• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

Does a Free Trade area really require absolute freedom of movement for the citizens living within the area to work?

Freedom of movement seems the absolute proxy for national boundaries within the EU to be erased and form a single unified state.
A bit like how in the UK people living in, say, Dundee are free to move to say London, or Birmingham to find work as they are all living in the same nation state.
Similar, people living in Granada in Spain travelling to Madrid for work etc.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
milo said:
It's disappointing to see that she abstained on same sex marriage and very worrying that she hasn't ruled out giving a position to Farage.
Click to expand...

I find it more than disappointing. It ought to be unthinkable to anyone to have a Prime Minister who is against equal rights for all the nation's citizens (and abstaining in such a key vote is akin to being against). The reason she gave for abstaining on the vote was "I cannot vote for a measure that risks centuries of faith-based belief in marriage."
That is simply unacceptable. Religious beliefs should not interfere with government and law.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
I find it more than disappointing. It ought to be unthinkable to anyone to have a Prime Minister who is against equal rights for all the nation's citizens (and abstaining in such a key vote is akin to being against). The reason she gave for abstaining on the vote was "I cannot vote for a measure that risks centuries of faith-based belief in marriage."
That is simply unacceptable. Religious beliefs should not interfere with government and law.
Click to expand...

I agree
 
Glenda's Legs said:
I find it more than disappointing. It ought to be unthinkable to anyone to have a Prime Minister who is against equal rights for all the nation's citizens (and abstaining in such a key vote is akin to being against). The reason she gave for abstaining on the vote was "I cannot vote for a measure that risks centuries of faith-based belief in marriage."
That is simply unacceptable. Religious beliefs should not interfere with government and law.
Click to expand...

You're right.

Equal marriage for gays doesn't risk faith-based straight marriages at all.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
I find it more than disappointing. It ought to be unthinkable to anyone to have a Prime Minister who is against equal rights for all the nation's citizens (and abstaining in such a key vote is akin to being against). The reason she gave for abstaining on the vote was "I cannot vote for a measure that risks centuries of faith-based belief in marriage."
That is simply unacceptable. Religious beliefs should not interfere with government and law.
Click to expand...

could not agree more

that she's a GHod botherer bothers me greatly, one would hope we'd be picking from a pool of greater intelligence
 
milo said:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Click to expand...
If it's option 2, and we're allowing free movement then why not just continue to allow free movement and continue free trade?

Brucey Bonus being that it might tinkle off the UKIP types enough to go and live elsewhere (while we all drown in irony)
 
scaramanga said:
If it's option 2, and we're allowing free movement then why not just continue to allow free movement and continue free trade?

Brucey Bonus being that it might tinkle off the UKIP types enough to go and live elsewhere (while we all drown in irony)
Click to expand...

I think the suggestion there is that it is a staging post whilst further negotiations are carried out but I could see the political will to continue drying up at that point.
 
Boris still maintaining in his telegraph article today that EU needs us for trade so will agree to free trade without tariffs or quotas. I cannot understand why they would give us a better deal than their members.
 
Robspur12 said:
Boris still maintaining in his telegraph article today that EU needs us for trade so will agree to free trade without tariffs or quotas. I cannot understand why they would give us a better deal than their members.
Click to expand...
Because in the eyes of the EU, all that regulation and cost is a benefit, not a hindrance. They really are that caught up in their little world of bureaucracy that they think we're better off contributing £Bs and having our farmers paid for than not.
 
he did not join to be a "career politician"..:)..despite the fact that he started in politics over two decades ago..and will remain an MEP until the end..he's got his country back...
 
scaramanga said:
Because in the eyes of the EU, all that regulation and cost is a benefit, not a hindrance. They really are that caught up in their little world of bureaucracy that they think we're better off contributing £Bs and having our farmers paid for than not.
Click to expand...

The EU can't be seen to reward us for voting leave or else it might encourage other countries to do like wise.

I think that the best that we can expect is a rehashing of the deal Cameron struck with some slight tinkering to make it look like we got further concessions on freedom of movement.

The freedom to work that Dan Hannan has spoken about since the referendum is not a million miles away from the benefit limits that Cameron got. That re-badged and some controls on movement from new member states is my guess at where we'll end up on immigration with us retaining EEA access and contributing the same to the budget.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back