EU migrants could be allowed to enter Britain until 2022

  • 0 Replies

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 4128
  • +75/-0
EU migrants could be allowed to enter Britain until 2022
« on: April 06, 2017, 08:23:28 PM »
Note: The treacherous double dealing remainer May  is intent on selling us out... RH 
EU migrants could be allowed to enter Britain until 2022, as Theresa May suggests free movement extension

The Prime Minister admitted free movement could still be allowed after Brexit while businesses and governments implement the deal she negotiates CREDIT: NEIL HALL/REUTERS
 Gordon Rayner, political editor, in riyadh 
5 APRIL 2017 • 7:37AM
Migrants from the European Union could be allowed to come to Britain with full citizens’ rights for years after Brexithappens in 2019, Theresa May has hinted.
The Prime Minister admitted there would have to be “a period of time” after Brexit when businesses and governments are implementing the deal she negotiates with the EU, when free movement could still be allowed.
It raises the prospect of Britain having no control over its borders until 2022, after EU leaders suggested a three-year transition period will be necessary after Brexit.
Mrs May also said she was confident she will reach a final deal with the EU member states within two years.
Addressing reporters on the second day of her tour of the Middle East, the Prime Minister was asked directly if she could rule out free movement of migrants during any transitional period after Brexit.
She said: “If you think about it, once we’ve got the deal, once we’ve agreed what the new relationship will be for the future, it will be necessary for there to be a period of time when businesses and governments are adjusting systems and so forth, depending on the nature of the deal.”
She added that Britain would have “control of its borders and control of immigration” once it left the EU, but would not set a date for when that will happen.
Theresa May attends a meeting with Sarah al-Suhaimi, CEO of the Saudi Stock Exchange, on Tuesday CREDIT: FAYEZ NURELDINE/AFP
Separately, in an interview with Sky News, Mrs May said: “What's important is that when we leave the EU, people know what the future relationship is.
"It's common sense, it's pragmatic for people, it's pragmatic for businesses, and I believe that's what we will be working for and it's what both sides will be working for.”
Richard Tice, co-chairman of the pressure group Leave Means Leave, warned that more than a million extra migrants could move to Britain unless a cut-off date was quickly agreed.
He said: “If the Prime Minister fails to set a cut-off point on immigration, Britain must prepare for a crisis as around 1.25 million extra EU migrants will likely move to Britain… and our public services, transport and housing stock which are already at breaking point will not be able to cope.”
Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Nayef welcoming Theresa May in Riyadh on Tuesday CREDIT:  SAUDI PRESS AGENCY
Paul Nuttall, leader of Ukip, said: “By voting to leave the EU, the British people asked the government to reduce the high levels of immigration that see a city the size of Hull and Newcastle come to the UK each year.
“The fact that the Tories won’t even specify how long the period of open-door immigration will continue after we have left the EU sets alarm bells ringing.”
Sir Bill Cash, the Conservative MP and Leave campaigner, defended the Prime Minister, saying: “The fact that we leave means the end of the European legal basis for free movement.
"But there will still be a need for some fluidity of labour and that will be dealt with in the Immigration Bill.
"You can't have an overlap. EU law will end and the terms of the Immigration Bill will take over, but that will include movement of people for the purposes of having a proper workforce and I think that's what the Prime Minister was referring to."
An ICM poll published this week suggested that the majority of voters are relaxed about the prospect of free movement continuing after Brexit.
Asked whether they would accept the continued free movement of people “for a few years after Brexit, as part of a transitional deal”, 54 per cent of people said it would be acceptable, with only 29 per cent saying it was not acceptable.
John McFarlane, the chairman of Barclays, said earlier this year that the Government was supportive of a three-year transition period because of the “complexity” of putting the Brexit deal into action.
Some manufacturing firms have even suggested a five-year transition period would be helpful.
Asked if she believed a Brexit deal could be done within two years, Mrs May replied: “Yes.” She said that if she ended up in a “no deal situation” it would not be “in anybody’s interests”.
Many Britons voted Brexit to cut immigration – they fear betrayal in Theresa May's talk of 'control'

