Should We Leave the EU?

[furnessvale]

And the BBC was reporting a couple of days ago that all that is needed to end the Le Touquet treaty is six months' notice on either side. So what would there be to stop the French giving that notice the day after a British "No" vote?

As the Brexit people say, the EU would certainly want trade deals with an exited Britain, but they would assuredly negotiate very hard to get the best deal for themselves, shewing no favours to the British. Why should they adopt a generous approach if we have just told them we don't want to belong to their club any more? And if France negotiated the Calais agreement in a spirit of EU co-operation, why should France not take a very hard line if we are no longer in the EU?

I certainly can't see the aftermath of "No" as being all sweetness and light.

Fully agree with you. It will be hard nosed negotiation but no-one is going to cut their nose off to spite their face.

We are no Norway or Switzerland. The UK is the 5th largest economy in the world. We also have a £60bn pa balance of payments deficit with the rest of the EU which means they have a lot more to lose than us.

 

[zuriblue]

The standard of debate on this has been pretty poor with personalities dominating.
This is a pity because most of the Tories backing stay don't score high on personality, and the press won't give a serious platform to any other party.

There certainly has been foolish scaremongering along the lines of increased decreased risks of terrorism.
Perhaps worse is that scaremongering becomes the catch all "dead cat" of the campaign.

I was listening to the radio and the head of the Frankfurt Stock exchange gave an erudite interview.
He explained how multi nation treaties enabled various national bourses to trade efficiently.
He also explained how the various ID checks on trading entities were interchangeable - so a security checked business in the UK can bid for business in another member state without a ton of prior red-tape.
He finally explained that if London breaks away and refuses to play by the rules and regulations (established to guarantee liquidity post 2008), that other countries will require greater surety to trade with London.
Fascinating stuff, and I'm sure I've forgotten the half.

Then they got a UK politician to oppose him, who simply stated "This is just more scaremongering".
Banal, simplistic, and available to cover any situation.

As my username suggests I actually live in Switzerland and referenda are a way of life here, if you can get 100000 people to sign within 18 months it's put to the vote. But the media are scrupulous, giving the pros and cons, explaing what the initiative means and the possible consequences, similarly with the voting papers you get a booklet from the Government giving the full details of the story. Good luck getting that from the British press.

And there is a difference between scaremongering and scarefacting. The trouble is that there is a level of cognitive dissonance that is comparable to the Scottish referendum. Both sides are guilty to a certain extent but the outs seem to be particularly bad, displaying a cultish paranoia similar to the Scottish independance folk or the Trump supporters in the States.

 

[Oswyntail]

... it does generally seem to have a left-liberal inclination in its selection of what to report and the language used by many of its staff.

This, I believe, reflects the inclinations of the vast majority of the country, and so might be considered the correct stance. I would not wish the editorial stance of the corporation blindly to accept BF or SWP views simply because a few sad people express them. In a universal spectrum, all the three main political parties (plus SNP and even PC) can be described as left-liberal. I do not see a problem generally.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Still it is good to know that the vote cast in the coming referendum by each individual website member counts just as much as the individual vote cast by all the political soothsayers.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Fully agree with you. It will be hard nosed negotiation but no-one is going to cut their nose off to spite their face.

There are only two countries, one of which is Ireland, in which we receive more than 10% of their export trade. By comparison, some EU countries do 35% of their trade with Germany alone.

I do not think that anyone will "cut their nose off to spite their face". But the idea that everything will carry on as normal, that the UK will get all the benefits of EU membership without any of the obligations, is quite frankly laughable.

Collectively we are an important trade partner with the EU, and would continue to be so. As you say, we are not Norway. But I seriously doubt that there would be no repercussions for chooisng to leave the EU.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

it does generally seem to have a left-liberal inclination in its selection of what to report and the language used by many of its staff.

I don't agree that it is particularly left-wing (no organisation chaired by a director of HSBC and British Aerospace is), but it is liberal in outlook. But then most people in the UK are liberal in outlook, regardless of whether they choose left-wing or right-wing economics.

I have issues with both the current and previous political correspondents (Robinson the Oxford Tory obviously, but the behaviour of Kuenssberg's father in Labour makes me wonder about her) but generally the BBC doesn't do too badly. The only ones bleating about bias tend to be the far right and the far left.

