Concrete Achievements

Tag: immigration

  • So much of the backstory to this reminded me of UK politics talking about immigration in…

    So much of the backstory to this reminded me of UK politics talking about immigration in the early 2000s (including race-baiting propaganda headlines). newyorker.com/magazine/2020/…

    I mean…

    And…

    I’m sure that the voters of 2040 will view 2000-era tabloids with the same horror that we do those headlines (and things like the 1966 Euston station “colour bar” strike).

  • Please stop calling it Common Market 2.0.

    Please stop calling it Common Market 2.0. It’s a cheap sop to fool people who “thought we were joining the common market” and is hostage to whatever “trade but no migrants” vision they have in their heads.

    Call it “Norway Plus” or “EEA+” or “Great British Winston Churchill Old Maids Cycling To Communion Through The Autumn Mist Special Arrangement” but not Common Market 2.0.

    Otherwise the Mail will lead *for the next decade* on “we were told it was Common Market 2.0 but LOOK now we have to follow health and safety rules of BRUSSELS TYRANTS without even a VOTE”

    And the Mail will be right, to the extent that we won’t have a vote, and it won’t be like Common Market 1.0 – because in Common Market 1.0, EU Membership, we have a vote.

    Common Market 2.0 should be called Common Market Parental Controls Edition.

  • Please stop calling it Common Market 2.0.

    Please stop calling it Common Market 2.0. It’s a cheap sop to fool people who “thought we were joining the common market” and is hostage to whatever “trade but no migrants” vision they have in their heads.

    Call it “Norway Plus” or “EEA+” or “Great British Winston Churchill Old Maids Cycling To Communion Through The Autumn Mist Special Arrangement” but not Common Market 2.0.

    Otherwise the Mail will lead *for the next decade* on “we were told it was Common Market 2.0 but LOOK now we have to follow health and safety rules of BRUSSELS TYRANTS without even a VOTE”

    And the Mail will be right, to the extent that we won’t have a vote, and it won’t be like Common Market 1.0 – because in Common Market 1.0, EU Membership, we have a vote.

    Common Market 2.0 should be called Common Market Parental Controls Edition.

  • Things the UK hasn’t learned yet: you can’t buy off the anti-immigrant brigade.

    Things the UK hasn’t learned yet: you can’t buy off the anti-immigrant brigade. Anything other than bricking up the Channel Tunnel and mining the Straits of Dover will be “we voted for Brexit but look at all the immigrants”. twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/s…

    If the UK is going to take the hit of leaving the EU to appease its anti-immigration voters, that’s its choice. But do it or don’t do it. Don’t take the economic hit then volunteer to take the political hit – you’ll just be paying the Danegeld.

    Or if you don’t think the economic hit is worth it [CLUE: IT IS NOT WORTH IT] then take the political hit on the chin – go for EEA+ or Revoke – and *explain*.

  • Things the UK hasn’t learned yet: you can’t buy off the anti-immigrant brigade.

    Things the UK hasn’t learned yet: you can’t buy off the anti-immigrant brigade. Anything other than bricking up the Channel Tunnel and mining the Straits of Dover will be “we voted for Brexit but look at all the immigrants”. twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/s…

    If the UK is going to take the hit of leaving the EU to appease its anti-immigration voters, that’s its choice. But do it or don’t do it. Don’t take the economic hit then volunteer to take the political hit – you’ll just be paying the Danegeld.

    Or if you don’t think the economic hit is worth it [CLUE: IT IS NOT WORTH IT] then take the political hit on the chin – go for EEA+ or Revoke – and *explain*.

  • Links from the week of 14 January 2019

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Links from the week of 29 October 2018

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Imagine Italy took the Chequers approach to refugee redistribution.

    Imagine Italy took the Chequers approach to refugee redistribution. It would say “every country must take migrants off our hands, and we’ll say how many. You won’t have alternative or any control over the process we use to allocate it and we’ll be the judges

    of whether you’ve done enough, for ever. We’ve had a negotiation in Italy about it, now you have to do it.” How would Britain (which has done next to nothing to help Italy) feel about that?

    It’s such a lunatic position that even *this* Italian government isn’t trying it, and Italy’s moral claim for support with refugees is far greater than Britain’s moral claim on the single market.

  • Links from the week of 17 September 2018

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • This is less interesting than I’d expected from the hype.

    This is less interesting than I’d expected from the hype. In particular the key issue – freedom of movement – is brushed away in a paragraph with “hmm, tricky”. The UK’s entire pitch is “all the trade and none of the immigrants”. twitter.com/cer_grant/stat…

    I don’t think the EU could move on that without inflaming countries whose migrants would become second class citizens, but even if it could, it shouldn’t – morally or strategically.

    Everything else – courts, money, etc – the U.K. has signalled it is going to be flexible on, because what it wants, what Cameron wanted and what it has always wanted is all the EU minus immigrants.

    If, as polls suggest, immigration attitudes are starting to turn positive in the U.K., why put the whole EU in hock to a fading xenophobic constituency.