The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[Awol]

5 hours ago, lapal_fan said:

Nah, I'd rather be part of team Europe.

Stronger together.

Yeah, like Thelma & Louise. 

[HanoiVillan]

7 hours ago, villa4europe said:

taken them a while to get it going but id expect the leave campaigners to jump of the general disliking of dave and run with the story that he might quit if he loses

"not really sure of which way to vote? cameron might quit if we leave"

thats a sales pitch and a half to a lot of people

True. This is why Cameron went campaigning with Sadiq Khan yesterday, no longer 'a threat to national security' but now 'a proud Muslim'. Trying to protect the left flank from crumbling. 

[Fairy In Boots]

I just find the whole I'm in because I don't trust this political party to do right so short sighted. We get the opt back in in two years if it doesn't work anyway, by which time if we've come out, because of necessity the EU will have had to purge itself immensely. 

[HanoiVillan]

31 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

I just find the whole I'm in because I don't trust this political party to do right so short sighted. We get the opt back in in two years if it doesn't work anyway, by which time if we've come out, because of necessity the EU will have had to purge itself immensely. 

Sorry, but what are you referring to here?

[blandy]

11 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

Unless we are proposing enforced contraception, those people are going to be alive and eating food and burning food somewhere. So I'm not sure that overall it's any more impact on the environment if they are in Northumberland or Spain. Other than, if it's in planned cities with decent infrastructure then the numbers must mean economies of scale will reduce overall pollution, a little. Obviously there will be a localised impact where there previously wasn't a city, but I'm fairly sure there's room for one more city in Lancashire, and another in Yorkshire, Northumberland, Lincolnshire ...

Once we really are facing a genuine squeeze, perhaps we will genuinely start looking at energy efficient housing. Perhaps we'll harvest rainwater. We might even put green roofs on buildings or sports fields on top of schools. Once we're genuinely concerned about the environment, we might reconsider the 1,400,000 tonnes plus of pet food we buy in the UK every year. 

This island isn't too small. It's just quite badly organised compared with what it could be.

That's all fair comment. On the other hand the EU migrants are coming from places which already have schools and houses and all the rest. So our UK environment gets concreted over, while Polands or Spains society loses plumbers or chemists or whatever. And is there really room for one more city in Lancashire, say? Technically there is obviously land that isn't currently a city, but it's land that's either farmland, nature reserve, flood plain, or parkland. ie it already serves a purpose. It would have to stop being farmed, meaning less potatoes etc.

The measures you suggest need taking regardless of migration. And our population will go on rising as the world's will, but the human race is slowly, rapidly even, trashing the planet. If we could avoid paving over this part of it, where there is already schools and roads in another EU country that would be nice,

[Awol]

8 hours ago, villa4europe said:

taken them a while to get it going but id expect the leave campaigners to jump of the general disliking of dave and run with the story that he might quit if he loses

"not really sure of which way to vote? cameron might quit if we leave"

thats a sales pitch and a half to a lot of people

If Vote Leave wins then Cameron will be put out the door with the cat on the night of 24th. He'd be finished on the spot politically, no question.

But as a reason to vote out that's as poor reasoning as voting in due to fear of a right wing Tory Government. 

Even if you believe that come the actual Brexit in 2018/19 the Tories would want to shred workers rights, social protections etc. you could vote in a government in 2020 to restore them all.

It smacks of a lack of confidence in winning the argument and convincing the electorate to support the programme you want to implement. 

Fact is every single piece of existing legislation will still be there on Independence Day +1. It is then for the government to decide what if anything it wants to change & then carry those decisions by a majority in the HoC. With a Tory majority of 12 MP's getting anything contentious through in the face of a General Election would be very bloody difficult indeed!  

Just for those who say we need the EU to protect our rights and social benefits, the UK is actually better than many EU countries. UK gives 52 weeks maternity leave (39 weeks paid), while Holland, Italy, Austria, Spain, Luxembourg & Ireland only grant 16 weeks. Only Germany is better on 14 months. 

If future UKGov was after cutting entitlements they could go after those now from within the EU with no legal restrictions, it's just another scare tactic to frighten people into voting remain.

[Fairy In Boots]

17 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Sorry, but what are you referring to here?

I was in general terms referring to Article 50. When a state intends to leave they get a two year period to negotiate a exit deal. The EU is obliged to try to get them to remain, but the notice period which we will give if we vote No is binding and once set in motion it can't be stopped unless the member states of the EU allow it which is a no brainier for them as they'll pretty much fold by then. Or we could reapply which will be fast tracked but we would probably get a poorer deal. I'm sumising but given its hardly rocket science as to how it will play out shout leave get the nod. A vote to leave would give our political leaders the collateral to really get us a good deal, remain weakens any potential bargaining power. 

[Wainy316]

20 minutes ago, Awol said:

Just for those who say we need the EU to protect our rights and social benefits, the UK is actually better than many EU countries. UK gives 52 weeks maternity leave (39 weeks paid), while Holland, Italy, Austria, Spain, Luxembourg & Ireland only grant 16 weeks. Only Germany is better on 14 months. 

Pretty sure the Swedes get a better deal than us too, with even the Dad getting 90 days.

[lapal_fan]

3 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

Pretty sure the Swedes get a better deal than us too, with even the Dad getting 90 days.

Yup, most of Scandinavia is very much better than the UK with regards to Maternity/Paternity.

I'd say AWOL may have missed those by mistake, but maybe not

[HanoiVillan]

17 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

I was in general terms referring to Article 50. When a state intends to leave they get a two year period to negotiate a exit deal. The EU is obliged to try to get them to remain, but the notice period which we will give if we vote No is binding and once set in motion it can't be stopped unless the member states of the EU allow it which is a no brainier for them as they'll pretty much fold by then. Or we could reapply which will be fast tracked but we would probably get a poorer deal. I'm sumising but given its hardly rocket science as to how it will play out shout leave get the nod. A vote to leave would give our political leaders the collateral to really get us a good deal, remain weakens any potential bargaining power. 

So you want people to vote Leave in order to get a better deal and actually Remain?

No offence but I think I can spot a few flaws with this wheeze. 

[Awol]

5 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

Pretty sure the Swedes get a better deal than us too, with even the Dad getting 90 days.

Fair enough. My point was that we don't owe all of our social rights like equal pay, maternity leave etc to the EU but to our own laws. We don't need to be in a situation where judges in another another country can strike down the judgements of our own Supreme Court. It's ludicrous.

I also disagree with a few posters saying remain is the 'safe' option. We've managed with sovereign nation state democracy for centuries and been the most stable country in Europe throughout that period. 

By contrast we're now 43 years into an failing experiment in supra-national governance that is causing increasing poverty across the southern half of Europe through the €, rising social instability, sinking prosperity and political extremism. Remaining within that structure is, imo, the riskier option - particularly as its only going to get worse. 

[lapal_fan]

36 minutes ago, blandy said:

That's all fair comment. On the other hand the EU migrants are coming from places which already have schools and houses and all the rest. So our UK environment gets concreted over, while Polands or Spains society loses plumbers or chemists or whatever. And is there really room for one more city in Lancashire, say? Technically there is obviously land that isn't currently a city, but it's land that's either farmland, nature reserve, flood plain, or parkland. ie it already serves a purpose. It would have to stop being farmed, meaning less potatoes etc.

The measures you suggest need taking regardless of migration. And our population will go on rising as the world's will, but the human race is slowly, rapidly even, trashing the planet. If we could avoid paving over this part of it, where there is already schools and roads in another EU country that would be nice,

Which brings us full circle doesn't it?

Those countries that aren't as economically strong as the UK reap the benefits of the money/grants from the E.U, to improve their infrastructure - so those countries can become more economically independent and then maybe just maybe, all those scroungers/cheap labour wouldn't be "tekkin our jerbs!".

But without time/money, these things can't happen.

A classic case of the have's and the have not's - let's try and get out of that colonial thinking, and help other people for a change.

Wow, the more I think about it, the more stupid the out campaign is

[blandy]

4 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

Which brings us full circle doesn't it?

Those countries that aren't as economically strong as the UK reap the benefits of the money/grants from the E.U, to improve their infrastructure - so those countries can become more economically independent and then maybe just maybe, all those scroungers/cheap labour wouldn't be "tekkin our jerbs!".

But without time/money, these things can't happen.

A classic case of the have's and the have not's - let's try and get out of that colonial thinking, and help other people for a change.

Wow, the more I think about it, the more stupid the out campaign is

It's a different aspect to the one I was talking about. I was discussing the impact on the environment of the UK of continuing very high migration.

Yes, definitely help other people

It's an unavoidable truth that if the UK is economically doing better than elsewhere in the EU that this will attract workers from the continent. Which is in many ways a good thing....for us. Less so for the nations that lose their young nurses, plumbers, farmers, teachers etc. So there are some gains for us and for them and also some downsides for both.

