View Poll Results: How will you vote in the EU referendum?
Voters: 255. You may not vote on this poll
EU Referendum
20 February 2016, 11:59 PM
#31
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2015
Location: milk n beans
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Out for me too - it's actually how this has all 'panned out' that has made my mind up!
Long quote from Michael Gove press release (if you haven't seen already) - which I think has some excellent points:
Statement from Michael Gove MP, Secretary of State for Justice, on the EU Referendum
Immediate release, 20 February 2016
For weeks now I have been wrestling with the most difficult decision of my political life. But taking difficult decisions is what politicians are paid to do. No-one is forced to stand for Parliament, no-one is compelled to become a minister. If you take on those roles, which are great privileges, you also take on big responsibilities.
I was encouraged to stand for Parliament by David Cameron and he has given me the opportunity to serve in what I believe is a great, reforming Government. I think he is an outstanding Prime Minister. There is, as far as I can see, only one significant issue on which we have differed.
And that is the future of the UK in the European Union.
It pains me to have to disagree with the Prime Minister on any issue. My instinct is to support him through good times and bad.
But I cannot duck the choice which the Prime Minister has given every one of us. In a few months time we will all have the opportunity to decide whether Britain should stay in the European Union or leave. I believe our country would be freer, fairer and better off outside the EU. And if, at this moment of decision, I didn’t say what I believe I would not be true to my convictions or my country.
I don’t want to take anything away from the Prime Minister’s dedicated efforts to get a better deal for Britain. He has negotiated with courage and tenacity. But I think Britain would be stronger outside the EU.
My starting point is simple. I believe that the decisions which govern all our lives, the laws we must all obey and the taxes we must all pay should be decided by people we choose and who we can throw out if we want change. If power is to be used wisely, if we are to avoid corruption and complacency in high office, then the public must have the right to change laws and Governments at election time.
But our membership of the European Union prevents us being able to change huge swathes of law and stops us being able to choose who makes critical decisions which affect all our lives. Laws which govern citizens in this country are decided by politicians from other nations who we never elected and can’t throw out. We can take out our anger on elected representatives in Westminster but whoever is in Government in London cannot remove or reduce VAT, cannot support a steel plant through troubled times, cannot build the houses we need where they’re needed and cannot deport all the individuals who shouldn’t be in this country. I believe that needs to change. And I believe that both the lessons of our past and the shape of the future make the case for change compelling.
The ability to choose who governs us, and the freedom to change laws we do not like, were secured for us in the past by radicals and liberals who took power from unaccountable elites and placed it in the hands of the people. As a result of their efforts we developed, and exported to nations like the US, India, Canada and Australia a system of democratic self-government which has brought prosperity and peace to millions.
Our democracy stood the test of time. We showed the world what a free people could achieve if they were allowed to govern themselves.
In Britain we established trial by jury in the modern world, we set up the first free parliament, we ensured no-one could be arbitrarily detained at the behest of the Government, we forced our rulers to recognise they ruled by consent not by right, we led the world in abolishing slavery, we established free education for all, national insurance, the National Health Service and a national broadcaster respected across the world.
By way of contrast, the European Union, despite the undoubted idealism of its founders and the good intentions of so many leaders, has proved a failure on so many fronts. The euro has created economic misery for Europe’s poorest people. European Union regulation has entrenched mass unemployment. EU immigration policies have encouraged people traffickers and brought desperate refugee camps to our borders.
Far from providing security in an uncertain world, the EU’s policies have become a source of instability and insecurity. Razor wire once more criss-crosses the continent, historic tensions between nations such as Greece and Germany have resurfaced in ugly ways and the EU is proving incapable of dealing with the current crises in Libya and Syria. The former head of Interpol says the EU’s internal borders policy is “like hanging a sign welcoming terrorists to Europe” and Scandinavian nations which once prided themselves on their openness are now turning in on themselves. All of these factors, combined with popular anger at the lack of political accountability, has encouraged extremism, to the extent that far-right parties are stronger across the continent than at any time since the 1930s.
The EU is an institution rooted in the past and is proving incapable of reforming to meet the big technological, demographic and economic challenges of our time. It was developed in the 1950s and 1960s and like other institutions which seemed modern then, from tower blocks to telexes, it is now hopelessly out of date. The EU tries to standardise and regulate rather than encourage diversity and innovation. It is an analogue union in a digital age.
The EU is built to keep power and control with the elites rather than the people. Even though we are outside the euro we are still subject to an unelected EU commission which is generating new laws every day and an unaccountable European Court in Luxembourg which is extending its reach every week, increasingly using the Charter of Fundamental Rights which in many ways gives the EU more power and reach than ever before. This growing EU bureaucracy holds us back in every area. EU rules dictate everything from the maximum size of containers in which olive oil may be sold (five litres) to the distance houses have to be from heathland to prevent cats chasing birds (five kilometres).
Individually these rules may be comical. Collectively, and there are tens of thousands of them, they are inimical to creativity, growth and progress. Rules like the EU clinical trials directive have slowed down the creation of new drugs to cure terrible diseases and ECJ judgements on data protection issues hobble the growth of internet companies. As a minister I’ve seen hundreds of new EU rules cross my desk, none of which were requested by the UK Parliament, none of which I or any other British politician could alter in any way and none of which made us freer, richer or fairer.
It is hard to overstate the degree to which the EU is a constraint on ministers' ability to do the things they were elected to do, or to use their judgment about the right course of action for the people of this country. I have long had concerns about our membership of the EU but the experience of Government has only deepened my conviction that we need change. Every single day, every single minister is told: 'Yes Minister, I understand, but I'm afraid that's against EU rules'. I know it. My colleagues in government know it. And the British people ought to know it too: your government is not, ultimately, in control in hundreds of areas that matter.
But by leaving the EU we can take control. Indeed we can show the rest of Europe the way to flourish. Instead of grumbling and complaining about the things we can’t change and growing resentful and bitter, we can shape an optimistic, forward-looking and genuinely internationalist alternative to the path the EU is going down. We can show leadership. Like the Americans who declared their independence and never looked back, we can become an exemplar of what an inclusive, open and innovative democracy can achieve.
We can take back the billions we give to the EU, the money which is squandered on grand parliamentary buildings and bureaucratic follies, and invest it in science and technology, schools and apprenticeships. We can get rid of the regulations which big business uses to crush competition and instead support new start-up businesses and creative talent. We can forge trade deals and partnerships with nations across the globe, helping developing countries to grow and benefiting from faster and better access to new markets.
We are the world’s fifth largest economy, with the best armed forces of any nation, more Nobel Prizes than any European country and more world-leading universities than any European country. Our economy is more dynamic than the Eurozone, we have the most attractive capital city on the globe, the greatest “soft power” and global influence of any state and a leadership role in NATO and the UN. Are we really too small, too weak and too powerless to make a success of self-rule? On the contrary, the reason the EU’s bureaucrats oppose us leaving is they fear that our success outside will only underline the scale of their failure.
This chance may never come again in our lifetimes, which is why I will be true to my principles and take the opportunity this referendum provides to leave an EU mired in the past and embrace a better future.
ENDS
Long quote from Michael Gove press release (if you haven't seen already) - which I think has some excellent points:
Statement from Michael Gove MP, Secretary of State for Justice, on the EU Referendum
Immediate release, 20 February 2016
For weeks now I have been wrestling with the most difficult decision of my political life. But taking difficult decisions is what politicians are paid to do. No-one is forced to stand for Parliament, no-one is compelled to become a minister. If you take on those roles, which are great privileges, you also take on big responsibilities.
I was encouraged to stand for Parliament by David Cameron and he has given me the opportunity to serve in what I believe is a great, reforming Government. I think he is an outstanding Prime Minister. There is, as far as I can see, only one significant issue on which we have differed.
And that is the future of the UK in the European Union.
It pains me to have to disagree with the Prime Minister on any issue. My instinct is to support him through good times and bad.
But I cannot duck the choice which the Prime Minister has given every one of us. In a few months time we will all have the opportunity to decide whether Britain should stay in the European Union or leave. I believe our country would be freer, fairer and better off outside the EU. And if, at this moment of decision, I didn’t say what I believe I would not be true to my convictions or my country.
I don’t want to take anything away from the Prime Minister’s dedicated efforts to get a better deal for Britain. He has negotiated with courage and tenacity. But I think Britain would be stronger outside the EU.
My starting point is simple. I believe that the decisions which govern all our lives, the laws we must all obey and the taxes we must all pay should be decided by people we choose and who we can throw out if we want change. If power is to be used wisely, if we are to avoid corruption and complacency in high office, then the public must have the right to change laws and Governments at election time.
But our membership of the European Union prevents us being able to change huge swathes of law and stops us being able to choose who makes critical decisions which affect all our lives. Laws which govern citizens in this country are decided by politicians from other nations who we never elected and can’t throw out. We can take out our anger on elected representatives in Westminster but whoever is in Government in London cannot remove or reduce VAT, cannot support a steel plant through troubled times, cannot build the houses we need where they’re needed and cannot deport all the individuals who shouldn’t be in this country. I believe that needs to change. And I believe that both the lessons of our past and the shape of the future make the case for change compelling.
The ability to choose who governs us, and the freedom to change laws we do not like, were secured for us in the past by radicals and liberals who took power from unaccountable elites and placed it in the hands of the people. As a result of their efforts we developed, and exported to nations like the US, India, Canada and Australia a system of democratic self-government which has brought prosperity and peace to millions.
Our democracy stood the test of time. We showed the world what a free people could achieve if they were allowed to govern themselves.
In Britain we established trial by jury in the modern world, we set up the first free parliament, we ensured no-one could be arbitrarily detained at the behest of the Government, we forced our rulers to recognise they ruled by consent not by right, we led the world in abolishing slavery, we established free education for all, national insurance, the National Health Service and a national broadcaster respected across the world.
By way of contrast, the European Union, despite the undoubted idealism of its founders and the good intentions of so many leaders, has proved a failure on so many fronts. The euro has created economic misery for Europe’s poorest people. European Union regulation has entrenched mass unemployment. EU immigration policies have encouraged people traffickers and brought desperate refugee camps to our borders.
Far from providing security in an uncertain world, the EU’s policies have become a source of instability and insecurity. Razor wire once more criss-crosses the continent, historic tensions between nations such as Greece and Germany have resurfaced in ugly ways and the EU is proving incapable of dealing with the current crises in Libya and Syria. The former head of Interpol says the EU’s internal borders policy is “like hanging a sign welcoming terrorists to Europe” and Scandinavian nations which once prided themselves on their openness are now turning in on themselves. All of these factors, combined with popular anger at the lack of political accountability, has encouraged extremism, to the extent that far-right parties are stronger across the continent than at any time since the 1930s.
The EU is an institution rooted in the past and is proving incapable of reforming to meet the big technological, demographic and economic challenges of our time. It was developed in the 1950s and 1960s and like other institutions which seemed modern then, from tower blocks to telexes, it is now hopelessly out of date. The EU tries to standardise and regulate rather than encourage diversity and innovation. It is an analogue union in a digital age.
The EU is built to keep power and control with the elites rather than the people. Even though we are outside the euro we are still subject to an unelected EU commission which is generating new laws every day and an unaccountable European Court in Luxembourg which is extending its reach every week, increasingly using the Charter of Fundamental Rights which in many ways gives the EU more power and reach than ever before. This growing EU bureaucracy holds us back in every area. EU rules dictate everything from the maximum size of containers in which olive oil may be sold (five litres) to the distance houses have to be from heathland to prevent cats chasing birds (five kilometres).
Individually these rules may be comical. Collectively, and there are tens of thousands of them, they are inimical to creativity, growth and progress. Rules like the EU clinical trials directive have slowed down the creation of new drugs to cure terrible diseases and ECJ judgements on data protection issues hobble the growth of internet companies. As a minister I’ve seen hundreds of new EU rules cross my desk, none of which were requested by the UK Parliament, none of which I or any other British politician could alter in any way and none of which made us freer, richer or fairer.
