5 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Why the straw man ? Because you have nothing else ?
 

 

Already suggested a solution. Rejoin the Single Market and allow freedom of movement for EU nationals (although there is no chance of it happening in the foreseeable). 

 

5 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Every UK Taxpayers voice should be heard. Regardless of where they might be in the World.

 

I disagree. I pay tax to the South African and Spanish governments on dividends paid by companies registered in their respective countries. I don't reside in either country and I don't expect a vote in their elections.

 

5 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/886366/issues-facing-britain/

 

58% is a lot of voices.

 

1 of the reasons that Labour are currently tanking faster than a big bag of fast things.

 

I agree

 

5 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

1993 was a bit before your time ? Tells me everything I need to know.

 

Not sure what that tells you. 1993? I know that's when the EU came into existence but we'd been in the EEC since 1972.

 

(I was actually around then but my only interest back then was football).

12 hours ago, RayC said:

 

Two things to say at the outset: 1) I am only talking about legal immigration here and 2) imo most Brits are welcoming and accept immigrants

 

However, unfortunately, there have always been a minority who have complained about immigrants, often for no better reason than they don't like the colour of their skin or their accent. This sentiment existed way before the UK joined the EU (EEC). The Irish, the Windrush generation, the Ugandan Asians are examples. Go back centuries and the Huguenots and European Jewish migrants also suffered some discrimination.

 

Wrt the EU specifically. Imo freedom of movement was a success and contributed to a (relatively) efficient labour market. In theory, pre-Brexit an EU national could hop onto Eurostar in Brussels or Paris at 10:00 and be serving behind a bar in London, picking fruit or working in a care home at midday: Worker happy, employer happy, customer (probably) happy. Contrast that with the hoops that EU nationals have to jump through now to get a work visa for such jobs, and the red tape and cost to the UK employer. Of course, the same applied - and applies - to UK workers heading to the continent.

 

Hopefully it won't happen, but if it ever gets to the stage where I am incapable of looking after myself the last things I'm going to worry about is the colour of the skin, accent, country of birth or religion of the person caring for me. I'll just be very grateful that they are there.

Great post. Many of the problems that are driving the anti-immigrant sentiment are economic and are a direct result of brexit, ironically famously championed by Farage. Throughout history, whenever there has been an economic downturn the finger has been pointed at immigrants because they are a soft target. Over ninety- five percent of immigration is legal;  visas having been issued by the Home Office. The big increase in legal immigration is largely a result of brexit and the implemention of post-brexit migration rules, overseen by Boris Johnson and not Starmer. These rules made it so much easier for non-EU nationals and foreign students to get visas. Didn't Farage and Johnson promise that brexit would ensure UK sovereignty and guarantee economic prosperity? Facts are so easily forgotten in culture wars that do not serve any legitimate interest, only self-interest, and are waged emotively and not rationally.

12 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

I don't trust Farage. I do trust Tommy. It's Tommy or nothing as far as Im concerned. Was in todays Daily Mail that Farage said that Begum lass isn't too bad and he wouldnt mind her returning to Britain. Says it all.

Ohhh Tommy. Tommy Tommy Robinson. An absolute hero.

Judge a man by the company he keeps:

 

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Judge a man by the company he keeps:

 

The idea of Farage as PM is laughable, especially when people start looking into Reform's policies.  The idea of Tommy being in any position of power is just ridiculous.  

8 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

Which freedoms have been lost and how is wrapping yourself in flags, getting lagered up and pissing against buildings going to get them back exactly?

very true , in fact  probably about as effective as fighting with the police and chanting "from  the  river to the sea" is going to be in changing anything

I'm sure the lefties excreted a similar amount of urine and I doubt they used public toilets either 

20 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Reform estimates the changes could save £234 billion over each migrant’s lifetime."

 

Dang man.  I may be tempted to hop on one of those dinghies.

53 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

The idea of Farage as PM is laughable, especially when people start looking into Reform's policies.  The idea of Tommy being in any position of power is just ridiculous.  

