Off Topic Impact of Brexit on Football

My biggest problem with leaving is I don't want to be on the same side as mad Boris!

 

He's not as stupid as he looks, far from it. What I will say is that I will never vote Tory again with Cameron or Osbourne as leader. In fact I'm sick to death of of politics right now, they're all either career politicians in it to line their own pockets a la Tony Blair and Kinnock, or down right bloody loonies like Corbyn and Livingstone !

 

Hi bors, re the cutting of red tape. On the TV this week. Minimum wage raised but workers worse off because companies (B&Q for one) have cut other benefits employees enjoyed. Where is the EU to defend the workers ?

Another point, the NHS, this was created by a Labour government just after WW2, we had a government then that the interest of the people at heart, to paraphrase Cameron, it was a leap in the dark. Labour has become what I term pink Tories and before it is said I am prejudiced I will say that when I was employed locally I was a trade union official, listening to Labour politicians nowadays they mention looking after business first and then the workers come second, more like an afterthought.

KIO mentions Blair and Kinnock. Cameron has announced that he will not be seeking re-election after this Parliament. Makes me wonder what he has in mind for his future. Surely not retirement at his age or looking after his family's trust fund. You can't vote Labour and you don't like the present Tories, now you know why I voted UKIP.

JKC mentions there are 8 independents giving their views on Brexit. Whether it is them or Osborne the answer is the same, they are guessing because no-one with a modicum of sense really knows the answer. The electorate will just have to judge if they believe what politicians say, those for IN and those for OUT. As I have mentioned before they at least now have the chance to make their own minds up.

I just happen to think it was a pity our politicians in the past could not have approached the people and got their views on joining a political union with Europe. But then that would confirm that our country is a democracy.

 

Hi bors, here is something the IN faction fail to mention.

KALININGRAD formerly Konigsberg Prussia.
Ceded to Russia after WW2. It is totally landlocked by the EU.

Railroads connect Kaliningrad to Russia though Lithuania and Belarus but importing food from Russia is not cost effective. However, Kaliningrad is surrounded by European Union-member states, so trade on the wider market is indeed possible.

So if the EU can trade with a Russian region why is there any problem trading with us if we leave the EU.

 

Bloody hell Norkie, stop talking so much sense will you

 

KIO bor, accept my apologies, also for my mistake on another thread.

 

Huh? Kaliningrad is actually having untold trading issues now that their SEZ status has been revoked.

The whole issue has even been dubbed 'Problem 2016' by the region's media. Kaliningrad is referred to even by major Russian media as a 'stagnant enclave'.

 

I've been looking around for actual, positive and impactful examples of potential 'red tape' being cut the UK leaves.

I keep seeing this argument from Brexiters, and never seeing any examples quoted.

 

JKC bor, let's deal with your first question.

Huh? Kaliningrad is actually having untold trading issues now that their SEZ status has been revoked.

Must have been revoked by the EU. Doesn't alter the fact that the EU did trade with Russia, possibly Russia's stance on the Ukraine has altered that status. It might have altered Kaliningrad's status but the EU still takes gas supplies from Russia, I cannot see the EU wanting to revoke that agreement as Russia supplies most of EU's gas, that is trading with a non EU country. Incidentally what is SEZ STATUS, please resort to the English language so we can fully understand what you are saying.

Was in our local Tesco and saw this notice : "Buy our lamb, fed on grass from Britain and New Zealand". Another non-European nation the EU trades with, if the EU can trade with New Zealand and Russia and Australia and South Africa and any other country you care to mention outside the EU there is no reason why they cannot trade with us if we leave.

Second question.
I've been looking around for actual, positive and impactful examples of potential 'red tape' being cut the UK leaves.
I keep seeing this argument from Brexiters, and never seeing any examples quoted.

If you want evidence of the removal of red tape if we leave, that is self evident.

We will not be under the control of Brussels. They create the red tape, not us. We just have to abide by their red tape. If you need evidence of that just take a look at our fishing industry as it is now and what it was before we entered the EU. There is your evidence you seek. Do you know anything about the milk quota for our country ?

I spend holidays in Tenerife, a Spanish possession. Now Spain is in the EU but Tenerife is not. The English (Fyffes) brought wealth to the Canaries by creating the banana industry. Because of EU red tape they are unable to sell their bananas to the EU because their bananas are considered too small so they export them to the Caribbean and South America where guess what, they produce bananas.

Now that is just an example of EU red tape.

 

SEZ = special economic zone.
Indeed. It shows just how easily the EU can say no to markets outside of the EU if it so wishes.

As for Russia generally, its 'diplomatic stance' of late is a massive argument in favour of a strong and cooperative EU. There's a reason Putin wants us out of the EU.



Small bananas from Tenerife eh? Blimey. That would be a significant improvement.

Don't our dairy farmers get considerable financial support from the EU? In fact, aren't a lot of our farmers campaigning for 'Remain' because they stand to lose out on subsidies?


As for fisheries, I'm pleased that the EU took action where many independent nations wouldn't when it comes to protecting fragile fish stocks.
It's a big deal for me that the EU often pays attention to environmental issues via actual legislation, when the governments of independent nations would merely pay lip-service.

 

It's propaganda time

Spoiler

please log in to view this image

Spoiler

please log in to view this image

Spoiler

please log in to view this image

 

JKC bor, what do you think our farmers got in subsidies before we entered the EU, Scotch mist ! They were subsidised during WW2. When Europe was dominated physically by the Germans. Before EU was in existence.

Fishing industries, preservation of endangered species, how come Spanish boats are doing so well in the North Sea to the detriment of our own industry. Lip service, that is a good one. Back to Kaliningrad, big deal, they take action against that region of Russia but when it comes to the crunch, oh no, mustn't annoy the Russians by boycotting their gas. If they were earnest about Russian policy in the Ukraine, they would ban Russia totally from trading in the EU.

As for Russia generally, its 'diplomatic stance' of late is a massive argument in favour of a strong and cooperative EU.

A strong and co-operative EU. Withdrawing trade with Russia, that really would make the Russians laugh. Russia alone is bigger than the EU. Withdrawing trade if it wishes, what would be the EU's reaction if Russia did just that. Just remember the EU is a political organisation, it is not just concerned with trade. It was a political decision by the Americans that made Japan declare war against them.

Tenerife bananas are very sweet but not large, obviously not up to EU measurement standards, perhaps they are not straight enough !!! Was it really necessary to ban them. Remember the joke about straight cucumbers ?

Coming back to Europe. It was recently disclosed that car manufacturers were cheating on their pollution figures, as you appear to be well informed on EU policy, can you explain to us EU doubters what action Brussels is taking against those transgressors ? We know the American government has already implemented court actions to punish the perpetrators. Oh I forgot VW is a European company and thus outside EU rules.

I notice you keep away from the one subject on the minds of the people of this country. Care to talk about immigration ?

 

I'm not naive enough to think that the UK is always benefited by EU membership. That's why I'm not 100% for staying in.
However, I believe contemporary EU membership should be about compromise and countries working together. I can't abide the attitude that the EU should make concessions for Britain just because we don't like every aspect of how it works.

You're quite right that Europe isn't in a position to fully boycott Russia in terms of fuel at the moment. If there was a blanket boycott, we'd be seeing a period of energy insecurity which could severely harm all EU members. Energy prices would be horrendous as I'm sure you're aware.
[↓ My next point addresses how a cooperative EU (with UK included) can move away from Russian energy dependency ↓ ]

Not in absolute terms it isn't. Certainly not in terms of economic size. It's GDP is tiny compared to that of a combined EU.
Furthermore, as Europe continues to move away from fossil fuels and towards renewable alternatives it will be less and less dependent on Russian gas. The EU needs to remain together in order to move away from this reliance on Russian fuel. A European power grid could be achievable at some point, giving much better energy security for the entire continent, and as such cheaper fuel for all EU citizens. I doubt that would be achievable if the EU breaks up and individual countries continue to rely on Russia's energy sources.

I'm a bit confused by your mentioning of the US and Japan here, I must admit.
I'm fully aware that the EU is, to an extent, a political organisation as well as a trading bloc.

One of the myths regarding EU red tape, you mean?

Huh? The European Parliament is currently pursuing VW in court, so I'm not sure what you mean here?

Sure. What would you like to know?
You're probably already aware that I don't view immigration as a key when compared to other aspects of EU membership.

 

JKC bor, I wouldn't bother about Russian gas, like everything else it only has a limited life, will eventually run out. I was just pointing out that the EU has to trade with others for its own good and that applies to us and them if we leave. Trade is beneficial to all, no matter what their political views are, why I am in favour of the EEC as original conceived but not with the political ties that currently shackle us. So the EU realises it needs to trade with Russia, as we need and so do they need to trade with each other. A free trade area should encompass the world not just Europe.

Cameron has said he wants to stay in the EU so we can change the way it works, a good idea, the reason why we are holding a referendum, but if we stay will we be able to change its policies. Of the current 28 states how many could we really count on to get that necessary majority to make those changes. Don't bother to answer because we know the answer already.

You say the EU is pursuing VW, why don't they announce it like the Americans do. If they are successful in getting the verdict against VW I hope they have better success against them than they did when the French broke EU rules over the sale of our beef in their country ! I will not mention those countries imposing border restrictions in breach of EU rules.

That is a typical political argument, ignore one question and concentrate on trade. What would I like to know, it is simple, your views or do you prefer to keep that view to yourself. My view is simple, we look after those already in this country born here and see to their welfare first before considering other nationals.

 

That's not very fair. I'm not ignoring anything.

I don't believe that any one resident of the UK is any more entitled to support than any other resident of the UK purely based on the lottery that is their nationality.

 

The question was fair because you failed to express your view when asked. You use the term resident, that covers people of all nationality, those here now are subject to the laws of the land and should be treated equally. But the subject I mentioned was immigration, not those currently living here.

 

If what you're asking is whether we should scrap or reduce our International Aid contribution or whether we should significantly reduce how many migrants we accept into the UK, my answer is no to both.

 

Thank you for your frank answer. You are opposed to the government's current policy of limited immigration and wish to increase the number of immigrants. Very commendable, of course you have made the necessary plans to provide the infrastructure to cater for this increase. In case you are not aware the government has announced that we have an existing housing shortage for those in this country already without taking into consideration a further increase immigration will cause. That is just housing.

International Aid is a different subject. JKC bor I find nothing wrong with your views, I don't agree with them but I respect your right to express them.

If we stay in I think you will get your wish because all those immigrants taken in by Germany will become European citizens and be eligible to enter our country unhindered.

 

...... Seconds out, Round.....

 

KIO bor, JKC is expressing a purely Christian viewpoint which is ok up to a point. The UK is like a bottle, it will only hold so much. Before even considering allowing more into the country we should ensure the homeless here are provided for as a first consideration. This not a contest but a debate on the pros and cons of staying in the EU although I appreciate your sentiment LOL.