It is hard to overstate the degree to which the EU is a constraint on ministers' ability to do the things they were elected to do, or to use their judgment about the right course of action for the people of this country. I have long had concerns about our membership of the EU but the experience of Government has only deepened my conviction that we need change. Every single day, every single minister is told: 'Yes Minister, I understand, but I'm afraid that's against EU rules'. I know it. My colleagues in government know it. And the British people ought to know it too: your government is not, ultimately, in control in hundreds of areas that matter.
But by leaving the EU we can take control. Indeed we can show the rest of Europe the way to flourish. Instead of grumbling and complaining about the things we can’t change and growing resentful and bitter, we can shape an optimistic, forward-looking and genuinely internationalist alternative to the path the EU is going down. We can show leadership. Like the Americans who declared their independence and never looked back, we can become an exemplar of what an inclusive, open and innovative democracy can achieve.
We can take back the billions we give to the EU, the money which is squandered on grand parliamentary buildings and bureaucratic follies, and invest it in science and technology, schools and apprenticeships. We can get rid of the regulations which big business uses to crush competition and instead support new start-up businesses and creative talent. We can forge trade deals and partnerships with nations across the globe, helping developing countries to grow and benefiting from faster and better access to new markets.
We are the world’s fifth largest economy, with the best armed forces of any nation, more Nobel Prizes than any European country and more world-leading universities than any European country. Our economy is more dynamic than the Eurozone, we have the most attractive capital city on the globe, the greatest “soft power” and global influence of any state and a leadership role in NATO and the UN. Are we really too small, too weak and too powerless to make a success of self-rule? On the contrary, the reason the EU’s bureaucrats oppose us leaving is they fear that our success outside will only underline the scale of their failure.
This chance may never come again in our lifetimes, which is why I will be true to my principles and take the opportunity this referendum provides to leave an EU mired in the past and embrace a better future.
ENDS
21 February 2016, 12:11 AM
#32
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
21 February 2016, 12:40 AM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is one of the few things which seems to be agreed upon by people of various political persuasions in my office, everyone seems to want out (although I think the lefties are more likely to lap up the pro-EU rubbish that the BBC etc will spout, and may have their minds changed).
Camerons 'deal' essentially just slows down the effective handover of power and sovereignty to the EU, joining the euro currency and so on would become almost inevitable in the future. There won't be another vote further down the road, it's now or never.
There are still some points worth noting though. Firstly if the 'out' vote won would the EU kick off and try and force the UK to stay, or take legal action against it (a bit like when the Greeks national vote was overturned by the EU in 2015 as they didn't like the outcome, so overturned it)
The second is, is the EU likely to survive anyway? It's an absolute mess with very slow growth, staggering levels of debt, being flooded with migrations and doesn't seem to know how to handle the situation and citizens all over the EU are increasingly turning to nationalist/anti-EU parties.
The only country that really benefits from being in the EU is Germany. If they were still using the Deutschmark their currency would be extremely strong, and this would limit exports massively. As they're in the euro which is weakened by the weaker economies it means they have a strong export market. On the flip side its a disaster for Southern European countries like Greece, Portugal, Spain who have to deal with a currency which is much too strong, so their economies have been devastated, but hey Germany basically runs the EU so that's how they'll continue.
Camerons 'deal' essentially just slows down the effective handover of power and sovereignty to the EU, joining the euro currency and so on would become almost inevitable in the future. There won't be another vote further down the road, it's now or never.
There are still some points worth noting though. Firstly if the 'out' vote won would the EU kick off and try and force the UK to stay, or take legal action against it (a bit like when the Greeks national vote was overturned by the EU in 2015 as they didn't like the outcome, so overturned it)
The second is, is the EU likely to survive anyway? It's an absolute mess with very slow growth, staggering levels of debt, being flooded with migrations and doesn't seem to know how to handle the situation and citizens all over the EU are increasingly turning to nationalist/anti-EU parties.
The only country that really benefits from being in the EU is Germany. If they were still using the Deutschmark their currency would be extremely strong, and this would limit exports massively. As they're in the euro which is weakened by the weaker economies it means they have a strong export market. On the flip side its a disaster for Southern European countries like Greece, Portugal, Spain who have to deal with a currency which is much too strong, so their economies have been devastated, but hey Germany basically runs the EU so that's how they'll continue.
I'm going to take issue with most of this..
Firstly the Euro: the PM has just signed a deal that essentially states that the UK will 'never' join the Euro. Now in itself that's a daft piece of political grandstanding (like most of the so called renegotiating), who knows what's going to happen years and decades down the road? It might well turn out at some point absolutely the right thing to do. Things change, and always will. What is a certainty though is that the only way the UK could ever join the Euro is with the consent of the British people. So to say that a yes vote will lead to us inevitably joining the single currency is completely untrue.
The EU couldn't 'force' the UK to stay, that's just some noddy ill thought out nonsense.
The EU is a mess: undoubtedly yes at the moment, but things change, economies recover, they nearly always do. The EU will survive, there isn't anyone serious saying it won't.
If Germany was the only country that benefited from being part of the EU, then it wouldn't only be the UK having a referendum.
Your point about relative currency strength is of course true...BUT THINGS CHANGE!!
Last edited by Martin2005; 21 February 2016 at 01:03 AM.
21 February 2016, 12:42 AM
#35
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
21 February 2016, 12:43 AM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole future of the country hinges on this decision. Do we regain our status as a sovereign nation, or do we become a province of the EU? Do we roll over and accept a group of foreigners making our laws for us, or do we make our laws to suit us? Do we hand over to the next generation the power of their own destiny or do we shamefully say we gave it away in our time? Do we squander the sacrifices of our fathers or do we honour them? Do we stand up and be counted for freedom or do you go quietly into the night with your tail between your legs?
Do we vote to save or destroy the UK as a nation?
OF COURSE IT BLOODY MATTERS!
Do we vote to save or destroy the UK as a nation?
OF COURSE IT BLOODY MATTERS!
'Foreigners'... you can take the boy out of UKIP...
21 February 2016, 12:46 AM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Err collectively but certainly not relatively
51% of our exports are to the EU, about 15% of the EU's exports are to the UK.
We have far far more to lose overall.
21 February 2016, 12:47 AM
#38
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No we joined political Union
No, France and Germany have more say. Its based on populations. Please at least make the effort to show you know what you're talking about
No, France and Germany have more say. Its based on populations. Please at least make the effort to show you know what you're talking about
Last edited by warrenm2; 21 February 2016 at 12:54 AM.
21 February 2016, 12:49 AM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=ALi-B;11799311]I'm currently OUT!
BUT...
Do I trust the competence of UK politicians in re-establishing the UK back as a fully independent country on economics, law, social/welfare and migration?
NO!
You just know that when it comes to negotiating a trade deal we will get the s**ty end of the stick.
Of course with the right people in power with the knowledge and ability to articulate our needs, we could be so much better...in or out of the EU. Sadly that will never be; Someone who is good at this wouldn't be stupid enough to be a politician. I mean many countrys cherry pick the EUs rules and regs to suit them and ignoring them when it doesn't with little or no consequence - why can't we instead of following every rule to the letter?[/QUOTE]
You must have many examples of this...?
BUT...
Do I trust the competence of UK politicians in re-establishing the UK back as a fully independent country on economics, law, social/welfare and migration?
NO!
You just know that when it comes to negotiating a trade deal we will get the s**ty end of the stick.
Of course with the right people in power with the knowledge and ability to articulate our needs, we could be so much better...in or out of the EU. Sadly that will never be; Someone who is good at this wouldn't be stupid enough to be a politician. I mean many countrys cherry pick the EUs rules and regs to suit them and ignoring them when it doesn't with little or no consequence - why can't we instead of following every rule to the letter?[/QUOTE]
You must have many examples of this...?
21 February 2016, 12:53 AM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How much more 'say' does France have?
The population argument is a good reason stay in then isn't it as the UK is predicted to have the largest population in the EU by 2050?
