FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > New Brexit Bonus
New Brexit Bonus
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
"As we are no longer in the EU our government can charge whatever tax on alcohol they choose, so the great Brexit news today is that in pubs a pint of beer will stay the same price and cider will be 1p cheaper. Hurrah. Oh and a bottle of wine is up 44p, spirits 76p, sherry 97p and Port £1.30. "When you are saying a brexit bonus. Are you trying to indicate the e.u set a maximum duty thay these duties wouldn't have reached? | |||
| |||
| |||
"The EU doesn't differentiate between different strengths of alcohol but we just have. " I was just trying to ascertain the bonus side. Didn't quite get what you meant via the original post. I thought the e.u had minimum rates no? The minimum rate for a hectolitre of beer is 1.87 and spirits is 550? | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I think charging by the alcohol content makes sense but I also think the rates are far too high especially so with inflation pushing up prices anyway. Glad to hear a pint in the pub is unchanged as its dear enough." I would like them to averhaul it properly. Drinking in pubs has become took expensive, but it used to be how localcommunities met and talked and socialised. The pubs in my hometown are dead now. There used to be 9. Now it's 5 and ona Saturday night you're lucky if by 9pm there's still 10 people in one of them. | |||
"The obvious bonus is cider in a UK pub will be 1p cheaper. " How much cider per day would we need to drink to offset the billions flushed down the brexit toilet every year? | |||
" How much cider per day would we need to drink to offset the billions flushed down the brexit toilet every year?" Good question ! Any mathematics here ? | |||
"I think charging by the alcohol content makes sense but I also think the rates are far too high especially so with inflation pushing up prices anyway. Glad to hear a pint in the pub is unchanged as its dear enough. I would like them to averhaul it properly. Drinking in pubs has become took expensive, but it used to be how localcommunities met and talked and socialised. The pubs in my hometown are dead now. There used to be 9. Now it's 5 and ona Saturday night you're lucky if by 9pm there's still 10 people in one of them." Maybe you need to stop haranguing the punters for their lack of knowledge on some topics you want to discuss while propping up the bar Morley! They might start coming back! 
That was a joke BTW  | |||
" How much cider per day would we need to drink to offset the billions flushed down the brexit toilet every year? Good question ! Any mathematics here ?" Bloomberg suggests that Brexit costs the economy about £100 billion a year. So that's 10 trillion pints of cider a year to balance out. Or 421.5 pints of cider per person every day. Although all of us who are legally allowed to drink will have to pick up the slack from those who aren't. | |||
| |||
"The obvious bonus is cider in a UK pub will be 1p cheaper. How much cider per day would we need to drink to offset the billions flushed down the brexit toilet every year?" None. Nothing was flushed. | |||
"I think charging by the alcohol content makes sense but I also think the rates are far too high especially so with inflation pushing up prices anyway. Glad to hear a pint in the pub is unchanged as its dear enough. I would like them to averhaul it properly. Drinking in pubs has become took expensive, but it used to be how localcommunities met and talked and socialised. The pubs in my hometown are dead now. There used to be 9. Now it's 5 and ona Saturday night you're lucky if by 9pm there's still 10 people in one of them. Maybe you need to stop haranguing the punters for their lack of knowledge on some topics you want to discuss while propping up the bar Morley! They might start coming back!
That was a joke BTW "It's alright. Typically remoaners stay in and drink, to drown their sorrows about a vote they lost 7 years ago | |||
" How much cider per day would we need to drink to offset the billions flushed down the brexit toilet every year? Good question ! Any mathematics here ?" Not to mention the cost to the NHS of alcohol related diseases and addiction. | |||
"The obvious bonus is cider in a UK pub will be 1p cheaper. How much cider per day would we need to drink to offset the billions flushed down the brexit toilet every year?" Well to offset the 8bn per month than Brexit costs, we regain 1bn per month in ‘savings’ Anyone got a calculator? | |||
"I think charging by the alcohol content makes sense but I also think the rates are far too high especially so with inflation pushing up prices anyway. Glad to hear a pint in the pub is unchanged as its dear enough. I would like them to averhaul it properly. Drinking in pubs has become took expensive, but it used to be how localcommunities met and talked and socialised. The pubs in my hometown are dead now. There used to be 9. Now it's 5 and ona Saturday night you're lucky if by 9pm there's still 10 people in one of them. Maybe you need to stop haranguing the punters for their lack of knowledge on some topics you want to discuss while propping up the bar Morley! They might start coming back!
That was a joke BTW
It's alright.
Typically remoaners stay in and drink, to drown their sorrows about a vote they lost 7 years ago "Lol not where I live. The bars and pubs are packed with people (a predominantly remain area) all quaffing fizz and laughing at brexiters who try to grasp every tiny straw | |||
"I think charging by the alcohol content makes sense but I also think the rates are far too high especially so with inflation pushing up prices anyway. Glad to hear a pint in the pub is unchanged as its dear enough. I would like them to averhaul it properly. Drinking in pubs has become took expensive, but it used to be how localcommunities met and talked and socialised. The pubs in my hometown are dead now. There used to be 9. Now it's 5 and ona Saturday night you're lucky if by 9pm there's still 10 people in one of them. Maybe you need to stop haranguing the punters for their lack of knowledge on some topics you want to discuss while propping up the bar Morley! They might start coming back!
That was a joke BTW
It's alright.
