EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[EM2]

There is no "freedom of movement" between continental Europe and the UK. There is the right to work and settle for those legally entitled to be within the bloc. Those arriving from the EU into the UK go through the same border control as those arriving from elsewhere. Leaving aside asylum claims on arrival, only if they are entitled to be in the EU will they be given permission to enter the UK.

So come November 1st, with no border controls, what is to stop an EU national legally entering the Republic of Ireland, and then illegally entering Northern Ireland? How can you have control of your borders without border control?

 

[edwin_m]

There is no "freedom of movement" between continental Europe and the UK. There is the right to work and settle for those legally entitled to be within the bloc. Those arriving from the EU into the UK go through the same border control as those arriving from elsewhere. Leaving aside asylum claims on arrival, only if they are entitled to be in the EU will they be given permission to enter the UK.

How many times do we have to explain this?

Freedom of movement is exactly the same thing as the right to work and settle for those legally entitled to be in the bloc.

The benefit claimed by the Brexiters was that we could stop this freedom of movement, and deny entry to the UK if we chose for those who have freedom of movement within the EU. But people with this freedom will still be able to enter the UK via Ireland, illegally but without much chance of being caught. They no longer have the right to work and settle but can still get here and work in the black economy or make a living from crime. This seems to me exactly the sort of thing Brexiters wanted to stop!

And I don't know if you've been through an airport recently, but last time I did there was a big sign for UK, EU and EEA citizens and another one for everywhere else.

 

[Typhoon]

Why would that be then?

There is no "freedom of movement" between continental Europe and the UK. There is the right to work and settle for those legally entitled to be within the bloc. Those arriving from the EU into the UK go through the same border control as those arriving from elsewhere. Leaving aside asylum claims on arrival, only if they are entitled to be in the EU will they be given permission to enter the UK.

At present the people whom the smugglers are smuggling from (say) France have no right of entry to the UK. They would (or should) be denied boarding if they attempted to travel legitimately by air or sea as the UK is not party to Schengen and they would be denied entry on arrival. The same situation applies to Ireland (also not party to Schengen). The smugglers use the sea crossing direct from France because it is the shortest route. So, why have the smugglers got their calendars marked? They will continue to attempt to smuggle people into the UK. They will continue to do so illegally and directly from France. Why would they go to the bother of sending their cargo via Ireland (with all the associated extra difficulties, risk and expense involved) when their activities are every bit as illegal whether the UK is part of the EU or not? What exactly changes for them on October 31st?

There are two groups of people that are aiming to enter the UK - asylum seekers and economic migrants. Asylum seekers - nothing changes, they want to get caught. Economic migrants might well be sent back so they don't want to get caught. At present people smugglers have two choices - via the ferry or tunnel or via dinghies. Both are fairly easy to monitor, the former involves checks at the departure points in France (two main points plus container ports), the latter usually aim for either St Margaret's Bay area or the Romney coast - Dymchurch to Dungeness (advantage sparsely populated, disadvantage - longer), which is now more tightly patrolled. The smugglers will be looking for any opportunity and I would have thought it inevitable that they will try just to see if it is a weak link. It may prove to be a cul-de-sac, but worth taking a risk. Many European economic migrants may find it rather easier, and safer, to enter Ireland then slip across the border.

 

[edwin_m]

Ministers are parroting the Dominic Cummings line that Parliament can't stop no deal going through, and the government is refusing even to talk to the EU so no other outcome seems possible. Explaining why he came to this view by an amazing coincidence just when he would otherwise have lost his ministerial limo, Matt Hancock had the sheer bloody gall to say:

When the facts change, sometimes even as a politician you have to change your mind.

(https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49234603)
Shame they seem determined by hook or by crook to deny the rest of us that opportunity.

 

[Bantamzen]

There are two groups of people that are aiming to enter the UK - asylum seekers and economic migrants. Asylum seekers - nothing changes, they want to get caught. Economic migrants might well be sent back so they don't want to get caught. At present people smugglers have two choices - via the ferry or tunnel or via dinghies. Both are fairly easy to monitor, the former involves checks at the departure points in France (two main points plus container ports), the latter usually aim for either St Margaret's Bay area or the Romney coast - Dymchurch to Dungeness (advantage sparsely populated, disadvantage - longer), which is now more tightly patrolled. The smugglers will be looking for any opportunity and I would have thought it inevitable that they will try just to see if it is a weak link. It may prove to be a cul-de-sac, but worth taking a risk. Many European economic migrants may find it rather easier, and safer, to enter Ireland then slip across the border.

It is inevitable that an open ROI / NI border will result in people smuggling through that route. Some people assume that Ireland's distance from the European mainland will prove too much of a barrier, but as has been seen time and again in the Mediterranean sea, traffickers will use any means possible to put their victims (I call them this because they are in effect victims of crime) into little dingys in the middle of the sea. So what would stop them simply sailing around to international waters around Ireland, then drop them off to make their way to the coast and be moved swiftly from there into Northern Ireland? So sooner or later in the case of a no deal, the issue of a hard border will have to be tackled. And when it is, expect sectarian violence to rise very quickly.

Ministers are parroting the Dominic Cummings line that Parliament can't stop no deal going through, and the government is refusing even to talk to the EU so no other outcome seems possible. Explaining why he came to this view by an amazing coincidence just when he would otherwise have lost his ministerial limo, Matt Hancock had the sheer bloody gall to say:
(https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49234603)
Shame they seem determined by hook or by crook to deny the rest of us that opportunity.

The current cabinet is now effectively form a lame duck government. Its not really visible yet due to the summer recess, but once the House is back in session expect to see them flounder and fail as the deadline approaches, and no confidence votes to be called for. With a working majority of just one, it is inevitable that there will be at least a couple of defections from their side of the House. Normally I would be looking forward to this cluster-you-know-what of a government to crumble & a General Election be called. But the opposition are simply incapable of forming a new, effective, majority government and so an election would simply lead to an even more hung, and therefore dysfunctional House. The only possible upside of that would be that it would be vulnerable to legal challenges about leaving with no deal without Parliamentary consent.

Personally I am now holding out for a Zefram Cochrane moment!

(For those unaware of this fictional character, he was a central one in the Star Trek film 'First Contact', where humanity first meets an alien race of superior intelligence and logic)

 

[hwl]

So come November 1st, with no border controls, what is to stop an EU national legally entering the Republic of Ireland, and then illegally entering Northern Ireland? How can you have control of your borders without border control?

Quite often there isn't even a fence and many times not even a hedge, so even if they staff all crossings they will just be bypassed. e.g. the border is a line of bollards* between 2 industrial estates. *conveniently below lorry tail gate height!

(I own some land next to a river section of the border and am stocking up on the popcorn for Halloween. (I might even head over to watch the chaos))

 

[Typhoon]

It is inevitable that an open ROI / NI border will result in people smuggling through that route. Some people assume that Ireland's distance from the European mainland will prove too much of a barrier, but as has been seen time and again in the Mediterranean sea, traffickers will use any means possible to put their victims (I call them this because they are in effect victims of crime) into little dingys in the middle of the sea. So what would stop them simply sailing around to international waters around Ireland, then drop them off to make their way to the coast and be moved swiftly from there into Northern Ireland? So sooner or later in the case of a no deal, the issue of a hard border will have to be tackled. And when it is, expect sectarian violence to rise very quickly.

The smugglers may well find willing partners amongst certain disaffected Republican or Loyalist groups.

 

[Bantamzen]

The smugglers may well find willing partners amongst certain disaffected Republican or Loyalist groups.

As well as a re-starting of the arms routes that such groups relied on at the height of the troubles.

 

[furnessvale]

As well as a re-starting of the arms routes that such groups relied on at the height of the troubles.

I struggle to see how a currently open border suddenly becomes a problem in this manner after 31st October if either it remains open or it becomes a closed one. Either it stays the same with regard to smuggling arms or it becomes fractionally harder.

 

[Bantamzen]

I struggle to see how a currently open border suddenly becomes a problem in this manner after 31st October if either it remains open or it becomes a closed one. Either it stays the same with regard to smuggling arms or it becomes fractionally harder.