I also agree with you that the out campaigners are stupid, but so are the in campaigners. They've all been massive bell ends so far.

[lapal_fan]

Just now, blandy said:

It's a different aspect to the one I was talking about. I was discussing the impact on the environment of the UK of continuing very high migration.

Yes, definitely help other people

It's an unavoidable truth that if the UK is economically doing better than elsewhere in the EU that this will attract workers from the continent. Which is in many ways a good thing....for us. Less so for the nations that lose their young nurses, plumbers, farmers, teachers etc. So there are some gains for us and for them and also some downsides for both.

I also agree with you that the out campaigners are stupid, but so are the in campaigners. They've all been massive bell ends so far.

yup, absolutely no argument there from me.

I think the fact that fear is main aim of both parties just goes to show how little anybody really knows of the effects of the decision.  I've said a few times now that this referendum is an absolute joke.

[chrisp65]

Fair play to the French, cranking up industrial action as the summer tourist season approaches and days before the Euros begin.

For all the pasty waving and fear of King Felipe or Hitler, nothing will quite make people vote leave like pictures on the news of French pickets spoiling our hard working holidays. 

My money is still on a win for leave.

[Awol]

By the government's own figures  we can expect inward migration of around 3 million net over the next decade. The vast majority will be hard working and a net gain in terms of tax receipts. Great, but where do you house them, where are the school places, hospital beds, where is the money to increase the capacity of transport infrastructure? 

It's not a black & white issue of whether the Treasury breaks even on tax in Vs benefits out per capita, it's the infrastructure to support that many new people. 

All big political parties want to remain yet none of them even have a plan to address these issues (because it won't affect them, and they are incapable of thinking strategically about the country's needs). 

It's no wonder immigration is gaining traction as a referendum issue.

[blandy]

3 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

I've said a few times now that this referendum is an absolute joke.

Indeed you have. One of the best bits of the joke is that Cameron promised it because he wanted to shut up the little Englanders on the tory right and to head off the UKIPs from taking tory votes and splitting the tory party.

It's fun watching the tories absolutely slagging each other off and complaining about the tactics being used. It's like "even you've noticed that you're in a political party that mainly consists of odious, lying, cheating, words removed"

[StefanAVFC]

48 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

Which brings us full circle doesn't it?

Those countries that aren't as economically strong as the UK reap the benefits of the money/grants from the E.U, to improve their infrastructure - so those countries can become more economically independent and then maybe just maybe, all those scroungers/cheap labour wouldn't be "tekkin our jerbs!".

This is exactly right. I've seen it happen first hand over the last 2 years. Poland has the fastest growing economy in the EU (IIRC) because of the help they get. 

People in the UK just see poles coming over here and 'taking our jobs' and not the fantastic impact the EU's cash has on the country as a whole. 

[Awol]

11 minutes ago, blandy said:

Indeed you have. One of the best bits of the joke is that Cameron promised it because he wanted to shut up the little Englanders on the tory right and to head off the UKIPs from taking tory votes and splitting the tory party.

It's fun watching the tories absolutely slagging each other off and complaining about the tactics being used. It's like "even you've noticed that you're in a political party that mainly consists of odious, lying, cheating, words removed"

FWIW this is one of the best prospects about Brexit, imo. We've debated to death on here about the party system at Westminster (or at least the parties themselves) not being fit for purpose. 

If we leave (inshallah) it seems we could get a total realignment of the domestic political scene, not over night, but still pretty quickly.

All the Kings horses and men won't put the Tories back together after this, and I think forming a gov of national unity would be appropriate out to the 2020 election. There will be lots to do in a practical sense, but the referendum itself has let the reform genie out of the bottle and at civil society level people may well start to ask how exactly we want to use the powers we get back, once we have them again.

As discussed the political elements of the Remain and Leave campaigns have shown themselves to be utterly cynical shits. I think it's opening many eyes to quite how dysfunctional things currently are. If we do leave, there's a good chance something really quite good could come out of it. 

[Fairy In Boots]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

So you want people to vote Leave in order to get a better deal and actually Remain?

No offence but I think I can spot a few flaws with this wheeze. 

No I want out completely for good personally.

But if we vote out but do end up taking a deal and remaining after the 2 year notice our leaving should ensure we've got a better deal from the EU at the very least. It's negotiations 101 start aggressive  and settle somewhere lower down the scale that works for both. June 24th we inform the EU we intend to leave and tender our resignation, then they offer us more and if it's good enough we stay. We vote remain they'll not care and take us for granted.