5 APRIL 2017 • 12:31PM

Take back control. These three powerful words drove home Vote Leave's key message last year: outside of the EU, Britain could manage its own borders, its own laws and - above all - its own future.
Every one of the 17.4 million Leave voters could find something they liked about this vision, and now Theresa May has to get on with delivering it. The Prime Minister may not have fought alongside the official Brexit campaign, but she has to respect the outcome of the referendum they helped come to pass, as it has given her a mandate - the "biggest ever given to a British government” in David Davis' words - to negotiate the terms of Britain's exit. 
The restoration of British sovereignty will excite some Brexit voters, but many others will want to see what she can do to get a grip on immigration. Her fight to get net migration down to the tens of thousands provided constant humiliation for David Cameron's government as official figures regularly showed how far off target it was. Their struggle allowed the Brexiteers to argue that it would be so much easier if Britain left the EU, as it wouldn't have to follow the bloc's free movement rules.
The Government has made its antipathy towards EU freedom of movement clear, but it is less keen to spell out what this means for immigration levels. Under grilling from Andrew Neil, Mrs May preferred to talk about Britain being "in control" of migration numbers instead of promising that they would be any lower.  "We want to see migration, net migration coming down," she stressed, adding that Brexit meant "we’ll be able to put rules in place, decided here, about the basis on which people can come from inside the European Union".
Watch | May: Points-based migration system won't give us control
If so, ministers are taking their time to set out these rules. David Davis suggested in February that it would take "years and years" before British workers were taking on the jobs currently being done by those from other member states. The Brexit Secretary said in March that migration numbers could actually rise "from time to time". And now it emerges that EU migrants could be allowed  to come to Britain with full citizens’ rights for years after Brexit happens in 2019, with free movement being phased out after a three-year transition process.
This "implementation period" may be sensible if it allows businesses to adjust to life post-Brexit, but it will unnerve many voters who backed Brexit in order to see a cut in migration numbers. Their tribune Nigel Farage has declared that "the British people voted for proper border controls & want to see net migration at sensible levels". and his fellow Ukippers are ready to seize on any delay in border controls as proof of Brexit betrayal.  
It may be tempting for ministers to shrug off such a backlash. A recent poll by ICM might give them some solace, as it found that 54 per cent of voters would accept the continued free movement of people “for a few years after Brexit, as part of a transitional deal”, with only 29 per cent saying it was unacceptable. But they cannot rest easy, as an earlier poll by YouGov found that 43 per cent of voters thought it would be unacceptable for Britain to maintain free movement during any transitional period, with only 36 per cent prepared to support it. 
The British public may not be too clear about how quickly it wants free movement to end as Britain reclaims its borders, but it wants to see a sense of direction. Some Eurosceptics want to see a cut-off date set, so it can be known how long it will take for these changes to happen. 
Theresa May told the Commons last month that Britain, outside of the EU, "will control immigration so that we continue to attract the brightest and the best...but manage the process properly so that our immigration system serves the national interest." She will know that many Britons voted Brexit in order to see the immigration system managed "properly", and they expect results. The longer they have to wait, the more they will fear a betrayal. 
Is Europe Choosing to Disappear?
by Giulio Meotti
April 4, 2017 at 4:00 am

