ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha, Administrator
My understanding is that the official figures are the rebated amount of £12.9 billion per year, £35 million per day.secret.simon wrote:£350 million a day, Casa.Casa wrote:Or perhaps the 51.9% could share in the £35 million a day the UK have been contributing to the EU budget.
I think that now there is a possibility that a country will actually leave, it will concentrate minds in the EU and across the capitals. A lot of possibilities will be on the table. While most people are assuming that the rules will be followed, what if the rules are rewritten? Nothing is cast in stone.Poland said today (24 June) that Britain’s vote to leave the EU meant it was time for a “new European treaty” to overhaul the federalist model of closer European political integration.
How will they do that?Obie wrote:The EU must compel the UK to invoke Article 50 immediately.
It seems they can.Obie wrote:You cannot have the likes of Borris and Gove having their cake and eating it.
Obie wrote:If the want out, they must invoke article 50. The cannot continue to hold the EU to ransom.
Yes they do want out. They have had enough of the EU and wanted control of their own country again.Obie wrote:Now that they voted, the smell the coffee, and dont want to invoke article 50.
Looking at all the happy faces, they don't feel conned, they feel free. Some people are going to have to learn to be grateful to the Brits for letting them stay, or out they will goObie wrote:British people are are to see that they have been conned. Farage has already told them there will be no 350 million for NHS.
Are you referring to us UK citizens who immigrated to this country legally and enjoyed the rights and benefits of EU citizenship as well? Or did you have somebody else in mind?Petaltop wrote:Obie wrote: Looking at all the happy faces, they don't feel conned, they feel free. Some people are going to have to learn to be grateful to the Brits for letting them stay, or out they will go
I think the poster understood that it wasn't your post, i think he/she was being sarcastic.Obie wrote:Don't attribute that post to me.
I clearly did not type that .
The rest of the post also states that EU law continues to apply to the UK until the end of the period envisaged by Article 50 (which could be longer or shorter than two years with the agreement of all 28 current Member-states). As the UK-EU deal only came into force if the UK voted to remain, that means that it is practically guaranteed for there to be no change to the EEA-Route Applications for the next two years at least. I can imagine that a lot of you would be relieved by that development.Third, the likelihood, therefore, is that Brexit will be accomplished under Article 50. That means that — unless matters are wrapped up earlier by mutual agreement — the UK will remain a Member State of the EU for at least two years from the date on which notice of the UK’s intention to leave is served upon the European Council. And that gives rise to the question whether — and, if so, when — notice must be served. As a matter of law, notice does not have to be served — ever — because the outcome of the referendum is not legally binding. The legislation that provided for a referendum to be held said nothing whatever about the effect of the outcome of the referendum, and the result does not place the Government under any legal obligation to secure Brexit — whether by serving notice on the European Council under Article 50 or otherwise. Put another way, the United Kingdom has not, simply by holding an advisory referendum, “decide[d] to withdraw” within the meaning of Article 50. Rather, the will of the people has been expressed through an advisory referendum, and the making of the decision whether to withdraw remains a matter for the Government.
However, to say that the Government is not legally obliged to trigger Brexit is one thing. Political reality is something else entirely. It would, self-evidently, be astonishingly political difficult for the Government to ignore the outcome of the referendum, and there is, in effect, an insuperable political obligation to fire the Article 50 starting-gun. That does not, however, mean that the UK Government must — or should — immediately do so. Given that it is not obliged by UK law or by EU law to start the Article 50 process, it can, if it wishes, bide its time — in order, if nothing else, to take stock and work out who, and by reference to what strategy, the negotiations will be conducted. The UK could, for instance, decline to trigger the Article 50 process until a new Prime Minister takes office in the autumn — which is what David Cameron appeared to envisage would happen in his resignation statement.
That will not be fair. I don't like May very much, but I believe it will be wrong for her to clear a mess that Cameron and to a very large extent Johnson created.Casa wrote:Better hope that the other contender, Mrs May doesn't take the vacant place.
