What if German law makers decide that they wish to fast track those arriving as some have proposed to fast track uk citizens? The point is we have no control over other countries and who they decide to make their citizens and therefore our citizens.

What if - what if - what if.

It would be an unlikely scenario but - lets suppose it did happen - do you think they would then suddenly all flock in their thousands over to the UK after a country had just given them citizenship? If they proved themselves worthy of citizenship then they would have the same rights as any other EU citizen - what is it that worries you? Do you think they're all terrorists/rapists/thieves/criminals or something?

Thousands trying, but how many actually got in?

That would prove very controversial and would raise objections from many other EU states. Germany couldn't just make a unilateral decision to take in hundreds of thousands of refugees / migrants (probably against the wishes of the EU), hand them all German passports and send them all on to other EU states.

Well there are many queuing up across France so the UK seems to be more popular than many other countries so the unlikely bit is already proven on the ground. The point is not whether they would the point is they would have the right. That is a right born out of the illegal crossing of borders between safe countries. It is rewarding illegal activity so yes the majority are indeed law breakers as the UN specifically states that all asylum seekers should obey the laws, regulations and instructions of the host country. Somehow that seems unimportant and it is that aspect that is causing the problems.

It would be controversial and if Germany did it who would actually stop them? Germany can make that decision, they would not have to send them many would go of their own accord.

I bet you do not know either.

It would very likely be in breach of EU freedom of movement regulations. The rules are clearly meant to allow citizens of the EU to move freely around the union in order to find work. They say absolutely nothing about newly arrived refugees fleeing a war zone having the right to freedom of movement and an EU country unilaterally choosing to hand such refugees passports would not alter that.

Can you imagine a country like Ireland offering to take in half a million refugees fleeing a civil war, handing them all Irish passports and saying "Off you go boys, you're now free to move to anywhere in the EU"? Even if they tried it, the EU would almost certainly move to block it and declare it illegal.

Farage's poster was wrong in my view because it sought to wrongly equate the EU freedom of movement problems with the Europe/Middle East/Africa migration crisis. He should have stuck to the much wider issues of free movement rights across the whole EU and the problems that has caused. The population of the other EU27 countries is about 450m so that clearly dwarfs the numbers that have entered Europe as asylum seekers/economic migrants over the last few years. A far bigger potential impact would be Turkey joining the EU.

The EU has been slow to react and agree how to manage the migration crisis, but, to be fair, it has been a huge crisis in Europe's recent history. That does not mean however that it cannot be resolved, so to say that "The EU has failed us all" is perhaps a bit premature. If the EU did not exist at all, this would not stop huge numbers of people trying to flee wars and persecution and getting to Europe and to whichever country they are trying to get to.

Merkel's opening of Germany was a German government, not EU, decision and was highly controversial particularly if she did not consult or get agreement from the rest of the EU. She has suffered somewhat, politically, as a result. On the other hand, Greece can neither control its borders, because of its geography, nor has the resources to cope with the huge number of migrants it has received - some Europe-wide assistance/approach therefore seems the sensible solution.

All in all, I think the poster was scaremongering, designed to fuel people's fear of immigration and foreigners, especially those of middle-eastern appearance. It's a low blow to make political capital out of people fleeing wars and persecution and also to try to criminalise such people.

This is the real nub of your issue with immigration. You see it as a threat. Why? Immigration is a benefit to the UK.

The situation years ago was much harder. it is now much easier to live and work within the rest of the EU and that is a good thing. Outters have now made it much harder for the likes of me to live and work in the rest of the EU. It is so narrow minded.

Immigration is tiny in this country. Again, you have swallowed all the rubbish peddled by Farage and the right-wing press. Govt of all colours falling to build over decades enough houses is not the fault of the immigrant.

Very few. If they did, they'd know that our borders are far from open. As it happens, I rather like the burgundy coloured passports.

The difference between you and me is that I am anti all this right-wing British nationalism. It's ugly.

I'm anti that stuff as well, I was being sarcastic!

...and you think that's going to stop post Brexit? No chance.

The beef you Outters really have is with illegal immigrant and we would all agree with that.

It doesn't change the fact that that poster was wrong and misleading. It didn't reflect the current UK situation and the picture wasn't even taken in the UK. Sadly, the easily influenced believed it and we will all now pay the price.

Here here, a first rate post. It peddled this irrational 'fear of the other' mentality.

I ask you for proof that these people broke laws and you offer me supposition based on news reports about what other people did.

This is why I didn't vote Leave. The original Project Fear.

That's why I was asking.

This is the whole point, there are waves of people breaking laws across Europe who are not being subjected to the same rule of law that the rest of us are and one of the guiding principles of the EU is that all people are equal before the law. The mere fact that the majority of them are where they are is an indication of law breaking for the following. If they are refugees they must obey the law of the host country and have no right to cross further borders, if they have claimed asylum the same rules applies, if they are not refugees or have not claimed asylum then they are crossing borders illegally in Europe. In almost all scenarios there is no legal reason for them to be there but still you want proof that those you class as refugees have broken the law. There is a long column of people who are the living proof.

Which is the point no one knows. Some think we have half a million illegal immigrants here already, some think two million. Some supermarket stats indicate that it could be as high as 6 million. That is the tragedy.

The whole point is that you don't know where they came from, you don't know if they broke laws. You simply assume that they did because others have. It's supposition. So much for being equal.

Most are escaping war or tyranny. God knows what they've been subjected to and what it's cost physically, emotionally or financially to get where there are. It's a bit surreal really to say to them (immediately anyway) - you must queue up here - do as your told - don't pass go - do not claim your £200 etc, They have been living through Hell - do you not cut them any slack?

We do know where they came from, they are coming from Croatia, if they have claimed asylum in Croatia they should stay there, if they have claimed asylum before reaching Croatia they should have stayed there, if they have not claimed asylum anywhere they have arrived in Croatia illegally. What is so hard to understand about that?

Supermarket stats?

Most have come from Turkey. I am quite prepared to 'cut some slack' but that is a bit different from saying they are not doing anything illegal. There is a migrant and refugee crisis that has been growing on the EU borders for about six years and the EU palpably failed to deal with it in any effective manner where realistically it is their competence to do so.

A few years back an article referred to the supermarkets using food and goods sales to estimate the current population. Sources indicated that this could be over 80 million. Other sources referred to waste water and sludge stats as an indication as well (that is possible because I have a septic tank and records of its emptying are kept and the companies pay disposal so I understand by volume).
Now to be clear I do not say they are correct and find them a little hard to believe but they are one estimate of the number of illegal immigrants in the country. I also heard that there were over 85 million NHS numbers in circulation but I will hastily say that could well be apocryphal.
As a guess on the illegal migrants present though they have as much accuracy as any other guess and they are all guesses.

Quite. When I lived in London I would occasionally listen to LBC. Not out of any loyalty to the station, but because I generally prefer talk radio in the background to music.

Anyway, LBC certainly attracted the nutters. Not even occasionally, but every single caller seemed to be as you described, even if the topic or presenter was reasonable, the callers chosen were always rabid lunatics who would often veer wildly off topic.

I don't miss it one bit, especially now the great mistake happened in June and Nigel is the new kind in town, the callers will be jubilant and extra paranoid.