21 February 2016, 01:08 AM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If he truly believed in the will of the British people and democracy then he wouldn't support our preposterous electoral system, a system that inevitably hands power to a party that the majority of people didn't vote for!
So I'm afraid it's difficult to take his views on this seriously
Last edited by Martin2005; 21 February 2016 at 01:10 AM.
21 February 2016, 08:30 AM
#46
Scooby Regular
When/if Turkey get in they'll have the biggest population (by 2050), and most of their country isn't even in Europe! heck most of it is bordering Syria and Iraq!
21 February 2016, 09:08 AM
#47
Scooby Regular
21 February 2016, 09:52 AM
#48
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Scoobynet
Posts: 5,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm going to take issue with most of this..
Firstly the Euro: the PM has just signed a deal that essentially states that the UK will 'never' join the Euro. Now in itself that's a daft piece of political grandstanding (like most of the so called renegotiating), who knows what's going to happen years and decades down the road? It might well turn out at some point absolutely the right thing to do. Things change, and always will. What is a certainty though is that the only way the UK could ever join the Euro is with the consent of the British people. So to say that a yes vote will lead to us inevitably joining the single currency is completely untrue.
The EU couldn't 'force' the UK to stay, that's just some noddy ill thought out nonsense.
The EU is a mess: undoubtedly yes at the moment, but things change, economies recover, they nearly always do. The EU will survive, there isn't anyone serious saying it won't.
If Germany was the only country that benefited from being part of the EU, then it wouldn't only be the UK having a referendum.
Your point about relative currency strength is of course true...BUT THINGS CHANGE!!
Firstly the Euro: the PM has just signed a deal that essentially states that the UK will 'never' join the Euro. Now in itself that's a daft piece of political grandstanding (like most of the so called renegotiating), who knows what's going to happen years and decades down the road? It might well turn out at some point absolutely the right thing to do. Things change, and always will. What is a certainty though is that the only way the UK could ever join the Euro is with the consent of the British people. So to say that a yes vote will lead to us inevitably joining the single currency is completely untrue.
The EU couldn't 'force' the UK to stay, that's just some noddy ill thought out nonsense.
The EU is a mess: undoubtedly yes at the moment, but things change, economies recover, they nearly always do. The EU will survive, there isn't anyone serious saying it won't.
If Germany was the only country that benefited from being part of the EU, then it wouldn't only be the UK having a referendum.
Your point about relative currency strength is of course true...BUT THINGS CHANGE!!
Not really reason enough to stay in my opinion. Look how hard it is for Cameron to try and get them to act on things that are in the UK's best interest, even with the threat of BREXIT on the back burner the EU bureaucrats are stubborn as hell.
Do you think agreeing to stay in the EU will make our negotiating position stronger?! Of course it won't, our government will have EVEN LESS weight to influence things.
Sir Robert Walpole would be turning in his grave if he knew Britons would, in a mere 300 years from when he become effectively the first British Prime Minister, be potentially handing over the reigns of high government to some unelected EU bureaucrats with a short, and mostly dire, track record. It's just unbelievable.
21 February 2016, 09:55 AM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Berks
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is that not the same argument used for getting out?
Last edited by neil-h; 21 February 2016 at 09:57 AM.
21 February 2016, 10:00 AM
#50
Scooby Regular
21 February 2016, 10:08 AM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Scoobynet
Posts: 5,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
21 February 2016, 10:08 AM
#52
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Berks
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course it can. 
The worlds changed considerably since then though.
The worlds changed considerably since then though.
21 February 2016, 10:15 AM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Scoobynet
Posts: 5,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
21 February 2016, 10:32 AM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Berks
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You simply won't get that under the current voting system. You'll end up with a government doing what's best for the party in power at the time. The real debate should be about electoral reform but apparently In/Out is more important.
