Off Topic Political Debate

You should know that migrants arriving from outside of the Schengen Agreement countries should be processed at the point of entry. Greece has failed to observe this rule which has caused problems to other members. Brussels is now trying to solve its failed system by forcing Greece to process migrants. It has threatened to build a solid barrier on Greece's borders to stop migrants moving north.

The UK should have an Australian type system. Only migrants who qualify will be admitted. If the UK's government decides that there is a proven need there is no reason why the NHS should be starved of necessary labour. I would have no problem with France or Germany etc refusing to take any undesirable UK citizens.

 

I certainly think Spain should stop giving UK crooks a relative safe haven.

 

What intrigues me about this argument is that on the one hand if we vote to stay in the EU we at least know more or less precisely what our future economic political prospects are. If we vote to leave the EU, then we have to hope (not expect) that we will be able easily to negotiate a "free trade" agreement (whatever that is) with the EU and presumably similar agreements with the other massive trading blocks, N America, Pacific, China etc. etc. These agreements seem to take forever to put into place and would probably contain conditions as draconian as some think are attached to membership of the EU. The world is a vastly different place since we cut the Commonwealth countries adrift in the 70s.

....and yet it is the pro-EU argument that is being described as "scare stories". Nothing scares me more than an arrogant UK (probably eventually without Scotland) setting off into the unknown convinced that the EU (and the rest of the world) needs us more than we need them - shades of "fog in Channel, Continent isolated".

Are we certain that our comparatively successful economy is in spite of, rather than because of, the EU? Will we see a slow but steady decline in inward investment by US, Japanese and Chinese companies - regardless of the "attractiveness" of our business environment?

Remember, we are not voting on our future for the next 10 years, this is it for keeps, certainly for the next 50 years. One of the arguments for an independent Scotland was its financial strength based on "its" oil. Look how quickly that situation changed.

Or is it that the English Establishment, having thought that joining the EEC in the 70s would enhance their prosperity, is now getting cold feet that their power and influence is on the wane. Perhaps leaving the EU would simply swap "undemocratic decision making" in Brussels with "undemocratic decision making back in Whitehall".

The worrying fact is that the only way of proving whether the EU is better for the UK to belong is to leave it and see.........

 

How can decisions made by an elected British government be undemocratic?

I'm not sure why a UK government free of the shackles of Brussels would need to be arrogant in any way. We are the fifth largest economy in the world so a bit of confidence would not be unreasonable. The UK does have a head start with its flexible labour market, low corporation tax and if freed from some of the stifling and unnecessary red tape we could fly. Much of the funds currently being sent to Brussels to subsidies Eastern European countries and French farmers could be used to invest here at home.

 

How many actually believe that the British Government is truly democratic? The power of the senior Civil Service, especially the Treasury, is too great for any elected government to rule without drastic interference from them. We may be the fifth largest economy in the world but to reiterate, is this in spite of or because of our membership of the EU? We already have a flexible labour market and low corporation tax within the EU, a lot of red tape is generally there to stop companies exploiting their workforce and has been introduced over years to try to prevent unrest in the labour market (sadly ineffective in France). Much of the investment in Eastern European countries is to allow them to participate more fully over the coming years in the marketplace. The Germans know that over the long term this will be an important market for their exports and are prepared to invest, we on the other hand seem to think that they will be a drain on our resources for ever.

I do agree however with your point re French farmers. I believe that some progress is being made on the CAP which is presumably why there is straw and tyre burning on a fairly regular basis on various Autoroutes and the Champs Elysee.

 

Goldman Sachs in the Guardian. And to be fair the scare stories are on both sides.

 

As you say W_Y I do not fly - for enviromental reasons. From where I am located it is simply not necessary. Mostly when I travel to the UK. it is via the Eurostar - and in this case the British police actually do border controls in Brussels. If not I would be arriving by ship. In both cases the border controls are much more extensive, and take longer than, on the reverse trip. Do not twist my words W_Y - I did not say that the EU. needs the UK. more than the UK. needs the EU. Britain is the 3rd largest net payer into the EU. budget - important yes, but not irreplaceable.

 

Good one

All my views below:

Defence - The only way forward is in united forces or defence agreement. We dont have to be USA's no 2 policeman any more and i hazard a guess that because of our USA joint ventures we are more prone to terrorism than because of our joint EU ventures. Joint defence also can mean a joint deterrent..... saves money all round.

Security - If we are talking immigration we already have tighter controls than the mainland countries. As said elsewhere most Uk based terrorism has come from withing the UK and by UK nationals. Our European police networks are established although IMO could be be beefed up. I also favour strong border controls

Trade/economy. Why wreck agreements that favour us? The business sector seems to be split so we can argue the toss either way. We have a favoured role in Europe. Look at Hollande's views on the City for example. I for one say we are best off with the status quo on this. USA will shaft us if we put too much trust in them.

Human Rights. Hopefully that terrible man will not get his appeal. However a bill and court of human rights needs to be outside of the Govt it is evaluating as all Govts seek to stretch their positions for their own ends. UN is toothless.

Medical. The standard of medical care in France and Spain... and I imagine Germany and Holland - is far superior IMO to the UK NHS which is underfunded and overburdened. Our principle of free medical treatment is to be applauded. Our dental services are dire unless you go private or are lucky to have a good NHS dentist. As people may know i have a close friend whose grandson was born in France and has the terrible illness Friedrich's Ataxia. The treatment in France was superb. He now lives in the UK and the treatment is poor. For the first two years they had to source the medications in France that save his heart and bring them to the UK.. he still goes back once a year and sees the experts and gets the care not available in the UK.

In relation to the bureaucracy and all that goes with it i agree and it needs to be sorted and the EU has got too big for its own good.

However on balance I am will vote for IN...........

 

"Goldman Sachs is backing the Britain Stronger in Europe campaign and has made a substantial donation, believed to be a six-figure sum." not biased are they???? I've become ever more distrusting of investment institutes who are making markets rather than analysing and making sensible investments. These people/organizations (the real rulers) drive the markets the way they want them for their investments... it's a multi trillion dollar fraud but you'll never break it, its the backbone of the world and you'll find yourself 6ft under very quickly if you try....

 

It is ironic that whilst questioning the democracy of the UK parliament you are supporting the retention of one of the most undemocratic organisations in the world. The fiddling by the technocrats make FIFA officials look harmless by comparison. There is so much fraud I understand none of the yearly accounts could be signed off as remotely near the truth.

Most people, even the inners agree that changes need to be made but there is no entity within the EU that is powerful enough to challenge the hierarchy. How can the population of the EU be dragged towards political and fiscal union when it is clearly unwanted.

As a europhile I do realise an out vote may produce some inconvenience as I would like to live at least part of the year in Europe, but the question over sovereignty is reason enough to vote out. With the unstoppable march by the technocrats to drag us further away from the original 'common market' idea, uncontrollable immigration and security issues it is a no-brainer.

 

Beat me to it Aberdeen....the left now getting all luvvy with Goldmine Sucks!

But it does raise an interesting aspect that the referendum is causing and that is the joining together of parties that are normally poles apart. It was interesting to see Cameron make the dig about the Out campaign having Farage and Gorgeous George Galloway on the same platform and this was repeated several times yesterday. But on the In campaign we will see Cameron, the SNP and Comrade Corbyn on the same Platform - what a bunch of hypocrites! The SNP want devolution and the returning of all powers to Scotland, yet are happy to give much of that to Brussels! Comrade Corbyn and his motley crew of State Socialists fundamentally hate the EU and all its institutions - interesting comments from one of his chief hard-left supporters:-

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-155b-THE-EU-ANTI-SOCIALIST-AND-ANTI-DEMOCRATIC#.VsrVE03nnIX

Corbyn's focus on supporting the In campaign is to protect workers rights, that is all he will comment on, plus he is enjoying the split it is causing the Tories. But fundamentally New New Labour does not support the EU.

 

I have seen a great deal on here regarding national sovereignty. Does TTIP have anything to do with national sovereignty ? Or increased/enforced privatizations ? The latter of which strips the state of its assets and therefore also strips it of the power to act. Does national sovereignty have anything to do with jumping into bed with the yanks as second fiddle (which is the full extent of our military philosophy outside of the EU.) ? Is there anything left of the myth called `National Sovereignty`after the WTO and the World Bank have had their say, after the ratings agencies have done their worst, and even gambled on the ruin of whole nations. The only thing which can preserve anything of the crumbled ruin called `National Sovereignty' is within larger units such as the EU. which, for all of its faults, can still be called to account by its population - but this can only be done from within. Outside of the EU. the UK. would become the next state of the USA. (If the Americans are still interested - which I doubt) and where would your sovereignty be then ?

 

TTIP will happen despite the EU..one again scare stories based on no facts. Why would the UK become the next state of the US? How can that happen? Further up in this thread the In supporters were claiming that the US would "cut the strings of it's UK puppet" if we left the EU. Perhaps you should get together and get your scare stories aligned!

 

"Called to account by its population". Sorry but that is delusional. The truth is outing in my flu induced whisky medicated state... What rules the world and dictates our future is the Davos set. All the rest is smoke and mirrors. It's nice to feel that we have some sovereignty but in the scheme of things we are all but pawns in a master chess game and we choose where we slot into this. Some choose Bohemianism, others socialism, others go along with thhe flow.. It's a bit like that theoretical earth destroying meteorite, Davos set is the meteor and we are nuclear missiles we may be able to deviate the course a fraction but very doubtful. Enjoy the ride that is life... I can't decide on the EU until I've studied the pros and cons a lot more, my heart says stay my head says go my body will probably just leave the UK anyway, it's al about what can let me reach my goals in retirement if I get given that time.... Advice to the kids though is go where you can achieve your dreams....

 

The pound has seen its biggest drop in more than a year against the dollar over uncertainty about a possible British exit from the European Union.

In early trading in London, the pound fell 1.65% to $1.41670, the biggest one-day drop since January 2, 2015.

Scare story or fact?

 

This will make the UK's exports cheaper so more attractive to foreign markets. There will always be volatility in the markets due to the uncertainty, often not based on logic.

 

No contradictions here W_Y, outside the EU. the UK. would try to smooch even more to its so called big brother over the pond, like it would to the Chinese to build its nuclear power stations Whether the yanks would still be impressed by all the talk of a special relationship is another matter.

 

It will also make imports more expensive thereby potentially increasing the trade deficit.

 

Certainly is a fact OFH, but in reality there has been a decline in the value of the £ compared to the USD since December 2015 and has actually rallied slightly since mid-January. So can we say that this decline is due to uncertainty about a Brexit?
Personally I am not a happy bunny as I am off to the US in a few weeks for a short break...so will be a bit more expensive!