Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

[blandy]

6 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Just find out what Chris Grayling would do, and do the absolute opposite.

That sounds a great plan.....but Chris Grayling doesn't know what the £^%! he's doing, so how the hell are we supposed to know?

[HanoiVillan]

21 minutes ago, Genie said:

I don't realistically see any reason why people would significantly change their buying or selling habits tbh. It won't be any more difficult to buy from the UK.

Because, as stated previously, there will be an enormous incentive for the EU to set tough restrictions on British access to the Common Market in order to discourage further leavers. 

Your belief that European leaders won't punish the UK certainly isn't borne out by statements from EU leaders. 

[tonyh29]

53 minutes ago, blandy said:

I was just going on what Theresa may and a host of others have said in the past year. for example torygraph. But you're right, they do lie. Often.

edit - because you didn't put a link in, I mooneyed your quote and it came up with this as the source - though no doubt there will be others asa he seems to have said it in parliament. Your quote also misses out the bit where he said "I rule out absolutely nothing"

 

that's because my source wasn't the source that you found so I couldn't leave out what I didn't see  

[chrisp65]

26 minutes ago, Genie said:

I don't realistically see any reason why people would significantly change their buying or selling habits tbh. It won't be any more difficult to buy from the UK.

Individuals might not consciously change their buying habits, all things remaining equal. But would they even now be deliberately paying a premium for a particular product? The majority of people buying a kettle or a toaster just want a red one, or a black one, or one that's twenty quid. I've never gone out to buy a Turkish fridge, or a specifically British washing machine. High end stuff, I admit is a little different. How many of us would like to see Smeg on our fridge door?

But that mid range Hoover white goods purchase? Don't care. So if British goods are penalised with a tariff or a joining fee and costs rise by 1% people might buy a shit Beko freezer instead of a shit Hoover one. Then, eventually, Hoover will think to itself 'we could actually be making these in Macedonia'.

No conscious change in buying habits. 

Would europe allow it's financial services to go through a differently regulated non-EU London? Or would it be 'easier' to build up Frankfurt? Remembering, that Germany would want some payback for having to either up it's own net contribution to offset the loss of ours, or, would have to sell the poorer countries the idea of having less hand outs.

I'm not saying what would or wouldn't happen, I'm accepting it's an unknown and that people should be careful what they wish for. 

 

[tonyh29]

10 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Because, as stated previously, there will be an enormous incentive for the EU to set tough restrictions on British access to the Common Market in order to discourage further leavers. 

Your belief that European leaders won't punish the UK certainly isn't borne out by statements from EU leaders. 

TBH that's not really based on any fact and is up there with Immigrants want to steal our jobs and babies rhetoric

Of course Europe is going to talk tough , the are probably craping themselves at the idea of the UK leaving , but should it happen I'd be very very surprised if the EU didn't want trade with us in the same way it trades with China, America and other countries

[blandy]

7 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

should it happen I'd be very very surprised if the EU didn't want trade with us in the same way it trades with China, America and other countries

Course "they" would  - the Companies, at least. Maybe less enthusiastically so for a few Gov'ts, mind. Perhaps the French Gov't might not quite want so much Lamb or Beef (and it would make their farmers happier), perhaps the Spanish might be less keen on letting Easyjet (or whoever) have so many flight slots to Madrid or Magaluff. I'm pretty confident that human nature and politician's natures would see medium level tit for tat stuff going on, and resentment at "us" for leaving etc. But I agree ultimately it would settle down and we'd carry on doing business much as before in most regards. I don't know what would happen to all the Brits in Spain, retired? how would they get treated in terms of losing rights or benefits they currently have as EU citizens? Would a "swarm" of orange pensioners with absolutely no working knowledge of Spanish turn up at Calais wanting let back in and hip replacements on the NHS? How would we cope? They'd be terrorising the streets in their electric scooters, hanging out around libraries and tea-rooms in huddles, not really fitting in.

[Brumerican]

41 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

 How many of us would like to see Smeg on our fridge door?

 

 

Hopefully nobody . Overrated pieces of tat .

(I sell kitchens and appliances) 

[HanoiVillan]

43 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

TBH that's not really based on any fact and is up there with Immigrants want to steal our jobs and babies rhetoric

Of course Europe is going to talk tough , the are probably craping themselves at the idea of the UK leaving , but should it happen I'd be very very surprised if the EU didn't want trade with us in the same way it trades with China, America and other countries

Of course 'they' are 'crapping themselves' at the idea of the UK leaving. We're not a normal country in the EU - we contain the continent's largest city, its' financial centre, one of its' largest armies (and closest link to America) and there is in no general no desire to see us leave. There is also a considerable fear that one country walking out may be a precursor to other countries walking out (not to mention issues like Catalan independence as well). The only lever that the rest of Europe will have is our need to get back into the Common Market. You're arguing they won't pull it - I'm arguing that they will, and my argument is backed up by EU leaders saying that they will. 

[Awol]

Leave.   

Trade. I think we'll take a short term hit and gain in the medium to long term. 10 years ago about 55% of our exports went to the EU, today it's 45%. In 10 years? We are tied into a customs union with the only continent that is failing to grow economically and will fall ever further behind the rest of the world. Outside we can sign our own bilateral trade deals (which we can't now) as all countries outside the EU do and benefit accordingly. Due to the massive trade deficit we run with the EU (UK is Germany's largest export market in the world) I have no doubt that a free trade deal will be secured once Brussels gets the initial fury at our exit out of its system. In 1975 we voted to stay in a free trade area, not a political union. 

Law. We have a system of common law evolved over 1000 years which comes from the ground up, the opposite of the Napoleonic Code model applied on the continent. The reason London is the international jurisdiction of choice for international arbitration is because our law and courts are recognized as the fairest in the world, we will eventually lose that if we stay in and the European Court remains a higher authority than our own Supreme Court.

Democracy. Even the EU itself recognizes the democratic deficit its institutions create. It is at its heart an elite project that doesn't draw its legitimacy or mandate from the people. The body that creates and proposes legislation is not accountable to the people. At the risk of doing an Errol Flynn... our forebears risked and frequently sacrificed everything for our right to directly elect and deselect those who would presume to make our laws. That link is invaluable and breaking it is a grave mistake IMO, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Sovereignty. Is it better for the people of the UK (through their directly elected parliament) to decide what is best for us, how  we should organise our own affairs and defend our Island and people? I think it is the most important question facing any country, so for me it's ultimately that which is the core of the whole debate. 

I hope that sufficient numbers of people in the UK think the same... but then I also hope Villa won't get relegated. 

[villakram]

2 hours ago, blandy said:

Course "they" would  - the Companies, at least. Maybe less enthusiastically so for a few Gov'ts, mind. Perhaps the French Gov't might not quite want so much Lamb or Beef (and it would make their farmers happier), perhaps the Spanish might be less keen on letting Easyjet (or whoever) have so many flight slots to Madrid or Magaluff. I'm pretty confident that human nature and politician's natures would see medium level tit for tat stuff going on, and resentment at "us" for leaving etc. But I agree ultimately it would settle down and we'd carry on doing business much as before in most regards. I don't know what would happen to all the Brits in Spain, retired? how would they get treated in terms of losing rights or benefits they currently have as EU citizens? Would a "swarm" of orange pensioners with absolutely no working knowledge of Spanish turn up at Calais wanting let back in and hip replacements on the NHS? How would we cope? They'd be terrorising the streets in their electric scooters, hanging out around libraries and tea-rooms in huddles, not really fitting in.

I love how the leave side are able to say this but if Scotland had abandoned the UK then death doom rape pillage destruction etc etc... 

[blandy]

53 minutes ago, villakram said:

I love how the leave side are able to say this

Um, I'm not on the leave side, Akram, though Tony, with whom I was agreeing on that point is.

In as much as I'm on any side, as I said a few pages ago, I'm a reluctant stay, but I don't think that all the arguments for leaving are wrong, or all those for staying are right.

[blandy]

3 hours ago, Awol said:

Sovereignty. Is it better for the people of the UK (through their directly elected parliament) to decide what is best for us, how  we should organise our own affairs and defend our Island and people? I think it is the most important question facing any country, so for me it's ultimately that which is the core of the whole debate. 

Your whole post is well argued, though I don't agree with much of it, I can see what you're saying and why and all the logic and so on.

On the bit I've quoted, this might be heresy, but I'm not convinced that it is better for the people of the UK (through Parliament) to decide "what's best for us...etc." Perhaps I think that because I loathe the tories, and loathe the way they suppress (national) democracy at every opportunity, it seems.[edit = the same applied to Blair and Iraq], But also because some (many) elements of basic Law as well as more complex matters are actually better done at a European level if we're trading and working and living with them (which we will be, in or out). Stuff like theft and murder and the like  - well that's pretty universal in the west - and we can and do decide what to do about those crimes ourselves, anyway. Stuff like the environment and worker safety and standards for vehicles and goods and such like - much better done continentally - same standards for everyone, level playing field, all the goods are acceptable for all the trading block.

I kind of think that there are not many things at all that are really somehow "lost sovereignty". I am sure there must be some, but any that make a material difference? Nope....can't think of any. So is it worth leaving over these rare few sovereignty things that so exercise the UKIPs and the Rees Moggs?. What actually are they?

The Bigger "leave" things that seem to annoy people are immigration and the "cost" of EU membership.

Immigration, I can understand as a viewpoint being valid and if people hold that view, fine.

The cost - much said about cost, but not about the benefit we get from the cost. Neither side has explained their case on this at all well.

Lack of accountability and byzantine negotiations and compromises and everything taking forever - yep. Fair point. Bit like our planning system, then, or our Parliament. We could get rid of half our national MPs, ¾ of the Lords and be better and cheaper run nationally. But the out'ers are rather hypocritical on this.

"No, no, we need all that pomp and ceremony and Royalty and Goatskin and massively expensive parliament in the UK, but Europe - they're so wasteful and inefficient"

[villakram]

54 minutes ago, blandy said:

Um, I'm not on the leave side, Akram, though Tony, with whom I was agreeing on that point is.

In as much as I'm on any side, as I said a few pages ago, I'm a reluctant stay, but I don't think that all the arguments for leaving are wrong, or all those for staying are right.

Soz for the confusion, I have been following and was aware of your position, my comment was more of a general statement as an amused non-brit onlooker.

[supermon]

A good read of the impact of Brexit from a legal perspective and possible ramifications for exiting the EU, download the PDF...For those who happen to give a fluck:

http://www.mccannfitzgerald.ie/knowledge/client-briefings/item/6102/brexit---a-legal-perspective.aspx

Also read in a different article that if we were to opt out then we just don't opt out immediately, we would probably have to give the EU 2 years' notice to leave, during this transitional period there could certainly be a lot of uncertainty in the economy. We need some stability in the economy, sadly this referendum, regardless of the outcome will have an impact on the economy as panic settles in.

Edited February 19, 2016 by supermon

[Richard]

In many respects the negotiations themselves are a sign to me that we should leave. We are not asking for very much in the deal,  not much at all and some of the stuff sounds very reasonable us asking permission to determine some things for our own country and the way in which it spends its money ourselves,  What's wrong with that why shouldnt we do that,  we have to ask for permission FFS. And even these small things we are asking for they are not wanting to agree to.  For me that just shows what the EU is all about.  Power mad power hungry wanting control over every member state.  These negotiations have damned themselves for me. Out

[OutByEaster?]

Could someone explain to me what Mr Cameron is currently in the EU to negotiate?

I've got the impression that it's largely an exercise in being seen to be doing something and that the most important part of the negotiation is that Dave comes out of it looking tough, both to please the public and more importantly his own party. 

I have no idea though what it is he's over there using as the prop for this posturing, or even if it might be possible that there's some substance behind his visit that's too boring for any of the mainstream media to talk about.

For the media, it seems that it's very important that I should know as a voting member of the public that Dave was heroically negotiating until 05:30 am, putting in the hard work and not backing down to the man, even if it means staying up all night; it's almost completely unimportant that I should know what he's negotiating about. Maybe it's just me but there doesn't seem to be much coverage of the substance of the discussion, just pictures of the PM.

From what I can gather there are two sticking points, one which is about paying benefits to migrants, about which I'm not sure of the specifics - but given current policy on just about everything, I'm guessing we don't want to pay anybody anything and the other being our insistence that the EU's pesky ideas about putting more regulation on banks to stop them breaking the economy again shouldn't apply to the chaps in the City. This last one worries me a bit as it leaves me with the idea that the PM is in Europe looking tough for the nation whilst arguing to protect some of his old school chums.

Anyways, those are listed as sticking points, what are the points that aren't stuck, what's the deal we're after, what is he doing there other than being all uber-PM for the papers?

 

[Genie]

4 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Could someone explain to me what Mr Cameron is currently in the EU to negotiate?

I've got the impression that it's largely an exercise in being seen to be doing something and that the most important part of the negotiation is that Dave comes out of it looking tough, both to please the public and more importantly his own party.

I have no idea though what it is he's over there using as the prop for this posturing, or even if it might be possible that there's some substance behind his visit that's too boring for any of the mainstream media to talk about.

For the media, it seems that it's very important that I should know as a voting member of the public that Dave was heroically negotiating until 05:30 am, putting in the hard work and not backing down to the man, even if it means staying up all night; it's almost completely unimportant that I should know what he's negotiating about.

Oh my, some people really cannot win. He's putting in a shift it seems. Working hard, through the night etc... and you're moaning because the media are reporting the that PM is working hard to deliver a result (in his mind at least) which benefits the UK. Give him a break!

[snowychap]

On 19/02/2016 at 12:35, OutByEaster? said:

Could someone explain to me what Mr Cameron is currently in the EU to negotiate?

 

[OutByEaster?]

Just now, Genie said:

Oh my, some people really cannot win. He's putting in a shift it seems. Working hard, through the night etc... and you're moaning because the media are reporting the that PM is working hard to deliver a result (in his mind at least) which benefits the UK. Give him a break!

I'm moaning because the media aren't reporting what it is he's trying to achieve, what the deal he's making is.

 

[chrisp65]

Because the last thing Europe needs is an attempt towards working together on a shared set of values and objectives?

I can see how people can get angry at the UK appearing to need permission to wipe it's own arse. But let's not lose sight of the fact it's our own politicians that have been involved in getting europe to where it is today. Europe didn't suddenly declare itself the boss of us, we agreed to a thousand late night negotiated tweeks of legislation, to pork barrel agreements where we could drive to France without hassle in exchange for our VAT being similar to Ireland's. 

Lazy poor quality politicians that haven't had the mental capacity for detail have lead us here. Voted in by people swayed by newspaper headlines and jeering rather than thinking through the implications of things.

We weren't tricked in to paying benefits to the Portugese. There was something in it for us at some point, and we have agreed to it. What was in it for us? Probably cheap staff to work in Costa and a promise our awesome banking system would be allowed to ruin us. Whether we deliberately agreed or whether we didn't hang around for the small print I don't know and perhaps it doesn't matter.

What we are now doing is not reclaiming ingerland for King Harry and Saint Crispin, what we are doing is realising quite late that lots of other countries took lots more interest in small print than we did. Mind you, I bet we did better newspaper headlines and soundbites.

These negotiations damn our own little englander politicians, none of whom are able to explain what this is even really about, what it will really cost, what the consequences will really be. I'm a lot more interested in the real security and prospects for my kids than I am with the colour of the flag or where the guy in the suit sits that decides to bail out banks but not libraries.

It's a poor show. Remember that next time you're voting and you think 'I like Boris / Jeremy / Nigel / Galloway, he's funny on the telly'.