21 February 2016, 10:38 AM
#56
Scooby Regular
Globalisation and the international cross border nature of capital has reduced the "sovereignty" of national governments, and limited their ability to control events
I can't help feeling that the focus on that single argument is a bit of a red herring
I can't help feeling that the focus on that single argument is a bit of a red herring
21 February 2016, 10:42 AM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Scoobynet
Posts: 5,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again, I totally agree with you on that, the voting system needs an overhaul - it's crazy that one party can receive 20% of the vote yet get no seats and so on, but would I take the current system over handing high level government to Brussels?! Every time.
21 February 2016, 10:48 AM
#58
No
Get out of the EU
We give 55 million quid a day
We get half back
After the floods I asked the question to the Nw EU MP at a packed public meeting
Is there money Availabke from the EU to build state of the art defences against future flooding for Cumbria ?
She said YES
Loads available
Money is available as it's a disaster
All Cameron has to do it ask and it will Given but must be within 12 weeks of the floods
Our Tory mp said
We could not apply as its too bureaucratic
Cameron then gives 2million quid for advertising that Cumbria is open for Buisness after visiting the floods
That's why I'm campaigning hard in Carlisle at the local elections and getting everyone in Carlisle to vote to leave the EU
Our last survey was 80% to leave the EU
What point is there in giving money when we can't get it back
Also the UK is full up
Get out of the EU
We give 55 million quid a day
We get half back
After the floods I asked the question to the Nw EU MP at a packed public meeting
Is there money Availabke from the EU to build state of the art defences against future flooding for Cumbria ?
She said YES
Loads available
Money is available as it's a disaster
All Cameron has to do it ask and it will Given but must be within 12 weeks of the floods
Our Tory mp said
We could not apply as its too bureaucratic
Cameron then gives 2million quid for advertising that Cumbria is open for Buisness after visiting the floods
That's why I'm campaigning hard in Carlisle at the local elections and getting everyone in Carlisle to vote to leave the EU
Our last survey was 80% to leave the EU
What point is there in giving money when we can't get it back
Also the UK is full up
Last edited by lordharding; 21 February 2016 at 10:51 AM.
21 February 2016, 10:49 AM
#59
Starting with some up-to-date figures then:
UK Overseas Trade 2015
Total non-EU exports: £17.1 billion
Total non-EU imports: £14.0 billion
Total EU exports: £10.4 billion
Total EU imports: £17.0 bilion
(source: https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statisti...n-EU_Data.aspx)
To save you doing the maths, this breaks down to trade with the EU accounting for 37.8% of our exports, and 54.8% of our imports.
Just for comparison, Switzerland's trade with the EU makes up 62% and 79% of their exports and imports respectively, which happens to be an exactly identical gap of 17% between the two as ours. Poor old Swiss, they must be in an utter panic
21 February 2016, 11:19 AM
#60
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Berks
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No
Get out of the EU
We give 55 million quid a day
We get half back
After the floods I asked the question to the Nw EU MP at a packed public meeting
Is there money Availabke from the EU to build state of the art defences against future flooding for Cumbria ?
She said YES
Loads available
Money is available as it's a disaster
All Cameron has to do it ask and it will Given but must be within 12 weeks of the floods
Our Tory mp said
We could not apply as its too bureaucratic
Cameron then gives 2million quid for advertising that Cumbria is open for Buisness after visiting the floods
That's why I'm campaigning hard in Carlisle at the local elections and getting everyone in Carlisle to vote to leave the EU
Our last survey was 80% to leave the EU
What point is there in giving money when we can't get it back
Also the UK is full up
Get out of the EU
We give 55 million quid a day
We get half back
After the floods I asked the question to the Nw EU MP at a packed public meeting
Is there money Availabke from the EU to build state of the art defences against future flooding for Cumbria ?
She said YES
Loads available
Money is available as it's a disaster
All Cameron has to do it ask and it will Given but must be within 12 weeks of the floods
Our Tory mp said
We could not apply as its too bureaucratic
Cameron then gives 2million quid for advertising that Cumbria is open for Buisness after visiting the floods
That's why I'm campaigning hard in Carlisle at the local elections and getting everyone in Carlisle to vote to leave the EU
Our last survey was 80% to leave the EU
What point is there in giving money when we can't get it back
Also the UK is full up