If we vote for Brexit what happens

gfplux

BobQ wrote: »

The practice is unusual in providing face to face translations. Most of these services are provided by telephone. A user can be connected to someone speaking their language in a minute.

The "requirement" is as you say not enshrined explicitly in EU law. However, the UK Human Rights Act and the Public Sector Equality Duty places obligations on service providers to ensure fair access to those from different groups inducing cultures etc. It is fairly common to provide such translation services and it is expensive. The only legal obligation for translation is for those under arrest or being charged with a crime.

Why the phrase "not enshrined explicitly in EU law"
It is not or it is.
And....it is not.
If the UK wishes to act humanly let's not blame the EU or even suggest the EU has something to do with it.

There are already too many things blamed on the EU without hinting at other things.

Generali

Let's be completely clear: the Human Rights Act and Britons' access to the ECHR has nothing at all to do with membership of the EU, the two things are completely separate.

The UK could remove access to the ECHR tomorrow if it so chose (assuming the House of Lords and Queen was pretty nimble) without any reference to the EU or the EC.

TrickyTree83

BobQ wrote: »

The practice is unusual in providing face to face translations. Most of these services are provided by telephone. A user can be connected to someone speaking their language in a minute.

I completely disagree with that.

I know that's not the case because my wife used to be one of these translators. And they were sending here all over the midlands translating in person at hospitals and GP's offices.

Telephone translations aren't adequate enough.

She was thinking of going into justice but you need to have an in-depth knowledge of legal terminology in English and be able to convey the meaning accurately with no mistakes or mis-understandings in translation, more so than health, which is odd.

CLAPTON

tommysaver wrote: »

Hi guys, I'm new to the forum but have browsed it regularly (Pretty on top of my finances for a 23 year old!)

I'm trying to educate myself a bit further on this referendum and have a couple of points I'd like to raise, if anyone would kindly elaborate/expand on!

1. Savings. I've done pretty well over the years, worked full time since 18; and I have quite a nice amount stashed for the future e.g. Deposit. People at work are suggesting the value of the £ could go up or down depending on Brexit. Is this something to worry about? I assume it's all relative and not much can be done really. One bloke at work says a financial crash is so imminent he's actually buying up gold and saying we should be doing the same! Is that rather extreme?

2. It's in my interest for property prices to come down, but also I don't want my hard-earned savings to become worth-less if that makes sense.

I've probably done a really bad job of explaining myself!

TL;DR I am still on the fence of which way to vote, I've watched brexit the movie and I am swaying towards leave, but need some more clarification on what's in my interests as a 23 year old with savings and wanting to get on the property ladder in say 5 years time.

Cheers, Tom.

during your lifetime the value of the pound has fluctuated up and down: were you concerned about it?
use google to look up the historic changes in pound v dollar and pound v euro to see how its fluctuated over the years

if immigration is cut back to 10s of thousand then house prices and rents will probably stabalise or maybe fall a little : very hard to say.

Shakethedisease

Hmmm, interesting polls this afternoon..

Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 1h1 hour ago EU referendum poll:

Remain: 42% (-5)

Leave: 45% (+6) (via ICM, phone)

Britain Elects ‏@britainelects EU referendum poll:

Remain: 44% (-1)

Leave: 47% (+2) (via ICM, online)

One/Two polls don't make a summer, however, these are moving a little too close for comfort I daresay for the Remain camp. Phone and online too.

michaels

What did the Scottish polls say 3 weeks before the vote and what was the final outcome?

Rinoa

mayonnaise wrote: »

With age comes wisdom.

I guess you're one of the forum's younger posters.

No matter here's Lord Sugar demonstrating how much wisdom you could acquire in just 6 months.

http://order-order.com/2016/05/31/lord-sugar-on-the-eu-just-6-months-ago/

BobQ

mrginge wrote: »

does this study take account of the non-migrants that either are not employed, or are not trained up to do the same role?

Do you have any reason to believe it does not? Your question is rather vague. A non migrant is a citizen? So you mean citizens who are unemployed or need training?

LHW99

The UK could remove access to the ECHR tomorrow if it so chose (assuming the House of Lords and Queen was pretty nimble) without any reference to the EU or the EC.

It could, except that the EU expects countries to show they have proper standards and seems to regard access to the EHCR as indicative of that.
If we vote to remain it would be very difficult to opt out of the EHCR

BobQ

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

There is a vastly smaller proportion of higher wage earning EU migrants than those who work on farms, bars, in hotels, in fast food, etc... where in all likelihood they will be on minimum wage.

I had the figures for A&E and GP costs per patient visit from gov.uk and gponline.com. There will probably be a degree of error but the sums show enough of a disparity between tax take and possible welfare cost to indicate that there could well be some truth to the "strain on the system" arguments.

Yes but that is true of the population as a whole, except that many unskilled British do not want to do the lower skilled jobs. So there are more waiters than doctors. What is your point?