Because a closed border would trigger an escalation in sectarian violence, which in turn would lead to more demand from these groups for illegal weapons.

 

[edwin_m]

And because any divergence from EU regulations within the UK creates an incentive for smuggling. For example if we allowed inferior but cheaper chlorinated chicken.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Because a closed border would trigger an escalation in sectarian violence, which in turn would lead to more demand from these groups for illegal weapons.

From what is known presently concerning gun supply to the British criminal gang fraternity, no escalation is needed as supply seems no option to meet any required demand.

The knife seems to be the chosen weapon to use by the younger elements in society today and seems to be very lethal.

 

[edwin_m]

The current cabinet is now effectively form a lame duck government. Its not really visible yet due to the summer recess, but once the House is back in session expect to see them flounder and fail as the deadline approaches, and no confidence votes to be called for. With a working majority of just one, it is inevitable that there will be at least a couple of defections from their side of the House. Normally I would be looking forward to this cluster-you-know-what of a government to crumble & a General Election be called. But the opposition are simply incapable of forming a new, effective, majority government and so an election would simply lead to an even more hung, and therefore dysfunctional House. The only possible upside of that would be that it would be vulnerable to legal challenges about leaving with no deal without Parliamentary consent.

Heard Lord Sumption this morning saying it was possible for the government to postpone an election beyond the Brexit date - another mess-up by the Cameron government in writing the Fixed Term Parliaments Act. So it may be necessary for a majority of MPs to support an alternative governement led by someone acceptable to enough people to prise Boris out of power. That probably requires Corbyn to step back. The government could agree to go to the people as soon as it had completed its main purpose, and if it reneged then it could easily be brought down by a new confidence vote.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

And because any divergence from EU regulations within the UK creates an incentive for smuggling. For example if we allowed inferior but cheaper chlorinated chicken.

An interesting point. Are there statistics available that show both deaths and severe medical conditions in the USA as a result of eating cooked chlorinated chicken?

 

[Bantamzen]

From what is known presently concerning gun supply to the British criminal gang fraternity, no escalation is needed as supply seems no option to meet any required demand.

The knife seems to be the chosen weapon to use by the younger elements in society today and seems to be very lethal.

Any escalation of violence in Northern Ireland will likely mean a lot more than a few gangsters running around with knives.

 

[Howardh]

I struggle to see how a currently open border suddenly becomes a problem in this manner after 31st October if either it remains open or it becomes a closed one. Either it stays the same with regard to smuggling arms or it becomes fractionally harder.

You lot wanted "control of borders" and yet you are perfectly happy to leave our border wide open so anyone can cross without anyone knowing who's in or out.

Frankly it means there's no point in having checks on passports at Heathrow, Dover, Manchester etc on EU flights/ferries in, as if someone wanted to enter the UK illegally then they simply fly to Dublin and get the bus (is it the 300?) into the UK.

What on earth do you lot want?? If you are happy with uncontrolled borders then let's join the Schengen zone. I'd be 100% with you on that one.

 

[Howardh]

An interesting point. Are there statistics available that show both deaths and severe medical conditions in the USA as a result of eating cooked chlorinated chicken?

Wrong end of the stick there! The EU is against the import of the chicken due to the horrendous conditions they are kept in which causes infections and disease which require the carcasses to be chlorinated to rid them of the bacteria. If they were in better conditions, their bodies would be healthier lessening the need for these measures. Of course there is the fiscal reason that these cheap and nasty chickens undercut EU farmers it must be added.

So chlorinated food isn't the issue, we swim in chlorine, and it's probably in our water supply.

This is a report from Brexit-supporting Daily Mail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4742712/Why-chickens-washed-chlorine.html

• Tens of thousands of super-sized 'Frankenstein' birds are crammed in vast warehouses.
• The chickens, which weigh up to 9lb, often buckle under their weight and must live without natural sunlight.
• Chickens frequently die before they reach maturity and many are left covered in their own faeces, turning warehouses into vile breeding grounds for disease.

Even if those chickens were perfect and didn't require chlorination would you want them entering the UK undercutting OUR farmers?

