Daily Express Campaign - Get Us Out Of Europe

[VillaAndLoyal]

Yes, we should get out of Europe imo.

[thetrees]

I engaged in an impromptu public debate with a French colleague before a multi-national audience at the time that the 15 became 25, and we were aware of it becoming 27.

My argument was that it was all about the expansion of the power of individuals, that there was too much power with the major countries, particularly France and Germany, and that the EU was achieving what Hitler failed to do, a 'blitzkrieg without bullets'.

After a long debate, the Frenchman declared that with the size of Britain, Germany and France, we could join together and control everything.

Needless to say, he didn't poll any votes!

[Jon]

Haven't voted since none of the options represent my own view, but I'm roundly for the EU. It has it's downsides but I think we gain from it on the whole.

I'm with the Chindster.

[Awol]

Haven't voted since none of the options represent my own view, but I'm roundly for the EU. It has it's downsides but I think we gain from it on the whole.

I'm with the Chindster.

Fair one. Out of interest (Jon or Chindie) what in your opinion(s) do you think the UK gains from EU membership?

[drat01]

- Many companies would pull out of the UK if we were not in the EU

- Trade - EU trade does not attract the same tariffs as non-EU trade.

- Massive grants from the EU for regeneration projects around ALL of the UK not just the South East

- Policing - The police in EU member states can now use an EU arrest warrant to get suspects moved from one country to another where they will face serious charges without lengthy extradition procedures.

- EU Working Time Directive ensures that all Europeans get at least four weeks of paid holiday per year

- Airlines deemed to be unsafe are now banned from travelling into any EU country. Recently some of Pakistan's national carrier were barred because of safety fears.

- Any citizen of a European country is entitled to free medical treatment if he or she is taken ill or suffers an accident in another member state

- The introduction of the Human Rights Acts has provided a legal framework to prevent abuses of power. (so conveniently forgotten - pah!)

There are hundreds more. What you typically see from people like UKIP and their supporters are the typical scare stories. They quote figures how much things supposedly cost but then when challenged are unable to show how those figures are reached, or even if they do are quickly shown to be massively inaccurate. You get them playing the racist cards, obscene and disgusting, but they pander to those that want to hear it.

Business gains massively from being part of the EU and like it or not without that support and impetus towards business the country is completely knackered.

I've said it before but I think the biggest anti-EU group are those that believe in isolationist theories that belong to the 19th century not the 21st. Borders between countries are artificial, man made and as the world evolves with high tech, transport, trade etc, inward looking countries and more importantly the people who live there will suffer massively. Its no coincidence that some of the worlds biggest growing markets are those that now look to the rest of the world rather than building an artificial wall around themselves.

The UK as an entity cannot survive by itself now without being part of the EU. Being part of the EU is not giving up sovereignty - another UKIP and Right Wing led myth - it actually protects the infrastructure and business and ultimately the people of this set of islands we live on. There are some things that need changing, but likewise there are in all parts of the world. Our ability to access freely the largest economy in the world is massive, its no coincidence that people like the CBI while objecting to certain rules and workings are not in favour of being outside the EU.

I could say a lot more but then it would probably end up in a VT bun fight - so I have dropped my 2 cents worth in (see what I did there?) and will leave it to you lot. One thing I will say for sure though if papers like the Express and the Daily Mail are against it, then need I say more

[Awol]

- Many companies would pull out of the UK if we were not in the EU

Big statement based on what evidence, Ian?

- Trade - EU trade does not attract the same tariffs as non-EU trade.

As a net importer of EU goods – they sell more to us than we sell to them – I don’t see that as an advantage to the UK when it restricts us from making similar arrangements with non-EU countries on a bilateral basis.

- Massive grants from the EU for regeneration projects around ALL of the UK not just the South East

We put more in to the EU than we get back in terms of finance. Your argument is like saying that if you give a neighbour a tenner then he’ll give you six quid back. How is that a good deal exactly?

Policing - The police in EU member states can now use an EU arrest warrant to get suspects moved from one country to another where they will face serious charges without lengthy extradition procedures.

If a British citizen is going to be hauled before a foreign court I want that decision to go before a UK judge. Anything less means that government is failing to protect its citizens.

EU Working Time Directive ensures that all Europeans get at least four weeks of paid holiday per year

Is there some reason why this cannot be legislated for by the UK Parliament?

Airlines deemed to be unsafe are now banned from travelling into any EU country. Recently some of Pakistan's national carrier were barred because of safety fears.

So what? Are you saying we couldn’t unilaterally ban them from UK airspace if we were not in the EU?

Any citizen of a European country is entitled to free medical treatment if he or she is taken ill or suffers an accident in another member state

leading to the phenomenon of ‘health tourism’ whereby people from abroad to us the UK health service at no cost. How is that good for the British people? If you travel abroad, get insurance, simple.

The introduction of the Human Rights Acts has provided a legal framework to prevent abuses of power. (so conveniently forgotten - pah!)

Human Rights have been around in modern form since Churchill:

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

—Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) 1948.

British citizens have had similar protection since 1683 and the ‘English Bill of Rights’. Why do we suddenly need the EU to tell us we can have something we’ve had for nigh on 350 years anyway?

There are hundreds more.

Please, go on..

What you typically see from people like UKIP and their supporters are the typical scare stories. They quote figures how much things supposedly cost but then when challenged are unable to show how those figures are reached, or even if they do are quickly shown to be massively inaccurate.

Any in this thread you’d like to challenge?

You get them playing the racist cards, obscene and disgusting, but they pander to those that want to hear it.

Oh dear, if you don’t like the EU you’re a racist.. you need to better than that mate.

Business gains massively from being part of the EU and like it or not without that support and impetus towards business the country is completely knackered.

I say again, UK is a net importer from the EU and restricted in how we can deal with external (potentially net profitable) relationships. The idea that business is knackered without the EU just doesn’t stand up, look at Norway – outside the EU but trading with Europe:

Exports - partners:

UK 24.28%, Germany 13.4%, Netherlands 10.87%, France 8.55%, Sweden 5.76%, US 4.82% (2009)

Are they screwed without EU membership? What about the Swiss? Switzerland's main trading partner is the EU.

Hmmm. Maybe you’re 'scaremongering' a little, Ian?

I've said it before but I think the biggest anti-EU group are those that believe in isolationist theories that belong to the 19th century not the 21st.

On the contrary, I think we should be free to trade how we want with whoever we want, not tied into a declining demographic time bomb which we lose money by being associated with.

The UK as an entity cannot survive by itself now without being part of the EU.

Blimey, we must have fluked the last 1000 years then.

Being part of the EU is not giving up sovereignty - another UKIP and Right Wing led myth - it actually protects the infrastructure and business and ultimately the people of this set of islands we live on.

It’s not about giving up sovereignty? Really? From the Horse’s mouth

The Union’s slow but continuing progress towards a more advanced level of

integration, involving closer political and economic ties between its Member States and the

transfer of an ever-increasing share of their essential sovereignty to the supranational European

institutions, in conjunction with the EU’s declared ambition (unpopular with the public of some

Member States) to bring new members within its fold, have created new tensions or exacerbated

existing ones, testing the Member States’ commitment to the furtherance of European integration.

Oops.. If you’re not convinced then how about this:

‘By creating a Community of unlimited duration, having its own institutions, its own

personality, its own legal capacity and capacity of representation on the international

plane and, more particularly, real powers stemming from a limitation of sovereignty or

a transfer of powers from the States to Community, the Member States have limited

their sovereign rights and have thus created a body of law which binds both their

nationals and themselves … The transfer by the States from their domestic legal system

to the Community legal system of the rights and obligations arising under the Treaty

carries with it a permanent limitation of their sovereign rights’

“Right wing myth” my arse.

[Zatman]

Dont get too high hopes regarding a public vote on the matter. It will be a long scaremongering campaign leading up to the vote.

Even if you surprise them by still voting "No" it wont be considered a showstopper.

Change a word here, a comma there, let the scaremongering continue and be ready for a "new" treaty to vote for, within two years.

Yes we have experienced this in Ireland.

1st we rejected Nice treaty and were forced by Europe to have another referendum and then we rejected Lisbon and were forced again to have another referendum

[drat01]

Jon - you could be a spokesman for UKIP, sorry but I am not getting into a silly argument with you. Extreme (IMO) Right wing scare stories and propaganda from organisations like UKIP are not worthy of getting into any sort of discussion let alone a internet based argument over.

[Awol]

Jon - you could be a spokesman for UKIP, sorry but I am not getting into a silly argument with you. Extreme (IMO) Right wing scare stories and propaganda from organisations like UKIP are not worthy of getting into any sort of discussion let alone a internet based argument over.

What a cop out. You gave your points, I rebutted them with facts and the words of the European Central Bank itself and you come back with accusations about right wing stories?? Priceless. I think anyone else reading those posts with an open mind can draw their own conclusions even if you are (unsurprisingly) refusing to argue your own case in the face of the facts.

Rather than being pro or anti EU without actually thinking about why, it would be better if more people actually did the research about the EU's aims. We could at least then have a rational debate based on facts and leave ridiculous stereotypes at the door.

EDIT: In fact, Ian, please point out a single thing in my post that was "extreme" or even "right wing". I'd wager you can't because your comment is totally without foundation.

In your own time...

[Chindie]

Haven't voted since none of the options represent my own view, but I'm roundly for the EU. It has it's downsides but I think we gain from it on the whole.

I'm with the Chindster.

Fair one. Out of interest (Jon or Chindie) what in your opinion(s) do you think the UK gains from EU membership?

Can't speak for Jon obviously but from my point of view, I'll just stick with saying I'm for it, purely because of what this page has shown, it's a pointless entrenched debate.

I will say I came to my decision not solely because I'm for 'the idea of Europe' but because when I was made to really think about the EU and it's functions, I largely agreed with it and what it does. I also accept considerable amounts of it as an organisation could do with some work. But regardless I think it's a good thing at heart and something we've seen benefit from.

I'm sure the 'debate' you'll have here that's already started will be enough for one thread

[VillaAndLoyal]

- Many companies would pull out of the UK if we were not in the EU

- Trade - EU trade does not attract the same tariffs as non-EU trade.

- Massive grants from the EU for regeneration projects around ALL of the UK not just the South East

- Policing - The police in EU member states can now use an EU arrest warrant to get suspects moved from one country to another where they will face serious charges without lengthy extradition procedures.

- EU Working Time Directive ensures that all Europeans get at least four weeks of paid holiday per year

- Airlines deemed to be unsafe are now banned from travelling into any EU country. Recently some of Pakistan's national carrier were barred because of safety fears.

- Any citizen of a European country is entitled to free medical treatment if he or she is taken ill or suffers an accident in another member state

- The introduction of the Human Rights Acts has provided a legal framework to prevent abuses of power. (so conveniently forgotten - pah!)

There are hundreds more. What you typically see from people like UKIP and their supporters are the typical scare stories. They quote figures how much things supposedly cost but then when challenged are unable to show how those figures are reached, or even if they do are quickly shown to be massively inaccurate. You get them playing the racist cards, obscene and disgusting, but they pander to those that want to hear it.

Business gains massively from being part of the EU and like it or not without that support and impetus towards business the country is completely knackered.

I've said it before but I think the biggest anti-EU group are those that believe in isolationist theories that belong to the 19th century not the 21st. Borders between countries are artificial, man made and as the world evolves with high tech, transport, trade etc, inward looking countries and more importantly the people who live there will suffer massively. Its no coincidence that some of the worlds biggest growing markets are those that now look to the rest of the world rather than building an artificial wall around themselves.

The UK as an entity cannot survive by itself now without being part of the EU. Being part of the EU is not giving up sovereignty - another UKIP and Right Wing led myth - it actually protects the infrastructure and business and ultimately the people of this set of islands we live on. There are some things that need changing, but likewise there are in all parts of the world. Our ability to access freely the largest economy in the world is massive, its no coincidence that people like the CBI while objecting to certain rules and workings are not in favour of being outside the EU.

I could say a lot more but then it would probably end up in a VT bun fight - so I have dropped my 2 cents worth in (see what I did there?) and will leave it to you lot. One thing I will say for sure though if papers like the Express and the Daily Mail are against it, then need I say more

Drat, I respect your opinion, but I do find it somewhat ironic that you critisise so-called 'right-wing led myth's' and then yourself finish by attacking (in a very sarcastic manner) two papers which traditionally sit on the 'right' side of the fence. By dismissing them so freely and jovially it could be argued you are merely displaying another 'left-wing led myth' that all these papers do is talk drivel. By all means state your opinion but by making such comments it does smack of hypocrisy somewhat.

One fact you cannot deny is that British people were promised a referendum on the EU (by more than one Government) and this has never materialised. Thus meaning the country has never had any serious, in-depth debate on the subject.

So whether you are pro-EU or anti-EU the Daily Express should at the very least be applauded for opening up a serious debate on the topic. That is, after all, what democrasy is all about. For that reason I feel you should be rather less sarcastic when referring to them - there are pro's and con's for each argument, including your own.

[Jon]

Haven't voted since none of the options represent my own view, but I'm roundly for the EU. It has it's downsides but I think we gain from it on the whole.

I'm with the Chindster.

Fair one. Out of interest (Jon or Chindie) what in your opinion(s) do you think the UK gains from EU membership?

Can't speak for Jon obviously but from my point of view, I'll just stick with saying I'm for it, purely because of what this page has shown, it's a pointless entrenched debate.

I will say I came to my decision not solely because I'm for 'the idea of Europe' but because when I was made to really think about the EU and it's functions, I largely agreed with it and what it does. I also accept considerable amounts of it as an organisation could do with some work. But regardless I think it's a good thing at heart and something we've seen benefit from.

I'm sure the 'debate' you'll have here that's already started will be enough for one thread

Again, I'm with Chinders on this. Agree with everything he's just written.

Studied the EU in reasonable depth when I was at Uni for a module back in 94, so much of my knowledge is a bit dated, although the general theory and workings of it haven't changed that much in 15 years.

[tonyh29]

Blimey Ian there are so many holes in your defense anyone would think Richard Dunne put it together for you

There is NOTHING the EU can do that we cannot do for ourselves. A British commission could do exactly the same thing.

