Off Topic Political Debate

I expect the UK, similar to the Scottish referendum will vote to keep the status quo due to the fear factor. I hope our teachers have greater intelligence than that for a reason to vote.

 

When it comes down to biting the bullet, people do not vote for the rabble rousers like Farage and Le Pen as shown when they stood for election.

I think Hollande lost.

 

Both of these politicians had a substantial numbers of votes. If Cologne had his way with PR they would have quite a voice in their respective parliaments.

The latest poll suggests the 'out' are leading, need to wait for poll after details of agreement released.

If the parliaments of the other members attempt to water down this meagre deal it will encourage the undecided to support the outers.

 

We will vote to come out I think - and it will be a disaster in my opinion. I fully respect the view of those who say the stayers only have fear on their side but would respectfully suggest that they only have utopia on theirs.

And in terms of misinformation, whilst Superhorns rightfully states HSBC said they will remain in London he neglects to say that 1000 jobs would move to Paris.

I just hope both sides will engage in open and honest debate and lay out the arguments transparently - but I do also hope my £125,000 lucky 15 for Cheltenham comes in . Both have a similar chance...

 

If you're right Dan, then we will be having a referendum in Jersey as to whether we enter the EU. I imagine that talks will have already taken place between the politicians here and those in the EU. What may be decisive here is whether the Portuguese (Madeiran, mostly) community actually vote as most of them don't in the usual elections

 

HSBC considered moving back to Hong Kong or America but cited the reasons for staying in London as deep talent pool, experience in handling complex international affairs, and a respected regulatory framework and legal system. Hundreds of thousands of French nationals work in London, it is where the action is.

 

Been an interesting read of the French news and comments this morning. A common theme was"" if only we had a leader like Cameron".

 

Challenge to those who propose out.

Show me the economic argument please.......

The immigration argument is populist hype and there is pretty much zero evidence that any form of immigration has negatively affected our economy. Most people would only know a European accent by their accent which one generation in will be assimilated. (Unless people are alluding to people of colour or religion... )

 

Free trade, joined up markets, joint ventures, agreed standards on pollution and many other things, joined up police and defence networks, freedom of movement and employment, stronger human rights laws...... better hospital and dental treatment in some countries than the UK accessible under the EC

 

OK Yorkie, thanks for that. Let me respond to some of them in turn:-
Defence
There is no evidence of facts that back up a claim that we have better defence networks by being part of the EU. In fact it is likely that if the unelected leaders of the EYU have their way and we have a EU Army, it is likely that our defence would be weakened as we will have to wait for decisions from Brussels (or wherever this Army will be based) before we could act and it's possible that decisions are made that are not in the best interests of our country. Historically there is little to show that this would ever be successful - for instance the abject failure in Bosnia of some of the EU armies to keep the peace and to stop genocide, for instance France pulling out of Nato. For years the EU could not even agree as to what size bullets should be used!
Being forced to join and fund a EU Army would mean we would have to reduce our own armed forces and that is far more risky.
Security
As seen in Europe the freedom of movement has also meant the freedom for terrorists to travel and smuggle their arms and bombs. As an Island we have been able to limit this especially with the improved security measures with air travel. However we still have the ports where because of the freedom of movement and vehicles are crossing we are exposed. With the rush for further expansion and countries like Turkey and Bosnia joining, it will add millions to those who have freedom of movement and just adds to our security risk. Leaving the EU would mean we can add more controls to the ports and add similar measure to what are in place for air travel.
Free Trade, Joined Up Markets, Joint Ventures (?)
If Britain left the EU, there is no reason why this cannot be negotiated and established. In fact with a massive imbalance in trade, it's very much in the interest of EU producers to push for such agreements. I would think Audi, BMW, Bosch, the French wine growers, Dutch flower growers, Spanish Lettuce & Tomato producers etc. etc. will be very active in pushing for trade agreements with Britain. There will be alls sorts of scare stories put out by the "In" campaign, but not one fact will emerge. What is comes down to is, who has the most to lose if trade barriers are erected?
One fact that will be interesting if it ever gets debated is that the EU economy as a whole is shrinking and it's the only major continental economy that is doing so, why should Britain (as the 5th largest economy in the world) tie itself to such a laggard?
Human Rights Laws
Britain has been a leader in establishing the rights of it's citizens for centuries. Much of the EU Human Rights legislation are based on British laws. Why is it that people in this country always think that this country is some kind of evil place that denies the rights of its people? What the issue here is that the rulings of the EU Court override those of our own courts and particularly where the ruling is based on the interpretation of Law, not the facts of the case. Many people in this country do not believe this to be correct. How can judges sitting in Strasbourg understand the culture and perception of the people of a country when considering the interpretation of a law? For example one case that will be heading the way of Strasbourg is that of one of the Rotherham rapists who is appealing the decision to remove his British citizenship and then deport him when his sentence is complete - his first appeal in this country will fail, so his appeal to ECHR will be that his rights will be at risk if he is returned to his native country. But what will those in Strasbourg know of Rotherham or just what those monsters did there - just whose rights have been abused?
Better Hospital & Dental Treatment
Not quiet sure what you mean by this. Do you mean that British citizens can get better treatment in EU countries? If so, it's a bit of a stretch. I have seen a TV programme where people have been going to France for minor op's that are being funded by the local Health provider, but these were people in Kent & the SE. I cannot see many people from Cumbria or Wales taking advantage of it. Also this may be true in France and Germany, but I doubt very much it is in Romania!
It's more of a criticism of the sorry state of our own NHS where successive governments have screwed around and made it worse.

