EU debate - young v old

[Bazj]

But it also shows how most of the remain camp seem to not only want the EU to legislate on every aspect of their lives, it also shows they have given up hope of ever getting a Labour Government that would fight and introduce laws that would make illegal such practices seen at Sports Direct as they always point out what a Tory Government is going to do. Is it a case that the only defence against an elected Tory Government is an unelected EU?

[P J]

thats quite a leap of logic Baz, mostly assumption to be honest.  I want to remain in the EU but I don't want the EU to legislate on every aspect of my life, which they don't . I also don't see how it means I have given up all hope of ever having a Labour government?  Aren't the practices at Sports Direct already illegal hence Ashley getting his ass dragged into the select committee??

[Bazj]

thats quite a leap of logic Baz, mostly assumption to be honest.  I want to remain in the EU but I don't want the EU to legislate on every aspect of my life, which they don't . I also don't see how it means I have given up all hope of ever having a Labour government?  Aren't the practices at Sports Direct already illegal hence Ashley getting his ass dragged into the select committee??

 

Illegal they may be... maybe he has found a loop hole of the sort that Camerons dad exploited to save paying Tax. Companies the size of Sports Direct may well have teams of people employed just to find ways of paying less and taking more 

 

But with regards to Labour, it really does come across in the press and on TV that whenever their MP's are interviewed, when supporters are interviewed, that they see the EU as a way of suppressing the evil ambitions of a Tory Government. Gone )it seems) are the days when they would tell us what they would do WHEN they are elected into Government

[P J]

thats really just your take on things, ask any labour supporter do they want a Labour Government and you surely know what the answer will be.  If Ashley had found a loophole he wouldn't be answering at the select committee.  Personally I feel the law needs toughening up with much harsher punishments for transgression.  Can't see the present bunch, even before the referendum divided and set blue on blue, doing much about that, in fact quite the opposite when it comes to workers rights and union rules.

[asperity]

You can't have it both ways PJ. You claim being in the EU protects workers' rights, and in the same breath claim that workers' rights not being protected has nothing to do with the EU! Make up your mind :lol:

[observer]

There's an ongoing presumption in all this, that if legislation is in place it is automatically complied with and everything is sorted. Clearly not the case; The only way to protect workers rights is through an organized and informed labour force;  if youngsters are non-unionized and ignorant of their rights they are open to exploitation by bad employers.  Now rights legislation is in place in both the EU and the UK, so it doesn't matter whether we're in or out of the EU, what matters, is that Trade Unions and the Left, get their finger out, to ensure such rights are monitored and enforced on the shop floor. 

[Davy51]

I think there are also varying degrees with which some countries respect EU regulations....we seem to follow it to the letter while other countries seem to pick the bits that suit them.

[observer]

True Dave: and we need to look no further than Germany, who ignored EU (Dublin Convention) policy by unilaterally inviting a million migrants into their Country and are now suffering for it; or States like Austria and Hungary, who, when faced with the crisis, unilaterally abandoned Shengen and built border fences.   At the end of the day, this theoretical Union is no more than a collective of self interests, and when things don't suit their self interest, they get ignored.    

[P J]

I think there are also varying degrees with which some countries respect EU regulations....we seem to follow it to the letter while other countries seem to pick the bits that suit them.

 

Which ones Davy?

[P J]

True Dave: and we need to look no further than Germany, who ignored EU (Dublin Convention) policy by unilaterally inviting a million migrants into their Country and are now suffering for it; or States like Austria and Hungary, who, when faced with the crisis, unilaterally abandoned Shengen and built border fences.   At the end of the day, this theoretical Union is no more than a collective of self interests, and when things don't suit their self interest, they get ignored.    

Schengen was suspended and rightfully so.

[observer]

Shengen was suspended because Hungary et al ignored it, just as the Dublin Convention was suspended (unilaterally by Merkel); seems anything is open to suspension, if it suits some countries.  

[P J]

or if an international emergency dictates.  Don't forget, we, the UK , were instrumental in the war causing the diaspora from Syria so have no moral or ethical high ground when it comes to dealing with the consequences of our actions.  But I don't expect you to care that much.

[observer]

 Wow, that was a good footwork, but nothing to do with the fact that Germany totally ignored EU policy in unilaterally suspending the Dublin Convention, followed by the rest unilaterally suspending Shegen in their own interests. So nothing to do with morals or ethics, all to do with accepting shared policies and sticking to them, which is what the EU supposed to be about, until it was tested.

[P J]

had they not, then what? Had we stuck rigidly to the Dublin agreement, what happens?

[Davy51]

But, amid the tragedy that is Syria, what has the west done to help to resolve the situation. We seem reluctant to do anything to bring peace to the area in case we join the wrong side. Apart from setting up refugee camps the UN is a toothless organisation. Instead of just accepting wave after wave of migrants the EU should be lobbying frantically to get the Syrian crisis resolved.

[P J]

 the EU should be lobbying frantically to get the Syrian crisis resolved.

