EU referendum

[smudgedj]

Yes NATO has helped but they sided with Iceland to ensure we lost the cod wars. They were also missing (both as a deterrent and a force) in the Falklands war.

We have had peace in Europe for 70 years, partly because of NATO but also we have been in a partnership with Other EU Countries For much of that time.

One of the main reasons for WW1 (that should have been the war to end all wars) is the lack of continuous dialogue. The Germans misunderstood our intentions and thought we wouldn't protect France!

The recent bombings in Paris and Brussels (plus 7/7 and Madrid) show that the EU is ineffectual, even at the domestic level.

 

[SWP's back]

The recent bombings in Paris and Brussels (plus 7/7 and Madrid) show that the EU is ineffectual, even at the domestic level.

The EU certainly helped in the Falklands. What with the French selling the Argies exorcet missiles and all.

 

[blueish swede]

"It does not mean that the jobs will go tomorrow but will drift abroad over a period and the longer-term future of Britain as a manufacturing nation will be blighted. Ministers had better understand that if we delay ***** too long there may be nothing left to save." - James Dyson...










...in 1998! The missing word is "ENTRY".
Dyson was a vocal advocate of the UK adopting the Euro. He threatened to move his production to Malaysia back then if the UK didn't join - not to the Euro zone, mind, which would have overcome his objections to the UK having an independent currency. The guy is a first class clown.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

The recent bombings in Paris and Brussels (plus 7/7 and Madrid) show that the EU is ineffectual, even at the domestic level.

At the domestic level, it's responsibility of home intelligence agencies to try to avert such atrocities (sharing intelligence with other Countries where helpful). We are indebted to our intelligence services for thwarting so many attacks but it is impossible to prevent every attack.

Yes EU countries could probably get better at sharing intelligence but that's only part of the picture. We have agreement for international arrest warrants etc that help with our safety.

Also, was the EU responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Centres or the Bali bombings?

The biggest terrorist thread to the UK in recent years has been from homegrown terrorists.

 

[BigJoe#1]

Mate....surely you must agree that it shouldnt just be about "what we running away from"......the country also needs to know "what we running towards"....I still believe Boris/Gove need to give reasons/answers for leaving other than.....trying to escape the EU.....just my opinion! It's like jumping out of the frying pan into the fire...Boris still needs to present a case even tho its not a General election....otherwise people dont know what they voting for.....most people on a daily basis dont even know how much/or little the EU affect their daily lives....

How can Boris present a case, a manifesto of pledge commitments? He's not the PM, he has no mandate whatsoever to deliver what you're asking for.

Cameron as PM like the government should be absolutely neutral on this. Because it's not neutral it cannot present a balanced view on scenarios should we decide to leave or stay. The incumbent government are the only people who can deliver the post referendum manifesto - there is not anither election for four years, though one could well (or even should) be called much sooner if the Brexit vote wins the day, it will give the political parties the opportunity to deliver precisely what is naievely being asked for in a cross party referendum.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I do think that both sides should be able to answer "what happens if you win/lose". It doesn't need to be manifesto, it needs to be an analysis of what would happen, which is very different.

Various economist types have had a say, producing howls of bias but no real counter position. Remain offer a dark view of what would happen with Brexit, and the shouts are of Project Fear.

I don't think Leave want to answer beyond highlevel comments about single issues like more jobs or whichever random number Johnson invents today, but not an overall picture of what they think would happen. That's not a manifesto, it's being able to see what might happen.

"It's the economy, stupid" still has weight in this situation.

 

[IanBishopsHaircut]

Yes NATO has helped but they sided with Iceland to ensure we lost the cod wars. They were also missing (both as a deterrent and a force) in the Falklands war.

We have had peace in Europe for 70 years, partly because of NATO but also we have been in a partnership with Other EU Countries For much of that time.

One of the main reasons for WW1 (that should have been the war to end all wars) is the lack of continuous dialogue. The Germans misunderstood our intentions and thought we wouldn't protect France!

The fuck?

I think you're getting EU mixed with Europe mate..which we are and have always been a part of..the EU has got fuck all to do with it

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

I do think that both sides should be able to answer "what happens if you win/lose". It doesn't need to be manifesto, it needs to be an analysis of what would happen, which is very different.

Various economist types have had a say, producing howls of bias but no real counter position. Remain offer a dark view of what would happen with Brexit, and the shouts are of Project Fear.

I don't think Leave want to answer beyond highlevel comments about single issues like more jobs or whichever random number Johnson invents today, but not an overall picture of what they think would happen. That's not a manifesto, it's being able to see what might happen.

"It's the economy, stupid" still has weight in this situation.

Ok I might vote remain please tell me what will happen in our economy in 1 year, 2 years and 5 years please within the Eu. I want detail.

 

[BigJoe#1]

Mate....this is a disagreement of opinion....It is the glass that he(Boris), Gove and everyone else that wants to leave is offering....As soon as Boris (or anyone) stands up in front of millions asking for us to agree and follow "their" view.....they need to tell us what those views entail..I disagree that "running away from the EU" should be enough detail for me to make an intelligent/informed decision to risk what I have now....I'm not thick enough to not understand that Boris doesnt run the country and its not his problem to fix the mess after we leave but as a spokesperson for it, he's selling an idea he cant back up with reason....We are all different so not knocking your view mate....some of us jump at the chance of change without knowing what that change would cost....for me wanting/needing to know more from the "leave" campaign is just rational thinking?

You believe EU is the cause of our problems and I dont believe they are...which is why I voting "stay"....Its that simple!

All Boris, Gove and the rest of the Brexiters are doing is reforming the landscape, changing the environment within which we operate. When we get to the point where the direction of the country is known the Government can then tell us how they wish to progress. Who is the PM and which party is in power will obviously affect the direction of travel but one thing is for certain you will not have Boris, Gove, Farage, Skinner and Giesla Stewart all in the same government, let alone the same cabinet from where such policies will eminates. So please stop asking for these answers now, or at least if that's what you want, ask Call me Dave what his stance would be when we leave should we vote to so do!

 

[steviemc]

Yes because the stronger our economy the more jobs that will be created for our people.

You will have seen on this thread a poster providing a link to an independent report showing that immigrants have largely taken extra jobs that have been created.

If reduced pay means I am no longer held to ransom by plumbers and electricians (as was the case ten years ago) that will do me. Remember when there was a routine £50 call out charge before a plumber or electrician inspected a job?

So you're quite happy for UK workers to receive lower pay, as long as it reduces the cost to yourself?

Quite an astonishing comment when the crux of the EU debate should be centred around what's best for 'everybody' in the UK.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Ok I might vote remain please tell me what will happen in our economy in 1 year, 2 years and 5 years please within the Eu. I want detail.

That's the question that should be asked, as I said, to BOTH sides. As an onlooker, 1-2 years my impression is "exactly how it is whichever side wins". Five years? Then things will be coming unwound and the effect will be more clear - I don't know what it will be.

I'm not promoting Remain or Leave, so I'm not in a position to answer your question. Both campaigns should have a clear idea of how they think will pan out, without just talking about single issues like immigration pressure, effect on sterling, trade, banana curvature, etc.

 

[hgblue]

That's the question that should be asked, as I said, to BOTH sides. As an onlooker, 1-2 years my impression is "exactly how it is whichever side wins". Five years? Then things will be coming unwound and the effect will be more clear - I don't know what it will be.

I'm not promoting Remain or Leave, so I'm not in a position to answer your question. Both campaigns should have a clear idea of how they think will pan out, without just talking about single issues like immigration pressure, effect on sterling, trade, banana curvature, etc.

How can leave tell you how negotiations that haven't taken place yet will pan out?

 

[Tim of the Oak]

The fuck?

I think you're getting EU mixed with Europe mate..which we are and have always been a part of..the EU has got fuck all to do with it

If you look back through the thread there are several posts about the reasons for the organisations that eventually led to the EU.

Peace in Europe and financial prosperity were the drivers!

 

[YPhrunts]

Bill Cash, Tory MP writes...

"How many people are on the EU payroll? You’d think it would be easy to find out — after all, we’re all paying for them through our taxes.

But no — the EU doesn’t think that the public is entitled to this information.

The most widely accepted estimate is that it directly employs 85,000 people. This is about the same as the entire British Army — though EU perks would make our soldiers more than slightly envious.

Let’s start with the officials. At one time, those who went on regular trips got their own MasterCard with a memo informing them ‘this card is totally free and may also be used for private purposes’.

That meant any cash withdrawals outside the EU — to a maximum of ¤5,000 (£3,930) a month — were paid for by the European Parliament. Not bad, particularly as they didn’t have to account for what they were spending the money on.

What about Members of the European Parliament? They now get a salary of around £77,700.

However, those who have been in the European Parliament since before 2009 can still use the old payments system, whereby their basic salaries are fixed at the level of MPs in their home country — so a British MEP would take home £74,962, while an Italian (the best paid) would get more than £127,000.

What gives the job its real appeal though is its amazing expenses, as MEPs can claim £48,721 a year as a ‘subsistence allowance’.

And, no, they don’t have to provide any receipts and, yes, it’s all tax-free. British MEPs have nicknamed this perk SOSO: Sign On and Sod Off.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

So you're quite happy for UK workers to receive lower pay, as long as it reduces the cost to yourself?

Quite an astonishing comment when the crux of the EU debate should be centred around what's best for 'everybody' in the UK.

Not astonishing at all. I expect to pay a fair price for the goods and services I pay for. Maybe you don't. You could always lobby City to put up the price of match tickets to increase the wages of the workers.

So what you are saying is you agree with excessive prices due to shortages of skilled labour!

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

That's the question that should be asked, as I said, to BOTH sides. As an onlooker, 1-2 years my impression is "exactly how it is whichever side wins". Five years? Then things will be coming unwound and the effect will be more clear - I don't know what it will be.

I'm not promoting Remain or Leave, so I'm not in a position to answer your question. Both campaigns should have a clear idea of how they think will pan out, without just talking about single issues like immigration pressure, effect on sterling, trade, banana curvature, etc.

Ok but remainers often ask leavers to predict the future whereas leavers somehow know the future and are immune from global economic uncertainty.

If we leave I can say with some certainty.

We won't join the euro

We won't be forced to bail out failing Europe countries

We won't be forced to support new joiners

We will still be able to trade with the European Union

We will control our own laws

We will control our own immigration policy

We will not pay over 10 billion a year to the eu. (Net).

So if we stay in , over to you.......

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

Not astonishing at all. I expect to pay a fair price for the goods and services I pay for. Maybe you don't. You could always lobby City to put up the price of match tickets to increase the wages of the workers.

So what you are saying is you agree with excessive prices due to shortages of skilled labour!

He was not the one saying brexiters do not care for workers rights , you my friend were.....

 

[SWP's back]

So you're quite happy for UK workers to receive lower pay, as long as it reduces the cost to yourself?

Quite an astonishing comment when the crux of the EU debate should be centred around what's best for 'everybody' in the UK.

It's comedy gold isn't it.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

He was not the one saying brexiters do not care for workers rights , you my friend were.....

I care for workers rights. I believe in Trade Unions. What I don't agree with is being held to ransom pay fees for building or plumbing work. You obviously do.

You've tried to twist my words several times and failed.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

How can leave tell you how negotiations that haven't taken place yet will pan out?

Either you've misunderstood what I meant, or I'm not making myself clear.

They can't, and I don't expect them to KNOW the future, although I'd expect any cabinet-level politician to have a fair idea what negotiations are going to produce. Apart from anything else, a Leave win still requires Parliament to create the new rules that will apply, and that ould be ages, especially if the Conservatives are split.

I do expect them to be able to say "if UK chooses Leave/Remain, then we believe that XYZ will occur." Even if it's just what might be considered the top 10 subjects, both sides should be able to produce more than "it'll improve" without any calculations to back a highlevel comment up.

Many of the TV debates descend into very focussed subjects. Everyone knows that Cameron and Osborne are serial liars, if Farage is on it'll get hung up on immigration, if Brois is on, he'll be amusing but bonkers. I'd like to see an economy debate between the two sides to prove that they've both thought about it.

ON a side-issue, I'd have been interested to see the poll at the top with an 'unsure' option in it, to see what happens. Since I first saw it, there's been a gap of about 100 consistently, but no indication of the third group who will likely decide things.