Should We Leave the EU?

[Railops]

If they did. So no, it isn't.

Spinning like a top, but for you that's your default position.

 

[anme]

I'm no UKIP supporter, but why wouldn't they campaign to leave the UN? Do you know what UKIP stands for? It's the UK Independence Party. Surely any outside influence over the governance of the UK is abhorrent to them? If not, then what point does UKIP have?

 

[Railops]

I'm no UKIP supporter, but why wouldn't they campaign to leave the UN? Do you know what UKIP stands for? It's the UK Independence Party. Surely any outside influence over the governance of the UK is abhorrent to them? If not, then what point does UKIP have?

If I was you I'd wait until they do before posting about it.

 

[anme]

If I was you I'd wait until they do before posting about it.

Are you in favour of the UK leaving the UN? Why, or why not?

 

[Railops]

Are you in favour of the UK leaving the UN? Why, or why not?

You're getting ridiculous now, what on earth has my views on the UN got to do with anything.

 

[anme]

You're getting ridiculous now, what on earth has my views on the UN got to do with anything.

I'm just curious about whether UKIP are *really* in favour of UK independence or whether they're just faking it.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Spinning like a top, but for you that's your default position.

It's not my fault if you misinterpret things. You made an aggressive assertion that was wrong, and are blaming me for your own mistake.

I notice that none of the Kippers ever actually have any arguments for me: they just like to insult me. Says a lot that they do this when pressed for answers, really.

 

[miami]

So the FT, hardly known for it's euro-skeptic or fanatic-racist views, has

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e90a080e-107b-11e6-91da-096d89bd2173.html

Germany to push for progress towards European army

Germany is to push for progress towards a European army by advocating a joint headquarters and shared military assets, according to defence plans that could ricochet into Britain’s EU referendum campaign.
Although Berlin has long paid lip-service to forming a “European defence union”, the white paper is one of the most significant for Germany in recent years and may be seized by anti-integration Brexit campaigners as a sign where the bloc is heading.

Initially scheduled to emerge shortly before the June 23 referendum vote but now probably delayed to July, the draft paper seen by the Financial Times outlines steps to gradually co-ordinate Europe’s patchwork of national militaries and embark on permanent co-operation under common structures.
In this and other areas, its tone reflects Germany’s growing clout and confidence in pursuing a foreign policy backed by elements of hard power. Initiatives range from strengthening cyberwarfare abilities to contentious proposals to relax the postwar restrictions on army operations within Germany.
“German security policy has relevance — also far beyond our country,” the paper states. “Germany is willing to join early, decisively and substantially as a driving force in international debates . . . to take responsibility and assume leadership”.

Of course it also states

Resistance to serious defence integration is well entrenched in many EU states and has hobbled efforts to make meaningful progress in common defence. Co-ordinated hard military power in Europe remains largely the preserve of Nato.
However, about 37 EU security missions have been launched since 2003, including recent operations in Mali and against piracy. If vigorously pursued in Brussels, Germany’s call for joint civil military headquarters would be an important step in enhancing the bloc’s capabilities and ambitions.
“The creation of a European army is a long way off, but it is a strategic necessity to implement important steps to pave the way towards it now,” wrote Roderich Kiesewetter, a Bundestag foreign affairs committee member, in a recent paper.
Berlin is aware that its call for more European defence — long a bugbear of British Eurosceptics — could inadvertently resonate in the UK referendum campaign. Although publication was first expected in early June, this has been delayed to July, according to people familiar with the process.

The brexiters will point to this as "Germany failed to win in 1945 so they're doing it now", conveniently ignoring the fact that this would require sovereign states to sign up, and would be a way to coordinate military action with allies when needed - not to mention nato has a headquarters.

 

[Barn]

Yesterday also gave us the French threatening to veto free trade with the US. We might be simultaneously at the back and the front of the queue.

If the French do follow through with their threat they'll follow the Italians (who are holding up free trade with Australia) and the Romanians (who are holding up free trade with Canada). So much for the EU's bargaining power - it has 500+ million people but spread across 28 countries all wanting different things.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Yesterday also gave us the French threatening to veto free trade with the US. We might be simultaneously at the back and the front of the queue.

If the French do follow through with their threat they'll follow the Italians (who are holding up free trade with Australia) and the Romanians (who are holding up free trade with Canada). So much for the EU's bargaining power - it has 500+ million people but spread across 28 countries all wanting different things.

This is begging the question: we all want different things because we keep putting barriers between us. I don't see India or China struggling, with almost triple that number.

 

[Antman]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LTMO0-YGI4


I didn't always agreed with the late Bob Crow but he absolutely hits the nail on the head in this clip

 

[Railops]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LTMO0-YGI4


I didn't always agreed with the late Bob Crow but he absolutely hits the nail on the head in this clip

Yes he's quite right in that description.

 

[WessexEclectic]

This is begging the question: we all want different things because we keep putting barriers between us. I don't see India or China struggling, with almost triple that number.

Tibet, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Kashmir respectfully disagree...

 

[TheKnightWho]

Tibet, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Kashmir respectfully disagree...

I agree, but what analogous situations do you have in the EU to those?

My point was that saying 500 MILLION PEOPLE does not automatically make something ungovernable.

 

[Flying Snail]

Yesterday also gave us the French threatening to veto free trade with the US. We might be simultaneously at the back and the front of the queue.

If the French do follow through with their threat they'll follow the Italians (who are holding up free trade with Australia) and the Romanians (who are holding up free trade with Canada). So much for the EU's bargaining power - it has 500+ million people but spread across 28 countries all wanting different things.

In some ways this is the best part of EU collective governance, there is a better chance that at least one country will kick off against bad policies that a sovereign nation's majority parliament can force through no matter how bad a deal it is for the citizens at large.

That EU-US trade deal is shockingly bad, it undermines a whole host of safeguards we have so we can be in harmony with the US where they pretty much let big corporations do whatever they like.

 

[yorksrob]

In some ways this is the best part of EU collective governance, there is a better chance that at least one country will kick off against bad policies that a sovereign nation's majority parliament can force through no matter how bad a deal it is for the citizens at large.

That EU-US trade deal is shockingly bad, it undermines a whole host of safeguards we have so we can be in harmony with the US where they pretty much let big corporations do whatever they like.

The question is, are we more likely to be lumbered with TTIP if we're in the EU or out of it.

On the one hand, leaving might put a spanner in the works since without us there will be fewer anglo-Saxon economies to counter act the more sensible countries. On the other hand, outside we may get dragged along anyway if they do go ahead with it.

That said, I think President Obama's desperation to get involved in the referendum can perhaps be taken as a clue to what the US thinks is it's best chance of getting it through.

 

[miami]

The question is, are we more likely to be lumbered with TTIP if we're in the EU or out of it.

With the tories in charge in the UK until 2020, and probably 2025?

Compare with a europe that's always been more economically left and more protecting of workers rights?

Once the full text is agreed and presumably release, it will have to be ratified by the democratically elected MEPs (the EU parliament is more left wing than the westminster parliament), and by a majaority of the EU council (which represents the nations)

On the one hand, leaving might put a spanner in the works since without us there will be fewer anglo-Saxon economies to counter act the more sensible countries. On the other hand, outside we may get dragged along anyway if they do go ahead with it.

Or we'll sign up for an even worse deal with America, as we'll be of much less importance to them as when we're part of the EU.

That said, I think President Obama's desperation to get involved in the referendum can perhaps be taken as a clue to what the US thinks is it's best chance of getting it through.

Yes, the Tory government, via their representative "David Cameron" on the EU council (which gives him a much larger say - 1 in 28 in one count, and 1 in 11 in another count, than the Tories in the EU parliament who have 1 in 37 of the votes, although not as much as they have in Westminster which is over 1 in 2, thus all the power), will fight tooth and nail to get the EU into the UK against protests from countries like France.

There are these posibilities

1) The Tories don't want TTIP, but the other governments and the MEPs do
2) The Tories do want TTIP, and the other governments and the MEPs do
3) The Tories don't want TTIP, and the other governments and the MEPs don't
4) The Tories do want TTIP, but the other governments and the MEPs don't

The only way that TTIP would be passed if we're in the EU and wouldn't be passed if we weren't is option 1. I think that option 4 or option 2 are the most likely, in both cases the UK will still sign up for TTIP or similar. Option 3 is unlikely, and wouldn't make any difference.


I'm not sure if the UK parliament has to separately ratify the treaty, France certainly does. Fortunatly we're a sovereign country, so we can always refuse it. There would be consequences, probably that the entire TTIP would collapse given the size of our market, but there are consequences involved in leaving the EU in any case.

The best bet to get TTIP blocked is to talk to you local MEP about blocking it. There are 71 UK MEPs, at least 45 of whom should be against TTIP if it's really going to impact on the average worker (Labour, LibDem, Green, UKIP, SNP, PC). That's the same story all over europe.

 

[yorksrob]

With the tories in charge in the UK until 2020, and probably 2025?

Compare with a europe that's always been more economically left and more protecting of workers rights?

Once the full text is agreed and presumably release, it will have to be ratified by the democratically elected MEPs (the EU parliament is more left wing than the westminster parliament), and by a majaority of the EU council (which represents the nations)



Or we'll sign up for an even worse deal with America, as we'll be of much less importance to them as when we're part of the EU.



Yes, the Tory government, via their representative "David Cameron" on the EU council (which gives him a much larger say - 1 in 28 in one count, and 1 in 11 in another count, than the Tories in the EU parliament who have 1 in 37 of the votes, although not as much as they have in Westminster which is over 1 in 2, thus all the power), will fight tooth and nail to get the EU into the UK against protests from countries like France.

There are these posibilities

1) The Tories don't want TTIP, but the other governments and the MEPs do
2) The Tories do want TTIP, and the other governments and the MEPs do
3) The Tories don't want TTIP, and the other governments and the MEPs don't
4) The Tories do want TTIP, but the other governments and the MEPs don't

The only way that TTIP would be passed if we're in the EU and wouldn't be passed if we weren't is option 1. I think that option 4 or option 2 are the most likely, in both cases the UK will still sign up for TTIP or similar. Option 3 is unlikely, and wouldn't make any difference.


I'm not sure if the UK parliament has to separately ratify the treaty, France certainly does. Fortunatly we're a sovereign country, so we can always refuse it. There would be consequences, probably that the entire TTIP would collapse given the size of our market, but there are consequences involved in leaving the EU in any case.

The best bet to get TTIP blocked is to talk to you local MEP about blocking it. There are 71 UK MEPs, at least 45 of whom should be against TTIP if it's really going to impact on the average worker (Labour, LibDem, Green, UKIP, SNP, PC). That's the same story all over europe.

There are always consequences wherever route we take.

That said, I agree there's no harm in writing to elected representatives to express our concern.

The other option is that we stall the whole thing long enough for people to wake up and smell the coffee, by which time who knows what Government we may have.

 

[TheKnightWho]

There are always consequences wherever route we take.

That said, I agree there's no harm in writing to elected representatives to express our concern.

The other option is that we stall the whole thing long enough for people to wake up and smell the coffee, by which time who knows what Government we may have.

Come on - this is sophistry.

You can't talk about the potentially dreadful consequences of staying in the EU, and then when it's pointed out how those are more likely to happen (and worse) if we leave just dismiss it with "there are always consequences wherever route we take".

 

[Johnuk123]

Project Fear seems to be working really well. Considering what we've had so far including todays "terrible wars will follow if we leave" speech it's no surprise the polls have rapidly turned Camerons way.

Oh wait just checked - they ain't.

 

[Aldaniti]

Project Fear seems to be working really well. Considering what we've had so far including todays "terrible wars will follow if we leave" speech it's no surprise the polls have rapidly turned Camerons way.

Oh wait just checked - they ain't.

It's becoming laughable now. We're now even being told how the dead (Churchill) would vote. What a patronising and negative campaign the Remain side have conducted. Looks like some people have realised they're being taken for fools..... as you say, the Poll of Polls isn't looking too good for Cameron!

 

[zuriblue]

Project Fear seems to be working really well. Considering what we've had so far including todays "terrible wars will follow if we leave" speech it's no surprise the polls have rapidly turned Camerons way.

Oh wait just checked - they ain't.

Meanwhile Project Lie have made some fishy claims:

http://jondanzig.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/fishy-news-about-eu.html

 

[Antman]

Project Fear seems to be working really well. Considering what we've had so far including todays "terrible wars will follow if we leave" speech it's no surprise the polls have rapidly turned Camerons way.

Oh wait just checked - they ain't.

Cameron is becoming increasingly desperate and I think 'project fear' is just pushing people towards Brexit

 

[deltic]

Cameron is becoming increasingly desperate and I think 'project fear' is just pushing people towards Brexit

Couldn't agree more - 3 months ago Cameron said he would vote to leave EU if he didn't get I deal. Now he is saying we are at risk of war if we leave - so is he saying he would have risked war 3 months ago if he didn't get the deal he wanted!

Meanwhile Boris has gone from saying UK had higher priorities to deal with than sorting out the fall out of leaving the EU 3 months ago to now saying it is the highest priority to leave.

It's really just an internal battle within Conservative party which has massive repercussions for the rest of us

 

[Steveman]

Cameron is becoming increasingly desperate and I think 'project fear' is just pushing people towards Brexit

Cameron has been savaged after yet another speech full of dire warnings, at least he didn't mention Ebola this week.
The Government campaign has peaked far too early with all the armageddon we've got to look forward to if by some miracle we were ever allowed to leave the EU.

As the Government. have said they are refusing to do any contingency planning for an exit this is a clear pointer that they know one way or another leaving isn't an option and won't happen.
A responsible Government. would always prepare for any eventuality unless they already knew the result beforehand.
Be it the first referendum or the second one we will be staying in as that is official policy. the forthcoming referendum is a paper exercise very reluctantly forced upon them by UKIP. winning the European parliament election.

 

[Johnuk123]

Cameron is having a lot of trouble convincing the Leavers, his speeches and the ones written for others are only having a very negative effect.
We have the terminally boring Gordon Brown later this week and if he isn't enough to turn off the waverers nothing is.
Unfortunately It's very obvious that Cameron is not going to accept a Leave vote as binding which of course he doesn't have to although it will start the break up of his party.
I think he would take a smashed up Tory party if it mean't continued membership of the EU.

 

[miami]

Nothing is working for Cameron at all, nothing he says or speeches he writes for other leaders have any effect, as soon as we get a few OUT polls in the lead regularly I think a lot of INNERS will decide it's lost and not bother to vote.

Ahh yes, intimidate people into not voting because theres a risk that the vote may actually reflect public opinion.

We have the terminally boring Gordon Brown later this week

Sadly so many people vote on personality, rather than facts.

Unfortunately It's very obvious that Cameron is not going to accept an OUT vote as binding which of course he doesn't have to although it will smash his party to bits.
I think he would take a smashed Tory party if it mean't continued membership of the EU.

There will be a leadership election regardless of the vote, certainly if it's an out vote then we'll likely get Boris Johnson in charge. If there's an in vote we may end up with a fracturing of the Tory party leading to another general election

Remember unlike the EU, where you need a democratic mandate, once the Leave EU Tory party members (say 180 of them) vote for a leader, that leader, via the whips (under threat of being deselected, or "fired"), controls all 330 Tory votes in almost all cases, and those 330 votes control all of the parliament. The leader is also in charge of commissioning the laws in the first place.

180 Tory MPs, with an average 25325 votes in 2015, so elected by about 4.5 million people or 15% of the electorate, have all the power.

 

[Senex]

180 Tory MPs, with an average 25325 votes in 2015, so elected by about 4.5 million people or 15% of the electorate, have all the power.

That's the great British democracy that the OUTers are so proud of and so desperately want to keep - the democracy that they tell us is a model for the world.

 

[TheKnightWho]

That's the great British democracy that the OUTers are so proud of and so desperately want to keep - the democracy that they tell us is a model for the world.

You're right. Two things strike me from this latest flurry of posts:

1) The outers are gloating because they're only slightly behind in the polls. When you're gloating even though you're not winning you know you're desperate. Clearly they're beginning to become completely deluded in their own little bubble where they all talk to each other, even though reality doesn't bear out that way. When the betting agents begin to give you more favourable odds then I might start to believe you.

2) None of them have provided any arguments or refutations for the arguments for In. Very obvious they've fallen for the media line hook, line and sinker and have nothing to back it beyond "BRITAIN GOOD" and economically illiterate rubbish that fails to understand even basic macroeconomics (you can't just look at government spending, as literally any economist will tell you). Very telling that Johnuk123 writes 'IN' and 'OUT' in all-capitals, just like the Daily Express - I wonder where he gets his news from!

I'm sure that the interests of millionaire porn mogul Dirty Des (owner of the Express) are exactly the same as the average man - absolutely no vested interests whatsoever

 

[Bletchleyite]

What is quite concerning is what I would expect to see in the event of an "out" vote:-

1. In short order Scotland has another referendum and secedes, rejoining the EU.

2. England therefore ends up with a permanent Tory Government. (Though the split of the Scottish vote between SNP and Labour has also to some extent done that).