Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
"I'm afraid there is no plan"
Precisely.vinny wrote:Doesn't the UK Parliament represent democracy in the UK?
I am quite troubled by your analysis of the EU and free movement and your comparison with the situation in America.secret.simon wrote: It is true that it is practically impossible to get EU legislation in place without the approval of the EU Commission. But guess who appoints the EU Commission; the national governments. So, the new EU Commission appointed towards the end of 2018 may be much more open to ideas of restricting free movement. And that will be the case without a Brexit.
So, even if Brexit is avoided, the doors could be closing. Like the US elections, this is a situation that affords no optimism.
Given that Trump is forecast to lose with upwards of 40% of the popular vote, that Marine Le Pen is forecast to get to the final stage of the French presidential elections and the AfD is forecast to get into the Bundestag, the swing towards a more socially conservative mood is visible and obvious across the Western world and therefore I would not hold out much hope for freedom of movement.RealClearPolitics wrote:The 'Populist International' — a loose group of anti-globalist European parties and politicians — will continue to advance.
Mark Elliott and Hayley J. Hooper wrote:The key issue therefore concerns the legal status of those EU law rights which are enforceable in the UK only by operation of the ECA 1972. There are two ways of looking at this. The first sees the ECA as a conduit for the effect in domestic law of rights that are EU law rights. This, we contend, is the correct view. The second view — preferred by the Court — sees the ECA as the creator of domestic rights. By taking this view, the Court triggers the well-established constitutional principles concerning the extent of prerogative power. The upshot, on this view, is that the Government cannot use the prerogative to remove the rights in question — for that would entail using prerogative authority to ‘alter the law of the land’.
They are the sevants of the people. You can't gtet more democratic than the, one person one vote system that was used by the British for Brexit.vinny wrote:Doesn't the UK Parliament represent democracy in the UK?
In the traditional British understanding of the role of MP, MPs were never delegates who voted according to how decisions were taken elsewhere, but independent representatives who voted according to their understanding of a specific issue.Petaltop wrote:They are the sevants of the people.
The judges did not rule on the referendum, they ruled on the effects of the European Communities Act (ECA) and whether that restricted the right of the government to treat with foreign governments and organisations.Petaltop wrote:As aked on another forum, has the UK ever been in the EU? That freedom of trade vote that took the UK into the EU, was on a public vote. In this judges view, it appears the UK being in the EU was never legal?
How about all the treaties that took the UK deeper into wha tht EU is now, many of these were only signed by the PM at the time. The Lisborn Treaty that many British didn't want, was mentioned in Labour's manifesto, that if you vote for us we will give the country a vote on this treaty. Once in, they then didn't and wasn't that treaty that was signed by then PM Brown, not represented correctly to parliment? On the judges thinking, how are these treaties legal in the UK either?
Just a simple question. Who give the unskilled/low-skilled migrants work and why? The BRITISH employers. Because the employers feel they can control the immigrants who still have no clue how the system work in the UK and what are their working rights unlike the citizens. Besides their hard working attitude and availability to work bank holidays, weekends and night shift on minimum wage. So, the immigrants find it easy to get a job and send to their friends and relatives to follow them and get a job in their working place. Who is helping and motivating this? British Managers in factories, British HR Managers and British Working agencies Managers. So, the businesses are welcoming the unskilled immigrants with open arms. While a fraction of the public who they feel resentment about that.secret.simon wrote:Paragraphs 1 -36 of the Miller judgment gives a very good overview of the constitutional structure of the UK and the interplay of the various parts of government within the UK. Worth a read.
I agree that Brexit can still be avoided. But people assume that Brexit not happening means that the status quo with regards to immigration prevails. And that is simply not the case.
Brexit has made it abundantly clear that unlimited migration, especially unskilled/low-skilled migration, to the UK is not welcome. So, migrants are less likely to choose to come to the UK.
The people who had the right to vote but did not turn out in effect opted not to speak and hence can not complain that their voices were not heard. As an aside, the referendum saw one of the highest electoral turnouts in British electoral history.Manchester171 wrote:Only 16 million who voted out (England and Wales) with the turn out 72% of the registered Electorate 47 million. How much the percentages of who voted out? 34%