Typically remoaners stay in and drink, to drown their sorrows about a vote they lost 7 years ago
Lol not where I live. The bars and pubs are packed with people (a predominantly remain area) all quaffing fizz and laughing at brexiters who try to grasp every tiny straw "Grasping those new beverages coming over from newzealand and Australia. Breweries loving, I'm sire the aussies will love our pale ales. | |||
"I think charging by the alcohol content makes sense but I also think the rates are far too high especially so with inflation pushing up prices anyway. Glad to hear a pint in the pub is unchanged as its dear enough. I would like them to averhaul it properly. Drinking in pubs has become took expensive, but it used to be how localcommunities met and talked and socialised. The pubs in my hometown are dead now. There used to be 9. Now it's 5 and ona Saturday night you're lucky if by 9pm there's still 10 people in one of them. Maybe you need to stop haranguing the punters for their lack of knowledge on some topics you want to discuss while propping up the bar Morley! They might start coming back!
That was a joke BTW
It's alright.
Typically remoaners stay in and drink, to drown their sorrows about a vote they lost 7 years ago
Lol not where I live. The bars and pubs are packed with people (a predominantly remain area) all quaffing fizz and laughing at brexiters who try to grasp every tiny straw
Grasping those new beverages coming over from newzealand and Australia. Breweries loving, I'm sire the aussies will love our pale ales.
"I hope you are right. As I constantly say, we should celebrate all positive news on trade and the economy but not lose sight of net benefit. Once everything is back on an even keel we can properly celebrate. | |||
"I think charging by the alcohol content makes sense but I also think the rates are far too high especially so with inflation pushing up prices anyway. Glad to hear a pint in the pub is unchanged as its dear enough. I would like them to averhaul it properly. Drinking in pubs has become took expensive, but it used to be how localcommunities met and talked and socialised. The pubs in my hometown are dead now. There used to be 9. Now it's 5 and ona Saturday night you're lucky if by 9pm there's still 10 people in one of them. Maybe you need to stop haranguing the punters for their lack of knowledge on some topics you want to discuss while propping up the bar Morley! They might start coming back!
That was a joke BTW
It's alright.
Typically remoaners stay in and drink, to drown their sorrows about a vote they lost 7 years ago
Lol not where I live. The bars and pubs are packed with people (a predominantly remain area) all quaffing fizz and laughing at brexiters who try to grasp every tiny straw
Grasping those new beverages coming over from newzealand and Australia. Breweries loving, I'm sire the aussies will love our pale ales.
I hope you are right. As I constantly say, we should celebrate all positive news on trade and the economy but not lose sight of net benefit. Once everything is back on an even keel we can properly celebrate."It already is no? It seems our trade with e.u is where it was, infaxt the e.u even seems to be struggling atm. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I think charging by the alcohol content makes sense but I also think the rates are far too high especially so with inflation pushing up prices anyway. Glad to hear a pint in the pub is unchanged as its dear enough. I would like them to averhaul it properly. Drinking in pubs has become took expensive, but it used to be how localcommunities met and talked and socialised. The pubs in my hometown are dead now. There used to be 9. Now it's 5 and ona Saturday night you're lucky if by 9pm there's still 10 people in one of them. Maybe you need to stop haranguing the punters for their lack of knowledge on some topics you want to discuss while propping up the bar Morley! They might start coming back!
That was a joke BTW
It's alright.
Typically remoaners stay in and drink, to drown their sorrows about a vote they lost 7 years ago
Lol not where I live. The bars and pubs are packed with people (a predominantly remain area) all quaffing fizz and laughing at brexiters who try to grasp every tiny straw "hope that's a environmental paper straw | |||
"I think charging by the alcohol content makes sense but I also think the rates are far too high especially so with inflation pushing up prices anyway. Glad to hear a pint in the pub is unchanged as its dear enough. I would like them to averhaul it properly. Drinking in pubs has become took expensive, but it used to be how localcommunities met and talked and socialised. The pubs in my hometown are dead now. There used to be 9. Now it's 5 and ona Saturday night you're lucky if by 9pm there's still 10 people in one of them." I agree. The tax for offsale should be higher then for onsale | |||
"At long last I have actually found a Brexit Bonus. At Dublin airport Duty Free a mini bottle of wine is €5 for EU travellers and €4 for non-EU. " As British travellers book their flights out of Dublin to gain the benefit lol | |||
| |||
"I'm going back on Tuesday !" Just catching up here - delighted that someone has finally found the reason for leaving the EU. Unfortunately I live in France so cannot take advantage as things are already less expensive here but, for those heading to Dublin airport to take advantage of the reason we left, go for it! | |||
"our trade with e.u is where it was" Impossible. How can it be the same? Great Britain is now handicapped by customs barriers, regulatory declarations, visa requirements, VAT obstacles, carnets, Schengen stay limits, and rules of origin... to name a few. That is what it means to be a non-EU, non-EEA, non-Schengen country. It is unbelievable. Who the hell promised all of that - today's reality - before the appalling so-called referendum??? The EU-UK deal "creates barriers to trade that do not exist at present", wrote the European Commission. The European Commission has shown more care for this country, by knowing what they are talking about, than some some so-called "Conservatives". Shame on this country. The treatment of EU citizens in the UK has been a disgrace that's left a foul stain on this country. EU cits were denied a vote on their own future while being the most affected. This country basically said, "Oh no, you don't count. You're not British enough". It's an abomination. I admit my own fault. I wanted to stay in the EU because I thought it's a good idea to be on-site with