So the deal on the table definitely has something of substance. Not yet clear how much it is yet.Originally Posted by Hazir
So the deal on the table definitely has something of substance. Not yet clear how much it is yet.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
You must be looking at another deal than I. Even the one thing they really seem to get, that emergency break thingy, is what other EU countries already had for as long as I can remember because they weren't so stupid to combine welfare with employee benefits. Which means the Brits could have had it without any negotiations at all, just like the rest of us. The enhanced competition is a shared interest and it is a project already started at the appointment of VP Timmermans, keeping out extremists also is both a common interest and standard procedure for most other countries (I know for a fact that typically extremist imams are blocked from speaking publicly in the Netherlands through the extensive use of visa-regulations) and the Red Card procedure only works if a 50% of all parliaments is against something. Which under the present rules already would blow legislation out of the water.
So, congratulations on finding something of substance. Not that it matters either way, since the facts play no role whatsover in the discourse about the EU. Have fun discussing as if they do.
Congratulations America
Sorry Hazir but you fail to understand the welfare issue. Yes we could rely upon contributions (and I would far prefer that) but that would mean denying benefits to Britons who haven't contributed. That is politically unacceptable and any Conservative government that tried that would unfortunately be riled at as right of Attila the Hun. I think we should do it anyway, but it isn't being done - so the 4 years issue will affect non-Brits who haven't contributed rather than including Brits too. That is something and something that was deemed impossible months ago (even if I'd far prefer it extend to everyone who hasn't contributed).
Doesn't take away from the fact that ONLY the UK needs the EU to agree on how it organises its welfare system. Nobody else has this problem.
Congratulations America
So what?
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaf...-14048470.htmlStädte warnen vor Anreizen zur Einwanderung
EU-Ausländer dürfen nach einem Urteil des Bundessozialgerichts in Deutschland Sozialhilfe erhalten. Nun liegt die Urteilsbegründung vor – und die Kommunen laufen Sturm.
Federal Social Court of Germany has ruled that EU citizen must get social security until they get frown out. The towns are not happy.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
Bottom line : you don't have to allow them to stay.
Congratulations America
Bottom line : you don't have to allow them to stay.
Also there's a little but significant difference between a right to remain in a country on the basis of EU regulations and the right to stay on the basis of a residency permit the spokesperson on behalve of the communities doesn't seem to be aware of. The Akdas ruling (albeit in the case of a Turkish citizen) makes that perfectly clear.
This 'problem' like the British in-work benefits is home made and can be fixed by German legislation.
Congratulations America
The problem is not home made. Right or wrong domestically the concept of welfare in the UK has been decided to be universal regardless of contributions to all citizens. This was decided post war in the 40s and is a deliberate decision.
The problem is that instead of applying to all citizens it is being extended to 400 million people who are not our citizens. Yes we can solve that unintended consequence by stripping our own citizens of welfare they haven't contributed towards but that would break the cradle to grave welfare state that the country currently wants.
Changing the rules so that non citizens need to contribute first fixes the problem.
That's what the Austrians did, all by themselves, without asking for anybody's permission in Brussels.
They didn't set up, while they should have been aware of EU rules, a system that enabled people to obtain a full life-income on the basis of a 12 hours per week job.
Congratulations America
Considering our welfare system was set up in the 1940s I don't think it was set up knowing the EU's rules either
I object to our welfare system as applied to our citizens but that's an issue for our domestic politics.
In-work benefits were not set up in the 1940s.
As things are; in the Netherlands we have a comprehensive welfare system, even for those who can't contribute. Yet, we are not obliged under any rule to providefor EU citizens who can't provide for themselves through work or other legal sources of income.
Come to the Netherlands, apply for welfare and find yourself on the first train/plane out of the country. As you not only don't have the right to welfare, but under both national and EU rules, not even the right to be in the country.
But by all means, keep claiming your problems aren't home made.
Congratulations America
In other words, the EU doesn't want to accept refugees seeking asylum, unless they can buy it? Doesn't that negate the principle of refugees seeking safe haven?
We aren't taking about refugees here.
They're speaking of migrants from other EU countries.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Mr Cameron was told today that the deal isn't a deal really.
Congratulations America
No it was said that the deal has yet to be ratified, which is self-blindingly obvious since its not even been signed yet.
Ratification is not required at all.
Congratulations America
For any deal to be binding it needs to ratified. Once it is ratified it is binding.
Humour with your explanation of how you ratify your purchases at the local Lidl.
Congratulations America
I make payment. Sale is confirmed only after that is done.
No, that is not ratification.
Congratulations America
No, but negotiations of agreements that are then ratified by governments and Parliaments are then ratified.
Treaties are ratified, whatever agreement is struck tomorrow is not a treaty, so it need not be ratified and will not be ratified. It will however have to be codified through the usual channels.
Congratulations America
So it's official a deal has been reached and the vote will be 23 June.
If the EU can't figure these things out.....then why should it be any "easier" for the US? Maybe I should defer to the game show on CNN
What?
Boris.
What are you doing.
Seems like our dear Hazir is not representative of his own countrymen. A clear margin of Dutch polled want Britain to stay but the Dutch despite that are according to a poll even more likely to vote to leave the EU than we are. Unfortunately my tablet isn't letting me copy and paste the link.
Want Britain to stay 48 to 37
Want Netherlands to leave 43 to 43
#NEXIT
Strictly in selfish terms for dear Boris, wouldn't most Londoners want to be in the EU given the finance bent of the City's economy?Boris.
What are you doing.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote