You Mightn't Be Able To Help Here
ChatterBank0 min ago
Why Are Politicians Scared Of Cutting Immigration?
It is obvious the vast majority of the population wants immigration to be cut. Why wont the government act on it? What are they afraid of? I don't understand why they just cant get on with it.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by dave50. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
May as well hear both sides, Islay.
http://
http://
///6. Workers are protected – this is made possible through the European Working Time Directive; the directive includes regulations regarding holidays, working hours, breaks, etc///
In case you haven't noticed, all working class people in this country are on zero hour agency contracts. (usually on minimum wage) That's because of all those rather nice directives that, of course, none of them qualify for. (except those sucking the state teat for whom money's no object)
In case you haven't noticed, all working class people in this country are on zero hour agency contracts. (usually on minimum wage) That's because of all those rather nice directives that, of course, none of them qualify for. (except those sucking the state teat for whom money's no object)
As an aside :
Low prices of goods.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
One can opt to have a common market without having a union so it's not really a benefit of the EU. Given the right agreements one doesn't even need a common market as such. Not taxing means your home market has less protection. Plus any tax collected goes to governments, which means it need not be collected by other taxes to make up the difference. Overall questionable as a benefit.
Freedom of movement.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
More of a drawback. Less control on who comes into your country. And an ease to undercut the home labour market as folk just wander in from countries with different economies. And for what, a shorter line to go through at the ports ? In any case one can still travel, study, or work in countries outside of hate EU, one simply has to get the necessary approval.
Jobs.
¯¯¯¯
I'm unsure what these extra jobs are aside from running the EU. Anything we can do connected to the EU we can surely do in the wider world.
Development.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Paying for others' development is hardly a benefit. And it doesn't need an EU to give one's money away.
Louder voice.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Even if you believe the world hears the EU's opinion more than that of individual countries, it is unlikely if hears it more than those countries combined. Plus it is clear that a stated EU opinion may not be held by all its members. Plus the loss of our own voice within the EU is too much to pay for it even if it was of use.
Worker protection.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
This seems quite insulting. The claim is clearly that a national government can not protect the workers as they wish anyway. What it means in reality is that the national government's will can/is overridden.
Grants for farmers.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Not only again is this claiming that the national government could not apply grants where applicable anyway; but out of the EU they'd have more money to do so, if it is thought to be a good thing.
Human rights.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Even more insulting. Human rights is not an EU owned idea, but it seems ridiculous interpretation of what a human right may be is something imposed upon us these days, so it is another disadvantage. Outside of the EU a national government has to make the definition of a human right for itself, and has no excuse not to do the right thing.
Low prices of goods.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
One can opt to have a common market without having a union so it's not really a benefit of the EU. Given the right agreements one doesn't even need a common market as such. Not taxing means your home market has less protection. Plus any tax collected goes to governments, which means it need not be collected by other taxes to make up the difference. Overall questionable as a benefit.
Freedom of movement.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
More of a drawback. Less control on who comes into your country. And an ease to undercut the home labour market as folk just wander in from countries with different economies. And for what, a shorter line to go through at the ports ? In any case one can still travel, study, or work in countries outside of hate EU, one simply has to get the necessary approval.
Jobs.
¯¯¯¯
I'm unsure what these extra jobs are aside from running the EU. Anything we can do connected to the EU we can surely do in the wider world.
Development.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Paying for others' development is hardly a benefit. And it doesn't need an EU to give one's money away.
Louder voice.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Even if you believe the world hears the EU's opinion more than that of individual countries, it is unlikely if hears it more than those countries combined. Plus it is clear that a stated EU opinion may not be held by all its members. Plus the loss of our own voice within the EU is too much to pay for it even if it was of use.
Worker protection.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
This seems quite insulting. The claim is clearly that a national government can not protect the workers as they wish anyway. What it means in reality is that the national government's will can/is overridden.
Grants for farmers.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Not only again is this claiming that the national government could not apply grants where applicable anyway; but out of the EU they'd have more money to do so, if it is thought to be a good thing.
Human rights.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Even more insulting. Human rights is not an EU owned idea, but it seems ridiculous interpretation of what a human right may be is something imposed upon us these days, so it is another disadvantage. Outside of the EU a national government has to make the definition of a human right for itself, and has no excuse not to do the right thing.
Re your “advantages” Islay:
No.1 would be maintained if we left. The EU sells more to us than we do to them (and our sales to the EU are declining because most of the EU is in decline). It would be in their interests to ensure free trade and the Treaty of Lisbon dictates that free trade agreements must be negotiated with any member nation that leaves the EU.
No. 2 would still be available whether we are an EU member or not. People move around the world, people move into and out of the EU (as my immigration figures demonstrate).
No.3 has been achieved despite the EU not because of it.
No 4. Unfortunately the areas that consume most of the “development” funds lie outside the UK. The UK could keep its contributions to the EU and develop the areas in the UK it chooses.
No. 5 Was true a few years back. The EU is becoming increasingly irrelevant as it slips into decline.
No 6 Workers in the UK have adequate protection under UK law. Many of the EU regulations place the UK at a positive disadvantage.
No 7 Mainly go to the (inefficient) French. Once again the UK could keep control of its funds and pay its farmers any subsidies it wishes.
No 8 The European Convention on Human Rights was brought into force in 1953 and has nothing to do with the EU (which was founded by the Treaty of Rome in 1958).
No.1 would be maintained if we left. The EU sells more to us than we do to them (and our sales to the EU are declining because most of the EU is in decline). It would be in their interests to ensure free trade and the Treaty of Lisbon dictates that free trade agreements must be negotiated with any member nation that leaves the EU.
No. 2 would still be available whether we are an EU member or not. People move around the world, people move into and out of the EU (as my immigration figures demonstrate).
No.3 has been achieved despite the EU not because of it.
No 4. Unfortunately the areas that consume most of the “development” funds lie outside the UK. The UK could keep its contributions to the EU and develop the areas in the UK it chooses.
No. 5 Was true a few years back. The EU is becoming increasingly irrelevant as it slips into decline.
No 6 Workers in the UK have adequate protection under UK law. Many of the EU regulations place the UK at a positive disadvantage.
No 7 Mainly go to the (inefficient) French. Once again the UK could keep control of its funds and pay its farmers any subsidies it wishes.
No 8 The European Convention on Human Rights was brought into force in 1953 and has nothing to do with the EU (which was founded by the Treaty of Rome in 1958).
Latest Posts
Arts & Literature2 mins ago
Society & Culture2 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles7 mins ago
Crosswords13 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.