 

Not half as laughable as Trump getting elected President.

 

Yet, here we are...

3 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Not half as laughable as Trump getting elected President.

 

Yet, here we are...

 

True.  It's a worrying time!

15 hours ago, RayC said:

 

Different times. Bit before my time but, unfortunately, the anti-immigrant brigade were out in force then as well.

 

We weren't giving everything away to anyone who turned up, thats why it was different times. 

9 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

 

Yeah yeah, of course. 

Which freedoms have been lost and how is wrapping yourself in flags, getting lagered up and pissing against buildings going to get them back exactly?


 

 

When you got that sheer volume of people on the streets, where do you expect them to piss? 

 

That said, the left wing extremist march wasn't that well supported, that's why they were able to queue in a small line using the same portaloo. 

My friend is a nurse in the UK for nearly 20 years, on a indefinate leave to remain. 

 

So we are now saying these people are hostile and under risk ? The rhetoric around this is disgraceful. 

 

Isn't it about time someone explained and gave some push back against all this nonsense ? The media seem to love it, and there appears no journalist push back. 

20 hours ago, Summerinsiam said:

Anyone who thinks that the chief cheerleader of the catastrophe that was brexit will make a good leader is seriously misguided. I will grant you that he is a great communicator, but in reality he is nothing more than a charlatan who panders to the worst base instincts of a minority of the electorate. He offers no real solutions to the myriad of domestic and international problems that the UK faces. Didn't he insist that brexit would restore the UK's sovereignty? If he kicks out all the immigrants, who will prop up the NHS, staff the care homes, harvest crops....? Its the easiest thing in the world to say what is wrong, and to advocate pie in the sky, quick-fix policies that will never see the light of day and have no real-life consequences.

Whilsy Nigel Farage was the main organiser behind Br5exit it was NOT his responsibility for what happened to the UK after Brexit.

 

For that debacle you can blame the successive Tory governments for NOT implementing Brexit properly, nor can you blame Labour as they were not in power either either.

1 hour ago, DonniePeverley said:

My friend is a nurse in the UK for nearly 20 years, on a indefinate leave to remain. 

 

So we are now saying these people are hostile and under risk ? The rhetoric around this is disgraceful. 

 

Isn't it about time someone explained and gave some push back against all this nonsense ? The media seem to love it, and there appears no journalist push back. 

Stop getting your knickers in a twist, those that genuinely contribute should be fine. 

31 minutes ago, sungod said:

Stop getting your knickers in a twist, those that genuinely contribute should be fine. 

Farage has prosed canceling all previous ‘indefinite leave to remain’.

 

There is zero guarantee of anyone being ‘fine’ 

15 hours ago, RayC said:

 

Two things to say at the outset: 1) I am only talking about legal immigration here and 2) imo most Brits are welcoming and accept immigrants

 

However, unfortunately, there have always been a minority who have complained about immigrants, often for no better reason than they don't like the colour of their skin or their accent. This sentiment existed way before the UK joined the EU (EEC). The Irish, the Windrush generation, the Ugandan Asians are examples. Go back centuries and the Huguenots and European Jewish migrants also suffered some discrimination.

 

Wrt the EU specifically. Imo freedom of movement was a success and contributed to a (relatively) efficient labour market. In theory, pre-Brexit an EU national could hop onto Eurostar in Brussels or Paris at 10:00 and be serving behind a bar in London, picking fruit or working in a care home at midday: Worker happy, employer happy, customer (probably) happy. Contrast that with the hoops that EU nationals have to jump through now to get a work visa for such jobs, and the red tape and cost to the UK employer. Of course, the same applied - and applies - to UK workers heading to the continent.

 

Hopefully it won't happen, but if it ever gets to the stage where I am incapable of looking after myself the last things I'm going to worry about is the colour of the skin, accent, country of birth or religion of the person caring for me. I'll just be very grateful that they are there.

 

 1) I was referring to all immigration. (2) most Brits accept immigrants arriving but legally and with due vetting.

 

Yes, there will always be a minority who complained about immigrants, but for various reasons.

