, there is no reformed EU and we have not fundamentally altered out relationship. ​PS - British Prime Minister's have returned from Germany with a 'piece of paper' before now - and look how well that's turned out
  21. The timing could hardly be more desperately cynical This is not an EU initiative, it’s an independent agreement between 5 countries. The UK, Germany, France, Italy and Spain have agreed to the data exchange. It proves we can work together with our neighbours outside of the EU. It is however, massively hypocritical. Consider this: EU Commissioners pay a lower rate of income tax - around 8% When the EU stops Europe's biggest corporate tax evasion scheme set up by Jean-Claude Juncker the EU president in Luxembourg when he was PM there I will start to believe something good is being done. And all this from an organisation that’s not had it’s own accounts signed off for over two decades due to massive amounts of fraud and corruption!
  22. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33146011 Airbus has 'no intention' of pulling out of UK over EUAirbus chief executive Fabrice Bregier has said he has "no intention" of pulling manufacturing out of the UK if the country votes to leave the European Union (EU). Speaking to the BBC at the Paris Airshow, Mr Bregier said the aircraft manufacturer was committed to its 16,000 employees based in the UK. He added Airbus had no plans to relocate its British factories.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.