 

I agree, along with everyone else.  Don't try to pin the Syrian crisis on the EU though.

[observer]

Right, here's what should have happened,"  had they stuck rigidly to the Dublin agreement":-  Huge camps would have been set up in Lesbos and Lampedusa, to temporary house and feed these people, while their claims for asylum were being processed by an Army of EU civil servants;  and rightfully imo Greece and Italy would recoup the cost from the EU. As they are now, belatedly trying to do, all non-refugees (the majority) would be identified and immediately repatriated to countries of origin.    Problem 1:   As front line States both Italy and Greece totally failed to do this, waving on over a million un-vetted migrants into the heart of Europe.    Problem 2:    Then, like headless chickens, the EU basically lost it completely; allowing one individual National Leader (Merkel) to unilaterally invite this host to Germany; no doubt on humanitarian grounds and not because her economic advisers were telling her that Germany needed three million young migrants to re-balance their demographics. Problem 3:  As the swarm made it's way through the Balkans, Hungary and Austria; making no attempt to apply for asylum, as their objective was Germany or the UK;  these States en rout naturally looked to their own interests and began erecting border fences and controls, in what was supposed to be the Shengen zone, so no Shengen.  One interesting aspect of this, is that States like Hungary, are quite happy to off load their citizens on us, in the name of free movement, but weren't prepared to host migrants themselves. Such is the unity of the EU.     Now, in the wake of this shambles; the EU are finally making efforts to stop the flow; which includes a deal with Turkey to clamp down on trafficking, which they seem to have done quite quickly, just showing how easily it was for them to have done it in the first place. But the price of "the deal" has been a £6billion bribe and replacement of migrants with visa free travel for Turks, so not quite a solution.  Moving onto the Southern Front: the EU now propose a system of financial aid (historically referred to as "Dane Geld"); to the African States from where and through which, the migrants are coming.  This basically amounts to bribery, and will allow these African States to continue with an extortion racket - you keep sending us the money or we'll keep sending you the migrants.  So costing the EU ( UK)  tax-payer £billions.   Meanwhile, instead of "recuing" these illegal invaders and returning them to Libya; the combined EU Navies are completing their journey into Italy and Europe.  A complete and utter shambles by an incompetent and dis-functional EU.     PS:  It seems it's being left to the US,UK and France to risk their Special Forces in Libya, eradicating ISIL and trying to restore a semblance of stability that will allow Libya to once again become the gate keeper to Europe; no sign of the proposed EU Army intervening though ! 

[P J]

non refugees are not the majority.

[observer]

That's for the authorities to decide through a system of processing, but weren't given the chance, as this swarm was just waved through into Europe without any checks whatsoever.  But, as we've seen from news coverage, the majority are young men of military age, folk with sufficient wealth to pay traffickers $1,000 a pop for a ride; and considerable numbers are not even from Syria, migrating for the sole purpose of "seeking a better life"; in other words economic migrants. Hence the need to have established holding camps in Italy and Greece where such identification and processing could have taken place, as per the Dublin Convention. Those failing to warrant  asylum being immediately returned to country of origin. 

[Davy51]

I agree, along with everyone else.  Don't try to pin the Syrian crisis on the EU though.

 

The EU is a big enough political entity to be lobbying the UN to get it own borders protected ,either as the EU or as individual states. If we were in a conflict situation Europe would have been overrun even faster by armed troops. The Syrian crisis is not the fault of the EU ,but it should have a right to lobby for more to be done to solve the crisis.This problem has been on going for nearly 5 years.

UN involvement in the Falklands & Iraq crises was established more or less overnight.

[P J]

The EU is a big enough political entity to be lobbying the UN to get it own borders protected ,either as the EU or as individual states. If we were in a conflict situation Europe would have been overrun even faster by armed troops. The Syrian crisis is not the fault of the EU ,but it should have a right to lobby for more to be done to solve the crisis.This problem has been on going for nearly 5 years.

UN involvement in the Falklands & Iraq crises was established more or less overnight.

 

How many issues can you possibly conflate in a single post?

[P J]

That's for the authorities to decide through a system of processing, but weren't given the chance, as this swarm was just waved through into Europe without any checks whatsoever.  But, as we've seen from news coverage, the majority are young men of military age, folk with sufficient wealth to pay traffickers $1,000 a pop for a ride; and considerable numbers are not even from Syria, migrating for the sole purpose of "seeking a better life"; in other words economic migrants. Hence the need to have established holding camps in Italy and Greece where such identification and processing could have taken place, as per the Dublin Convention. Those failing to warrant  asylum being immediately returned to country of origin. 

 

How dare anyone not completely destitute flee war and starvation.  

[observer]

Precisely !  But they're fleeing all the way here, when there are camps for them to go to.   

[P J]

they are fleeing the camps you idiot

[observer]

Oh, thought you said they were fleeing the war ? So they're not refugees after all, they just want a better life ? !