A sterile Europe apparently thought that civil liberties could be bargained away in exchange for a temporary peace. Everything became negotiable.
As British author Douglas Murray has asked, why were workers not brought in from European countries suffering high unemployment, such as Portugal, Italy, Greece or Spain?
A clear-eyed U.S. Congressman, Rep. Steve King, correctly said recently that, "You cannot rebuild your civilization with somebody else's babies." He instantly drew that white-hot fire reserved for people who tell truths that threaten treasured fantasies (think Giordano Bruno or Galileo).
The new data released by Italy's National Institute for Statistics for 2016 sounds again like a death knell. There has been a new negative record of births: 474,000 compared to 486,000 for 2015, which had already fallen to historic lows. There were 608,000 deaths in 2016. In one year, Italy lost 134,000 people -- the equivalent of a city of the size of Ferrara or Salerno.
The demographic "illusion" is kept only by the influx of immigration (135,000). If one needs an idea of what Italy would be without immigrants, look at Emilia-Romagna, one of Italy's most populated and affluent regions: in 2035 it will have 20% fewer residents.
Italy is sometimes thought of Europe's guinea pig: wherever Italy goes, much of Europe follows it, especially in the central and southern countries. In 1995, Antonio Golini, a professor at La Sapienza University and a former president of the National Institute of Statistics, was contacted by the director-general of Plasmon, Italy's largest producer of baby food. Looking at the declining birth rates, the firm asked him if something could be done to prevent the company from going out of business. Plasmon started to make dietary products for adults.
A year ago, European geographers went in search of "the most desolate place in Europe". They discovered it not in northern and cold Lapland, but in sunny Spain, specifically in the area of Molina de Aragon, two hours from Madrid. Depopulation has not been the consequence of the climate, as in the Russian steppe or northern forests, but of a demographic crisis.
A report by the National Statistical Institute of Spain explained how the Iberian peninsula has become the sick man of Europe: Spain loses 72 inhabitants every day; 20% fewer children are born there than two decades ago. Demographers draw a line where Spain has no future and 30% of the population will be over the age of 65. In some Spanish regions, the fertility rate barely reaches one child per woman. Deaths already exceed births. Even the newspaper El Pais asked, "Are the Spanish people in danger of extinction?". The Spanish government just appointed a "sex czar" to try to figure out how to sustain the shrinking population.
Spain, in 2050, will be a depopulated nation dominated by older people and singles. The country will lose 5.3 million inhabitants: 11% of the current population. By that time, there will be 1.7 million Spanish children fewer than there are today. No children means that, in the long run, there will be no economic growth or prosperity; democracy will become a gerontocracy and Spain will embrace global irrelevance. Alejandro Macarrón Larumbe, director of the Foundation for Demographic Revival, has provided figures on the number of Spanish provinces that have already seen a loss of population.
The Islamic world has launched a demographic challenge to a sterile Europe. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently exhorted Muslims in Europe to have five children, "because you are the future of Europe". It echoes what the President of Algeria, Houari Boumedienne, said in 1974: "The wombs of our women will give us victory". They dream of conquering Europe through demography instead of terror -- and it seems they are succeeding.

While Italian and Spanish statistics were released, another headline should have captured our attention: "Islam will surpass Christianity" -- to become the world's largest religion in 2070. There is a link not only between Europe's empty cradles and Islam's expansion, but also between Europe's demographic suicide and its passivity facing its many troubles during the last two years: mass immigration, terrorism, intimidation.
No modern, affluent society ever stopped having children before. The influx of Muslim immigrants is a symptom, not a cause of Europe's decline. Members of a healthy continent, who embrace the future in its most elementary form (raising a new generation), would have never have allowed foreign immigrants carving out separate spheres of sharia law in Europe's multicultural enclaves.
As the British author Douglas Murray, has asked, why were workers not brought in from European countries suffering high unemployment, such as Portugal, Italy, Greece or Spain? A sterile Europe apparently thought that civil liberties could be bargained away in exchange for a temporary peace. Everything became negotiable, because everything seemed perishable. An entire continent is filled with aging occupants indulging in childlike illusions of "internationalism", and claiming that all conflicts can be resolved peacefully, non-lethally and diplomatically. Europe's culture is essentially pacifist. It demonizes war, and seeks pleasure and comfort above all else.
Europe's demographic suicide also has serious consequences for the security of a society. During the transition to an elderly-majority state, democracy will be endangered. Welfare redistribution depends on younger workers providing payroll taxes to fund social security. What happens when an elderly majority can vote for itself more and more, at the expense of the dwindling young? National defense will be endangered. Today Europe already refuses to invest in the NATO alliance. Old people's entitlements will take precedence over defense spending. States that will not spend money on defense will be vulnerable to those that do.
A clear-eyed U.S. Congressman, Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), correctly said recently that, "You cannot rebuild your civilization with somebody else's babies." He instantly drew that white-hot fire reserved for people who tell truths that threaten treasured fantasies (think Giordano Bruno or Galileo).
Decline is a choice, not a destiny. There is still time, but not much, for Europeans to choose not to disappear.
Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.
Note: Small nations like Sweden are in more immediate danger than countries such as the UK, but if the growth in Muslims in the UK continues at its present rate of doubling every ten years  while the rest of the population remains stable Muslims would become a majority in the UK in the 2040s. 
The 1011 UK census showed Mulsim to be 2.7 millio for England and Wales . There were also Muslims in Scotland and Norther Ireland so lets call it 3 million. that would mean 6 million in 2021, 12 million in 2031, 24 million in 2041, 48 million in 2051

Share this topic...
In a forum
In a site/blog

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk