Recent Posts and Categories

David Cameron backs Sir John Major's warning that public fears about EU immigration could push Britain out of Europe

OWoN: Why back it? Why not give the British people the referendum now and we will be out in a week!




David Cameron backs Sir John Major's warning that public fears about EU immigration could push Britain out of Europe

  • David Cameron called Sir John Major's speech 'excellent' and 'powerful'
  • Said he agreed that issue free movement in the EU must be addressed
  • Added that EU must have flexibility to tackle concerns of member states
  • Sir John said 'sheer scale' of immigrant influx strained British resources
  • Australian Prime Minister said he would prefer UK to remain part of EU

Mail Online
By Jason Groves
14 November 2014

David Cameron today backed Sir John Major's warning that public concern about EU immigration could push Britain out of Europe.

Sir John said this week that the chances of Britain leaving the EU were now 'just under 50 per cent' - and warned the prospect of 'Brexit' would grow unless Brussels agrees to accommodate British concerns about free movement.

Speaking in Germany, Sir John said he wanted Britain to remain in the EU. But he said public concern about the scale of immigration, and its impact on public services, could no longer be ignored.

Asked about his predecessor's comments at a press conference in Canberra, Australia, Mr Cameron said: 'I think it was an excellent speech and I agree with what he said, particularly the point that he went to Germany to make a very clear speech about the need there is to address Britain's concerns about immigration inside the EU.

'I think it is very powerful that a former Prime Minister, a very respected British politician, with a long record of negotiating in Europe, felt it necessary to make that speech in those terms so clearly.

'It seems to me that one of the reasons he feels so strongly about this is that when countries in Europe have difficulties that need to be addressed, Europe needs to have the flexibility to address them.

'When there are problems with the French budget or countries' differing views about what power sources they should use or problems countries have with particular aspects of the EU, we need a network that is flexible enough to cope and manage on these things.


'That's why I think John Major's speech was so powerful, so important and so timely and I agree with what he said.'

Mr Cameron was speaking alongside Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, who welcomed him to the Canberra Parliament with a speech in which he hailed the UK as 'a European country with a global role'.

Mr Abbott indicated that he would prefer Britain to stay in the EU.

He said: 'I'm not going to offer any specific directives to other countries, or indeed to the European Union.

'Obviously, it is in all of our interests that Europe collectively is strong, effective and successful. It is in all of our interests - particularly Australia's interests - that Britain is strong, effective and successful.

'I think Britain has very much kept its own character, very much kept its freedom of action, while at the same time being a strong and effective member of Europe. I just don't see that this is an either/or business.

'I think Britain can be a strong, powerful global voice, while at the same time being an effective member of Europe.'

link

4 comments :

  1. "Speaking in Germany, Sir John said he wanted Britain to remain in the EU. But he said public concern about the scale of immigration, and its impact on public services, could no longer be ignored."

    And the U.S. does not think that this will not be even more of an issue if all immigrants currently in U.S. are given amnesty by E.O. ......we are in deep do do if this happens. Texas is filing suit against O over this...other states should follow suit, we can hardly take care of our own much less another 11 m plus stressing an already stressed system.



    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, I have compassion for children and others seeking a better life, yet, a blind eye to our rule of law is what prevails. Hard working legal citizens are the ones to suffer in the long run.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I do apologise for Abbott, but at least you got a good laugh.

    “What the housewives of Australia need to understand as they do the ironing is that if they get it done commercially it’s going to go up in price, and their own power bills when they switch the iron on, are going to go up.”

    "Jesus didn't say yes to everyone, Jesus knew there was a place for everything and it's not necessarily everyone's (asylum seekers and refugees) place to come to Australia."

    "We just can’t stop people from being homeless if that’s their choice."

    "There may not be a great job for indigenous people, but whatever it is they just have to do it - and if it's picking up rubbish around the community, it just has to be done."

    "No-one, however smart, however well-educated, however experienced, is the suppository of all wisdom"

    "I think it would be folly to expect that women will ever dominate or even approach equal representation in a large number of areas simply because their aptitudes, abilities and interests are different for physiological reasons."

    Who cares what he thinks about UK in the EU? LOL

    ReplyDelete
  4. Canada’s False Flag Terror: Fingerprints of U.S. Involvement
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/canadas-false-flag-terror-fingerprints-of-u-s-involvement/5412838

    The “Terrorist” Events of Wednesday October 22nd in Ottawa and two days earlier in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu bear all the hallmarks of a coordinated cross-border one-two punch false flag operation.

    The first, the left jab hit-and-run killing of a Canadian soldier, would be the psychological softening up for the follow-up right cross, the killing of another Canadian soldier in Ottawa. Together they dazed the public to an extent that even the ostentatiously-iconic murder at the National War Memorial alone might not have achieved.

    The context was within the intensification of the so-called “global war on terror” and in concert with the pro-military Stephen Harper government’s deployment of warplanes supposedly fighting “the terrorists” of the suddenly-emerging “Islamic State.” The first bombing sorties of Canadian F-18s took place hours after the violent acts of supposed “homegrown” and “self-radicalized” supporters of “Islamic jihad.”

    Domestically the second outrage occurred on the very day the government was to introduce legislation giving the RCMP, CSIS and CSEC [CSEC is changing its name (to CSE) so that it can continue to spy – and indeed do more spying abroad – but not have the word “Canada” associated with this spying. “Spy agency CSEC says goodbye to Canada” is the headline over an October 31st Toronto Star story by Tonda MacCharles. ]

    These coincidences of timing, I submit, are not coincidences at all but quite deliberately planned to maximize the intended impacts: greater public support for a new war in the Middle East, better chances for faster and less-questioned support in Parliament for the increased police and spy powers, and enhanced public approval ratings for the Harper government in the run-up to next year’s general election.

    This article delves deeper into the timing including that the events happened, to the day, as military-intelligence “exercises” were taking place that precisely mirrored the “surprise” events. Other hallmarks include the prior involvement of government agents with both of the supposed jihadists, the fact that both were easy-to-manipulate “human wreckage” and the early “terrorism” branding led by the Prime Minister. Other hallmarks include the unfolding parade of memorable iconic elements and images, the “lone wolf” narratives, the dual role of the media in general to both to reinforce the official narrative and to fail to ask fundamental questions about it. (more at link)

    ReplyDelete

If your comment violates OWON's Terms of Service or has in the past, then it will NOT be published.

Powered by Blogger.