 

[Senex]

I was listening to the radio and the head of the Frankfurt Stock exchange gave an erudite interview.
He explained how multi nation treaties enabled various national bourses to trade efficiently.
He also explained how the various ID checks on trading entities were interchangeable - so a security checked business in the UK can bid for business in another member state without a ton of prior red-tape.
He finally explained that if London breaks away and refuses to play by the rules and regulations (established to guarantee liquidity post 2008), that other countries will require greater surety to trade with London.
Fascinating stuff, and I'm sure I've forgotten the half.

Then they got a UK politician to oppose him, who simply stated "This is just more scaremongering".
Banal, simplistic, and available to cover any situation.

The head of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange is most likely a real specialist who knows his stuff inside out and has decent presentational skills too.

The UK politician most likely learnt his idea of what passes for debate whilst sitting in the House of Commons, with particular attention to PMQs.

 

[miami]

The head of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange is most likely a real specialist who knows his stuff inside out and has decent presentational skills too.

The UK politician most likely learnt his idea of what passes for debate whilst sitting in the House of Commons, with particular attention to PMQs.

So why didn't the "no to EU" campaign offer "a specialist who knows his stuff inside out and has decent presentational skills too."?

 

[Oswyntail]

....
I have issues with both the current and previous political correspondents (Robinson the Oxford Tory obviously, but the behaviour of Kuenssberg's father in Labour makes me wonder about her) ....

Both of them (the daughter, not the father) chose to be highly confrontational early in the job, presumably to get noticed. This has led to them as being seen as opposed to the government of the day. Kuenssberg's reporting at the start of the present campaign was almost manically pro-Brexit, at one point saying "he would say that, wouldn't he" after reporting (briefly) on Cameron. She seems to have been given a slightly lower profile in the last couple of weeks, thank goodness.
And there's nothing wrong with an Oxford Tory, per se.

 

[furnessvale]

Which is exactly what some of us would like to see. The EU may well have many faults and may already have been a great disappointment to some of us, but the alternative of a little England (assuming Scotland would head off pretty quick and get back into the EU) always going on about its (so-called) democracy, its superiority in all respects over other European coutries, the way its people love being subjects of the crown, etc truly appals.

Entirely your choice.

We will have a vote on it on 23rd June and I will accept the result.

As long as you do the same we will have no problems.

 

[Senex]

Entirely your choice.

We will have a vote on it on 23rd June and I will accept the result.

As long as you do the same we will have no problems.

If the result is "stay" I shall be unenthusiastically pleased. If "leave" I shall sorrowfully accept it. What really worries me is that if it is "stay" there will be significant numbers of Tory MPs who will still not accept the choice of the people and will continue trying to stir things up into the foreseeable future.

 

[radamfi]

Entirely your choice.

We will have a vote on it on 23rd June and I will accept the result.

As long as you do the same we will have no problems.

What does "accepting" the result mean?

Suppose there is a "leave" result and it is subsequently decided that British citizens are to be imprisoned in the UK if they don't leave within a certain time, would I have to imprison myself to "accept" the result?

 

[ExRes]

What does "accepting" the result mean?

Suppose there is a "leave" result and it is subsequently decided that British citizens are to be imprisoned in the UK if they don't leave within a certain time, would I have to imprison myself to "accept" the result?

Accepting the result means getting on with it whether the result is In or Out, some of us will be happy while some won't, I don't recall the world ending in 1975

I rather think your second paragraph is just you being silly, if you don't want to live in an In or Out UK, whichever way you swing, then you can emigrate to another country

 

[radamfi]

I rather think your second paragraph is just you being silly, if you don't want to live in an In or Out UK, whichever way you swing, then you can emigrate to another country

But that option might not be available in the event of a "leave", or at least it might get a lot harder, especially for the unskilled. It's available now, but you might not want to leave right now.

 

[Busaholic]

The deployment of selective statistics and other 'facts' by both sides in the debate, both on this forum and in the wide world, will probably do little to sway opinion one way or the other. I dare say all the 'facts' are correct - it is how you use them to advance your argument that counts and, on each side, the 'facts' you choose not to use in case they depress your argument.

Actually, I would like to see the end of the terms Europhile and Europhobe, to be replaced in this context by EECphile and EECphobe. I would probably term myself a Europhile but not an EECphile. I doubt that more than 5% of the population are EECphiles, and probably a lot of those get some sort of living from making, interpreting or applying EEC laws and other regulations. On the other hand, I suspect there are a lot more EECphobes who really, really want nothing to do with the EEC and EU; my estimate would be 15%, though in Scotland and Wales the figure would probably be lower. Going by these estimates alone, it would seem the 'noes' have an inbuilt majority at the start of the referendum campaign, but I would argue this is a fallacy. I accept the EEC has an overinflated bureaucracy, wastes a great deal of money and is probably riven with corruption at all levels. That doesn't mean that I am against the UK remaining in the EEC though: I am aware that the UK shares these features, and would doubtless see a huge increase were we to leave the EEC. I think there are very many who, though they might not express it in the way I've done, share my view that we would probably be better remaining and that, in any case, we would not wish the huge risk that leaving might bring.

In the end, looking at who supports either view will probably sway how you vote i.e. Tony Benn will be proved wrong and the 'ishoos' will be trumped by the 'personalities'. If I was seriously considering voting 'no' then seeing I was on the same side as IDS, Grayling, Galloway and Farage might well make me reconsider, not to mention main backer John Mills, a Labour supporter.

 

[Steveman]

With today's claims about pressure being applied from the Govt it looks an absolute certainty that the axe has fell on British Chambers of Commerce director general John Longworth after Downing Street picked the phone up probably within minutes of the speech.
When Sky tried to contact the organisation every single one of the 10 board members we're "unavailable" which tells us they have been gagged.

I hope Mr Longworth doesn't end up the same way as Dct. David Kelly who dared to stand up against a Govt. we all know how he was dealt with.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What worries me is the statements of confidence made by those in Britain who feel that Britain will have no difficulty whatsoever in renegotiating any current agreements with any part of the EC. This shows either a "Britain still has an Empre" attitude or a total lack of understanding of how other countries in Europe might view such optimistic aspirations which would seem to totally ignore their feelings.

 

[Steveman]

We're the 5th biggest economy in the world, Not Norway or Switzerland we will negotiate from a position of strength.

Saying that we won't be leaving anyway, one way or another Cameron will not take us out.

 

[TheKnightWho]

What worries me is the statements of confidence made by those in Britain who feel that Britain will have no difficulty whatsoever in renegotiating any current agreements with any part of the EC. This shows either a "Britain still has an Empre" attitude or a total lack of understanding of how other countries in Europe might view such optimistic aspirations which would seem to totally ignore their feelings.

I think this is a very astute observation. What I suspect it stems from is overwhelmingly negative press reports about the EU over the past 15 years or so, which means that whilst we all know the faults and foibles of the EU, most of us are rather ignorant of its advantages. As such, we simply take them for granted and assume they'll continue as normal - because we don't realise quite how dependent many of them are on membership of the EU. (And conversely, how many of our problems (and "problems") have nothing to do with the EU, but other pan-European institutions such as the ECHR etc.)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

We're the 5th biggest economy in the world, Not Norway or Switzerland we will negotiate from a position of strength.

Saying that we won't be leaving anyway, one way or another Cameron will not take us out.

What position of strength? Our rank in the world economies (which is something I hear from lots of people who want to leave, so I suspect it's part of the Out camp's campaigning) has little bearing on the fact that we are still much, much smaller than the rEU and are far more invested in them relative to our size than they are in us. Do you think we negotiate from a position of relative strength when it comes to China or the US (which are of a similar size to the rEU)?

Plus Norway and Switzerland both have distinct advantages which mean that the EU *is* particularly dependent on them. They aren't just bullied around - Norway has enormous oil reserves which, particularly with the advent of new Russian aggression, the mainland is very dependent on. Switzerland has all of its unique characteristics it's well-known for.

 

[ComUtoR]

What worries me is the statements of confidence made by those in Britain who feel that Britain will have no difficulty whatsoever in renegotiating any current agreements with any part of the EC. This shows either a "Britain still has an Empre" attitude or a total lack of understanding of how other countries in Europe might view such optimistic aspirations which would seem to totally ignore their feelings.

There have been a few politicians and buisness leaders that are making those same claims.

Not everyone on the exit side of the debate lack understanding.

 

[tony_mac]

The EU is actively looking for free-trade agreements, and has them in place with a number of countries already, such as South Korea and the Caribbean.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_free_trade_agreements

The fact that we have obviously already met all of the conditions of taking part suggests that it would be quite easy to join one.
The problems may come later on, if the EU wishes to make changes and the UK has to negotiate further agreements from an 'outside' position.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

With today's claims about pressure being applied from the Govt it looks an absolute certainty that the axe has fell on British Chambers of Commerce director general John Longworth after Downing Street picked the phone up probably within minutes of the speech.