 

[Typhoon]

Wrong end of the stick there! The EU is against the import of the chicken due to the horrendous conditions they are kept in which causes infections and disease which require the carcasses to be chlorinated to rid them of the bacteria. If they were in better conditions, their bodies would be healthier lessening the need for these measures. Of course there is the fiscal reason that these cheap and nasty chickens undercut EU farmers it must be added.

So chlorinated food isn't the issue, we swim in chlorine, and it's probably in our water supply.

This is a report from Brexit-supporting Daily Mail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4742712/Why-chickens-washed-chlorine.html

There was also a Dispatches programme ('The Truth About Chlorinated Chicken') - Channel 4, 03/06/19 - may be still available, about conditions in a factory of one of the largest producers, not just for the livestock but also for the workforce. Not for watching while you are eating though!

 

[Howardh]

There was also a Dispatches programme ('The Truth About Chlorinated Chicken') - Channel 4, 03/06/19 - may be still available, about conditions in a factory of one of the largest producers, not just for the livestock but also for the workforce. Not for watching while you are eating though!

Beggars belief why Brexiters still think the issue is the chlorine rather than the real reasons it has to be used. Just like they think they can have control of borders yet want one wide open. Or that trade deals will be "easy" or that "blue passports" will keep our privileges (they won't, we will have to submit to the ETIAS scheme in 2022 when it comes in, something we wouldn't have to do if we kept our freedom of movement).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Beggars belief why Brexiters still think the issue is the chlorine rather than the real reasons it has to be used.

It was I who asked a medically-related question about how humans could be affected in relation to the first mention of chlorinated chicken and both my good lady wife and I are middle septuagenarians who are "Remain" voters.

I make no apologies for classifying humans as being more important than animals and we at home are totally fed up with adverts about animals in overseas counties needing care when the political powers-that-be in those countries are responsible for matters. Shades of "The Empire" in how certain British charities pontificate to the leaders of other countries, rather than concentrating on matters in Britain.

Imagine how Britain would view TV advertisements made in Burkino Faso, the Democratic of Congo, etc, that showed the Homeless in Britain sleeping rough, etc.

 

[furnessvale]

Beggars belief why Brexiters still think the issue is the chlorine rather than the real reasons it has to be used. Just like they think they can have control of borders yet want one wide open. Or that trade deals will be "easy" or that "blue passports" will keep our privileges (they won't, we will have to submit to the ETIAS scheme in 2022 when it comes in, something we wouldn't have to do if we kept our freedom of movement).

Could just be something to do with the remainer narrative which has banged on about chlorine and not mentioned animal welfare, or our good old home grown salmonella for that matter.

 

[Howardh]

Could just be something to do with the remainer narrative which has banged on about chlorine and not mentioned animal welfare, or our good old home grown salmonella for that matter.

Any examples? I assume the majority or Remainers assumed that Brexiters knew perfectly well why chlorine was necessary, maybe we overestimated Brexiters knowledge??

And can you please answer my question about the open border? I'll repeat in case you missed it...

You lot wanted "control of borders" and yet you are perfectly happy to leave our border wide open so anyone can cross without anyone knowing who's in or out.

Frankly it means there's no point in having checks on passports at Heathrow, Dover, Manchester etc on EU flights/ferries in, as if someone wanted to enter the UK illegally then they simply fly to Dublin and get the bus (is it the 300?) into the UK.

What on earth do you lot want?? If you are happy with uncontrolled borders then let's join the Schengen zone. I'd be 100% with you on that one.

 

[furnessvale]

Any examples?
And can you please answer my question about the open border? I'll repeat in case you missed it...

You lot wanted "control of borders" and yet you are perfectly happy to leave our border wide open so anyone can cross without anyone knowing who's in or out.

Frankly it means there's no point in having checks on passports at Heathrow, Dover, Manchester etc on EU flights/ferries in, as if someone wanted to enter the UK illegally then they simply fly to Dublin and get the bus (is it the 300?) into the UK.

What on earth do you lot want?? If you are happy with uncontrolled borders then let's join the Schengen zone. I'd be 100% with you on that one.

You have to be joking, right?

As for the rest of your post, I give single lines on what I want to say, end of. I am certainly not "you lot".

 

[Howardh]

You have to be joking, right?

As for the rest of your post, I give single lines on what I want to say, end of. I am certainly not "you lot".

(a) you can't back up what you write and (b) you can't answer a basic question about open borders.

I'll try again, you want "control of borders" - that was part of the Leave campaign that you and 17 million others voted for (ie "you lot"!) - yet you want one left wide open. The two are incompatable - so (a) can we remove all EU to UK immigration controls across the whole UK - Heathrow, Dover, the lot - as keeping them simply diverts the unwanted to Ireland and into the uK that way?
(b) if so, we might as well leave the EU but join the Schengen Zone?
I'm trying to ask a civil question to a fellow messageboarder; can we ditch our EU/UK border controls even if we leave the EU??

 

[Typhoon]

Beggars belief why Brexiters still think the issue is the chlorine rather than the real reasons it has to be used. Just like they think they can have control of borders yet want one wide open. Or that trade deals will be "easy" or that "blue passports" will keep our privileges (they won't, we will have to submit to the ETIAS scheme in 2022 when it comes in, something we wouldn't have to do if we kept our freedom of movement).

What surprised me was the conditions inside the factory, for the live animals, the hygiene on the dead animal conveyor belts and the working conditions. They would certainly be unacceptable in this country and I suspect in many others, including some in the supposed third world. I could certainly see why food is comparatively cheap in the US. If I was a farmer, I would be concerned about how I would compete given our hygiene standards - either standards would have to drop or I would lose a fair amount of business. After all when you go in an outlet of Utah Fried Chicken they don't always tell you where then product is from.

(Utah Fried Chicken is used to denote a fictional outlet imitating a well known retailer but not necessarily maintaining the standards of that retailer. These outlets can be found in a number of High Streets. You don't want to know how many states I had to go through before I found one that did not appear to support a Fried Chicken outlet and, yes, I did try Rhode Island.)

There is trailer for the programme on YouTube.

 

[fowler9]

You appear to be making the case for a closed border.

Not at all. Just saying.

 

[thejuggler]

Looking at BBC website just now I think its time for a total embargo on news about Brexit until there is something worth reporting on.

Both parties making each other look like the bad guy is pathetic.

There is a formal process for reopening negotiations - but of course that means 31 October flies out of the window.

 

[berneyarms]

Looking at BBC website just now I think its time for a total embargo on news about Brexit until there is something worth reporting on.

Both parties making each other look like the bad guy is pathetic.

There is a formal process for reopening negotiations - but of course that means 31 October flies out of the window.

Good luck with that!!

 

[berneyarms]

Any examples? I assume the majority or Remainers assumed that Brexiters knew perfectly well why chlorine was necessary, maybe we overestimated Brexiters knowledge??

And can you please answer my question about the open border? I'll repeat in case you missed it...

You lot wanted "control of borders" and yet you are perfectly happy to leave our border wide open so anyone can cross without anyone knowing who's in or out.

Frankly it means there's no point in having checks on passports at Heathrow, Dover, Manchester etc on EU flights/ferries in, as if someone wanted to enter the UK illegally then they simply fly to Dublin and get the bus (is it the 300?) into the UK.

What on earth do you lot want?? If you are happy with uncontrolled borders then let's join the Schengen zone. I'd be 100% with you on that one.

What I would suspect many of them wanted was controlled immigration, in the sense of restricting the numbers of people from outside the UK and Ireland who could take up employment legally or who could claim benefits.

Illegal immigration is something that only be controlled via a closed hard border on the island of Ireland or checks at GB & NI ports on internal ferries, neither of which are likely to happen.

You’re still going to have intelligence led spot checks by UK Border Force for illegal immigration - this already happens on a near daily basis in NI and on flights/ferries between the island of Ireland and GB.

 

[fowler9]

Looking at BBC website just now I think its time for a total embargo on news about Brexit until there is something worth reporting on.

Both parties making each other look like the bad guy is pathetic.

There is a formal process for reopening negotiations - but of course that means 31 October flies out of the window.

Put your fingers in your ears and hope Johnson delivers the impossible you mean?