nauseus

Thanks. Of course I will never be happy about the fudging of the Brexit process. I remember that you, with business interests in Europe, were concerned with the economic problems of leaving, and that's understandable. However, I saw growing issues with sovereignty, with ever-decreasing UK government control of its own country, and I think that's why you saw the out vote. The steps of reviewing/removing EU legislation were started but not completed. I don't think that all EU laws were to be scrapped but there has been little news of this process reported recently. I see the EU as a failed project, with true equality of members neither practical nor achievable. The EU was built as an old club, with higher status afforded to founding members, by agreements and in treaties. We all saw in 2015 and 2019 who really ran the show. The EU suffers from poor and weak leadership, wastefulness, and bad policies; its economies are fading and I think that it is the EU, as was and is now, which has the most flaws.

On a roll?

You are arguing for an age of moderate immigration that has long ended. i don't have a problem with much of that. My comment on "low regard" is drenched in reality - this comes from statements from the immigrants themselves. GDP will become irrelevant. And you want a prize?

They can also impede the democratic process.

Far better than with this mainly unproductive immigrant influx, much of which seems to hold low regard for the UK and its native peoples. Or do you really think all these new people won't age too? Forget the GDP argument. GDP/capita is already dropping. Guess why?

truly leaving meant returning to the same status as before the UK joined the EEC. Yes, I know, so many problems with that, but with mutual and genuine goodwill they could have been sorted out.

Me: "Do I really have to tell you again"? Tom Sykes European Editor at Large royalist

I believe that is correct. However, confirmation from the TRD would be appreciated, of course.

Well, they might need a lot off spares.

Well worth it.

Culled the Civil Service.

Not too far, really. Migrants are brought overland from distant countries into N. Africa and Turkey. Italy has been experiencing this problem for more than 20 years, mainly via Lampedusa, an Italian island off Tunisia. From Turkey, most have been moved into Greece through the easternmost Greek islands. Now it look like Greece has had enough too. Most EU borders are effectively open to travel from other EU states, which has enabled so many to move on, further north and west.

Nothing to do with this topic.

If communities are not being wiped out, how come at least 700 homes (and possibly up to 4000), a church, a graveyard and eight Grade II-listed buildings would have to be demolished or abandoned in Sipson (total rite-off) and parts of Harmondsworth? Newer international airports in Asia are already further away from city cores than Heathrow is to London, now. Look at Narita (Tokyo) and Incheon (Seoul). As an international jet-setting guru, you don't seem aware of the reality of the geographic setting of recent major airport sites. Narita is 80km from central Tokyo but works thanks to an efficient and quick rail system. Hong Kong and Seoul had to build their newer main airports on the islands they were lucky to have. London doesn't have much available within 50km. In the UK and Europe the options are very restricted. There may well be no suitable alternative locations within 50 km of London but so what? Forget the expense of having to travel more than an hour to an airport for the London area because it may become a necessity, if air travel continues to rise, using conventional jets at least.

Poffibly.