 

EU freedom of movement was only a success for the minority that it benefitted but the effect was almost invisible in the EEC/EC days. With the expanded community, as the EU, FOM mainly benefitted peoples from eastern Europe able to work in the richer western states, especially the UK. One problem was that these workers sent much of their incomes home, so that much money was not spent back into the UK economy. Most EU workers were prepared to take on low-paid jobs and even accepted pay cuts and this started the trend of more British becoming too content to live on benefits, rather than work. You call this efficiency and I call it madness. This freedom was intended to apply to EEC nationals only - now it seems to be the right of anyone with a foot already on EU soil.

 

This freedom of movement concept might have been fine for the original EEC member states, which mostly had a  similar level of wealth. However, since 1993 this pillar has been damaged and misinterpreted so much that it's starting to fall. The Schengen system is a similar (or even more abused) failure.

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Farage has prosed canceling all previous ‘indefinite leave to remain’.

 

There is zero guarantee of anyone being ‘fine’ 

 

And no guarantee they wont be fine too

45 minutes ago, sungod said:

 

And no guarantee they wont be fine too

People currently with indefinite leave to remain are fine as it is.

 

No reason to change.

On 9/22/2025 at 7:40 AM, BritManToo said:

I could live with that.

Britain isn't really a good place to take foreign wives.

Try telling that to my Thai wife of 22 years, who now enjoys a Freedom Oyster Card giving her free travel across the London Transport network, access to a free health service and prescriptions, and thanks to her NI contributions an index-linked pension of around £170 per week in just six years’ time. She also holds a British passport, granting visa-free travel to most countries worldwide, and benefits from a supportive network of Thai friends and cultural activities through the local Thai temple and community groups where she plays an active role.

Most of her peers have little desire to return to Thailand, except for short visits or longer stays if, like us, they maintain property there.

 

Oh and great summers and clean air - you can't put a price on that. 

48 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Try telling that to my Thai wife of 22 years, who now enjoys a Freedom Oyster Card giving her free travel across the London Transport network, access to a free health service and prescriptions, and thanks to her NI contributions an index-linked pension of around £170 per week in just six years’ time. She also holds a British passport, granting visa-free travel to most countries worldwide, and benefits from a supportive network of Thai friends and cultural activities through the local Thai temple and community groups where she plays an active role.

Most of her peers have little desire to return to Thailand, except for short visits or longer stays if, like us, they maintain property there.

 

Oh and great summers and clean air - you can't put a price on that. 

Hopefully she can vote too - and I'm guessing it won't be for Reform!

On 9/22/2025 at 12:44 PM, BritManToo said:

He should remove all Muslims from our Christian country.

 

Alternatively, he could just ban all religion from the UK.

 

Obviously, those that choose to worship, not those who were just born in religion.

 

 

Same for Buddhists, Shintos and Rastafarians?

Only in English language can there be 'Indefinite Leave to Remain'  555

 

What's the opposite, Definite Stay to Leave ?

12 hours ago, RayC said:

Already suggested a solution. Rejoin the Single Market and allow freedom of movement for EU nationals

 

Join the single market and allow free movement ?
 

An oxymoron, if I ever heard one.

 

Which is no solution to anything.

 

12 hours ago, RayC said:

Not sure what that tells you. 1993? I know that's when the EU came into existence but we'd been in the EEC since 1972.

 

Which was a great idea. Ruined by the desire to morph into a Political and Monetary Union.

 

 

Posts containing capitalised shouting were removed, as was a post defaming adherents of a major religion as were posts expressing derision for a country and its people. Please debate the topic politely, and refrain from personal attacks and nastiness. Thank you. 

21 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Join the single market and allow free movement ?
 

An oxymoron, if I ever heard one.

 

Which is no solution to anything.

 

I would have thought that it would be intuitively obvious that removing barriers to entry would - other things being equal - result in an increase in the pool of available labour.

 

Rejoining the Single Market and re-enabling freedom of movement for EU nationals would offer a solution to the labour shortages faced by the service sector for (relatively) low-skilled workers.