I hope that we can carry on this debate in this tone and try and discuss facts and detail.

 

A comprehensive response. In my opinion the issues of sovereignty and border control are by far more important than the amount of benefits migrants obtain. To remain means a 'step in the dark' with ever closer union taking us further down a path that nobody has agreed to. Any apparent safeguards Cameron may boast about can be simply downgraded by the European parliament.
I'm so pleased the 'outs' have added such an influential political beast to its ranks. Go BOJO.

 

What is this fixation with border controls which you have SH. Britain controls its borders and is not a member of Schengen - what more do you want, machine guns on the border ? It already takes longer to get through British customs than any other country in Europe - including non EU. members such as Switzerland. If Britain left the EU. it would also lose the right to have border controls outside of the UK. such as in French ports and in Brussels - in other words those seeking asylum would appear on British soil as opposed to camping out in Calais. The vast majority of migrants to the UK. do not come from other EU. nations and this would continue with or without EU. membership. How can you, or anyone else, say how trade would be for the UK. outside of the EU. - and what agreements it would be in a position to negotiate. Do not over estimate the value of the UK. to the German export market either, the trade embargo with Russia hurt German industry but they still did it, and survived. Ever closer union is taking many people down a path which they do not want to go, and why ? Because for decades the electorate have been passive, have voted passively (20% or so turnout in EU. elections) have no idea of who sits with whom in the European Parliament - in short, have let the issue pass them by - and it is time to take the issue back, which cannot be done through constantly bickering from the sidelines. The EU. needs Britain as a member, but only if Britain is prepared to be a fully active member which takes on the responsibility of helping to create the 'Europe' of tomorrow on equal terms.

 

The UK does not have border control as we cannot decide as a nation on the quantity and quality of potential migrants. Any migrant refused entry would, and should, be returned to France if that was the point of embarkation. The UK cannot be responsible for Schengen members not following their own rules. France should return the migrants currently in the camps to the point of entry into Europe.

 

A master class. We have opted out of closer union and we have the power to deport anyone with a criminal record. Still, if the experts are correct when we pull out and the pound is devalued by 20% we won't get any complaint from you...

 

In what way are Schengen members not following their own rules ? Once again you are conveniently mixing general immigration up with EU. migration and further still with refugees. What percentage of those coming to Britain are either EU. citizens or refugees ? You will find that the percentage which are from other EU. countries is smaller than in any other EU. country - and Britain can decide already on the quantity and quality (whatever the latter is supposed to mean) of all non EU. migrants. EU. migration brings more into the UK. financially than it takes out. Where would the NHS. be, or care for old people, if there were no migrants from Eastern Europe ?

 

Please do elaborate with the basis for this 20% devaluation claim. It would make the UK one of the cheapest places on the planet to conduct business and would promote an incredible rate of internal growth in an already successful economy so I'd love to learn the economic basis for this claim. Would make foreign holidays less attractive though...

 

Having border controls outside of the UK has nothing to do with EU membership. It's an agreement between France & The UK and could be cancelled by either party at any time - this is just another scare story put out by the Pro EU supporters. Why have these asylum seekers not sort asylum in France? Is this not an existing agreement? If border controls were moved back to the UK, then entry for illegal immigrants would be denied and they can be returned to France. In effect we would strengthen our borders.
As you have openly admitted you have not travelled by air for years, so how do you know it takes longer to get through border control ( I assume you meant border controls rather than customs) in the UK? Or do you have some facts to back this up? In my experience this is massively variable at every airport - I have got through Heathrow in minutes and spent ages trying to get through Linate.
As you mention the EU needs Britain more than Britain needs the EU, we are a massive net contributor. Without our contributions there will be a massive shortfall in EU finances - will Turkey and Bosnia fill it?
Non EU immigration is controlled via Visa's and Work Permits - there are no controls on EU immigration.

 

I am surprised that w_y should raise the subject of an EU army. This idea died when the European Defence Community collapsed in 1954 and despite wishes by some over the last 60 years it is accepted that it is still a long way off. It would need approval by every country in the EU, so clearly could not come about while the UK was in there. Bit of a red herring there.

 

Another scare story - will be interesting to see who this expert is.