our neighbours. But I hardly knew anything about the EU. Not before 2016. I didn't know what its values are. I didn't know how big its budget is, or what the top two expenses are. It was about 1% of UK gov spending, and the top two expenses of the EU are farming and regional development. Shamefully, I didn't think about citizens' rights either. It was only afterwards, I wondered, heck, what does it mean? Does it really mean, to rip up the entire legal basis of millions of people's lives in the UK? Even now, too many still don't realise that the UK used the habitatual residence test on access to benefits. You have to show you normally live in an EU country before you can claim benefits there. But this myth, the idea that anyone could just swan in from another EU country and claim benefits straight away - it's still around. It's still believed. It's so frustrating. I now realise, I had never even heard of the key decision making body. That's the Council of the European Union. It's where the national government ministers and diplomats meet. The key body! I'd never even heard of it! Well, I wasn't much of a supporter, was I? | |||
"our trade with e.u is where it was Impossible. How can it be the same? Great Britain is now handicapped by customs barriers, regulatory declarations, visa requirements, VAT obstacles, carnets, Schengen stay limits, and rules of origin... to name a few. That is what it means to be a non-EU, non-EEA, non-Schengen country. It is unbelievable. Who the hell promised all of that - today's reality - before the appalling so-called referendum??? The EU-UK deal "creates barriers to trade that do not exist at present", wrote the European Commission. The European Commission has shown more care for this country, by knowing what they are talking about, than some some so-called "Conservatives". Shame on this country. The treatment of EU citizens in the UK has been a disgrace that's left a foul stain on this country. EU cits were denied a vote on their own future while being the most affected. This country basically said, "Oh no, you don't count. You're not British enough". It's an abomination. I admit my own fault. I wanted to stay in the EU because I thought it's a good idea to be on-site with our neighbours. But I hardly knew anything about the EU. Not before 2016. I didn't know what its values are. I didn't know how big its budget is, or what the top two expenses are. It was about 1% of UK gov spending, and the top two expenses of the EU are farming and regional development. Shamefully, I didn't think about citizens' rights either. It was only afterwards, I wondered, heck, what does it mean? Does it really mean, to rip up the entire legal basis of millions of people's lives in the UK? Even now, too many still don't realise that the UK used the habitatual residence test on access to benefits. You have to show you normally live in an EU country before you can claim benefits there. But this myth, the idea that anyone could just swan in from another EU country and claim benefits straight away - it's still around. It's still believed. It's so frustrating. I now realise, I had never even heard of the key decision making body. That's the Council of the European Union. It's where the national government ministers and diplomats meet. The key body! I'd never even heard of it! Well, I wasn't much of a supporter, was I?" .you seem tonpost a lot of erratic responses which never deal with the fact as hand. Can you please take a minute and instead kf being emotive. Look at total exports and imports and confirm whether they hrenhigher or not? | |||
| |||
| |||
"EU cits were denied a vote on their own future while being the most affected. Eu citizens who became citizens in the uk could vote. Your post seems to indicate that we should have allowed any one to register to vote from inside the e.u? " I think that everyone who lived in the UK should have had a vote regardless of them being a citizen or not. Many had no need to apply for citizenship prior to Brexit so why should they have applied to vote? When I say everyone, I mean those over the legal age to vote etc. etc. | |||
"EU cits were denied a vote on their own future while being the most affected. Eu citizens who became citizens in the uk could vote. Your post seems to indicate that we should have allowed any one to register to vote from inside the e.u? I think that everyone who lived in the UK should have had a vote regardless of them being a citizen or not. Many had no need to apply for citizenship prior to Brexit so why should they have applied to vote? When I say everyone, I mean those over the legal age to vote etc. etc. " Well this would be a great way to election rig any election across the e.u Just move citizens form 1 country to the next. Whenever there's an election to ensure a government the e.u wants in is in. I'm not sure of any other country that gives non citizens a right to vote. You could just take a holiday to another country and completely change a government. | |||
"EU cits were denied a vote on their own future while being the most affected. Eu citizens who became citizens in the uk could vote. Your post seems to indicate that we should have allowed any one to register to vote from inside the e.u? I think that everyone who lived in the UK should have had a vote regardless of them being a citizen or not. Many had no need to apply for citizenship prior to Brexit so why should they have applied to vote? When I say everyone, I mean those over the legal age to vote etc. etc. " With FoM there were plenty of people from other EU countries who had made their lives in the UK with jobs, families and homes. Paying taxes and using services but with no requirement to be a citizen. So I agree that these people who were “resident” in the UK should have had a vote BUT only if they had been in the UK as a resident for a minimum amount of time, perhaps 12mths? Otherwise as Morley says, it would be easy to rig the outcome. | |||
"EU cits were denied a vote on their own future while being the most affected. Eu citizens who became citizens in the uk could vote. Your post seems to indicate that we should have allowed any one to register to vote from inside the e.u? I think that everyone who lived in the UK should have had a vote regardless of them being a citizen or not. Many had no need to apply for citizenship prior to Brexit so why should they have applied to vote? When I say everyone, I mean those over the legal age to vote etc. etc. Well this would be a great way to election rig any election across the e.u Just move citizens form 1 country to the next. Whenever there's an election to ensure a government the e.u wants in is in. I'm not sure of any other country that gives non citizens a right to vote. You could just take a holiday to another country and completely change a government. " Isn't it fun to take the piss | |||