 

https://www.bpb.de/themen/migration-integration/regionalprofile/english-version-country-profiles/northerneurope/541566/uk-mig

 

Freedom of movement would partly offset the shortage of higher skilled workers e.g. doctors, engineers, etc in the short term at least, but an increase in the number of domestic workers in these professions is needed. Sadly, successive governments have been unable to find solutions to the problem.

 

21 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Which was a great idea. Ruined by the desire to morph into a Political and Monetary Union.

 

 

 

So don't rejoin the EU but, instead, admit that it was a mistake to leave the Single Market and Customs Union and rejoin them.

5 minutes ago, RayC said:

I would have thought that it would be intuitively obvious that removing barriers to entry would - other things being equal - result in an increase in the pool of available labour.

 

What are you gibbering about ?
 

The UK, currently has 

 

* 1.2 million NEETS

 

* 1.67 unemployed

 

* A further 8 million between 16 - 65 economically inactive.

 

A massive internal pool of labour.

 

9 minutes ago, RayC said:

Freedom of movement would partly offset the shortage of higher skilled workers e.g. doctors, engineers, etc in the short term at least,

 

The UK's skilled Worker Visa negates any need for  freedom of movement.

 

You either never thought your response through, or you are more ignorant and uninformed than I gave you credit for.

On 9/23/2025 at 7:58 AM, nauseus said:

 

 1) I was referring to all immigration. (2) most Brits accept immigrants arriving but legally and with due vetting.

 

Yes, there will always be a minority who complained about immigrants, but for various reasons.

 

EU freedom of movement was only a success for the minority that it benefitted but the effect was almost invisible in the EEC/EC days. With the expanded community, as the EU, FOM mainly benefitted peoples from eastern Europe able to work in the richer western states, especially the UK. One problem was that these workers sent much of their incomes home, so that much money was not spent back into the UK economy. Most EU workers were prepared to take on low-paid jobs and even accepted pay cuts and this started the trend of more British becoming too content to live on benefits, rather than work. You call this efficiency and I call it madness. This freedom was intended to apply to EEC nationals only - now it seems to be the right of anyone with a foot already on EU soil.

 

This freedom of movement concept might have been fine for the original EEC member states, which mostly had a  similar level of wealth. However, since 1993 this pillar has been damaged and misinterpreted so much that it's starting to fall. The Schengen system is a similar (or even more abused) failure.

 

The opportunity to take advantage of EU freedom of movement was open to all. That only a minority of Brits took advantage of that opportunity is down individual choice.

 

As I have said previously, freedom of movement helps to balance demand and supply in the labour market; any barriers to entry restrict this adjustment. Whether the increase in immigration is beneficial to a nation overall is a wider question.

 

No doubt some earnings were repatriated by EU workers to their home countries but the local economies were also boosted by their spending. 

 

Any wage deflation caused by Eastern European workers mitigating to the UK could have easily been mitigated by the government increasing the minimum wage.

 

The subsequent increase in immigration post-Brexit may be, in part, due to the UK leaving the bloc but that is hardly the fault of the EU.

 

Schengen has certainly made it easier for illegal immigrants to traverse Europe but, that aside, it has been a success.

4 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

What are you gibbering about ?
 

The UK, currently has 

 

* 1.2 million NEETS

 

* 1.67 unemployed

 

* A further 8 million between 16 - 65 economically inactive.

Nested numbers.

Each of these categories includes individuals recorded in the other categories.

 

4 hours ago, RayC said:

 

Easiest way to respond is to tag in italics:

 

4 hours ago, RayC said:

The opportunity to take advantage of EU freedom of movement was open to all. That only a minority of Brits took advantage of that opportunity is down individual choice. Did you seriously think that British workers would all flock to Poland to take advantage of their movie star wages and state benefits? 

 

As I have said previously, freedom of movement helps to balance demand and supply in the labour market; any barriers to entry restrict this adjustment. Whether the increase in immigration is beneficial to a nation overall is a wider question. The whole EEC/EU idea made some sense for the original 6-12 members, who shared a weak semblance of economic equality. 

