Off Topic European Debate Thread

[Captain Jack Sparrow]

Tbh I will admit that I did slightly go to far with a few comments but the sag one was a joke.

In my opinion scholarships are there to reward people as opposed to anything else and I was a bit overly passionate being a student and going for scholarships myself.

As for the dodging questions part, it's just that there are so many posts for the out side and I don't have time to read or respond to all of them as my A level exams have just reached its most intense period and so they are a priority.

I don't want to cause any upsets for when this ends and barring disgruntlement from whichever side loses we can all unite to moan about the football

At the end of the day both sides of the argument have passionate issues and agendas and so it will get heated.

Im only going to comment on what I highlighted in red....

Thats fair enough, I can see where you are coming from. I wouldnt have gone on so much about answering questions if I knew your circumstances

Its a shame though that you couldnt read peoples comments because if you were able to, you would have saved more time in the long run as you wouldnt have to repeat yourself as much, as you would have seen answers to the questions/points that you were asking a lot.

Oh well...

 

[Cliftonville]

I must admit you have a very sensible approach and adult way of judgement, it does not always workout on forums as I have discovered, this whole thing has enveloped me for various reasons, I'm old fashioned and that is my entitlement but maybe I should step away and let a different point of view with a different aspect take over.

I'm a bit disappointed with some of the comments but maybe that is just me, I'm happy to offer the prospect to any candidate who is willing to take over the task.

Not for me, but when it comes down to things like politics I try to take a considered view and attempt to evidence base posts v using solely opinion. The EU vote should not be a form of internet sport.

 

[johngalleyfan2]

Sorry JGF but that is the complete opposite to what will happen.

??? IT IS HAPPENING ... I have lost over £25k in the past 2 months
FINANCE BILLIONAIRES THAT "FLOAT THE MARKET" have openly stated they will risk it till we are out over £100b has been wiped off already

 

[Captain Jack Sparrow]

Camerons behaviour has actually made me more stringent in my belief that I want to leave and I want him gone as soon as possible after this vote he has proven himself to be a two faced liar.

Cameron said earlier that he will remain in charge if the UK votes to leave on Thursday. He was asked if he will walk away if leave wins the vote. He said at the last election, the public voted for his manifesto, which said to bring a referendum and also says if the UK votes out then he will carry on. He said he wont go against his manifesto that the people voted for.

Looks like we will be stuck with him.

 

[Cliftonville]

He said at the last election, the public voted for his manifesto, which said to bring a referendum and also says if the UK votes out then he will carry on. He said he wont go against his manifesto that the people voted for.

Mr Osbourne's emergency (revenge) budget in the event of the UK leaving the EU would break that manifesto.

Says all sorts mind Cameron "Britain outside of the EU will prosper ...".

 

[Captain Jack Sparrow]

Mr Osbourne's emergency (revenge) budget in the event of the UK leaving the EU would break that manifesto.

We could list a lot of things on his manifesto that he has broken but we would be here all night

 

[Premiershiporbust IV]

I said I was done but this is too important to ignore - all the Leave advocates who believe that we will be free to trade with who we please on Brexit had better watch this briefing to the press.

The whole piece is valuable in terms of the relationship re sovereignty, British/EU law but if you just want the trade detail, watch from about 9 minutes onward.

You must log in or register to see media

I realise that it will not sway some but it might open the eyes of the less entrenched as to quite how royally we screw ourselves in the arse by leaving

It is important to have a full understanding of the economics of the situation and this bloke literally wrote the book...

Enjoy...

 

[Cliftonville]

We could list a lot of things on his manifesto that he has broken but we would be here all night

"The PM has refused to take part in a debate against other senior Conservatives."

Liked that one last night from David Dimbleby.

The referendum is part of HIS manifesto but he refuses to debate it with his own party

 

[banksyisourhero]

"It is we who want to give power back to people. It is we who want to stand up against the corporatist and elitist system that will never admit its mistakes. That is why we believe in democracy – because it is the best way humanity has found of correcting the errors of our rulers; and we are mad to throw it away.

Now is the time to believe in ourselves, and in what Britain can do, and to remember that we always do best when we believe in ourselves. Of course we can continue to provide leadership and support for Europe – but intergovernmentally, outside the supranational EU system.

I hope you will vote Leave, and take back control of this great country’s destiny; and if we Vote Leave, then all our votes will count for more in the future. This chance will not come again in our lifetimes, and I pray we do not miss it."

 

[banksyisourhero]

It is important to have a full understanding of the economics of the situation and this bloke literally wrote the book...

He quite literally didn't.. he is a Professor who by his own admittance has worked in education all his adult life and is biased to the remain side. (aren't they all?) and is a paid 'expert' for the government and remain side.

His first sentence with regards sovereignty is contradictory.. I'll watch the rest later to see if he can come up with any real facts but so far he is very clear where his loyalties lie, despite his protests.

 

[Premiershiporbust IV]

He is a lawyer specialising in the EU and analysing and commenting objectively re EU competency and is quite open about his vote and if you are willing to listen to what he says about trade without pre--judging, you will see why...

 

[Cliftonville]

He is an lawyer specialising in the EU and analysing and commenting objectively re EU competency and is quite open about his vote and if you are willing to listen to what he says about trade without pre--judging, you will see why...

To add balance we could think about a former head of the Bank of England saying that the Euro zone is headed for disaster.

Or

Gisela Stuart. Labour MP. A German immigrant. Specialist in international law. Worked on the EU Constitution. States the EU is unsustainable. A ticking time bomb.

 

[Premiershiporbust IV]

A few more salient points, then I am really done:

It is an accepted fact that on average, it takes 10 years to negotiate a new trade agreement due to primarily, the regulatory concerns mentioned i.e. component requirements, kite marks, guarantees and basically everyone doing things differently.

Whatever you think, the guy knows his stuff so the one single statement that should strike REAL (not imagined or perceived) fear in the consideration of whether to leave or not is:

"it is completely beyond doubt that leaving the EU will also terminate all of the UK’s current trade agreements with 3rd countries outside Europe because those agreements were negotiated with and through the EU. THEY WILL TERMINATE IF WE LEAVE”

I've highlighted these words in a nice blood red colour because essentially, we will be cutting our own throat and will be at the mercy of the rest of world, not as to whether they trade with us (as most clearly will) but, it will be on their terms.

In addition, we will basically be in the same position with the EU as the implication is that we would not be offered "the Norweigan deal" as we would not agree to free movement of people.

I would suggest that any half savvy businessman/woman in UK manufacturing (and I am not talking the global conglomerates but UK SME businesses) who has a clear understanding of this statement and its implications must be absolutely terrified of a vote for Brexit as they can basically throw away their production lines and start all over again. Most would probably not be able to fund the Cap-Ex and would be finished...

The whole "Leave" campaign has an analogy to our very own football bulletin boards with fans clammering to get rid of a manager, for example Curbisley at Charlton or Pardew at Newcastle and look what happened to them (and many others).

Sometimes, unspectacular but steady is not such a bad thing, be very careful what you wish for....

 

[Premiershiporbust IV]

To add balance we could think about a former head of the Bank of England saying that the Euro zone is headed for disaster.

Or

Gisela Stuart. Labour MP. A German immigrant. Specialist in international law. Worked on the EU Constitution. States the EU is unsustainable. A ticking time bomb.

As you often quite correctly tell me, these are opinions albeit in the instances you quote, well informed ones.

What Dougan is dealing with is a matter of FACT. Whatever your feelings on the subject, "the law is the law" and there is no changing it (without appropriate action)...

 

[wizered]

FOR Britain leaving the EU

1. A SOVEREIGN NATION AGAIN
Britain is a great nation with a proud history that has been forced into subservience to the unelected bureaucrats of Brussels. Outside the EU, Britain could resume its place as a powerful independent power. It is the world’s 5th biggest economy and 5th most potent military force with its own nuclear deterrent. It is a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council. Freed from restraints in Europe, Britain could rebuild ties with natural English-speaking allies in the Commonwealth and strengthen the Special Relationship with the United States.


2. CASTING OFF THE SHACKLES
Over-regulation by the EU has cost the British economy over £125 billion. Freed from Brussels red tape, the UK economy would thrive like Norway or Switzerland – two of the most successful states in Europe. Britain could negotiate its own trade deals with the likes of China, the United States and Russia on terms tailor-made to suit the national interest. Trade with the EU countries would continue – it will be in their interests to maintain Britain’s access to the European free market. Taxpayers would get an immediate saving of over £20 million a day from Britain not having to pump money into the EU budget. British farmers, fishermen and small businesses would all be free from ruinous Brussels policies.


