EU referendum - In or Out?

[bobby47]

It seems as though there is now a political acknowledgement that this bludgeoning surge of EU migrants who've settled here have placed an intolerable strain upon our public services and it seems as though 'they' might give our Country an 'Emergency Brake' that'll enable us to say 'stop coming! We can't cope'!

How times change. For years, despite the protests, the political elite, blind to the impact it has all had on tiny places like Hereford, they didn't listen, branded us bigots and told us how wonderful it all was for our economy and we were shortsighted to ever think that the free movement of people wasn't a lovely thing.

An Emergency Brake! I'd have pulled that brake years ago before the damage had been done. It's nearly all to late and the only way we can extricate ourselves from this madness is to get out. Leave!

If you are patriotic, proud to be born amongst our creative island race of people and you've no wish to watch the meat being picked away from our economic bones as we slide ever closer to the rule of Brussels, you pick up the courage, trust in your wonderful heritage and VOTE TO GET OUT of the EU.

[Roger]

How 'busy' would it have to get here before the 'brake' was applied? Very subjective that one. And you would need cooperation at the other end to make it happen. And even then it would not work particularly well. All this with the backdrop being that we're not in the Schengen Zone and already take fewer than probably anyone.

 

Then you got the situation where you potentially ban the low/no skilled EU worker (who can very probably speak our language) whilst waving through some people from the Philippines because we are short of nurses ...

[Gentle Giant]

Vital for the economy and business that the EU brings so I would stay in for sure. 

In that case, Mick, you should be voting to leave. The UK provides more trade to the rest of the EU than the EU brings in to the UK.

 

Are you aware that the EU fined the UK for doing too well? Yes, because we produced "excessive growth", this country had to pay a fine of, I think it was, £3bn to the EU.

 

In the EU we are one of 28 countries, with zero democracy for the people (MEPs have no power to initiate, revise or veto EU legislation). That leaves about 160 countries for us to make our own trade arrangements with when we leave the EU, in addition to the EU itself, which is not going to turn its back on the second largest market in Europe (the continent, not just the aberration that is the EU).

[Gentle Giant]

I agree and I think leaving the eu would be an economic disaster. 

How? They send us far more than we send them. Then the EU had the nerve to fine us £3bn for doing too well.

The EU, as has every other major empire throughout history, will collapse under the weight of its own administration, legislation, regulation and taxation. Our choice is whether to get out and be ready to help clear up the mess, or stay in an be buried under the rubble.

[Gentle Giant]

This is a very important debate Martin, so I have added a Poll, hope thats okay with you?

 

Well personally I think it would be a mistake to leave the EU, that said, I do think we need to take more control of our own laws and I also think the Human Rights Act needs updating big time!

That makes you an EU Pushmepullyou.

Either stay in and become a kind of Michigan of the United States of Europe or get the hell out and be able to do what you say you hope for the future.

You can't have both.

[Gentle Giant]

I voted to stay in.

 

 

In for me too

 

 

In for me, controll the boarders and immigration to an acceptance and responsible level/system. What we would loose In trade would out weigh any fines and benifits. It's all about the bigger picture.

Why?  Two people say stay in with no logical explanation - actually no reasoning at all.

The trade argument has been disproved so many times, it barely makes sense to talk about it any more. We will gain trade by leaving, because the EU depends on the UK more than the other way around.

It's not a big scary world out there without the EU; it's exciting and full of possibilities.

EU = Dictatorship

Out = Democracy

[Cambo]

Why? Two people say stay in with no logical explanation - actually no reasoning at all.

The trade argument has been disproved so many times, it barely makes sense to talk about it any more. We will gain trade by leaving, because the EU depends on the UK more than the other way around.

It's not a big scary world out there without the EU; it's exciting and full of possibilities.

EU = Dictatorship

Out = Democracy

Hello Gentile Giant welcome

I have to say I agree with your views on the EU I also don't see any reason why we will not survive outside of it either!

[megilleland]

While there may be economic arguments on both sides, leaving the EU is the only way to regain sovereignty, control our borders and negotiate our own trade deals.

