Beechey Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 (edited) 15 hours ago, lifted*fox said: Seb Dance putting a lot of emphasis on visas there, the dark green countries below also require no visas for UK citizens and yet a deep political union is required for precisely none of those. Edited 25 October 2018 by Beechey 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxinexile Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 3 hours ago, Beechey said: Seb Dance putting a lot of emphasis on visas there, the dark green countries below also require no visas for UK citizens and yet a deep political union is required for precisely none of those. I wasn't aware you didn't need a visa to work in the USA, South America, Canada, Australia, Africa etc. I wasn't aware it was so easy to move to those countries/continents, due to them requiring no visas for UK citizens. You learn something new every day ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beechey Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 (edited) 35 minutes ago, foxinexile said: I wasn't aware you didn't need a visa to work in the USA, South America, Canada, Australia, Africa etc. I wasn't aware it was so easy to move to those countries/continents, due to them requiring no visas for UK citizens. You learn something new every day ... Visa requirements != moving to a country permanently. Seb had "no visas" in its own sentence, considering he's an MEP trying to make a large political statement, you'd hope he's understand how few countries require UK citizens to have visas to visit. Edited 25 October 2018 by Beechey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl the Llama Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 16 minutes ago, Beechey said: Visa requirements != moving to a country permanently. Seb had "no visas" in its own sentence, considering he's an MEP trying to make a large political statement, you'd hope he's understand how few countries require UK citizens to have visas to visit. Pretty sure I needed one for my holiday to the states... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beechey Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 8 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said: Pretty sure I needed one for my holiday to the states... Maybe, most people (vst majority of British passport holders) can get a waiver, called an ESTA - there are exceptions though, and I'm unsure how long this system's been in place. Are you sure it wasn't this? https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/usa/entry-requirements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchsntf Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 On 24/10/2018 at 12:25, Strokes said: Having a strong currency isn’t a good benefit to all the countries in the union, the flexibility to either let Italy make investments or to have made the investments themselves. It’s all tailored for Germany and nothing will get in the way. Wales is not an independent sovereign nation. cymru am byth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchsntf Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, foxinexile said: I wasn't aware you didn't need a visa to work in the USA, South America, Canada, Australia, Africa etc. I wasn't aware it was so easy to move to those countries/continents, due to them requiring no visas for UK citizens. You learn something new every day ... Well sort of,..Germans also only need an ESTA. But 90 days,I believe is the maximum for Germans and Brits (vwp) program is there for other nationals as well... don't try to any of those areas,without a Visa or first enquiring...or you will be on the next plane out,at your own cost!!! If you are thinking of working in Australia/Canada, don't go without any reccomendation.Youth-workers can work up to 2 years. But there is still paper work.. Edited 25 October 2018 by fuchsntf 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl the Llama Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 51 minutes ago, Beechey said: Maybe, most people (vst majority of British passport holders) can get a waiver, called an ESTA - there are exceptions though, and I'm unsure how long this system's been in place. Are you sure it wasn't this? https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/usa/entry-requirements We didn't have electronic passports back then so it wasn't that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxinexile Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 2 hours ago, Beechey said: Visa requirements != moving to a country permanently. Seb had "no visas" in its own sentence, considering he's an MEP trying to make a large political statement, you'd hope he's understand how few countries require UK citizens to have visas to visit. But he wasn't just talking about visiting was he? To live, work, study in the countries you highlighted, you need a visa; if I want to live, work, study in France, Germany, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Malta, Poland, Sweden, Denmark etc. I'm all good to go (at present). That's the point he was making. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said: We didn't have electronic passports back then so it wasn't that. I’ve always had a waiver to visit the states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beechey Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, foxinexile said: But he wasn't just talking about visiting was he? To live, work, study in the countries you highlighted, you need a visa; if I want to live, work, study in France, Germany, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Malta, Poland, Sweden, Denmark etc. I'm all good to go (at present). That's the point he was making. Please point to where I said he only talks about visas, because I sure don't see it: "Seb Dance putting a lot of emphasis on visas there" He's fine to make a point about freedom of movement, but visas should have no point in that. Lack of visas is not freedom of movement. In his words: "On the left: your current free zone. You can work, travel, study, love, retire across this area. No visas. Includes non-EU members." Edited 25 October 2018 by Beechey 