 

No doubt some earnings were repatriated by EU workers to their home countries but the local economies were also boosted by their spending. A lot more money repatriated than you are suggesting, I would say.

 

Any wage deflation caused by Eastern European workers mitigating to the UK could have easily been mitigated by the government increasing the minimum wage. That would would have gone down well, I'm sure.

 

The subsequent increase in immigration post-Brexit may be, in part, due to the UK leaving the bloc but that is hardly the fault of the EU. I didn't say that but I would say that rises in UK immigration, both pre and post Brexit, are mainly down to a string of successive pro EU (i.e. hopeless) UK governments.

 

Schengen has certainly made it easier for illegal immigrants to traverse Europe but, that aside, it has been a success. Yep. A success for people smugglers, anyway.

 

Over and Out. 

11 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

What are you gibbering about ?
 

The UK, currently has 

 

* 1.2 million NEETS

 

* 1.67 unemployed

 

* A further 8 million between 16 - 65 economically inactive.

 

A massive internal pool of labour.

 

 

The UK's skilled Worker Visa negates any need for  freedom of movement.

 

You either never thought your response through, or you are more ignorant and uninformed than I gave you credit for.

 

If only successive Secretaries of State for Work & Pensions had employed your deep-thinking techniques the UK wouldn't have any labour market problems.

 

What could be easier than filling vacancies than employing the retired, the infirmed and unpaid carers? A shortage of GPs in John O'Groats? No problem, we can get an unemployed roofer in Lands End to fill that role. Ignoring the fact that maybe, just maybe, he doesn't want to uproot his family and move, there is also the slight possibility that his skillset doesn't match his potential new role.

 

According to the BMA, the UK needs 60k more health care professionals. Again, no problem. While we wait the 3 - 7 years to produce home-grown talent we can import some overseas workers on a short-term basis to fill the gap. For example, a French doctor would be a fool if he wasn't enticed by the prospect of paying up to £1751 in visa application fees, £1035 pa in health care costs, have no access to other welfare benefits and being unsure of whether his family will be allowed to join him as opposed to, say, catching a flight to Ireland, rocking at Dublin General, securing a job and then booking flights for his family to join him in Ireland. Alternatively, if this French doctor was a little more adventurous he could even try his luck in Australia, New Zealand, etc where they also make it a lot easier for him to secure employment.

 

Yeah, it's all a no-brainer really. If only I was as deep-thinking and clever as you, I would have realised all this at the outset.

7 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

 

* Did you seriously think that British workers would all flock to Poland to take advantage of their movie star wages and state benefits? 

 

 No. But 1.2 (UN estimate) to 2m (UK government estimate) resided in the EU pre-Brexit. I was one of them.

 

How has withdrawing this right of residency improved the lot of other Britons?

 

* The whole EEC/EU idea made some sense for the original 6-12 members, who shared a weak semblance of economic equality. 

 

If you recall there was a shortage of plumbers at one point in the UK. This problem was solved by a large number of Polish tradesmen arriving. Similar story for fruit picking. On that occasion it was mainly Bulgarians and Romanians who picked up the slack.

 

 * A lot more money repatriated than you are suggesting, I would say.

 

Irrespective of how much money was repatriated, these immigrants spent money in the local economy.

 

* That would would have gone down well, I'm sure.

 

You worry about immigrant labour driving down wages, but when it is suggested that a way to mitigate this possibility is to increase the minimum wage you object. You can't have it both ways.

 

* I didn't say that but I would say that rises in UK immigration, both pre and post Brexit, are mainly down to a string of successive pro EU (i.e. hopeless) UK governments.

 

So you are not blaming the rise in immigration in the UK on the EU but you are?

 

* Yep. A success for people smugglers, anyway.

 

Schengen has made doing business in Europe much easier. For the 1.8m cross-border workers in the EU their daily commute bears no comparison to what it was pre-Schengen.