SIGN UP

Answers

21 to 36 of 36rss feed

First Previous 1 2

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by bentaxle. 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.
“Anyone care to explain how being out of the EU will stop such instances?”

It will change only if the UK leaves the EU properly (i.e. does not acquiesce to a “deal” which involves the continuation of free movement) and if it properly polices its borders. At present the UK cannot deny entry (let alone settlement) to convicted murderers from other EU nations (short of a visit –at vast expense - to the High Court to determine whether it is in the “public interest” to deny such entry). All entrants to the UK (including UK passport holders, passport holders from other EU nations and those from elsewhere) have to pass through border control when entering the UK. The resources needed to deal with the total arriving will not be substantially altered. However those from former EU countries to whom the Border Agency is currently unable to deny entry will be able to be kept out as are undesirable people from non-EU countries. The PAC script you kindly provide a link to doesn’t really shed much light of this particular issue because it concentrates mainly on freight, which is a different matter entirely.

I don’t know why you ask how Schengen will be effected since the UK is not party to that ridiculous scheme. Neither for that matter is Romania, but that’s by the way. Whether the UK is in or out of the EU makes no difference to Schengen.

1. The original question was “Can you believe this country allowing people like this in”. And the answer is we have to believe it because plainly and simply we have no choice and we never will have whilst we remain EU members. We can both speculate on whether the border controls will or will not pick out such undesirables post-Brexit. But at present they needn’t bother (and probably don’t) because there is nothing they can do to deny entry and settlement to any citizen from any other EU nation.
I thought my comment pertinent to the discussion because however non EU people are treated at our borders now should be how EU people are treated on our final exit. NJs comment about any future deal not withstanding.

Therefore no new border requirements. Just an increase in one area and a fall in another.

As someone who thinks themselves more intelligent than the average ABer I thought it would have understood that.
It seems very strange to me that just because we are EU members we can't stop these people from getting in! Does being a member then mean EVERYONE can come in regardless of whatever vile thing they have done in their own country - like I said, very strange.
‘I don’t know why you ask how Schengen will be effected‘
I asked merely to point out the OP’s basic flaw. I knew it was unanswerable.

Cassa ‘just an increase in one area and a fall in another’
What on earth does that mean.

I note the leave voters have chipped in with opinions and zero facts. As per.
Khandro:
‘The UK isn't in Schengen, and will have full control of its borders, what's your point?’

I think you just made it for me. Ta.
NJ:
‘It will change only if the UK leaves the EU properly []and if it properly polices its borders. At present the UK cannot deny entry.

Again, Thanks for reinforcing my point to the OP.
ZM,
You appear happier at attempting to ‘win the internet’ on an online debate as opposed to condemning the attack by a criminal whom deep down you must know ought not to have been allowed anywhere near the UK.
//ZM,
You appear happier at attempting to ‘win the internet’ on an online debate as opposed to condemning the attack by a criminal...//

There's a story about some old English leftist (was it Cyril Connolly?) visiting the US in the old days and going through the standard "why and how long...?" interview. You know, "Are you now or have you ever been a communist?" etc.

When he came to the question "Do you plan to engage in any subversive activity during your stay?" Connolly allegedly replied "Main reason for visit".
He's got a higher IQ and a wider vocabulary than the typical internet troll, but appears to me to be made from the same base material.
I think that remark was first attributed to Oscar Wilde, who, when asked if he intended to overthrow the US government replied, "Sole purpose of visit".
Yes, that's more plausible. Thanks, Jackdaw.
“Cassa ‘just an increase in one area and a fall in another’
What on earth does that mean.”

The same as I surmised. The number of entrants to the UK will not change (apart from the growth which would occur with or without Brexit). The only difference will be that the foreign passport holders who previously went through the “EU” channel will, post Brexit, go through the “All foreigners” channel. So, far fewer staff needed in the “EU” channel (only UK passport holders will use it) and more needed in the “Foreigners” channel (which would deal with both non-EU and remaining EU people).

“I note the leave voters have chipped in with opinions and zero facts. As per.”

I don’t see any “facts” in your posts.

“‘I don’t know why you ask how Schengen will be effected‘
I asked merely to point out the OP’s basic flaw. I knew it was unanswerable.”

It’s not unanswerable. The answer, as I pointed out, is “not at all”. What you mean is that the question is actually irrelevant.
Jack; //I think that remark was first attributed to Oscar Wilde, who, when asked if he intended to overthrow the US government replied, "Sole purpose of visit".//

I think in Oscar's day - and probably Connolly's too- the US immigration officials had a better sense of irony and therefore could not of been of German descent.
// Ha. No answer again. Typical leave voter , basing their opinions on.......opinion, rather than facts. //

yeah I was a bit surprised by the shiny new Beeb series
Brexit - now it is with us - what will it MEAN ?

and thought christ we are year or two late for this
does this mean that everyone who voted for Brexit had no idea what it was about ?

Crazy
Thank you NJ, yes, ‘irrelevant’ might have been more appropriate.

Chill: you are.....sort of.....right.....but the main thrust of the OP assumed that Brexit had something to do with his like not being allowed in post March next year which is fundamentally incorrect and I believe typifies the lack of understanding of many leave voters (not the ones on here, obvs). I took it upon myself to point this out.

V-e: not sure how I can be obliquely referred to as a troll when all I’m doing is pointing out the error in the OP. Still, if you’ve nothing to say, attack the author eh? Pretty cheap.
-- answer removed --

21 to 36 of 36rss feed

First Previous 1 2

Do you know the answer?

Another Reason For Brexit

Answer Question >>