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxinexile Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 19 minutes ago, Beechey said: Please point to where I said he only talks about visas, because I sure don't see it: "Seb Dance putting a lot of emphasis on visas there" He's fine to make a point about freedom of movement, but visas should have no point in that. Lack of visas is not freedom of movement. In his words: "On the left: your current free zone. You can work, travel, study, love, retire across this area. No visas. Includes non-EU members." He's talking about the fact that at present we don't require any sort of visa to either live in, work in, or visit 27 other countries (those in the EU) and those non-EU countries that form the EEA (Norway etc.) He's talking specifically about the EU and EEA, not countries outside of this area. He implies (correctly) that we have freedom of movement between these countries without any need for any visa of any type. You brought in non-EU countries (USA, Canada, Australia etc.) for which we don't require a visa to visit for a limited time ... but I don't see the relevance of these because they form no basis of his argument. He's talking about the EU and EEA specifically. Whatever our arrangements are with countries outside this bloc is a moot point in relation to what he's highlighting. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beechey Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 (edited) 46 minutes ago, foxinexile said: He's talking about the fact that at present we don't require any sort of visa to either live in, work in, or visit 27 other countries (those in the EU) and those non-EU countries that form the EEA (Norway etc.) He's talking specifically about the EU and EEA, not countries outside of this area. He implies (correctly) that we have freedom of movement between these countries without any need for any visa of any type. You brought in non-EU countries (USA, Canada, Australia etc.) for which we don't require a visa to visit for a limited time ... but I don't see the relevance of these because they form no basis of his argument. He's talking about the EU and EEA specifically. Whatever our arrangements are with countries outside this bloc is a moot point in relation to what he's highlighting. I get exactly what he's talking about - but he's using visa free travel as a reason for remaining (seemingly) in the Single Market, which you don't need for visa free travel (he stated travel as well as work and studentships etc, which is important). His points about working etc are fine, I've not even disputed them. Arguing that we'll need visas to travel to the EU after Brexit is a mostly ridiculous concept - if no agreement is agreed the it might be the case for a few months, but both sides will want the huge tourism that happens currently to continue (remembering that UK holiday-makers spend around £35bn per year in Europe). We probably won't be able to freely work in the EU, and EU nationals won't be able to do so here, but that's a tradeoff the UK government will make. Talking solely about needing visas to travel after Brexit is really dumb though. There's two major countries in Europe that requires visas to travel to the Schengen Zone: Belarus and Russia. Both more or less dictatorships, and both completely repressive. One shoots down air liners and invades its neighbours. He effectively stated in that graphic that the UK will require visas to visit the EU (- Ireland because of the Common Travel Area) after Brexit, stating the UK will have the exact status of Russia and Belarus. I'd bet that won't be the case. It's not even something that needs to be negotiated, the EU can just add the UK to the visa-free list. Frankly they'd be mad not to as there's absolutely no downsides. Edited 25 October 2018 by Beechey 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchsntf Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 Why don't we tell EU...sorry we can't pay the monies due at the moment.... we have to get out Universal-benifits,and social services sorted...We owe our electorate!!!! Naive!! I know...!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxinexile Posted 25 October 2018 Share Posted 25 October 2018 36 minutes ago, Beechey said: I get exactly what he's talking about - but he's using visa free travel as a reason for remaining (seemingly) in the Single Market, which you don't need for visa free travel (he stated travel as well as work and studentships etc, which is important). His points about working etc are fine, I've not even disputed them. Arguing that we'll need visas to travel to the EU after Brexit is a mostly ridiculous concept - if no agreement is agreed the it might be the case for a few months, but both sides will want the huge tourism that happens currently to continue (remembering that UK holiday-makers spend around £35bn per year in Europe). We probably won't be able to freely work in the EU, and EU nationals won't be able to do so here, but that's a tradeoff the UK government will make. Talking solely about needing visas to travel after Brexit is really dumb though. There's two major countries in Europe that requires visas to travel to the Schengen Zone: Belarus and Russia. Both more or less dictatorships, and both completely repressive. One shoots down air liners and invades its neighbours. He effectively stated in that graphic that the UK will require visas to visit the EU (- Ireland because of the Common Travel Area) after Brexit, stating the UK will have the exact status of Russia and Belarus. I'd bet that won't be the case. It's not even something that needs to be negotiated, the EU can just add the UK to the visa-free list. Frankly they'd be mad not to as there's absolutely no downsides. I agree with that, I find it highly unlikely too that we'll require a visa to travel for time-limited periods to other EU countries after Brexit. I can see how his point about travel appears misleading but I think the point he's trying to make (and it's only my assumption) is that we currently enjoy unlimited travel around EU countries without the need for a visa. For example, if I choose to travel around Germany, Poland and Austria for six months, I don't currently require a visa to do that; however whether I can do that post Brexit, I find unlikely. I can currently travel around the USA for ninety days visa free, I can't for six months. I think he was highlighting that our freedom of unlimited travel within the EU, along with many other benefits, will sadly end. We need to know the basis of our future relationship first, I know, but I'd be very surprised if we kept the privilege of unlimited travel. He should have included that word in his tweet. It changes the point regarding travel within the EU to what is probably the reality that is coming our way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadt Posted 26 October 2018 Share Posted 26 October 2018 Australians can travel for 90 days visa free, highly doubt that we'd need visas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 26 October 2018 Share Posted 26 October 2018 As most of us knew they would, taking action at the time to get the message out its a smear, then drop the action later down the line and hope no one notices. They knew all along it was the truth and they didn't have a leg to stand on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voll Blau Posted 26 October 2018 Share Posted 26 October 2018 Yay. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 26 October 2018 Share Posted 26 October 2018 double yay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 26 October 2018 Share Posted 26 October 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Voll Blau said: Yay. Very interesting, will the opposition still be prepared to vote down the deal that comes back if this is the alternative to it? Theresa May might secretly be rubbing her hands with glee at this 6 minutes ago, lifted*fox said: double yay Incredible, our own treasury can't forecast accurate growth stats 6 months into the future yet this mob can calculate it onto a certain demographic income 32 years into the future. Laughable. How do you they expect it to be taken seriously by anybody? Edited 26 October 2018 by MattP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl the Llama Posted 26 October 2018 Share Posted 26 October 2018 4 minutes ago, MattP said: Very interesting, will the opposition still be prepared to vote down the deal that comes back if this is the alternative to it? Theresa May might secretly be rubbing her hands with glee at this You know you're on the wrong side of the argument when your idea of victory is forcing a choice between a bad deal and a worse one... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 26 October 2018 Share Posted 26 October 2018 8 minutes ago, MattP said: Very interesting, will the opposition still be prepared to vote down the deal that comes back if this is the alternative to it? Theresa May might secretly be rubbing her hands with glee at this Incredible, our own treasury can't forecast accurate growth stats 6 months into the future yet this mob can calculate it onto a certain demographic income 32 years into the future. Laughable. How do you they expect it to be taken seriously by anybody? They have to come up something to justify their pay. It's funny how the results come out positive or negative (depending on your view) to suit the people paying for the research. not that it's anything new political parties have been doing it for years and many big businesses do it to justify the changes often at the expense of their employees. Medical and food research do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 26 October 2018 Share Posted 26 October 2018 1 minute ago, Carl the Llama said: You know you're on the wrong side of the argument when your idea of victory is forcing a choice between a bad deal and a worse one... It's the position she only has herself to blame in. I can't believe I trusted her to deliver this looking back, she had form for backing down on everything (and has since i.e dementia tax) and that clearly didn't escape Barnier - they knew we were never serious about no deal and would compromise on anything. 1 minute ago, davieG said: They have to come up something to justify their pay. It's funny how the results come out positive or negative (depending on your view) to suit the people paying for the research. not that it's anything new political parties have been doing it for years and many big businesses do it to justify the changes often at the expense of their employees. Medical and food research do the same. Absolutely, the reason the treasury got the post- Brexit vote figures so comically wrong was because they made sure the questions got them to the answers they wanted to back up Osborne and Cameron's project fear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl the Llama Posted 26 October 2018 Share Posted 26 October 2018 45 minutes ago, MattP said: It's the position she only has herself to blame in. I can't believe I trusted her to deliver this looking back, she had form for backing down on everything (and has since i.e dementia tax) and that clearly didn't escape Barnier - they knew we were never serious about no deal and would compromise on anything. Of course we weren't, that would have been madness. It's like we're trying to bluff our way in a game of poker where the opponent has pocket aces and 2 aces on the flop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 26 October 2018 Share Posted 26 October 2018 1 hour ago, MattP said: It's the position she only has herself to blame in. I can't believe I trusted her to deliver this looking back, she had form for backing down on everything (and has since i.e dementia tax) and that clearly didn't escape Barnier - they knew we were never serious about no deal and would compromise on anything. Perhaps but whenever she has tried to negotiate hard she's been bombarded by Remainers including many in her own party saying she's stupid or naive or whatever other denigrating words they can use totally undermining any serious attempt at negotiating a good deal. I can't imagine anyone else doing much better under those circumstances. She was hamstrung before she even started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts