3. EFTA/Bilateral treaties like Norway or Switzerland - change but no real risk.
This will still mean freedom of movement and no change to EU immigration.
The Swiss voted 50.3% earlier this year for:
1 That Switzerland controls the immigration of foreigners.
2 The number of permits for the stay of foreigners in Switzerland is limited by maximum annual numbers and quotas. The maximum numbers apply to all grants of immigration law with the involvement of the asylum system. The right to permanent residence, family reunification and social benefits may be limited.
3 The maximum annual numbers and quotas for employed foreigners are to be aligned to the overall economic interests of Switzerland in consideration of precedence for Swiss citizens; the cross-border commuters are included. The key criteria for the granting of residence permits to be in particular the application of an employer, the integration capability and sufficient, independent livelihoods.
Because otherwise they'd end up bankrolling the whole thing even more than they do now.
It feels like we're reaching a tipping point. The problem is the club is so intransigent when it comes to debate and reform that it is becoming almost ludicrous. Witness Juncker this week pretty much saying that there should be a debate on the freedom of movement rules but the rules can't change. It's Orwellian and more and more people are waking up to the reality that EU officials really do live in cloud cuckoo land.
As someone who is a firm believer in European unity, I despair at how stupidly the EU behaves.
The EU can go F itself. If we leave, they only have themselves to blame. I bet they wouldn't have pulled this had we had a Referendum due in the next few weeks. This is just the start, if people vote to stay in then 1.7bn will be small change compared to what they demand.
Agree ! what are they gonna do if we DONT pay ?...throw a few politicians in jail ?...mind that may be a good idea ! .. .I remember the French leader in the sixties keep saying "no" to our membership>.so why don't we say no to the Eurobullies !
I was just being sarcastic really. Why the EU would see Cameron's desk thumping as 'going too far' is quite amusing to me; especially when viewed against the tirades Farage usually gives them.
A bit of desk thumping won't impress or cow them. They will still expect their drug money.
Europe will probably even charge the UK for Camerons damage to the rostrom stand ! ....or can we get a rebate for that !??
Have either Messrs Clegg or Miliband said anything on this matter? They are always going on about how we should be good Europeans and play by the rules.
The EU told them in July that that's all very nice but they can't do it as freedom of movement is inseparable from the single market.
I like the word for 'mass immigration': Masseneinwanderung
Yes, I agree that the 3rd option for the EU vote is no way as good as the 3rd option for the Scottish one.
I tend to see immigration as permanent settlement now, which means people that stay longer than five years and don't intend to leave. Free movement is really just people moving round the EU, if they stay less than five years.
If EU nationals had to apply for permanent settlement like everyone else after they had lived here for five years and we could set restrictions, or create a cap, then that might be a good compromise option.
I have been reading the "Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union/Title IV: Free Movement of Persons, Services and Capital" and unfortunately it seems to imply that EU nationals can stay even after they have finished employment and are automatically permanently settled.
I was surprised to see Irish Taoiseach Enda Kenny take a swipe at Cameron's stance on the news this evening - he said Britain had agreed to the rules as being part of the Union and now need to follow through [basically if Britain are in the Union, Britain follows the rules!}.... he had absolutely no sympathy for Cameron - and that's coming probably from Britain's strongest allies in the Union.
I was surprised to see Irish Taoiseach Enda Kenny take a swipe at Cameron's stance on the news this evening - he said Britain had agreed to the rules as being part of the Union and now need to follow through [basically if Britain are in the Union, Britain follows the rules!}.... he had absolutely no sympathy for Cameron - and that's coming probably from Britain's strongest allies in the Union.
Which just demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the public mood in the UK.
Cameron can not pay this demand, it would be political suicide.
Which just demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the public mood in the UK.
Cameron can not pay this demand, it would be political suicide.
But you have to realise if Britain is even putting Ireland out then the rest of the Union must be at breaking point with Britain - behind the scenes things must be in massive trouble.
I was surprised to see Irish Taoiseach Enda Kenny take a swipe at Cameron's stance on the news this evening - he said Britain had agreed to the rules as being part of the Union and now need to follow through [basically if Britain are in the Union, Britain follows the rules!}.... he had absolutely no sympathy for Cameron - and that's coming probably from Britain's strongest allies in the Union.
Let's call in the cheap loan we gave the Irish with immediate effect. We need the cash to pay our Danegeld
Which just demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the public mood in the UK.
Cameron can not pay this demand, it would be political suicide.
All he has to do is refuse to pay. The EU will take us to court and win, but by that time we will have had the general election. If Labour win its their problem and they will get the blame for paying up and paying the fine. If the Conservatives are in power it will strengthen the Euro sceptics case.
Either way it's a win win situation if you are a Tory right winger.
Statement by President Barroso on the budget contributions
I have to give an explanation of what is happening exactly, as it's a complex issue. I fully understand the surprise and also the concerns expressed by some Prime Ministers, but I want to show that there are some reasons for the documents produced by the Commission. Once again, I ask you for your patience because I think it is important to have the accurate information on this topic.
This is an annual exercise based on figures given by each Member State through their own statistical offices. This is the first point. The figures we have now worked out were the exact figures that were given to us by the National Statistics Office of the United Kingdom. This should not have come as a surprise to the Member States, as the maths are based on the own resource decision they have agreed unanimously.
The European Commission did not create this situation and for some years we have been the ones proposing to move to a different system. And this was rejected by the Member States. So we have to use the system the Member States created, which is based on the GNI (gross national income). So when there are changes in the GNI of the countries, we have to adapt the statistics and the contributions of the countries. We have been careful not to politicise the process we have been asked to administer.
Today, together with the next President of the Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, I have agreed that the Commission will now give further technical explanations about this annual process. There will be a hearing of finance ministers, where, of course, we are ready to provide all information, being clear that we cannot have a negotiation about the GDP of the different countries. It's impossible to have negotiations about GNI. This should be left to, of course, independent statistics authorities.
The EU must have a balanced budget. So every year we undertake an exercise to ensure all Member States are paying in the level of contribution they should, and that the revenues which the EU budget has obtained through, for example, competition fines, are returned to Member States. So this is an exercise where sometimes countries are asked to give more money, and sometimes they receive much more money. Because, for instance, all the proceeds of competition, the fines, go back to the national treasuries. So it's not, as some people might think, that the Commission is asking for more money. Sometimes it is the case, sometimes it is the opposite. I would say many times it's the opposite.
Every year, in the autumn, the Member States' contributions to the EU budget are recalculated in line with the updated statistical base. Each national statistical office has notified its updated GNI figures and these have now been considered correct by Eurostat. Eurostat, I want to remind you, is a completely independent body. We are very much attached to the principle of statistical independent. The Commission, the President of the Commission of the Commission in charge, cannot give instruction to Eurostat. We have taken considerable steps to ensure the independence of this process, and I think this is now an acquis that should not be put in question.
But you have to realise if Britain is even putting Ireland out then the rest of the Union must be at breaking point with Britain - behind the scenes things must be in massive trouble.
Its the EU's fault, they know Cameron is in trouble and yet they do nothing to help him out. They continue to hammer nails in the coffin.
If you don't live in the UK and you think this is some minor populism that will go away then you have a massive shock coming your way.
Its the EU's fault, they know Cameron is in trouble and yet they do nothing to help him out. They continue to hammer nails in the coffin.
If you don't live in the UK and you think this is some minor populism that will go away then you have a massive shock coming your way.
I think its just a coincidence - basically Britain agreed to these rules on its own back. I still think when it comes down to it Britain will vote to stay put... the unknowns outside the Union are massive.
I think its just a coincidence - basically Britain agreed to these rules on its own back. I still think when it comes down to it Britain will vote to stay put... the unknowns outside the Union are massive.
When did it ever agree to pay tax on drug dealing and prostitution?
If you believe in democracy, then you argue it through the courts and accept the verdict once that's run it's course, or simply withdraw.
You can't just say 'I don't agree with that law so I'm not going to follow it'. Where do you draw the line - is it ok for governments not to follow the rules, but not for individuals?
Should local councils be allowed to decide what laws suit them?
If our government doesn't follow the rules, why should we? Ignore any rule you don't think is fair. Let anyone build anywhere. Let employers pay what they think. Let Pimlico issue its own passports etc etc.
Doesn't matter who you work with, at any level. There have to be agreements, and things only work if people follow them. Otherwise it's anarchy.
We helped decsign the system, we should abide by it, and use it to fight our corner. You can't change things from outside in civilised society.
(and yes I do know others don't, but what sort of excuse is that. 'Miss, Billy Brown wee'd over the wall, why can't I'?)
If you believe in democracy, then you argue it through the courts and accept the verdict once that's run it's course, or simply withdraw.
You can't just say 'I don't agree with that law so I'm not going to follow it'. Where do you draw the line - is it ok for governments not to follow the rules, but not for individuals?
Should local councils be allowed to decide what laws suit them?
If our government doesn't follow the rules, why should we? Ignore any rule you don't think is fair. Let anyone build anywhere. Let employers pay what they think. Let Pimlico issue its own passports etc etc.
Doesn't matter who you work with, at any level. There have to be agreements, and things only work if people follow them. Otherwise it's anarchy.
We helped decsign the system, we should abide by it, and use it to fight our corner. You can't change things from outside in civilised society.
(and yes I do know others don't, but what sort of excuse is that. 'Miss, Billy Brown wee'd over the wall, why can't I'?)
Or they could just pay up and take the money from the NHS budget and cancel a few thousand cancer ops.
Didn't UK Borrowing just rise by 1.6billion?....now the EU wants 1.7, little convenient
Clegg very quiet today, not surprising. He tends to stay in his whole when the EU sticks their beak into our business. Labour's response seems to be "we should negotiate and work with the other member states" which is a stupid reply. When you have 19 countries set to get money back, you're out numbed, they won't back the UK.
David Cameron sure loves to yap on about not paying but the words he uses say otherwise. "Won't pay on Dec 1st" aka "won't pay on the date you said, maybe shortly after"
I think its just a coincidence - basically Britain agreed to these rules on its own back. I still think when it comes down to it Britain will vote to stay put... the unknowns outside the Union are massive.
You're completly misjudging the mood in Britain then.
Comments
This will still mean freedom of movement and no change to EU immigration.
The Swiss voted 50.3% earlier this year for:
From: http://www.admin.ch/ch/d/pore/vi/vis413t.html
The EU told them in July that that's all very nice but they can't do it as freedom of movement is inseparable from the single market.
I like the word for 'mass immigration': Masseneinwanderung
Because otherwise they'd end up bankrolling the whole thing even more than they do now.
It feels like we're reaching a tipping point. The problem is the club is so intransigent when it comes to debate and reform that it is becoming almost ludicrous. Witness Juncker this week pretty much saying that there should be a debate on the freedom of movement rules but the rules can't change. It's Orwellian and more and more people are waking up to the reality that EU officials really do live in cloud cuckoo land.
As someone who is a firm believer in European unity, I despair at how stupidly the EU behaves.
Agree ! what are they gonna do if we DONT pay ?...throw a few politicians in jail ?...mind that may be a good idea ! ..
Europe will probably even charge the UK for Camerons damage to the rostrom stand !
Yes, I agree that the 3rd option for the EU vote is no way as good as the 3rd option for the Scottish one.
I tend to see immigration as permanent settlement now, which means people that stay longer than five years and don't intend to leave. Free movement is really just people moving round the EU, if they stay less than five years.
If EU nationals had to apply for permanent settlement like everyone else after they had lived here for five years and we could set restrictions, or create a cap, then that might be a good compromise option.
I have been reading the "Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union/Title IV: Free Movement of Persons, Services and Capital" and unfortunately it seems to imply that EU nationals can stay even after they have finished employment and are automatically permanently settled.
That is a great word.
Which just demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the public mood in the UK.
Cameron can not pay this demand, it would be political suicide.
Let's call in the cheap loan we gave the Irish with immediate effect. We need the cash to pay our Danegeld
All he has to do is refuse to pay. The EU will take us to court and win, but by that time we will have had the general election. If Labour win its their problem and they will get the blame for paying up and paying the fine. If the Conservatives are in power it will strengthen the Euro sceptics case.
Either way it's a win win situation if you are a Tory right winger.
From: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-14-338_en.htm although it's not all of it.
Its the EU's fault, they know Cameron is in trouble and yet they do nothing to help him out. They continue to hammer nails in the coffin.
If you don't live in the UK and you think this is some minor populism that will go away then you have a massive shock coming your way.
When did it ever agree to pay tax on drug dealing and prostitution?
Its illegal, we don't collect tax on it.
You can't just say 'I don't agree with that law so I'm not going to follow it'. Where do you draw the line - is it ok for governments not to follow the rules, but not for individuals?
Should local councils be allowed to decide what laws suit them?
If our government doesn't follow the rules, why should we? Ignore any rule you don't think is fair. Let anyone build anywhere. Let employers pay what they think. Let Pimlico issue its own passports etc etc.
Doesn't matter who you work with, at any level. There have to be agreements, and things only work if people follow them. Otherwise it's anarchy.
We helped decsign the system, we should abide by it, and use it to fight our corner. You can't change things from outside in civilised society.
(and yes I do know others don't, but what sort of excuse is that. 'Miss, Billy Brown wee'd over the wall, why can't I'?)
Or they could just pay up and take the money from the NHS budget and cancel a few thousand cancer ops.
Clegg very quiet today, not surprising. He tends to stay in his whole when the EU sticks their beak into our business. Labour's response seems to be "we should negotiate and work with the other member states" which is a stupid reply. When you have 19 countries set to get money back, you're out numbed, they won't back the UK.
David Cameron sure loves to yap on about not paying but the words he uses say otherwise. "Won't pay on Dec 1st" aka "won't pay on the date you said, maybe shortly after"
You're completly misjudging the mood in Britain then.