It's a crude attempt to counter the pro-exit campaign propaganda that getting out of Europe is the only way to control immigration into the UK. The message is that exiting Europe will increase immigration not decrease it.
No idea if it will work with the general electorate or not.
As always, a simplified headline can be misleading, and the article is more about people's comments on Cameron's comments than on the comments themselves.
Cameron was surely saying that if we leave the EU, the French might be less willing to have our border controls on their territory. If they stopped, the level of illegal immigrants reaching the UK would be higher (before the arrangement was introduced it was about 50,000 higher).
Like every other argument about making any change, no-one can be certain what will happen, but this one looks fairly likely.
The world is full of problems, not many of which are due to people co-operating too much. Pulling out of Europe equals reduced co-operation. The result is likely to be many problems, some small, some big. Whether you think they're worth it for the sake of making "us" independent of "them", for the pride of being British, or because you resent being served your coffee by a foreigner... well, that's a subjective matter.
I think the point is that at the moment border controls are in France, so potential asylum seekers are kept there.
In the event of Brexit, the French might discontinue this service so asylum seekers would arrive at border control in Dover etc and need (secure?) accommodation while their claims were being assessed.
I think we need to improve things for the Syrians in Syria, easier said than done with the Russians bombing the **** out of them.
The French interior minister has been reported as saying that there will be a price for the Brexit and included in that price will be the ending of the Anglo/French agreement on borders. This agreement is not an EU agreement but is solely a private one between Uk/France.
Personally I think we would be better off out for various reasons.
No need for UKIP then either...
As for Cameron trying to kid on he got a good deal, don't make me laugh.. He was never prepared to campaign for a Brexit whatever "Deal" he got, and only used the idea of a referendum to win himself the election.
What I am trying to say is Scotland would be no more likely to vote for independence after a Brexit vote.
Sure there would be people voting to become independent who would otherwise have wanted to stay in the union because they want to be in the EU.
But it would work the other way as well.
They would also be going against democracy if Scotland voted to leave the EU but they wanted to take Scotland back in.
If we did leave the EU and Scotland became independent and rejoined it would certainly be interesting though. People from Scotland would quite likely need a work permit to work in England, Wales and NI as well as a Passport to visit.
I also read in the Times that the Bank (of England) has been buying dollars and our foreign cash reserves are as high as they ever been; so that in the event of a vote in favour of exit the Bank can buy sterling due to an anticipated run on sterling.
If you are going on to the euro zone get your euros early. Another scare story perhaps but an expected effect if we vote to leave.
I just wonder what the long term effects would be on British exports, business and the City if we leave.
There will be a lot of nonsense bandied about before this is over. Saw a guy on tv saying he wanted out because the EC were requiring him to put a particular label on the salmon he was producing. If he wants to sell to the ec after Britain leaves he wil still have to do this -he will have to produce a product that complies with and has been produced in accordance with ec standards (he may even have to pay a independent assessor such as BRC to assess that he complies ). Manufacturers selling products into the ec will have to have those products ce marked to show compliance with ec standards.
The problem with sensible debate is that people are likely to have singular issues which they will concentrate on eg immigration and will not look at the big picture. Trying to put across a complicated argument is likely to lose a large number of voters hence the simplistic headlines. Expect to see more of this.
I don't know how this will all pan out and have not fully made up my own mind about it yet but I think some people will be disappointed with their new utopia after an exit.
I'm afraid I see this as another example of Mr Cameron's weak leadership and putting party interests ahead of the country's. It's possible his gamble on this occasion may not pay off. He is to be applauded though for trying to get a better deal for Britain within Europe (whatever that means) but that appeared to be a pretty poor effort on his part.
In general, I would say that just about the worst way of deciding anything of National importance is to allow a public referendum.
I don't think people understand the concept of Democracy.
Democracy doesn't mean everyone has to get their own way. The whole point of a democracy is that you vote for REPRESENTATIVES who then REPRESENT the views of their constituencies in government. We vote for these representatives because (a) we look to get sensible people who can make a call on our behalf based on a collective understanding of the bias, nimbyism and prejudice that needs averaging out, and (b) they are supposedly dedicated to the task and can therefore spend the time and effort to study the subject and make the right decisions after discussion and debate.
By dropping back to plebiscites like this (and the Scotland debate) we are allowing our representatives off the hook. We let them say "ooh - it's complicated, there's too many different opinions and it's too hard to keep you all happy". If I wanted to spend my days/nights reading up on the pros/cons of EU exit I'd have become a politician. I didn't do that because I thought I didn't need to as I would vote in someone who could do that bit and represent the consolidated views of the people of my area. I would then live with the consequences of that because I am normal, and accept that is what happens in a democracy.
But oh no.... We can't possibly have to live with consequences any more. We all need to be heard. We stand posturing with our hands on our hips saying "I didn't vote for this. I thought we lived in a DEMOCRACY!!"
So that means that the entire spectrum of the Great British Public, from high falutin' country squire to lowly wandering village idiots and all flavours in between now get to tick a box and have a 'phone in' vote on something that the vast, vast majority won't understand or bother to research.
Why not just disband parliament and setup a phone line and an SMS centre and put every single decision required every day to run the country to a 50 million vote-off and see what sort of God-awful dogs breakfast we can make of the place.
Maybe at work I will try this. I will say that it's much fairer if the whole department makes every decision. I, as manager, have deemed myself incompetent (probably rightly so) and from now on every invoice for approval, every request for holiday, every enquiry about who can have a parking space and every decision on what project or activity we should do next will no longer be my job as manager to decide - but will in fact now be decided by all staff texting in A for Yes or B for No and then I can sit and look out of the window and when the place goes to pot I can look back across the department and say "Well it was you lot, not me".....
Brainless nonsense. God help us for what sort of precedent this sets. I used to laugh about The Peoples Republic of Surrey, but I genuinely wouldn't rule out even more nonsense of this sort after Scotland and now Brexit.
As the response to the idea was fairly positive let's give it a go. Think of it as the Alfaowner equivalent of the 606 phone in on Radio 5.
As a starting point i'd like to mention Nemanja Vidic. He's managed to damage not just one but three knee ligaments and is out for the season and possibly...
I thought I'd start a generic cricket thread similar to Keithboy's football discussion thread, where we can discuss and observe the wonderful game.
I'll start shall I?
I was listening to TMS while sitting at Arundel on Thursday and they were discussing the fact that there is a high probability...