EU referendum

[Metal Biker]

No, I didn't. I said it wouldn't change and implied you face a poor excuse for democracy with only a 2 house system, one unelected, first past the post in the other and no regional power, with endemic corruption.

I did not propose we have a two house system at all. We have a multiple house system, it's just that there are two main parties with the most support that often end up competing for governing parliament. For a while the Liberal Democrats were widely supported; had they continued we could have ended up with a 4-way 'battle' with the rise of UKIP. The rise of the SNP, despite having a smaller number of overall voters in comparison to seats won, shows that yes, although the Conservates are the party in power and Labour are the official opposition, had the SNP won more seats (by having more candidates open to be voted for across the UK) that overtook Labour, THEY would be the party in opposition. That's nothing like the United States, for example.

Democracy to me isn't vote for red or blue, it's vote for the best candidate and the most votes wins that seat and becomes the representative of my area in whihc I live that directly affects me. They are MY voice in parliament. I voted for a different candidate, the opposing candidate formed part of my local council, but my local council is allied with the political party that failed to gain enough seats to form a majority. That ruling government therefore tends to give more support to the councils which supported them over the ones that didn't, because there is only so much money to go around and lets face it, what is prompting them from excessively helping voters who rejected them? I may not like the result but that is democracy. The EU supercedes all that by giving power to an unelected commission, one which refuses to take the result of a people's vote into account (France, Netherlands, Ireland)

No, TTIP hasn't passed....yet. (Emphasis on yet) But they are trying despite all opposition to it. Will the people of Europe be given a vote on it? Will those members states who reject it not have to worry about it being imposed on their local governments? Somehow I doubt it.

 

[SWP's back]

As you have lectured us many times this is not right v left, on the first point you are right in the second point you'd be wrong, because however deeply damaging democracy is coming to the west with its short termism and protection of corruption and extreme wealth the alternative is worse

Sure.

 

[Bill]

Let's cut to the chase.

Which one will make me more money?

 

[EalingBlue2]

As this is a City forum it will be very interesting to look at Brexit from a City point of view. I would assume no more EU kids for the academy below the level of a Kelechi so the strategy there will be majorly effected and there will be a huge battle for English talent. Also I assume it would mean that many of our first team squad may not have been given work permits (that could be good and bad).

I would think there would have to be humongous changes in what constitutes special talent and a really long lag in any changes as otherwise the smaller sides and the championship would be bankrupted by any change .

 

[EalingBlue2]

Let's cut to the chase.

Which one will make me more money?

No one can possibly know and both sides would almost inevitably tell you what they want

 

[The perfect fumble]

Research European history from 1957 (when the ECSC was realised) to 1990 (which was the point I was making, not general European history and the feudal kings of old as a whole) and you'll see that during the pre-EU's formation from ECSC and EEC the number of conflicts between the European nations was....nil, aside from Eastern European nations trying to rid themselves of Communism or the little spat on our own shores regarding the troubles. But good shout bringing up the entirity of Britain's association with Europe, highlighting the number of times they've all tried at one point or another to eradicate our people from the face of the earth down to pure greed. Nothing says solidarity like "hey remember when we tried to eliminate you....quince? But hey, we good now, right? Just keep sending us money and allow our courts to overule your own. Did I mention they're not elected?"

The Nobel Peace Prize 2012 European Union (EU)....

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2012/eu-facts.html

Cooperation between Countries
After the decimation of the Second World War, reconciliation between Germany and France was an important step towards fostering peace in Europe. The two countries - which by then had fought three wars within the space of 70 years - built the European Coal and Steel Community together with four other countries in 1952. This organization became the foundation for an ever-broader cooperation within what has been known since 1993 as the European Union (EU).

In this time of economic and social unrest, the Norwegian Nobel Committee wished to reward the EU's successful struggle for peace, reconciliation and for democracy and human rights. When the community expanded to include additional countries during the 1970s and 1980s, democracy was a prerequisite for membership. After the fall of European communist regimes around 1990, the union was able to expand to include several countries in Central and Eastern Europe, where democracy had been strengthened and conflict checked. The Nobel Committee also believes that the question of EU membership is bolstering the reconciliation process after the wars in the Balkan States, and that the desire for EU membership has also promoted democracy and human rights in Turkey.

 

[TonyM]

As this is a City forum it will be very interesting to look at Brexit from a City point of view. I would assume no more EU kids for the academy below the level of a Kelechi so the strategy there will be majorly effected and there will be a huge battle for English talent. Also I assume it would mean that many of our first team squad may not have been given work permits (that could be good and bad).

I would think there would have to be humongous changes in what constitutes special talent and a really long lag in any changes as otherwise the smaller sides and the championship would be bankrupted by any change .

The visa system related to football needs to be fixed asap anyway but with an exit from the EU
It becomes even more important. It's how any business imports world class talent. I'd imagine it'd be very easy to give the Premiership a special sponsor status that could be reviewed on a regular basis to ensure its not abused.

We should have been allowed bring on that Iraqi kid or the UAE kid a few years ago. The fact that we couldn't but could have the pick of lesser EU potential shows another fundamental unfairness about the status quo. Should be fixed regardless.

 

[EalingBlue2]

As a confirmed federalist why not just say this than trying to say being in the EU is better for our country? Imagine there's no countries, its easy if you try - john Lennon.

I don't necessarily think it will be for the best I can't see our middle of the road politics surviving it will be pure capitalism or the opposite - unless technology gives us infinite energy for free or stops the fight for resources.

 

[EalingBlue2]

The visa system related to football needs to be fixed asap anyway but with an exit from the EU
It becomes even more important. It's how any business imports world class talent. I'd imagine it'd be very easy to give the Premiership a special sponsor status that could be reviewed on a regular basis to ensure its not abused.

We should have been allowed bring on that Iraqi kid or the UAE kid a few years ago. The fact that we couldn't but could have the pick of lesser EU potential shows another fundamental unfairness about the status quo. Should be fixed regardless.

We would need pretty free rules not to be disadvantaged

 

[Metal Biker]

As this is a City forum it will be very interesting to look at Brexit from a City point of view. I would assume no more EU kids for the academy below the level of a Kelechi so the strategy there will be majorly effected and there will be a huge battle for English talent. Also I assume it would mean that many of our first team squad may not have been given work permits (that could be good and bad).

I would think there would have to be humongous changes in what constitutes special talent and a really long lag in any changes as otherwise the smaller sides and the championship would be bankrupted by any change .

Why would there be no more kids from the EU?

A Brexit from the EU doesn't mean an exit from the EEA.It's an end to a political union with Europe, not to everything else such as free movement of people.

 

[CityStu]

As this is a City forum it will be very interesting to look at Brexit from a City point of view. I would assume no more EU kids for the academy below the level of a Kelechi so the strategy there will be majorly effected and there will be a huge battle for English talent. Also I assume it would mean that many of our first team squad may not have been given work permits (that could be good and bad).

I would think there would have to be humongous changes in what constitutes special talent and a really long lag in any changes as otherwise the smaller sides and the championship would be bankrupted by any change .

There is no reason why work permit regulations cannot be slackened for these players. It's not as if anyone would be against having them in the country, contributing to the economy.

 

[EalingBlue2]

Why would there be no more kids from the EU?

A Brexit from the EU doesn't mean an exit from the EEA.It's an end to a political union with Europe, not to everything else such as free movement of people.

I think this is where there are outers and there are outers, a lot wouldn't be happy with this half way house, equally a lot of inners might not be unhappy with this half way house. It will be interesting to see what happens .

 

[blueish swede]

Why would there be no more kids from the EU?

A Brexit from the EU doesn't mean an exit from the EEA.It's an end to a political union with Europe, not to everything else such as free movement of people.

Yes it does!














It really, really, really , really, really does.

 

[Metal Biker]

I think this is where there are outers and there are outers, a lot wouldn't be happy with this half way house, equally a lot of inners might not be unhappy with this half way house. It will be interesting to see what happens .

This is why being educated and understanding of what the Brexit means, what the EU is and what happens in the event of an exit without resorting to scaremongering about Britain being doomed, are essential to having this important debate about our membership.

Any 'Outer' reading this needs to understand that free movement of peoples, goods and services will not be affected by our exit and that as a member of the EEA (what we voted for back in the 70's) will still be in effect. Yes, we'd be allowed to control our borders, we'd be allowed to refuse the EU's declarations on accepting migrants and refugees, choosing our own accepted numbers or refusing entry entirely, but EU citizens would still be allowed to live and work in the UK as well as vice versa. That wouldn't change. There are some outers who want us to leave Europe completely (not my view) and there are those, like me, who want us to return to the original agreement offered in 1975, which IS what we'd be doing in the event of a 'Brexit'. Agriculture and fishing laws imposed by the EU would no longer have any effect on Britain. Policy making in Brussels would be null and void. TTIP, if imposed, would not be recognised by Britain. We'd join the US, China, Russia, Norway, Turkey, Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Iceland, India, Brazil, Canada, the UAE, Hong Kong, Algeria, South Africa and Nigeria as nations that trade with the EU, but are not governed by them, which is what we want.

A referendum on Britain being a member of the EEA is a debate for another time; this one is about leaving the totalitarian political 'union' with Europe, that sprang up and claimed dominance over the rest of us without anyone having a say on the matter.

 

[Metal Biker]

Yes it does!














It really, really, really , really, really does.

It's a referendum on ending a political union with the EU, not being a member of the EEA. You've heard many times people saying "Britain should be like Norway"? Well, Norway is not a member of the EU, but is a member of the EEA, so it abides by the EU's trading laws without having any influence over decisions made regarding tariffs etc, but manages to govern itself independently over other issues not relating to trade. We'd be free to trade with BRICS, the Americas and Europe, and we're not subject to their governing laws, just as we voted for. (Welll, not me I wasn't born then)

People need to understand this. After all, it's not done Canada, Brazil, China, or the US any harm, and they aren't even members of the EEA, either. Trust me, if a debate about Britain's contuned membership of the EEA came up and flaws were found in that, (especially if the EU were being dicks about us leaving) then i'd be calling for a referendum on our membership.

Love Europe, hate the EU; that is my stance.

 

[BigJoe#1]

They'd not sell us anything. Obviously..... Erm

Really...? And you think Mercedes, and all the other EU Businesses can cope without the UK market and subsidies? I don't think they can, will be an interesting scenario.

 

[EalingBlue2]

This is why being educated and understanding of what the Brexit means, what the EU is and what happens in the event of an exit without resorting to scaremongering about Britain being doomed, are essential to having this important debate about our membership.

Any 'Outer' reading this needs to understand that free movement of peoples, goods and services will not be affected by our exit and that as a member of the EEA (what we voted for back in the 70's) will still be in effect. Yes, we'd be allowed to control our borders, we'd be allowed to refuse the EU's declarations on accepting migrants and refugees, choosing our own accepted numbers or refusing entry entirely, but EU citizens would still be allowed to live and work in the UK as well as vice versa. That wouldn't change. There are some outers who want us to leave Europe completely (not my view) and there are those, like me, who want us to return to the original agreement offered in 1975, which IS what we'd be doing in the event of a 'Brexit'. Agriculture and fishing laws imposed by the EU would no longer have any effect on Britain. Policy making in Brussels would be null and void. TTIP, if imposed, would not be recognised by Britain. We'd join the US, China, Russia, Norway, Turkey, Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Iceland, India, Brazil, Canada, the UAE, Hong Kong, Algeria, South Africa and Nigeria as nations that trade with the EU, but are not governed by them, which is what we want.

A referendum on Britain being a member of the EEA is a debate for another time; this one is about leaving the totalitarian political 'union' with Europe, that sprang up and claimed dominance over the rest of us without anyone having a say on the matter.

There is no guarantees on any of this though and that is the reality. The out campaign choose a best case scenario and the in campaign choose a worst case scenario for Brexit. The reality will be somewhere in the middle and if it is EEA we may well not save the full 9 billion or get rid of the regulations etc that many in the out campaign want. I am sure the truth is somewhere between the nirvana and Armageddon that the campaigns paint. You are though wildly optimistic in my view

 

[EalingBlue2]

This is why being educated and understanding of what the Brexit means, what the EU is and what happens in the event of an exit without resorting to scaremongering about Britain being doomed, are essential to having this important debate about our membership.

Any 'Outer' reading this needs to understand that free movement of peoples, goods and services will not be affected by our exit and that as a member of the EEA (what we voted for back in the 70's) will still be in effect. Yes, we'd be allowed to control our borders, we'd be allowed to refuse the EU's declarations on accepting migrants and refugees, choosing our own accepted numbers or refusing entry entirely, but EU citizens would still be allowed to live and work in the UK as well as vice versa. That wouldn't change. There are some outers who want us to leave Europe completely (not my view) and there are those, like me, who want us to return to the original agreement offered in 1975, which IS what we'd be doing in the event of a 'Brexit'. Agriculture and fishing laws imposed by the EU would no longer have any effect on Britain. Policy making in Brussels would be null and void. TTIP, if imposed, would not be recognised by Britain. We'd join the US, China, Russia, Norway, Turkey, Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Iceland, India, Brazil, Canada, the UAE, Hong Kong, Algeria, South Africa and Nigeria as nations that trade with the EU, but are not governed by them, which is what we want.

A referendum on Britain being a member of the EEA is a debate for another time; this one is about leaving the totalitarian political 'union' with Europe, that sprang up and claimed dominance over the rest of us without anyone having a say on the matter.

You are the Liberal democrat of this debate quite centred on many of the issues even if anti EU from all the debate and comments I have seen you are on the very pro European fringe of the outers!

 

[grunge]

It's a referendum on ending a political union with the EU, not being a member of the EEA. You've heard many times people saying "Britain should be like Norway"? Well, Norway is not a member of the EU, but is a member of the EEA, so it abides by the EU's trading laws without having any influence over decisions made regarding tariffs etc, but manages to govern itself independently over other issues not relating to trade. We'd be free to trade with BRICS, the Americas and Europe, and we're not subject to their governing laws, just as we voted for. (Welll, not me I wasn't born then)

People need to understand this. After all, it's not done Canada, Brazil, China, or the US any harm, and they aren't even members of the EEA, either. Trust me, if a debate about Britain's contuned membership of the EEA came up and flaws were found in that, (especially if the EU were being dicks about us leaving) then i'd be calling for a referendum on our membership.

Love Europe, hate the EU; that is my stance.

If this is true then all the outers that think we'll be saving billions are in for a shock, we'll still be paying to be in the EEA.

 

[Metal Biker]

You are the Liberal democrat of this debate quite centred on many of the issues even if anti EU from all the debate and comments I have seen you are on the very pro European fringe of the outers!

I WAS an inner once, remember.

I was very supportive of the European Union, until it became quite clear it wasn't what we wanted or what we were promised it would never become. I hear many times from inners in the media saying "okay, we know the EU is not perfect and needs reform..." well, we've tried asking for reform and the higher ups at the EU are as stubborn as a religious fundamentalist in the respect of "The EU is perfect and flawless and does not need changing!"

Ever since the Dutch and Irish votes on the European Constitution and Lisbon Treaty I've found it more and more difficult to explain how the EU is beneficial, not just to Britain but to any European member. Yes there is a great uncertainty surrounding Britain's ability to 'go it alone' in the current economic era, but the certainty of what would happen if we were to remain in the EU worries me much more. When it adopted the Council of Europe banner as its Official Flag, when it adopted 'Ode to joy' as its anthem (which MEP's are expected to sing) when it called for a European currency, a European Army, a European people....that's what set my alarm bells ringing.

A few pages back people were discussing how the EU flag is present on projects in the UK that were apparently funded by the EU, but nobody asked the simple question "Why?" Why is there an EU symbol blazened across these projects? What purpose does the EU have in reminding people "DON'T FORGET!! THIS HAPPENED THANKS TO THE EU!!" It stinks of a watchful power ensuring the masses understand that without the EU they are nothing and progress would cease without them. The EU was supposed to be a quiet agreement that didn't need highlighting or praising for any projects undertaken, but they're slapping their logo on anything they were involved in. It just strikes me as sisnister that the EU, which used to claim it wan't meant to be imposing, is trying to remind everyone that Europe only succeeds so long as the EU as a political entity exists, and that although you have a choice about participation, talk of leaving it is something to be shunned, vilivfied and ridiculed. Doesn;t sound like a healthy relationship, to me.