They quote figures how much things supposedly cost but then when challenged are unable to show how those figures are reached

Cough Cough

Many companies would pull out of the UK if we were not in the EU

Evidence for this ?

The UK as an entity cannot survive by itself now without being part of the EU

evidence for this

I don't know fancy quoting facts without giving evidence on how that conclusion was reached .. I'm sure there is a word for that :winkold:

[tonyh29]

purely because of what this page has shown, it's a pointless entrenched debate.

I said as much on page 1 , it's always going to be the case to a degree and why (as awol has suggested) there ought to be more open discussion about it .. it may well be the points that you "thought about" have not been considered by other people in reaching their conclusion

I , like others on this thread , can't claim to be an expert on the matter but have tried to read as much documentation from both sides on the matter before coming to my conclusion , the suggestion from some that the conclusion comes out of ignorance , or right wing brain washing is sad really because as you say it doesn't add a lot to any debate ..

I'd love to see a proper debate on the subject and maybe one day a government will actually give us that debate ....

[Chindie]

The problem with the debate you want, Tony, which you may as well just put as 'referendum' lets be honest () is the EU is an enormously complex issue and, frankly, I'm not sure the entire population would either care or care to understand it. I just barely have a handle on it's functions and organisation and that took 3 months to work out (and some of it was so complex I've forgotten it already).

For people to have an informed debate on it you'd need to educate people on it which would snowball into educating people on other concepts and theories that ultimately I doubt Joe Public gives a shit about. It's just one of those things that doesn't lend itself to referenda to make an informed decision. So to make it you simplify things and by simplifying it you slowly get into territory of white lies and full on bullshit.

It's because of this that the scaremongering (and to be honest it is the more right wing side of society that does it, and thats pretty inescapable) takes hold and you get stuff like the seeming certainty that the EU is going to become the United States of Europe, which in actuallity is not the case (or at least not the certainty many would have you believe).

[tonyh29]

Slightly OT I'm not so sure that you can put scaremongering down as more exclusive to the right tbh .. I'd argue the recent student protests are down to the "left" and those demos had large amounts of scaremongering ( as well as other factors ,some sincere) about them

Eire voted No ..and so they were "forced" to vote again , and from what I heard (i'm sure Irish Vt'ers can give a better perspective though) scaremongering helped achieved a yes vote ( of cause it's arguable the original No vote was achieved by the same method ) and case closed ..

I make it that Ireland has currently a 1-1 draw and surely there should have been a penalty shoot out or something .. Ok that doesn't make it a federal state of Europe but it hardly makes it Democracy's finest hour either

[DanishVillan]

Dont get too high hopes regarding a public vote on the matter. It will be a long scaremongering campaign leading up to the vote.

Even if you surprise them by still voting "No" it wont be considered a showstopper.

Change a word here, a comma there, let the scaremongering continue and be ready for a "new" treaty to vote for, within two years.

Yes we have experienced this in Ireland.

1st we rejected Nice treaty and were forced by Europe to have another referendum and then we rejected Lisbon and were forced again to have another referendum

In Denmark it was the Maastricht treaty in june ´92:

Yes - 49,3% and "No" - 50,7%

In may ´93 it was up again, this time including the Edinburgh agreement. ( 4 exceptions to the original treaty)

Yes - 56,7% and "No" - 43,3%. The slope could continue.

[rjw63]

Great posts lads

[Awol]

Ok that doesn't make it a federal state of Europe

Clearly it's not there yet, but what characterises a state and is the EU aiming to acquire those characteristics? If so, why?

No 1. Defence.

Check. The EU has a common defence and security policy. As the only two European countries capable of independent expeditionary warfare, the UK/French defence agreement will in time form the core of a euro military.

No 2. Governance.

Check. Despite the inherent lack of democratic accountability the EU has it's own Council and Parliament - Senate and Congress.

No 3. Legal structure.

Check. The European Court already supersedes the legal systems of EU member states.

No 4. Treasury & financial structure (setting monetary and fiscal policy).

Check. The ECB is using the financial crisis to fold into itself the function of national central banks. Greece is in, Ireland is in and more will follow. Von Rumpouy has already been floating demands that the EU be given its own tax raising powers, initially through a carbon trading scheme.

No 5. Foreign Policy.

Check. The EU diplomatic service (headed by the non-entity of Baroness Ashton) is building embassies across the world at a cost of billions with the stated aim of becoming the first port of call for any non-EU governments.

Those five key elements constitute the basic functions of a state and given that the EU's stated aim is "ever closer integration" acquiring these functions only makes sense if the ultimate goal is unification.

[Chindie]

I think thats far too simple a line of thought AWOL but fair enough.

I'll remain considerably surprised if a genuine majority push ever comes about for a truly federal European state.