"EU cits were denied a vote on their own future while being the most affected. Eu citizens who became citizens in the uk could vote. Your post seems to indicate that we should have allowed any one to register to vote from inside the e.u? I think that everyone who lived in the UK should have had a vote regardless of them being a citizen or not. Many had no need to apply for citizenship prior to Brexit so why should they have applied to vote? When I say everyone, I mean those over the legal age to vote etc. etc. With FoM there were plenty of people from other EU countries who had made their lives in the UK with jobs, families and homes. Paying taxes and using services but with no requirement to be a citizen. So I agree that these people who were “resident” in the UK should have had a vote BUT only if they had been in the UK as a resident for a minimum amount of time, perhaps 12mths? Otherwise as Morley says, it would be easy to rig the outcome. " Imagine every one who voted bnp going over to Luxembourg for a holiday. And voting in a prime minister there and taking over the country.  | |||
"EU cits were denied a vote on their own future while being the most affected. Eu citizens who became citizens in the uk could vote. Your post seems to indicate that we should have allowed any one to register to vote from inside the e.u? I think that everyone who lived in the UK should have had a vote regardless of them being a citizen or not. Many had no need to apply for citizenship prior to Brexit so why should they have applied to vote? When I say everyone, I mean those over the legal age to vote etc. etc. With FoM there were plenty of people from other EU countries who had made their lives in the UK with jobs, families and homes. Paying taxes and using services but with no requirement to be a citizen. So I agree that these people who were “resident” in the UK should have had a vote BUT only if they had been in the UK as a resident for a minimum amount of time, perhaps 12mths? Otherwise as Morley says, it would be easy to rig the outcome. Imagine every one who voted bnp going over to Luxembourg for a holiday. And voting in a prime minister there and taking over the country. "I don’t think three people from Billericay is going to have much affect | |||
"EU cits were denied a vote on their own future while being the most affected. Eu citizens who became citizens in the uk could vote. Your post seems to indicate that we should have allowed any one to register to vote from inside the e.u? I think that everyone who lived in the UK should have had a vote regardless of them being a citizen or not. Many had no need to apply for citizenship prior to Brexit so why should they have applied to vote? When I say everyone, I mean those over the legal age to vote etc. etc. With FoM there were plenty of people from other EU countries who had made their lives in the UK with jobs, families and homes. Paying taxes and using services but with no requirement to be a citizen. So I agree that these people who were “resident” in the UK should have had a vote BUT only if they had been in the UK as a resident for a minimum amount of time, perhaps 12mths? Otherwise as Morley says, it would be easy to rig the outcome. Imagine every one who voted bnp going over to Luxembourg for a holiday. And voting in a prime minister there and taking over the country.
I don’t think three people from Billericay is going to have much affect "530k votes bnp in 2010 They could have had their own little racist strong hold inside the e.u if they were smarter and brexited ???? | |||
"EU cits were denied a vote on their own future while being the most affected. Eu citizens who became citizens in the uk could vote. Your post seems to indicate that we should have allowed any one to register to vote from inside the e.u? I think that everyone who lived in the UK should have had a vote regardless of them being a citizen or not. Many had no need to apply for citizenship prior to Brexit so why should they have applied to vote? When I say everyone, I mean those over the legal age to vote etc. etc. With FoM there were plenty of people from other EU countries who had made their lives in the UK with jobs, families and homes. Paying taxes and using services but with no requirement to be a citizen. So I agree that these people who were “resident” in the UK should have had a vote BUT only if they had been in the UK as a resident for a minimum amount of time, perhaps 12mths? Otherwise as Morley says, it would be easy to rig the outcome. Imagine every one who voted bnp going over to Luxembourg for a holiday. And voting in a prime minister there and taking over the country. "Some people are real clowns The only person that suggested that this affected a general election or prime minister was ...let me see... Yes! Mr Morley A referendum is not a general election (obviously some people do not know the difference). Perhaps talking rubbish is par for the course - FOM, Luxembourg etc. there is only one person that went off on this tangent. It would be better if some people were to learn to read what is said before putting words into people's mouths. | |||
"EU cits were denied a vote on their own future while being the most affected. Eu citizens who became citizens in the uk could vote. Your post seems to indicate that we should have allowed any one to register to vote from inside the e.u? I think that everyone who lived in the UK should have had a vote regardless of them being a citizen or not. Many had no need to apply for citizenship prior to Brexit so why should they have applied to vote? When I say everyone, I mean those over the legal age to vote etc. etc. With FoM there were plenty of people from other EU countries who had made their lives in the UK with jobs, families and homes. Paying taxes and using services but with no requirement to be a citizen. So I agree that these people who were “resident” in the UK should have had a vote BUT only if they had been in the UK as a resident for a minimum amount of time, perhaps 12mths? Otherwise as Morley says, it would be easy to rig the outcome. Imagine every one who voted bnp going over to Luxembourg for a holiday. And voting in a prime minister there and taking over the country.
I don’t think three people from Billericay is going to have much affect
530k votes bnp in 2010
They could have had their own little racist strong hold inside the e.u if they were smarter and brexited ???? "Ha ha true enough but... Ah but could they actually read and were they really allowed access to crayons? | |||
"if they had been in the UK as a resident for a minimum amount of time, perhaps 12mths? " There was already a system in place that allowed EU citizens in the UK to vote and stand as a candidate in local elections. The decision not to use the electoral register that included EU citizens, but to use the electoral register that excluded them, was a political decision. | |||
"if they had been in the UK as a resident for a minimum amount of time, perhaps 12mths? There was already a system in place that allowed EU citizens in the UK to vote and stand as a candidate in local elections. The decision not to use the electoral register that included EU citizens, but to use the electoral register that excluded them, was a political decision." Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? | |||
| |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums?" The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015." Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum" Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. " Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure" I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K, as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU. (And it should have been legally binding, which would have required a supermajority) | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K, as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU. (And it should have been legally binding, which would have required a supermajority) " Again another thing Cameron missed then which is surprising given what outcome he wanted | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K, as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU. (And it should have been legally binding, which would have required a supermajority) Again another thing Cameron missed then which is surprising given what outcome he wanted" Nobody ever accused him of being a smart man. | |||
| |||
""I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K." That makes 'em resident, and were/are entitled to vote for the local Mayor, Councillors etc., i.e. matters relevant to where they live. They're NOT UK citizens though, why should they vote on UK Govenment policies? "... as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU" They could and can, by post. I find the system quite logical, if I were living in Germany I'd expect to have a say in what went on in my locality, but not the Bundestag." Not all U.K citizens living in the EU had a vote, there was a time cut-off. EU citizens living in the U.K. were enormously affected by the vote, more than any of us. They should have had a say in the matter. A U.K. citizen who’d lived in the USA or Canada of somewhere for up to 15 years had a Brexit vote, but an EU citizen living and working in the U.K. didn’t. | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K, as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU. (And it should have been legally binding, which would have required a supermajority) Again another thing Cameron missed then which is surprising given what outcome he wanted Nobody ever accused him of being a smart man." Lol,true. Perhaps he was a secret leavers all along | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K, as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU. (And it should have been legally binding, which would have required a supermajority) " It was open to e.u citizens who'd settled in the uk. Thry would have been uk residents. Because they have applied fkr uk citizenship. | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K, as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU. (And it should have been legally binding, which would have required a supermajority) It was open to e.u citizens who'd settled in the uk. Thry would have been uk residents. Because they have applied fkr uk citizenship." Why would they have applied for U.K. citizenship? There was no requirement to do so. | |||
| |||
""Why would they have applied for U.K. citizenship? There was no requirement to do so" Exactly. My German wife was a language teacher in the local High School, taxpayer and pension fund contributor etc. Since BREXIT, has "settled status". She certainly has no intention of becoming a British Citizen! And unless she were, I/we continue to believe she has no "right" to a say in Westminster's decisions. Nor I in Berlin's..." And Brexit wasn’t ‘Westminster’s decision’ was it? It was ‘the will of the people’ (well, the will of some of the people) Here’s a good piece I found: “Essentially the UK has two electoral registers. One is for local and EU elections, the other for Westminster elections. The first register includes all EU residents in the UK. The second register only includes residents from the EU who are citizens of the UK, Eire, Malta and the Republic of Cyprus. On 25th May 2015 the UK government chose to use the second register plus Gibraltar (only 30,000) for the referendum on Britain in the EU. Consequently, although some residents from the EU who are not UK citizens were allowed to vote, most were not. The right to vote depended on which country they came from. Denying the opportunity to vote in such a crucial referendum simply because the UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A, contrary to Article 14 of the UK Human Rights Act where discrimination is not allowed on the basis of national origin. Citizens of the commonwealth (such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, but also including Malta (EU) and Republic of Cyprus (EU) etc.) who were resident in the UK were given a vote. Citizens of Eire resident in the UK, Eire being in the EU but not in the Commonwealth, were also given a vote. Citizens of Gibraltar were given a vote in Gibraltar. Other EU citizens resident in the UK were not permitted to vote. Had it been a European election or a local election they would have had a vote. That use of this electoral register, in this case, denied universal and equal suffrage precisely when the issue is crucial to EU residents. It was a major error of judgement that was also contrary to the UN declaration of human rights (Article 21(3))” | |||
""Why would they have applied for U.K. citizenship? There was no requirement to do so" Exactly. My German wife was a language teacher in the local High School, taxpayer and pension fund contributor etc. Since BREXIT, has "settled status". She certainly has no intention of becoming a British Citizen! And unless she were, I/we continue to believe she has no "right" to a say in Westminster's decisions. Nor I in Berlin's... And Brexit wasn’t ‘Westminster’s decision’ was it? It was ‘the will of the people’ (well, the will of some of the people) Here’s a good piece I found: “Essentially the UK has two electoral registers. One is for local and EU elections, the other for Westminster elections. The first register includes all EU residents in the UK. The second register only includes residents from the EU who are citizens of the UK, Eire, Malta and the Republic of Cyprus. On 25th May 2015 the UK government chose to use the second register plus Gibraltar (only 30,000) for the referendum on Britain in the EU. Consequently, although some residents from the EU who are not UK citizens were allowed to vote, most were not. The right to vote depended on which country they came from. Denying the opportunity to vote in such a crucial referendum simply because the UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A, contrary to Article 14 of the UK Human Rights Act where discrimination is not allowed on the basis of national origin. Citizens of the commonwealth (such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, but also including Malta (EU) and Republic of Cyprus (EU) etc.) who were resident in the UK were given a vote. Citizens of Eire resident in the UK, Eire being in the EU but not in the Commonwealth, were also given a vote. Citizens of Gibraltar were given a vote in Gibraltar. Other EU citizens resident in the UK were not permitted to vote. Had it been a European election or a local election they would have had a vote. That use of this electoral register, in this case, denied universal and equal suffrage precisely when the issue is crucial to EU residents. It was a major error of judgement that was also contrary to the UN declaration of human rights (Article 21(3))”" All of which was known a year before the referendum. You can argue it wasn't a 'westminster decision' but it was a 'national vote' which is why that particular register was used, because it aligned more closely than the other. I must again stress, this was previously known. If any residents wanted to become citizens in order to vote, they could have applied. | |||
""Why would they have applied for U.K. citizenship? There was no requirement to do so" Exactly. My German wife was a language teacher in the local High School, taxpayer and pension fund contributor etc. Since BREXIT, has "settled status". She certainly has no intention of becoming a British Citizen! And unless she were, I/we continue to believe she has no "right" to a say in Westminster's decisions. Nor I in Berlin's... And Brexit wasn’t ‘Westminster’s decision’ was it? It was ‘the will of the people’ (well, the will of some of the people) Here’s a good piece I found: “Essentially the UK has two electoral registers. One is for local and EU elections, the other for Westminster elections. The first register includes all EU residents in the UK. The second register only includes residents from the EU who are citizens of the UK, Eire, Malta and the Republic of Cyprus. On 25th May 2015 the UK government chose to use the second register plus Gibraltar (only 30,000) for the referendum on Britain in the EU. Consequently, although some residents from the EU who are not UK citizens were allowed to vote, most were not. The right to vote depended on which country they came from. Denying the opportunity to vote in such a crucial referendum simply because the UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A, contrary to Article 14 of the UK Human Rights Act where discrimination is not allowed on the basis of national origin. Citizens of the commonwealth (such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, but also including Malta (EU) and Republic of Cyprus (EU) etc.) who were resident in the UK were given a vote. Citizens of Eire resident in the UK, Eire being in the EU but not in the Commonwealth, were also given a vote. Citizens of Gibraltar were given a vote in Gibraltar. Other EU citizens resident in the UK were not permitted to vote. Had it been a European election or a local election they would have had a vote. That use of this electoral register, in this case, denied universal and equal suffrage precisely when the issue is crucial to EU residents. It was a major error of judgement that was also contrary to the UN declaration of human rights (Article 21(3))” All of which was known a year before the referendum. You can argue it wasn't a 'westminster decision' but it was a 'national vote' which is why that particular register was used, because it aligned more closely than the other. I must again stress, this was previously known. If any residents wanted to become citizens in order to vote, they could have applied. " It was a referendum, which means the scope was only limited by the referendum bill. Nobody said it had to be one register or the other, it could have been bespoke (well, it was bespoke as the additions of Malta, Eire and Cyprus demonstrate) As you say, people could have applied for citizenship in order to vote, but equally, parliament could have allowed them a vote, removed the ‘under 15 years’ restriction on U.K. citizens abroad, or done anything else they chose. | |||
""Why would they have applied for U.K. citizenship? There was no requirement to do so" Exactly. My German wife was a language teacher in the local High School, taxpayer and pension fund contributor etc. Since BREXIT, has "settled status". She certainly has no intention of becoming a British Citizen! And unless she were, I/we continue to believe she has no "right" to a say in Westminster's decisions. Nor I in Berlin's... And Brexit wasn’t ‘Westminster’s decision’ was it? It was ‘the will of the people’ (well, the will of some of the people) Here’s a good piece I found: “Essentially the UK has two electoral registers. One is for local and EU elections, the other for Westminster elections. The first register includes all EU residents in the UK. The second register only includes residents from the EU who are citizens of the UK, Eire, Malta and the Republic of Cyprus. On 25th May 2015 the UK government chose to use the second register plus Gibraltar (only 30,000) for the referendum on Britain in the EU. Consequently, although some residents from the EU who are not UK citizens were allowed to vote, most were not. The right to vote depended on which country they came from. Denying the opportunity to vote in such a crucial referendum simply because the UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A, contrary to Article 14 of the UK Human Rights Act where discrimination is not allowed on the basis of national origin. Citizens of the commonwealth (such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, but also including Malta (EU) and Republic of Cyprus (EU) etc.) who were resident in the UK were given a vote. Citizens of Eire resident in the UK, Eire being in the EU but not in the Commonwealth, were also given a vote. Citizens of Gibraltar were given a vote in Gibraltar. Other EU citizens resident in the UK were not permitted to vote. Had it been a European election or a local election they would have had a vote. That use of this electoral register, in this case, denied universal and equal suffrage precisely when the issue is crucial to EU residents. It was a major error of judgement that was also contrary to the UN declaration of human rights (Article 21(3))” All of which was known a year before the referendum. You can argue it wasn't a 'westminster decision' but it was a 'national vote' which is why that particular register was used, because it aligned more closely than the other. I must again stress, this was previously known. If any residents wanted to become citizens in order to vote, they could have applied. It was a referendum, which means the scope was only limited by the referendum bill. Nobody said it had to be one register or the other, it could have been bespoke (well, it was bespoke as the additions of Malta, Eire and Cyprus demonstrate) As you say, people could have applied for citizenship in order to vote, but equally, parliament could have allowed them a vote, removed the ‘under 15 years’ restriction on U.K. citizens abroad, or done anything else they chose. " Parliament could have but they didn't. The onus then lay on those who thought it so important. They chose not to. End of story. | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K, as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU. (And it should have been legally binding, which would have required a supermajority) It was open to e.u citizens who'd settled in the uk. Thry would have been uk residents. Because they have applied fkr uk citizenship. Why would they have applied for U.K. citizenship? There was no requirement to do so." As per the above. You would need to become resident to vote in a matter of "UK RESIDENTS" as other wise any one on their holiday could vote. | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K, as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU. (And it should have been legally binding, which would have required a supermajority) It was open to e.u citizens who'd settled in the uk. Thry would have been uk residents. Because they have applied fkr uk citizenship. Why would they have applied for U.K. citizenship? There was no requirement to do so. As per the above. You would need to become resident to vote in a matter of "UK RESIDENTS" as other wise any one on their holiday could vote. " Not at all, because polling slips are sent out to registered addresses. EU residents living in the U.K. could vote in EU elections. | |||
| |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K, as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU. (And it should have been legally binding, which would have required a supermajority) It was open to e.u citizens who'd settled in the uk. Thry would have been uk residents. Because they have applied fkr uk citizenship. Why would they have applied for U.K. citizenship? There was no requirement to do so. As per the above. You would need to become resident to vote in a matter of "UK RESIDENTS" as other wise any one on their holiday could vote. Not at all, because polling slips are sent out to registered addresses. EU residents living in the U.K. could vote in EU elections. " But not Westminster. And not matter concerning the government in power in the uk. That was solely the uk citizens " the electorate" | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. " But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K, as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU. (And it should have been legally binding, which would have required a supermajority) It was open to e.u citizens who'd settled in the uk. Thry would have been uk residents. Because they have applied fkr uk citizenship. Why would they have applied for U.K. citizenship? There was no requirement to do so. As per the above. You would need to become resident to vote in a matter of "UK RESIDENTS" as other wise any one on their holiday could vote. Not at all, because polling slips are sent out to registered addresses. EU residents living in the U.K. could vote in EU elections. But not Westminster. And not matter concerning the government in power in the uk. That was solely the uk citizens " the electorate"" Could parliament have expanded the vote to EU citizens in the U.K., or not placed a restriction on U.K citizens abroad? | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K, as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU. (And it should have been legally binding, which would have required a supermajority) It was open to e.u citizens who'd settled in the uk. Thry would have been uk residents. Because they have applied fkr uk citizenship. Why would they have applied for U.K. citizenship? There was no requirement to do so. As per the above. You would need to become resident to vote in a matter of "UK RESIDENTS" as other wise any one on their holiday could vote. Not at all, because polling slips are sent out to registered addresses. EU residents living in the U.K. could vote in EU elections. But not Westminster. And not matter concerning the government in power in the uk. That was solely the uk citizens " the electorate" Could parliament have expanded the vote to EU citizens in the U.K., or not placed a restriction on U.K citizens abroad? " Whybwoukd they give a vote on soemthing affecting the uk to 370 odd m or whatever non uk residents? Indknt get your argument here. Should the usa allow the uk a vote in the next election over there?/ because of our special relationship? | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb." Because they were uk citizens.... | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Because they were uk citizens...." But not all U.K. citizens got a vote, did they? | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb." Not now no. You need to be a uk citizent..but if opened up to non citizens then yes. Yes you could | |||
"Who makes these decisions? Is it government or some other body that runs elections / referendums? The Conservative party got a slim parliamentary majority in the General Election of May 2015. The European Union Referendum Act was passed in December 2015. Does that mean it was the government of the day that decided on who gets to vote in the referendum Parliament voted on the bill. The bill could have contained almost anything, as long as it was approved by parliament. Thank you. It's good to know it went through parliament. A little surprised the government under Cameron did not include EU citizens in the vote given he was a leading remain figure I’d argue that it should have been open to EU citizens settled in the U.K, as well as all U.K citizens living in the EU. (And it should have been legally binding, which would have required a supermajority) It was open to e.u citizens who'd settled in the uk. Thry would have been uk residents. Because they have applied fkr uk citizenship. Why would they have applied for U.K. citizenship? There was no requirement to do so. As per the above. You would need to become resident to vote in a matter of "UK RESIDENTS" as other wise any one on their holiday could vote. Not at all, because polling slips are sent out to registered addresses. EU residents living in the U.K. could vote in EU elections. But not Westminster. And not matter concerning the government in power in the uk. That was solely the uk citizens " the electorate" Could parliament have expanded the vote to EU citizens in the U.K., or not placed a restriction on U.K citizens abroad? Whybwoukd they give a vote on soemthing affecting the uk to 370 odd m or whatever non uk residents? Indknt get your argument here. Should the usa allow the uk a vote in the next election over there?/ because of our special relationship?" My argument is that the referendum bill could have allowed EU citizens in the U.K. to have a vote, and arguably should have, due to them being impacted greater than the average U.K. resident. ALL U.K. citizens in the EU should also have got a vote for the same reason. | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Because they were uk citizens.... But not all U.K. citizens got a vote, did they? " did they not? Are you talking about the 15 year limit. | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Not now no. You need to be a uk citizent..but if opened up to non citizens then yes. Yes you could " You’re talking nonsense. To register with no fixed address you also must provide a previous address, and is a different process to ‘normal’ | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Because they were uk citizens.... But not all U.K. citizens got a vote, did they? did they not? Are you talking about the 15 year limit." Yes. The 15 year limit that prevented U.K. citizens abroad from (except in Malta, Cyprus or Eire, in which case all could vote) | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Because they were uk citizens.... But not all U.K. citizens got a vote, did they? did they not? Are you talking about the 15 year limit. Yes. The 15 year limit that prevented U.K. citizens abroad from (except in Malta, Cyprus or Eire, in which case all could vote)" Because I assume whenever that billnwas enacted. They were considered no longer citizens after 15 years except for commonwealth and the lack of a land border in Ireland. I'm not really seeing your problem here? Each territory has its own set of rules as to why. The function of being a citizen uk citizen in Australia was different to being one in Malta. | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Not now no. You need to be a uk citizent..but if opened up to non citizens then yes. Yes you could You’re talking nonsense. To register with no fixed address you also must provide a previous address, and is a different process to ‘normal’ " How. We are talking hypotheticals. Why would they need a fixed address. They simply have to register at the address if bon citizens by your assesmsent | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Because they were uk citizens.... But not all U.K. citizens got a vote, did they? did they not? Are you talking about the 15 year limit. Yes. The 15 year limit that prevented U.K. citizens abroad from (except in Malta, Cyprus or Eire, in which case all could vote) Because I assume whenever that billnwas enacted. They were considered no longer citizens after 15 years except for commonwealth and the lack of a land border in Ireland. I'm not really seeing your problem here? Each territory has its own set of rules as to why. The function of being a citizen uk citizen in Australia was different to being one in Malta." My problem is that two U.K. citizens live abroad for 16 years. One in Malta and one in Italy. One got to vote on Britain remaining in the EU. One didn’t. An EU citizen working and raising a family in the U.K didn’t get a vote either, despite their security (and finances - settled status is expensive) in their host nation being dependent upon it. | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Not now no. You need to be a uk citizent..but if opened up to non citizens then yes. Yes you could You’re talking nonsense. To register with no fixed address you also must provide a previous address, and is a different process to ‘normal’ How. We are talking hypotheticals. Why would they need a fixed address. They simply have to register at the address if bon citizens by your assesmsent" You can’t register for an election without a fixed address, except in some instances where you the have to provide a previous address. Your idea that any foreign citizen could stay in an Airbnb for a few weeks and register vote is ludicrous and impossible. | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Not now no. You need to be a uk citizent..but if opened up to non citizens then yes. Yes you could You’re talking nonsense. To register with no fixed address you also must provide a previous address, and is a different process to ‘normal’ How. We are talking hypotheticals. Why would they need a fixed address. They simply have to register at the address if bon citizens by your assesmsent You can’t register for an election without a fixed address, except in some instances where you the have to provide a previous address. Your idea that any foreign citizen could stay in an Airbnb for a few weeks and register vote is ludicrous and impossible." But they'd have the address. It would be where they book their stay in air bnb | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Not now no. You need to be a uk citizent..but if opened up to non citizens then yes. Yes you could You’re talking nonsense. To register with no fixed address you also must provide a previous address, and is a different process to ‘normal’ How. We are talking hypotheticals. Why would they need a fixed address. They simply have to register at the address if bon citizens by your assesmsent You can’t register for an election without a fixed address, except in some instances where you the have to provide a previous address. Your idea that any foreign citizen could stay in an Airbnb for a few weeks and register vote is ludicrous and impossible. But they'd have the address. It would be where they book their stay in air bnb " Previous address is required - you can’t just register to live at an Airbnb where a household is already registered. | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Not now no. You need to be a uk citizent..but if opened up to non citizens then yes. Yes you could You’re talking nonsense. To register with no fixed address you also must provide a previous address, and is a different process to ‘normal’ How. We are talking hypotheticals. Why would they need a fixed address. They simply have to register at the address if bon citizens by your assesmsent You can’t register for an election without a fixed address, except in some instances where you the have to provide a previous address. Your idea that any foreign citizen could stay in an Airbnb for a few weeks and register vote is ludicrous and impossible. But they'd have the address. It would be where they book their stay in air bnb Previous address is required - you can’t just register to live at an Airbnb where a household is already registered." Why would the household be registered...its an Airbnb? They're renting it out? Your logic is that I as a new restore or student at 18cwpuldnt be able to vote. Because I never registered at a previous address before my student halls of residence | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Not now no. You need to be a uk citizent..but if opened up to non citizens then yes. Yes you could You’re talking nonsense. To register with no fixed address you also must provide a previous address, and is a different process to ‘normal’ How. We are talking hypotheticals. Why would they need a fixed address. They simply have to register at the address if bon citizens by your assesmsent You can’t register for an election without a fixed address, except in some instances where you the have to provide a previous address. Your idea that any foreign citizen could stay in an Airbnb for a few weeks and register vote is ludicrous and impossible. But they'd have the address. It would be where they book their stay in air bnb Previous address is required - you can’t just register to live at an Airbnb where a household is already registered. Why would the household be registered...its an Airbnb? They're renting it out? Your logic is that I as a new restore or student at 18cwpuldnt be able to vote. Because I never registered at a previous address before my student halls of residence" Morley it’s clear that you’ve not looked into this at all, so I’m not gonna continue. It’s a ludicrous argument that has no grounding in reality. Student halls btw would fall under rules that allow students two registrations, from which they can vote in one. | |||
""UK resident is a citizen of country A (France, for example) rather than country B (Malta, say) is a denial of the human rights of the UK resident who is a citizen of country A" So not a citizen in the country whose democracy they want to change. Ergo not a resident or citizen in country b United Kingdom. Ergo. No breach and no right to vote. You could literally just get people travelling from one cou try to another having votes by registering to hotel rooms or aibnbs to vote. Changing governments at their whim. But U.K. citizens in Malta could vote in the Brexit referendum, but one in France (dependent upon length of stay couldn’t). And you can’t fly over and get on an electoral register at a hotel room or Airbnb. Not now no. You need to be a uk citizent..but if opened up to non citizens then yes. Yes you could You’re talking nonsense. To register with no fixed address you also must provide a previous address, and is a different process to ‘normal’ How. We are talking hypotheticals. Why would they need a fixed address. They simply have to register at the address if bon citizens by your assesmsent You can’t register for an election without a fixed address, except in some instances where you the have to provide a previous address. Your idea that any foreign citizen could stay in an Airbnb for a few weeks and register vote is ludicrous and impossible. But they'd have the address. It would be where they book their stay in air bnb Previous address is required - you can’t just register to live at an Airbnb where a household is already registered. Why would the household be registered...its an Airbnb? They're renting it out? Your logic is that I as a new restore or student at 18cwpuldnt be able to vote. Because I never registered at a previous address before my student halls of residence Morley it’s clear that you’ve not looked into this at all, so I’m not gonna continue. It’s a ludicrous argument that has no grounding in reality. Student halls btw would fall under rules that allow students two registrations, from which they can vote in one. " But your argument is that a student wouldn't be able to register to vote ina halls of residence. As its a temporary rental for 1 year and they never had residence anywhere else having never voted before. | |||
