EU In or out

[rodp]

You can't really compare Scottish independence to brexit, two entirely different things. You have to take in to consideration the majority of folk don't want to be ruled by foreigners (and this has to be part of the equation) whereas with Scotland most English are happy to be tied to the Scottish people, it's just their numpty government we dislike.

And yep, this may have no bearing on financial outcomes at all but it affects quality of life and you can't put a price on that.

[ElvisThePelvis]

This is undoubtedly a hugely complex and enormously far reaching decision, I just hope that information is readily at hand for everyone to make an informed decision and the media and celebrities with public feuds keep out of it, this shouldn't boil down to a popularity contest.

[longspoon]

 

I've just been speaking with my neighbour who is a Latvian lorry driver and he's been here for a number of years. He's not a UK citizen and neither is his wife but his son was born here so he doesn't have a clue what will happen if we leave the EU. I'm assuming he'd carry on with a working permit but it's going to make for quite a workload sorting out who should be here and who's entitled to what.

If in doubt, turf them out !

[grrclark]

This is undoubtedly a hugely complex and enormously far reaching decision, I just hope that information is readily at hand for everyone to make an informed decision and the media and celebrities with public feuds keep out of it, this shouldn't boil down to a popularity contest.

I really fear that is exactly what we will see.

 

If anything was learned during the Scottish referendum it was that big powerful statements were made with little concession to substance and scant regard to the truth and those big powerful statements drove the debate.

 

Cameron's statement disappointingly, but unsurprisingly was also exactly that, powerful rhetoric about safety and security, but still largely vacuous.

[ElvisThePelvis]

I really fear that is exactly what we will see.

 

If anything was learned during the Scottish referendum it was that big powerful statements were made with little concession to substance and scant regard to the truth and those big powerful statements drove the debate.

 

Cameron's statement disappointingly, but unsurprisingly was also exactly that, powerful rhetoric about safety and security, but still largely vacuous.

The tricky thing for both sides will be making a clear and concise factual argument without resorting to Farage style mud flinging in a way that the general public will have the interest and patience to consume. Unfortunately many people want big statements so they don't have to think too hard before exercising their democratic right, which is equally scary. A further iteration of the mass dumbing down we are all subject to..

[old06]

Wise words from one who knows they want more of them here also one day we'll get feed up and give them a taste of justice

[Banger123]

Out but fear we will stay in!!

[MAB1954]

Out

[armsid]

out! they can,t be trusted if we vote to stay in the eu would scupper any deals dave does

[secretagentmole]

We're not propping up the Euro and neither is Sterling pegged to the Euro.

If we did not help bail out the economies that are failing, the Euro would have gone belly up a long time ago. It is handicapped and the all inclusive blanket it has tried to enforce on all the members that use it are punishing them all!

[grrclark]

If we did not help bail out the economies that are failing, the Euro would have gone belly up a long time ago. It is handicapped and the all inclusive blanket it has tried to enforce on all the members that use it are punishing them all!

We have not bailed out any Euro economies though. The only Euro country that we really had a significant contribution to directly was Ireland, but our motivations for that were different.

 

Don't confuse our contribution to the EU with the bailout of the Euro zone countries.

[rodp]

Doesn't really matter whether it's bail out or not, once the money's gone to the eu it's gone. No eu, no money sent

[FalconFN]

Doesn't really matter whether it's bail out or not, once the money's gone to the eu it's gone. No eu, no money sent

I'm afraid that isn't strictly true either. If we want to trade within the EEA, and we do, then it is highly likely that we will be required to contribute to the EU to do so. Norway contributes 2 billion, and they have a population much smaller than London, and has had to adopt an open borders policy just to be part of the EEA. Is that a win for them, or a missed opportunity?

[treetree]

I'm afraid that isn't strictly true either. If we want to trade within the EEA, and we do, then it is highly likely that we will be required to contribute to the EU to do so. Norway contributes 2 billion, and they have a population much smaller than London, and has had to adopt an open borders policy just to be part of the EEA. Is that a win for them, or a missed opportunity?

Sorry but that is not true. We are one of the world's largest economies, and probably the biggest market in the EU. There is no way that they will allow barriers to trade to be put up.

 

Who do you think buys these flash German cars, French wine, Italian suits. Yes, it's the UK.

 

The Norway argument is not relevant. Norway is a minnow who pays to play with the big boys. The EU will not want to risk losing the British market. We can leave and still trade on the same terms.

[treetree]

 

 

Don't confuse our contribution to the EU with the bailout of the Euro zone countries.

Regardless of where the money goes, it is still money wasted. We are net contributors; we pay in much more than we get back.

 

£54 million per day wasted.

[OJW]

Recently I attended a talk by an investment fund manager on the German Economy.

 

Apparently Germany have a declining workforce and in 15 years it's estimated that they will have 7million less people within the working ages. This was a reason given as to why they are more accommodating of refugees. In basic terms, the ones that escaped Syria ect are more likely to be the strongest economically as it costs money to escape, so a lot of them are doctors, engineers and other highly skilled individuals who would benefit any economy, especially one predicting a major labour shortage.

 

I can't say whether this view is well founded, only that the representative was from a huge global fund who probably looks after some most of your pensions so I'd hope he knew what he was on about. It just served to highlight how even countries within Europe who may have economies more similar to ours, may also have totally different agendas. I'm reserving my decision on In / Out, but this example just serves to highlight to me how difficult it is to have 28 totally different countries all interwoven in policy and bureaucracy.

 

I do however have faith in our current political leaders to make the right decision for the country in the long term and as a final caveat at least in terms of Real Estate Investment, the UK's membership of the EU is seen as being of high import.

[FalconFN]

Sorry but that is not true. We are one of the world's largest economies, and probably the biggest market in the EU. There is no way that they will allow barriers to trade to be put up.

 

Who do you think buys these flash German cars, French wine, Italian suits. Yes, it's the UK.

 

The Norway argument is not relevant. Norway is a minnow who pays to play with the big boys. The EU will not want to risk losing the British market. We can leave and still trade on the same terms.

Quite possibly, but I wasn't claiming to state facts, just point out that it isn't as simple as leaving = saving. As no large economy has left the EU before we are breaking new ground and therefore there are no certainties at all for the future.

 

Whatever the outcome of the vote, I'm sure the UK and EU will be working very closely together abd neither will face ruin.

[poontang]

I think Michael Gove's statement sums it all up very well.

 

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.

• 938Share on Facebook (Opens in new window)938
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to email (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)
• More

Tags: EU, Tories

[wymberley]

What I want to know is as I take shoe size 8 (British), when we leave will I be able to choose any pair identified as 8s knowing that they will fit as opposed to the undersized EU 42 supposedly equivalent currently sold as size 8?

[Danger-Mouse]

That`s an excellent statement Poontang, thanks for posting it. I particularly like "It is an analogue union in a digital age." It`s a great description of the EU.

 

A look back at many of the things that made Britain Great, and a look forward towards an optimistic future where we are in control of our own destiny once again.

 

Food for thought for those who want to stay. When an elected politician says his hands are tied by bureaucrats non of us voted for, surely it`s time to consider leaving?

[Grandalf]

We, the British, have very recently fought bloody wars trying to inject democracy to other countries. There is very little that is democratic about the EU. Unelected, and in some cases unelectable, commisioners run the whole shooting match.

Well I believe in democracy.

If it be the will of the people, we will quietly forget the whole thing and stay in. That is democacy at work.

I voted for a trading alliance not a political union. (I still would if that was on offer).

OUT, OUT, OUT.

 

Thanks for the post Poontag - Very good article.

Edited February 20, 2016 by Grandalf

[Grandalf]

I'm afraid that isn't strictly true either. If we want to trade within the EEA, and we do, then it is highly likely that we will be required to contribute to the EU to do so. Norway contributes 2 billion, and they have a population much smaller than London, and has had to adopt an open borders policy just to be part of the EEA. Is that a win for them, or a missed opportunity?

 

Our position in the world economies is very different to 'little' Norway.

Europe needs us and our trade - That is why they have made all the effort to keep us in.

Not enough though.

OUT, OUT, OUT!

[E27N_JD]

out because when nothing changes everyone will finally realize they are making a huge deal out of nothing.

[yod dropper]

I'm afraid that isn't strictly true either. If we want to trade within the EEA, and we do, then it is highly likely that we will be required to contribute to the EU to do so. Norway contributes 2 billion, and they have a population much smaller than London, and has had to adopt an open borders policy just to be part of the EEA. Is that a win for them, or a missed opportunity?

 

I'm pretty sure the Norway funding deal was all worked out on the basis that they were joining. It was then put to a referendum where the politicians wanted and expected a YES but where the people said NO but they were saddled with what had been previously agreed.

[rodp]

 

I think Michael Gove's statement sums it all up very well.

 

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.

• 938Share on Facebook (Opens in new window)938
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to email (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)
• More

Tags: EU, Tories

 

And this is a major problem. Here we have it straight from the horses mouth, from a member of our Government. What more do people need to make them vote OUT !!