[Osmosis]

I'll vote to stay in, for many reasons. Just looking at trade, the EU in 2014 accounted for almost half of UK exports of goods and services, and over half of UK imports of goods and services. Whilst I realise that non-EU economies are growing in importance to the UK, and the proportion of our trade with the EU is therefore declining, the value of that EU trade is increasing, as I understand it.

[greenknight]

Go on Colin let's take a new poll and see just how recent events might reflect a change in the vote!

[megilleland]

Arguments published for coming out

 

We have very little say within the EU, and would have far more leverage outside EU as an independent sovereign nation and the world’s 5th largest economy.

 

The UK currently has only 8.4% of voting power ‘say’ in the EU, and the Lisbon Treaty ensured the loss of Britain’s veto in many more policy areas.

 

Britain’s 73 MEPs are a minority within the 751 in the European Parliament.

 

With further enlargement (Croatia, Turkey’s 79 million citizens), British influence would be further watered down.

 

As for continuing contributions by an independent Britain, Swiss and Norwegian examples show that the UK would achieve substantial net savings.

 

SWISS CASE STUDY

Official Swiss government figures conclude that through their trade agreements with the EU, the Swiss pay the EU under 600 million Swiss Francs a year, but enjoy virtually free access to the EU market. The Swiss have estimated that full EU membership would cost Switzerland net payments of 3.4 billion Swiss francs a year.

 

NORWAY CASE STUDY

Norway only had to make relatively few changes to its laws to make its products eligible for the EU marketplace. In 2009, the Norwegian Mission to the EU estimated that Norway’s total financial contribution linked to their EEA (European Economic Area) agreement is some 340 mn Euros a years, of which some 110mn Euros are contributions related to the participation in various EU programmes. However, this is a fraction of the gross annual cost that Britain must pay for EU membership which is now £18.4bn, or £51mn a day.

[megilleland]

Some say Brexit would harm the UK economy primarily by reducing trade with EU countries. Leaving the EU would also prevent the UK from benefiting from future free trade agreements negotiated by the EU, such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership currently being negotiated with the United States. 

 

This alone is one reason for coming out and not being part of a great commercial stitch up. The problem is there are so many things going on the public can't focus on more than one issue a week - eg a tree leaning over in Belmont!

[greenknight]

Some say Brexit would harm the UK economy primarily by reducing trade with EU countries. Leaving the EU would also prevent the UK from benefiting from future free trade agreements negotiated by the EU, such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership currently being negotiated with the United States. 

 

This alone is one reason for coming out and not being part of a great commercial stitch up. The problem is there are so many things going on the public can't focus on more than one issue a week - eg a tree leaning over in Belmont!

I could not agree more particularly the last sentence though this will change because forthcoming local tax rises and further cuts to services will up the anti a little.

[Gentle Giant]

Let's simplify the question for those who believe that the UK will descend into third world poverty without EU membership:

 

Do you believe in democracy? – The EU is, in effect, a dictatorship. MEPs have no power to initiate, revise or veto legislation. If you don't like the EU "government" there's not a damned thing you can do about it.

 

Do you believe in free trade? – We can and will arrange to trade with the EU without full membership. They sell us lots more than we sell them. They need access to the UK market. We will then also be free to access markets the EU denies to us.

 

Do you believe that corporations should be prevented from running the world? – The EU is about to hand over power to corporations by means of TTIP. Any law a corporation dislikes it can overturn by means of secret settlements in which we have no say, no influence and won't learn about until it's too late.

 

Do you want cheaper food?  – The EU keeps food prices artificially inflated by means of, among other things, the Common Agricultural Policy. Prices are kept high to protect the farmers in certain member countries from the reality of market forces.

 

Do you want more industry in the UK? – The EU wants to move manufacturing industries to the new, poorer, member countries in order to level out differences between respective economies.

 

Do you believe in flood prevention? – The EU pays farmers, courtesy of the CAP, to remove "unproductive vegetation", i.e. trees and hedges, in order to provide grazing for sheep etc.. As a result, headwaters are deprived of proper drainage, floodplains are inundated, hence much of the recent flooding.
 

Do you want the UK to have an effective voice in the world? – the EU has taken the UK's place on many international bodies, reducing our voice to 1/28th of what it once was.

 

Do you believe that the UK should make UK law for UK people? – The vast majority of the legislation passed by the EU is merely "nodded through" by our legislators. EU law overrides UK law.

 

Do you want you and your children to be citizens of the UK rather than of the United States of Europe? – The EU, as set out in the Treaty of Lisbon, is committed to ever closer union, economically, fiscally and politically. England, Scotland and Wales will merely be versions of Michigan, Oregon and Kentucky in a USE.

 

Do you want the UK to decide on its own defence, in co-operation with others only when required? – The EU wants an EU army and air force, to be deployed where and when they decree, without reference to the member state.

 

Do you prefer to retain the £ rather than join the Euro? – The EU has stated a commitment to the Euro as the universal currency of the EU by 2020.

 

If you have answered "Yes" to more than half of the above questions, then you must vote to Leave the EU. There are more reasons to leave than the above and I have deliberately not included emotive reasons in order to avoid the usual hysteria associated with them.

 

I am open to logical arguments, backed by facts, as to why I might be wrong. Please, do tell me what I have missed if you are one of those who believe that it is imperative the UK remain in the EU.

[megilleland]

Thanks for spelling it for us Gentle Giant. People should read this before going to bed each night.

[Osmosis]

Let's simplify the question for those who believe that the UK will descend into third world poverty without EU membership:

 

Do you believe in democracy? – The EU is, in effect, a dictatorship. MEPs have no power to initiate, revise or veto legislation. If you don't like the EU "government" there's not a damned thing you can do about it.

 

Do you believe in free trade? – We can and will arrange to trade with the EU without full membership. They sell us lots more than we sell them. They need access to the UK market. We will then also be free to access markets the EU denies to us.

 

Do you believe that corporations should be prevented from running the world? – The EU is about to hand over power to corporations by means of TTIP. Any law a corporation dislikes it can overturn by means of secret settlements in which we have no say, no influence and won't learn about until it's too late.

 

Do you want cheaper food?  – The EU keeps food prices artificially inflated by means of, among other things, the Common Agricultural Policy. Prices are kept high to protect the farmers in certain member countries from the reality of market forces.

 

Do you want more industry in the UK? – The EU wants to move manufacturing industries to the new, poorer, member countries in order to level out differences between respective economies.

 

Do you believe in flood prevention? – The EU pays farmers, courtesy of the CAP, to remove "unproductive vegetation", i.e. trees and hedges, in order to provide grazing for sheep etc.. As a result, headwaters are deprived of proper drainage, floodplains are inundated, hence much of the recent flooding.

 

Do you want the UK to have an effective voice in the world? – the EU has taken the UK's place on many international bodies, reducing our voice to 1/28th of what it once was.

 

Do you believe that the UK should make UK law for UK people? – The vast majority of the legislation passed by the EU is merely "nodded through" by our legislators. EU law overrides UK law.

 

Do you want you and your children to be citizens of the UK rather than of the United States of Europe? – The EU, as set out in the Treaty of Lisbon, is committed to ever closer union, economically, fiscally and politically. England, Scotland and Wales will merely be versions of Michigan, Oregon and Kentucky in a USE.

 

Do you want the UK to decide on its own defence, in co-operation with others only when required? – The EU wants an EU army and air force, to be deployed where and when they decree, without reference to the member state.

 

Do you prefer to retain the £ rather than join the Euro? – The EU has stated a commitment to the Euro as the universal currency of the EU by 2020.

 

If you have answered "Yes" to more than half of the above questions, then you must vote to Leave the EU. There are more reasons to leave than the above and I have deliberately not included emotive reasons in order to avoid the usual hysteria associated with them.

 

I am open to logical arguments, backed by facts, as to why I might be wrong. Please, do tell me what I have missed if you are one of those who believe that it is imperative the UK remain in the EU.

You make some very valid and important points. I absolutely agree with you about the common agricultural policy and TTIP, for a start. However, are these arguments for leaving the EU, or are they arguments for scrapping TTIP and CAP? I have certainly done what I can to bring about the latter. That £41bn a year should be trousered by farmers, with the biggest, richest landowners receiving the largest payments is a scandal that should be a source of disillusionment to all supporters of the EU. We are yet to see what happens with TTIP. I accept the principle of sharing sovereignty over issues of common concern but not the idea of the rich nations combining to crush the democratic will of the poorer nations, as they are seeking to do, and successfully, to Greece.