Absolute certainty? What planet are you living on??? All we have is a completely unsubstantiated allegation from Boris. The facts, as we know it are that John Longworth has been temporarily suspended (so not, as you claim, axed), for a reason that appears very reasonable: The BCC wish to remain impartial, and that clearly means that if a board member who is in a position to speak for the BCC breaks that impartiality, then that board member's position might well become untenable.

Of course neither of us can rule out the possibility that there was some Government pressure involved, but unless some evidence turns up to indicate that was the case, then there is nothing more than unsubstantiated allegations by a person who clearly has a strong political interest in having us believe those allegations. The fact that you, Steveman, have chosen to describe those allegations as an 'absolute certainty', on a public forum apparently on the basis of no evidence at all, does not frankly reflect at all well on your judgement.

When Sky tried to contact the organisation every single one of the 10 board members we're "unavailable" which tells us they have been gagged.

Oh come on! If someone in your organization has been suspended or something similar, and you represent that organization, of course you're not going in most cases to want to comment personally on it - because of all sorts of professional issues of confidentiality and potential conflicts of interest and the need for the organization to speak with one voice etc. I cannot find the Sky report you refer to, but if it exists and it is accurate, then the fact that board members have chosen to be 'unavailable' tells us basically nothing at all.

 

[radamfi]

We're the 5th biggest economy in the world, Not Norway or Switzerland we will negotiate from a position of strength.

However, Norway and Switzerland have a much higher GDP per capita. The UK is (was) only 5th ranked due to its large population.

I also recall that the UK recently dropped to 6th behind France because of the fall in the value of the pound against the Euro.

There are 27 other countries in the EU. If it is so bad, why are they still in it?

 

[yorksrob]

What worries me is the statements of confidence made by those in Britain who feel that Britain will have no difficulty whatsoever in renegotiating any current agreements with any part of the EC. This shows either a "Britain still has an Empre" attitude or a total lack of understanding of how other countries in Europe might view such optimistic aspirations which would seem to totally ignore their feelings.

Perhaps it might act as a wake-up call to other countries in Europe who take the aquiescence of their own populations on ever closer union, for granted.

 

[furnessvale]

However, Norway and Switzerland have a much higher GDP per capita. The UK is (was) only 5th ranked due to its large population.

I also recall that the UK recently dropped to 6th behind France because of the fall in the value of the pound against the Euro.

There are 27 other countries in the EU. If it is so bad, why are they still in it?

Maybe they're queueing up for their slice of UK subsidy?

 

[radamfi]

Maybe they're queueing up for their slice of UK subsidy?

Other countries are net contributors to the EU, yet they are some of the staunchest supports of the EU.

The founding members recently reaffirmed their desire for "Ever Closer Union"

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-eu-founders-meeting-idUKKCN0VI246

A week after the EU accepted that some members may never go further in sharing sovereignty, as part of the price for keeping Britain in the club, Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg pledged to pursue "ever closer union" at a meeting in Rome, where they founded the bloc in 1957.

Unlike the UK, no region in the Netherlands qualifies for funding as a "less developed" or even "transition region", but there is no question of their commitment to the EU.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/20/European_regional_policy_2014.svg

 

[furnessvale]

The five founding members recently reaffirmed their desire for "Ever Closer Union"

Which is a good enough reason to get out now.

Anyone who thinks Cameron's scrap of paper is worth anything is deluding himself.

Even if it was, does anyone believe countries NOT wanting to integrate further will not be discriminated against?

 

[radamfi]

Which is a good enough reason to get out now

A more appropriate question would be why such great countries still see further integration as a positive?

 

[TheKnightWho]

Maybe they're queueing up for their slice of UK subsidy?

Do you think we single-handedly fund the EU or something? Plus I'd rather pay in a few billion a year to get back much, much more wealth in the form of private investment etc. An enormous amount of British wealth is concentrated in our ownership of foreign companies - why do you want to make that less lucrative?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Which is a good enough reason to get out now.

Anyone who thinks Cameron's scrap of paper is worth anything is deluding himself.

Even if it was, does anyone believe countries NOT wanting to integrate further will not be discriminated against?

What is your problem with integration? Why is this a bad thing?

 

[furnessvale]

What is your problem with integration? Why is this a bad thing?

I have no desire to join a United States of Europe. Other have and that is their choice.

On 23rd June we will each have a vote and I will abide by the result.

 

[Mvann]

Why is intergration a good thing? It hasn't worked very well for some countries that have intergrated there currency.