EU referendum

[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.