MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Tony Blair calls for introduction of new immigration policy that “reasserts control”
Ex prime minister Tony Blair has called on the UK government to introduce a new immigration policy which “reasserts control”. When he was prime minister, Mr. Blair's government - unlike most EU countries - did not apply transitional controls on migrants from eastern Europe, but in a Sunday Times article he said “times were different”. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesHe is becoming more like an ex Argie politician every day - living in fantasia land! EU said load and clear- you want free market - then you have free movement.FULL STOP. Dumbo Blair and many others - it is not UK who can set terms - UK voted to Leave- so ALL terms will be set by the others in the EU!
Sep 11th, 2017 - 07:19 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Very simple.
Only thing the UK gets to decide is the size of the cheque to write.
I think you will find that it is in the EU's interest to make a reasonable deal that favours both sides. The UK is the second biggest contributor to the EU and buys more from the EU than it sells to them. I think it is only right that the UK can pick and choose who can work in the UK. At the moment it has many illegals working there which lowers the wages undermining the minimum wage set by the government.
Sep 11th, 2017 - 11:26 pm - Link - Report abuse +1The man should be facing the Hague in my opinion. Hopefully that will ahppen one day but I am not holding my breath.
Sep 12th, 2017 - 06:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0Islander 1
Sep 12th, 2017 - 09:11 am - Link - Report abuse +1Not a fan of the UK I see.
From your point of view it is pointless in trying to negotiate anything. We will acquiesce to every demand the EU make and receive NOTHING in reply ?
In which case we should just leave without paying anything towards our “leaving settlement”
That should concentrate minds on the Commissions side.
The EU stick to rigid formulation on discussions until they are up against the deadline then it is the headless chicken syndrome trying to get agreement from ALL member states.
The discussions are not over UNTIL they are over and positions can alter near the crunch time. Remember, some EU states have a lot to lose if there is no deal. Some compromise will be hammered out.
Islander1 has a point. It's all very well for Blair to say the UK can make a new immigration policy and stay in the EU, but that's not what the EU are saying. Let him convince them to agree to that, until then he's just bloviating.
Sep 12th, 2017 - 10:17 am - Link - Report abuse -2@golfcronie
Leaving the EU should reduce the number of legal workers in the UK, but it's not going to reduce illegal ones. That has been up to our government all along. If anything it is likely to increase the number of illegal workers if businesses have difficulty filling positions legally.
What exactly are the EU saying...?
Sep 12th, 2017 - 01:19 pm - Link - Report abuse +2That the UK has to pay for a free trade deal and accept free movement of European immigrants....?
That's a joke...would a free trade deal with any other country outside the EU demand the same conditions...?
Walk away, pay nothing, send back 3 million immigrants withdraw from EU defence (UK is an island fortress protected by nukes) and ask individual EU states if they would prefer WTO tariffs over a deal...
The EU aren't saying anything in this article, it's about Blair. Was that Voice or The Voice??
Sep 12th, 2017 - 04:38 pm - Link - Report abuse -1@ Demon Tree I think you will find that the illegals all rely on the “ human rights law ” that is why we have so many, once here it is very,very difficult to get rid of them. They all say they have no passports and no identification so it is impossible to say which country they came from, and the country they came from do not want them back anyway.
Sep 12th, 2017 - 05:41 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“They all say they have no passports and no identification so it is impossible to say which country they came from, and the country they came from do not want them back anyway.”
Sep 12th, 2017 - 05:59 pm - Link - Report abuse -1And that's going to change when we leave the EU, is it? Are we leaving the Geneva Convention also?
DemonTree
Sep 12th, 2017 - 07:04 pm - Link - Report abuse +1You know fine well which Voice it is...
Just because I voted to remain, like most folk in Scotland, it does not mean I support the way in which the EU is trying to screw and punish “us”...
I can not turn back time even though I'm sure a lot more folk might have voted differently now...
The die is cast and the EU is making it quite clear that it is a case of “Them” and “Us”, it's time to get off the fence, stop crying over spilt milk and play hardball...and see how the EU likes it up em'...
United we stand...divided we fall...the UK Govt should bear that in mind...
If it wasn't for all the dots I would have seriously wondered. I can see why anyone might be angry with the way the EU is acting, but where did you get that “the UK has to pay for a free trade deal and accept free movement of European immigrants”?
Sep 12th, 2017 - 10:22 pm - Link - Report abuse -1As far as I know they are still refusing to even talk about a trade deal until they have blackmailed the UK into coughing up the money.
And your nuclear option is a terrible idea. Those 3 million immigrants are people with lives and friends here, as are the British immigrants living in Europe, and what do you think would be the effect of pulling 3 million people out of the economy at once? Pulling out of defence would have the same effect on the UK as on the US - less power and influence = and we will NOT be better off with a more unstable Europe on our doorstep.
Finally, speaking to individual states would be pointless. They aren't allowed to make their own trade deals due to EU rules, any more than the UK is now.
What do you mean where did I get...”the UK has to pay for a free trade deal and accept free movement of European immigrants”?
Sep 12th, 2017 - 10:50 pm - Link - Report abuse +1They want the UK to pay 60 Billion before any trade discussions...and then to stay in a single market...free movement of EU citizens...Have you not been reading the news...?
What nuclear option...? I made the point that the UK doesn't need any EU defence with Trident patrolling the seas and the UK is still part of NATO...
I don't care about Brit expats...you move to another country, you roll with the dice and live with the consequences....
EU rules or not the individual EU states will think twice about losing 60 million consumers on their doorstep...
Europe has been unstable for the last 1000 years it's nothing new...
There will never be a shortage of immigrants to fill the shoes of departing or expelled Europeans...
The UK will be able to pick and choose instead of tolerating EU citizens with apparently more rights than UK citizens...
The EU is drawing all the lines here with their demands...there is no appeasing them...
Besides appeasement does not work well traditionally in Europe...
Oh, you meant the exit bill. It's not a payment for a trade deal, it's to pay for things the UK already committed to. Even if we pay it they still may not agree on a deal.
Sep 12th, 2017 - 11:32 pm - Link - Report abuse -1And we could make a trade deal with the EU without having free movement, we just can't be in the free market, no matter what Blair says.
“I don't care about Brit expats”
Do you care about Brit non-expats? Do you care about Europeans who've made their lives here? We all roll the dice and live with the consequences, doesn't mean we should screw over our friends and neighbours.
“There will never be a shortage of immigrants to fill the shoes of departing or expelled Europeans...”
How will that help us? People want less immigration, not more. You want to replace all the people who are settled here and have jobs and houses with new immigrants. Why, just to spite the EU?
By nuclear option I meant your suggestion of a cliff-edge Brexit and withdrawal of all cooperation. Make no mistake, it would hurt the EU, but it would hurt the UK a lot more. They have the advantage and they know it.
As for defence, how many wars were there in Europe in the last 1000 years? Do we want to go back to that? But also, do we really want a united European army on our doorstep, one that we have no say in?
You say it's not a payment for a trade deal...but it is, it's a condition and even more so because there are no legal obligations to pay an exit bill...
Sep 12th, 2017 - 11:58 pm - Link - Report abuse +1If the EU are willing to make a casualty of their citizens living in the UK by their attitude and quest to punish the UK, then that is their fault...
The UK offered to discuss EU citizens at the very beginning...they didn't want to know....
As for immigrants and replacing them...I don't have a problem with immigrants...never have...it's immaterial to me where they come from...
The UK is not taking the hard stance, they just want to leave the Union the EU is taking the hard stance and are determined to make the UK suffer...
A reciprocal response is all they will understand...
Sometimes there is no alternative, but to walk away...
Yes the UK will suffer for quite sometime...but the UK is going to suffer anyway that is the EU's agenda...
Better than begging for scraps...
The UK is taking the hard stance, wanting to leave the single market and customs union right away, yet somehow keep an open border. They want to leave the jurisdiction of the ECJ yet remain in various agreements that are governed by it. The EU is also being unreasonable but they don't see the UK putting forward a coherent policy.
Sep 13th, 2017 - 10:09 am - Link - Report abuse -2The exit payment is not a payment for a trade deal, but they are using the threat of no deal as leverage to try and force the UK to pay it. And even if the EU is unreasonable why should we take it out on their citizens? That would be on us, not on them. We should treat them decently even if we can't come to an agreement.
I don't have a problem with immigrants in general, but I think we have too many of them, and it does matter where they come from because they bring their culture and attitudes they have learned with them.
The EU does want the UK to suffer but only to a certain extent, because it will hurt them too. Compromise is still possible but that means we or rather the hardcore Brexiters need to compromise too. That 52% has gone to their heads and now they think they should get their every demand met no matter how stupid and damaging to the country.
Having just heard Junker's speech to the EU with his vision of an United States of Europe with a President, Finance minister, it's own armed forces and the Euro as it's currency...no thanks.
Sep 13th, 2017 - 12:39 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Total centralisation of power is the opposite of what I think most people here want. We have had enough of this with Westminster thank you !
Interesting. I suppose they think with the UK out of the way they can go full steam ahead on the integration, but I wonder how the other countries will react? For countries already in the Eurozone having a finance minister might be a good thing, but I can't see those still outside racing to join the Euro.
Sep 13th, 2017 - 12:54 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Combining presidencies and making it an elected position would certainly be more democratic, but would take power away from the member states' governments, so I doubt it will go ahead.
The question is why is this piece appearing in Mercopenguin, a British government propaganda organ supposedly devoted to America, South America and the “South Atlantic”?
Sep 14th, 2017 - 04:43 am - Link - Report abuse -2Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!