The EU has done much to the benefit of everybody on environmental matters, but the disastrous abandonment of the soil framework directive, at the behest of agricultural lobbyists and the British government, is outrageous. Now the same industries (Big Farmer & construction mainly) are attempting to demolish the other environmental directives which are the only things protecting wildlife in the UK.

But here's the thing. Do you really think that our government is going to stop representing corporate interests, to the benefit of the populace, after Brexit? You only need to look at the latest example of covert lobbying by the British government to try to weaken European air pollution rules on behalf of the coal industry.The only winners of a break up of the EU would be Putin, Farage, neo-liberals, the extreme right, bankers, hedge funds, fossil fuel companies, human traffickers, environmental vandals, and global corporations. Do you really think there would be any ban on, say, neonicotinoids, if there wasn't an EU? Do you really think a Conservative government would do anything whatsoever to protect the UK's environment if we weren't part of the European Union? Faced with the growing reality of climate change and the pressures that it is already bringing the whole world, we all have two choices: to work together to protect the common good, or to retreat into nationalism and blaming others.

[greenknight]

You make some very valid and important points. I absolutely agree with you about the common agricultural policy and TTIP, for a start. However, are these arguments for leaving the EU, or are they arguments for scrapping TTIP and CAP? I have certainly done what I can to bring about the latter. That £41bn a year should be trousered by farmers, with the biggest, richest landowners receiving the largest payments is a scandal that should be a source of disillusionment to all supporters of the EU. We are yet to see what happens with TTIP. I accept the principle of sharing sovereignty over issues of common concern but not the idea of the rich nations combining to crush the democratic will of the poorer nations, as they are seeking to do, and successfully, to Greece.

The EU has done much to the benefit of everybody on environmental matters, but the disastrous abandonment of the soil framework directive, at the behest of agricultural lobbyists and the British government, is outrageous. Now the same industries (Big Farmer & construction mainly) are attempting to demolish the other environmental directives which are the only things protecting wildlife in the UK.

But here's the thing. Do you really think that our government is going to stop representing corporate interests, to the benefit of the populace, after Brexit? You only need to look at the latest example of covert lobbying by the British government to try to weaken European air pollution rules on behalf of the coal industry.The only winners of a break up of the EU would be Putin, Farage, neo-liberals, the extreme right, bankers, hedge funds, fossil fuel companies, human traffickers, environmental vandals, and global corporations. Do you really think there would be any ban on, say, neonicotinoids, if there wasn't an EU? Do you really think a Conservative government would do anything whatsoever to protect the UK's environment if we weren't part of the European Union? Faced with the growing reality of climate change and the pressures that it is already bringing the whole world, we all have two choices: to work together to protect the common good, or to retreat into nationalism and blaming others.

Very balanced arguments for both sides however for the many the economics doesn't come into it!

[lpusseycat]

We still have not seen the E.U accounts remember the Accountant in Brussels who got the sack for declaring they could not account for the millions of Euros spent in expenses and we still do not know where the money has been going it is a corrupt organisation set up by the Nazi's in 1942 and i do not want any part of that. NO

[Roger]

 

I hope this pending 'deal' isn't just a variation on the 4 year in work benefit ban on new EU Migrants as I think that's just the equivalent of fiddling around at the edges as Rome burns ... 

[Osmosis]

Very balanced arguments for both sides however for the many the economics doesn't come into it!

You're right, most people won't bother looking into it at all and making informed decisions. It will come down to issues around immigration.

[Roger]

You're right, most people won't bother looking into it at all and making informed decisions. It will come down to issues around immigration.

 

We have net migration ---> IN at + 300K per year at the moment. That's the equivalent of building a City the size of Nottingham this year, next year and the year after etc ... Then you populate it and install all the medical/educational/social infrastructure. Then you do it all over again every 365 days ... Hardly sustainable is it? Even with the new people paying their own way the rest of the fabric to support them just won't be there. And can't be there. That's why we need the net figure down to less than 100k per year. Definitely. And preferably a lot lower. Counting paper clips at the benefits office is just laughable when you look at the bigger picture ...

[greenknight]

We have net migration ---> IN at + 300K per year at the moment. That's the equivalent of building a City the size of Nottingham this year, next year and the year after etc ... Then you populate it and install all the medical/educational/social infrastructure. Then you do it all over again every 365 days ... Hardly sustainable is it? Even with the new people paying their own way the rest of the fabric to support them just won't be there. And can't be there. That's why we need the net figure down to less than 100k per year. Definitely. And preferably a lot lower. Counting paper clips at the benefits office is just laughable when you look at the bigger picture ...

Ah..I think Roger is confirming that Osmosis

[megilleland]

Immigration affects our economics - the two are linked. All these services and handouts don't come out of thin air. Interesting to see some countries now wish to expel "refugees" in vast numbers. I can see while Cameron is fiddling around with the EU all these countries will have closed their borders and there is only one place they will be heading for.

[greenknight]

Immigration affects our economics - the two are linked. All these services and handouts don't come out of thin air. Interesting to see some countries now wish to expel "refugees" in vast numbers. I can see while Cameron is fiddling around with the EU all these countries will have closed their borders and there is only one place they will be heading for.

Of course Megilleland but I don't believe the majority of people will look at the economic pro,s & cons.

 

Very shortly the numbers leaving the middle east and north Africa will pick up as t h e weather turns. The whole question will come down to immigration and the vote will be to leave. Will this stop people trying to reach our shores...nope. What will they do when they land up on Brighton beach...intern them ? At what cost? Will they be sent back by plane and to where,when they won't say where they are from?...at what cost? Are you honestly going to tell me that even now UK based criminal gangs aren't planning their business operations in channel people smuggling.Sure we will increase coastal security...at what cost?

 

We can make it difficult but we won't stop it because ultimately we still remain a democratic society (for now)..media reporting of refugees being being swooped up and interned on south coast beaches does make great reading in Blighty...however stand by its coming.

[Gentle Giant]

. . . But here's the thing. Do you really think that our government is going to stop representing corporate interests, to the benefit of the populace, after Brexit? You only need to look at the latest example of covert lobbying by the British government to try to weaken European air pollution rules on behalf of the coal industry.The only winners of a break up of the EU would be Putin, Farage, neo-liberals, the extreme right, bankers, hedge funds, fossil fuel companies, human traffickers, environmental vandals, and global corporations. Do you really think there would be any ban on, say, neonicotinoids, if there wasn't an EU? Do you really think a Conservative government would do anything whatsoever to protect the UK's environment if we weren't part of the European Union? Faced with the growing reality of climate change and the pressures that it is already bringing the whole world, we all have two choices: to work together to protect the common good, or to retreat into nationalism and blaming others.

I am not so naive as to believe that our government wouldn't continue to work with corporations, however, as long as we have the option to boot them out at election time, I have more faith in our future outside of the EU than within it. The EU Commission is unelected and we have no power to remove its members. That alone is reason enough to not want to be part of it. Totalitarian regimes always fall in the end; why wait?

 

Yes, there would be a ban on the likes of neonicotinoids without an EU. People power works well within individuals countries - sorry, member states - but is easier to ignore when viewed as fragmented idealism in a totalitarian superstate. How long do you think it will be before the EU is sued, post-TTIP, of course, to force all member countries to use these poisons? TTIP will be forced through in some form, whether we like it or not, because we have no means to stop it - democracy for sale to the highest bidder.

 

I am disinclined to agree with you in your anticipation of potential "winners" post break up of the EU. The bankers have the most to gain by crashing the Euro at some point. Think of all those wonderful gains from FX fees, differing interest rates in different countries, bail-outs galore and much more. Cynical, yes; realistic? Remember how they manipulated the ERM? As for your panic mongering - if I may call it that - part of the list you included in your above post is only relevant if we were to remain within the EU. Cross border co-operation on environmental and humanitarian issues does not need to cease merely because an unelected bureaucratic megalith has ceased to exist.

 

Yes, I take your point that co-operation can achieve great things, but when that co-operation comes at the cost of democracy and basic freedoms, the price is too high.

 

All major empires collapse under their own weight sooner or later, as history proves repeatedly. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat its mistakes.

[Roger]

Minimum monthly wage in Poland hit a high of €440 in January 2016. That is £334 per month. Or £83 a week.

 

 

Trading Economics

 

Will our proposed benefit ban deter new arrivals? Nope ... As you can earn more in the UK ... The outgoings are not factored into those bare stats but I think new arrivals probably only think about escaping the €440 figure ...

[Osmosis]

[Osmosis]

I am not so naive as to believe that our government wouldn't continue to work with corporations, however, as long as we have the option to boot them out at election time, I have more faith in our future outside of the EU than within it. The EU Commission is unelected and we have no power to remove its members. That alone is reason enough to not want to be part of it. Totalitarian regimes always fall in the end; why wait?

 

Yes, there would be a ban on the likes of neonicotinoids without an EU. People power works well within individuals countries - sorry, member states - but is easier to ignore when viewed as fragmented idealism in a totalitarian superstate. How long do you think it will be before the EU is sued, post-TTIP, of course, to force all member countries to use these poisons? TTIP will be forced through in some form, whether we like it or not, because we have no means to stop it - democracy for sale to the highest bidder.

 

I am disinclined to agree with you in your anticipation of potential "winners" post break up of the EU. The bankers have the most to gain by crashing the Euro at some point. Think of all those wonderful gains from FX fees, differing interest rates in different countries, bail-outs galore and much more. Cynical, yes; realistic? Remember how they manipulated the ERM? As for your panic mongering - if I may call it that - part of the list you included in your above post is only relevant if we were to remain within the EU. Cross border co-operation on environmental and humanitarian issues does not need to cease merely because an unelected bureaucratic megalith has ceased to exist.

 

Yes, I take your point that co-operation can achieve great things, but when that co-operation comes at the cost of democracy and basic freedoms, the price is too high.

 

All major empires collapse under their own weight sooner or later, as history proves repeatedly. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat its mistakes.

"I am not so naive as to believe that our government wouldn't continue to work with corporations" - did you mean to write "for corporations"? If not then I would say that you must indeed be naive. Yes we have the option to boot them out at election time. I think about 65% of the electorate turned out in 2015, of that percentage, only a small proportion will have even heard of TTIP, still fewer understand the nuances of investor/state dispute resolution. Most people couldn't give a toss (I'm basing this on unscientific personal experience of pavement pounding trying to gather signatures on a petition). The majority of people vote according to how much income tax they think each party is likely to set, and a good number also care disproportionately about immigration. Our government is going to carry on serving the interests of corporations and a narrow financial elite. You are certainly naive if you think that neonicotinoids would have been banned unilaterally by the UK. It was the UK, and the then Environment Secretary, Owen Paterson, who tried to prevent it happening in the EU. In correspondence with Syngenta he said that the UK government was ‘extremely disappointed’ in the decision to proceed with the proposed ban. They'll have them cleared for use after Brexit in two shakes of a lamb's tail.

[Osmosis]

And by the way, they already have tried to sue the EU over the ban.

[bobby47]

Well I don't bloody care about the economics of it all. I simply don't want to host millions of people who are here for the money and the free public services and don't care or love my Country.

But, if it is simple and straightforward economics that'll make you place your cross in the box that says, 'Out', then consider this and particularly the Nations of the former Soviet Bloc and the impact the EU economics have upon them.

Take poor Poland for example. Stripped of millions of their young people who've abandoned their homeland and invested themselves and their talents in the economy of our Country, they've got the huge advantage of not having to pay and care for their former citizens but their society, both socially and economically have become stagnant. Indeed, so heavily dependant upon pound sterling sent home to be recycled in their economy to prop up their fragile and ailing progress to attain some sort of near parity with the West, they've become hostages to the fortunes of the EU.

They are no longer able to develop themselves and modernise because their future, their bloody youngsters, have tipped up here to aid our economic aspirations. How can Poland possibly extricate themselves from this madness, create a better Poland when they've no manufacturing output or economic activity that doesn't involve Britsh Pound Sterlng or Euros earned and generated beyond their borders.

Since 2004 near on twenty one million have left the East region of Central and East Europe,flown the nest, abandoned their nations to work faster, cheaper and harder than everyone else. You tell me. Where's the economic sense inlosing their best and brightest to the West? How on earth does it benefit these Nations if all their youngsters leave and invest themselves in a foreign Country?