Cameron had few fans on here but that was one of his policies which had widespread support - I recall digging out the figures showing the UK was spending more on camps for Syrian refugees than the rest of the EU added together.
In December 2013 I wrote:
"I'm with the hardline UKIPpers on the subject of Syria (and I'm generally pro-immigration). There are 9 million displaced Syrians. Accepting a few refugees - or even tens of thousands of refugees - is not going to make any meaningful difference. It's gesture politics at its worst.
The British government has got this right - we should be giving generous aid to help the people on the ground. And we are."
I could do a quiz, guess who wrote in response:
"Your convoluted thinking to try and make this into something bad for Farage is a sight to behold. You are utterly wrong with this because you view immigration in simple black and white terms - just as you view UKIP in the same way."
And who wrote:
"Surely it's more racist to favour a European protectionist superstate with free movement of workers while requiring visas and controls for more talented people from Africa and Asia?"
If people have been persuaded by your arguments, then surely you should be pleased, rather than condemning them for it.
In three years time, therefore, you will be bitterly repenting supporting Brexit.
In the meantime, white South Africans will just need to do the best they can.
I don't know what your point is. You just want to have a go at people you don't like. That's your prerogative. But, the rest of us are entitled to think you're a bit of a twit.
Cameron had few fans on here but that was one of his policies which had widespread support - I recall digging out the figures showing the UK was spending more on camps for Syrian refugees than the rest of the EU added together.
In December 2013 I wrote:
"I'm with the hardline UKIPpers on the subject of Syria (and I'm generally pro-immigration). There are 9 million displaced Syrians. Accepting a few refugees - or even tens of thousands of refugees - is not going to make any meaningful difference. It's gesture politics at its worst.
The British government has got this right - we should be giving generous aid to help the people on the ground. And we are."
I could do a quiz, guess who wrote in response:
"Your convoluted thinking to try and make this into something bad for Farage is a sight to behold. You are utterly wrong with this because you view immigration in simple black and white terms - just as you view UKIP in the same way."
And who wrote:
"Surely it's more racist to favour a European protectionist superstate with free movement of workers while requiring visas and controls for more talented people from Africa and Asia?"
If people have been persuaded by your arguments, then surely you should be pleased, rather than condemning them for it.
In three years time, therefore, you will be bitterly repenting supporting Brexit.
In the meantime, white South Africans will just need to do the best they can.
I don't know what your point is. You just want to have a go at people you don't like. That's your prerogative. But, the rest of us are entitled to think you're a bit of a twit.
And I'm entitled to wonder why you're very comfortable with white South Africans being accepted into Britain, but not Syrian refugees.
O/T Betting. Given the latest Team Sky revelations I went to tweak my 2018 TdF bets and noticed that all bets are now "Winner without Froome" so they must be assuming that Froome will be suspended by July and don't want the arse ache of sorting out 1000s of disputed bets. Porte is the fav at 2/1 but he's never been a three week bike rider in his life. Nibali looks like value at 6/1 particularly seen as Astana probably won't exist next year so his doms will ride themselves to death to try and catch the eye of other teams.
Cameron had few fans on here but that was one of his policies which had widespread support - I recall digging out the figures showing the UK was spending more on camps for Syrian refugees than the rest of the EU added together.
In December 2013 I wrote:
"I'm with the hardline UKIPpers on the subject of Syria (and I'm generally pro-immigration). There are 9 million displaced Syrians. Accepting a few refugees - or even tens of thousands of refugees - is not going to make any meaningful difference. It's gesture politics at its worst.
The British government has got this right - we should be giving generous aid to help the people on the ground. And we are."
I could do a quiz, guess who wrote in response:
"Your convoluted thinking to try and make this into something bad for Farage is a sight to behold. You are utterly wrong with this because you view immigration in simple black and white terms - just as you view UKIP in the same way."
And who wrote:
"Surely it's more racist to favour a European protectionist superstate with free movement of workers while requiring visas and controls for more talented people from Africa and Asia?"
If people have been persuaded by your arguments, then surely you should be pleased, rather than condemning them for it.
In three years time, therefore, you will be bitterly repenting supporting Brexit.
In the meantime, white South Africans will just need to do the best they can.
I don't know what your point is. You just want to have a go at people you don't like. That's your prerogative. But, the rest of us are entitled to think you're a bit of a twit.
And I'm entitled to wonder why you're very comfortable with white South Africans being accepted into Britain, but not Syrian refugees.
I've never argued that all White South Africans should be granted asylum here. What exactly is the point you're trying to make?
Cameron had few fans on here but that was one of his policies which had widespread support - I recall digging out the figures showing the UK was spending more on camps for Syrian refugees than the rest of the EU added together.
In December 2013 I wrote:
"I'm with the hardline UKIPpers on the subject of Syria (and I'm generally pro-immigration). There are 9 million displaced Syrians. Accepting a few refugees - or even tens of thousands of refugees - is not going to make any meaningful difference. It's gesture politics at its worst.
The British government has got this right - we should be giving generous aid to help the people on the ground. And we are."
I could do a quiz, guess who wrote in response:
"Your convoluted thinking to try and make this into something bad for Farage is a sight to behold. You are utterly wrong with this because you view immigration in simple black and white terms - just as you view UKIP in the same way."
And who wrote:
"Surely it's more racist to favour a European protectionist superstate with free movement of workers while requiring visas and controls for more talented people from Africa and Asia?"
If people have been persuaded by your arguments, then surely you should be pleased, rather than condemning them for it.
In three years time, therefore, you will be bitterly repenting supporting Brexit.
In the meantime, white South Africans will just need to do the best they can.
I don't know what your point is. You just want to have a go at people you don't like. That's your prerogative. But, the rest of us are entitled to think you're a bit of a twit.
And I'm entitled to wonder why you're very comfortable with white South Africans being accepted into Britain, but not Syrian refugees.
I've never argued that all White South Africans should be granted asylum here. What exactly is the point you're trying to make?
In the case of Syrian refugees there were neighbouring countries which could accomodate them - and did. Which neighbouring country should White South Africans present themselves to?
Leo Varadkar, the Irish prime minister, has been skilful in enlisting the EU in full support of an open Irish border, but he risks disappointment. Either, Brussels will continue to back him and insist on a Northern Ireland clause in the Article 50 withdrawal agreement (which the UK might not sign) — or it will abandon and humiliate Mr Varadkar.
In both cases, there will be a hard Irish border after the end of the transitional period, at least in the technical/legal sense of the word. I am not in a position to judge the extent to which a combination of technology and bespoke customs arrangements can soften the actual experience of crossing the border. But I fear that Mr Varadkar has either overplayed his hand, or won a devastating — if Pyrrhic — victory.
Comments
At least they'll know who to blame......
In both cases, there will be a hard Irish border after the end of the transitional period, at least in the technical/legal sense of the word. I am not in a position to judge the extent to which a combination of technology and bespoke customs arrangements can soften the actual experience of crossing the border. But I fear that Mr Varadkar has either overplayed his hand, or won a devastating — if Pyrrhic — victory.
https://www.ft.com/content/5008618e-1e0a-11e8-aaca-4574d7dabfb6
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/03/02/enjoy-weekend-mrs-may-eu-coming-monday/?li_source=LI&li_medium=li-recommendation-widget