And they have very similar hairstyles, would make for comical photos togetherObie wrote:Boris and Trump are people with very similar attributes. They are professionals on inciting their Base.
This process of brexit won't happen overnight and it will take some time for UK to establish new relationships with EuropeObie wrote:It is odd for the UK to hold 50 million people to ransom . It all seems so strange. The whole uncertainly does not affect UK alone, it has impact on the financial market of the other states.
If Prime Minister Johnson in waiting thinks he can use this referendum as a gun in the head of the EU , to get concession and then hold a second referendum, then he is mistaking.
The most decent think to do is, trigger Article 50, approve Scotland's proposal for a new referendum and allow Scotland's referendum to be held before the period of Article 50 elapses.
I felt sorry for Scots, and 75 % of young people like myself, whO were engulfed by the wave of hate.
You go to polling station and you hear some of the venom being used on immigrant . So bad.
With all their hate and muderous instinct, which unfortunately led to the death of an innocent mother of 2 , they should try and do the right thing for once.
The difficulty for me, is the problem that UK refusal to formally go, is causing on the EU.vinny wrote:Perhaps a leave/stay referendum wasn't the best way of solving the UK's problems?
We should respect the decision of majority whether we were agreed or disagreed with them because this is democracy. People should not moan because decisions were not as per their expectation. Iyoshi_jp wrote:Having read some rather emotional and judgemental comments on this thread, I feel a very tiny bit unsettled.
I voted "out". Did that make me a person who was so intellectually challenged that he could easily be "incited" by a certain politician whom a few here so passionately dislike?
Do you really think that the majority of our fellow citizens are so stupid? What makes you think that you are any better?
Did my Polish wife somehow become a non-thinking non-entity because she voted "out"?
Just pause for a moment and try to imagine that some people might have voted "leave" for various reasons of their own while being fully aware that the figure of 350 million pounds was a bit dubious, that the "Brexiteers" had no clear onward plan post-exit, and that the career politicians promoting Brexit could quite possibly have less-than-ideal motives? Every person has unique priorities in life. Some believe "Give me liberty or give me death" and some believe ups and downs of FTSE 100 over the next 10 seconds are more important than anything, but the whole point of democracy is that both are equally entitled to vote.
Could some of you please ease off your cavalier attitude a bit? It is becoming too nauseating.
When did Jean Claude Junker and Donald Tusk become beacons of morality?
I would have gracefully accepted the result whether it was of my liking or not. I feel truly honoured and humbled by the experience of taking part in this historic event. Why don't you just respect our collective decision as a nation and stop bad-mouthing?
+1 Well said. We can't claim to be a democratic nation and then complain when democracy is implemented.yoshi_jp wrote:Having read some rather emotional and judgemental comments on this thread, I feel a very tiny bit unsettled.
I voted "out". Did that make me a person who was so intellectually challenged that he could easily be "incited" by a certain politician whom a few here so passionately dislike?
Do you really think that the majority of our fellow citizens are so stupid? What makes you think that you are any better?
Did my Polish wife somehow become a non-thinking non-entity because she voted "out"?
Just pause for a moment and try to imagine that some people might have voted "leave" for various reasons of their own while being fully aware that the figure of 350 million pounds was a bit dubious, that the "Brexiteers" had no clear onward plan post-exit, and that the career politicians promoting Brexit could quite possibly have less-than-ideal motives? Every person has unique priorities in life. Some believe "Give me liberty or give me death" and some believe ups and downs of FTSE 100 over the next 10 seconds are more important than anything, but the whole point of democracy is that both are equally entitled to vote.
Could some of you please ease off your cavalier attitude a bit? It is becoming too nauseating.
When did Jean Claude Junker and Donald Tusk become beacons of morality?
I would have gracefully accepted the result whether it was of my liking or not. I feel truly honoured and humbled by the experience of taking part in this historic event. Why don't you just respect our collective decision as a nation and stop bad-mouthing?