3. BORDER CONTROLS
Since Poland and the other eastern European nations joined the EU in 2004, migrants have used the Union’s free labour movement rules to flood the UK. Poles are now the biggest immigrant group in Britain. Immigrants arriving in Britain from the EU outnumbered Brits heading the other way by a record 180,000 last year, placing unacceptable strains on housing, welfare and education. Lax border controls in other EU countries already make it easier for illegal migrants and terrorists to get into Britain, despite the UK staying outside Schengen. Now the EU wants Britain to take more refugees. Leaving the EU would allow Britain to regain control of its borders.

4. THE MOTHER OF PARLIAMENTS
Britain is the birthplace of modern parliamentary democracy. It is time to free it from the murky decision-making of the EU where the un-elected Commission initiates legislation, national veto rights have been steadily undermined and lack of voter interest has eroded any claims to legitimacy by the European Parliament.

 

[Premiershiporbust IV]

Wiz, love you to death dear chap but did you watch the clip...?

In response to the statements above:

1). we are not forced to do anything by unelected bureaucrats, they have no say. Legislation is passed by ALL 28 members, generally by consensus and of course, we always have the option to veto.

2). We will not be offered the Norway deal as this is expressly subject to free movement, which we won't agree to. The Swiss meanwhile are negotiating separate bilateral treaties for every bit of business they do (150+ to date) and these take A LONG TIME.

Re the rest of the world, 10 years on average to do a deal. In the meantime, we either do what we are told or we don't do business - hang on, sounds familiar...!

3). No real argument except of course that we export our murderers, rapists, ****'s etc abroad (generally to Spain) - this way, they would have to stay here..!

4). Fine, if we want out then sobeit BUT, we agreed to this in the first place. The alternative is that we can do what most of the rest of the EU members do and ignore the bits we don't like...

 

[wizered]

You must log in or register to see images

Claim: The UK share of the vote in the EU Council of Ministers is 8%, down from 17% when we joined.
Conclusion: It has declined, but a new system based on population makes the UK's vote worth 13%. A lot of Council decisions are made by consensus after negotiation, so vote share doesn't neatly capture the UK's influence.

 

[wizered]

The UK can veto some laws alone, but needs three allies to block others
Not all EU decisions affecting the UK can be passed against its wishes. Some important issues can only be decided if every country voting agrees.
These areas include foreign affairs, taxation, justice and the EU budget. If the UK is adamantly opposed to a law requiring unanimous approval, it's unlikely to make it as far as a vote.
But in other areas, majorities are enough. Under the new system for majority voting, a law has to pass two hurdles.
First, 16 out of 28 member states have to vote for it. In special cases, it's 21 out of 28.
The UK naturally counts for only 1/28th from this point of view.
But there is a second condition: population matters. Member states representing 65% of all the people in the EU have to vote for a law before it passes.
The ability of the UK to combine with a couple of other big countries to block a law it doesn't like is made more difficult by a rider to this rule. You can get to 36% against a proposed law from just three countries, but they won't be able to block it unless joined by at least one more.
In other words, if fewer than four countries oppose or abstain on a law in the Council, it passes.
For example...
Let's say the European Commission has proposed a new law on air pollution. When it gets to the Council, Germany, Poland and the UK vote against it, but all other countries are in favour. It has 25 out of 28 votes, passing the first test, but only 64% of the votes by population. It still passes the second test, even though it hasn't hit 65%, because there are only three countries not voting for it.
But if another country joins the Nos or abstains, the law then fails. It doesn't matter which country it is, in this scenario—it could be tiny Cyprus or Malta.
We recommend playing with the EU's vote calculator to get the hang of how this works.
Traditionally, decisions are made without the need for a vote
A lot of experts say that voting isn't where the action is when it comes to Council decisions. In a lot of cases—75-80% of the time—every country votes for the proposal on the table.
There are a lot of reasons put forward to explain this consensus. It doesn't mean that the vote, or at least the prospect of a vote, isn't important. A lot of work goes on behind the scenes to prepare laws that everyone can support, as there's ultimately no point in pushing something to a vote when many countries oppose it.
The UK usually votes with the majority, but is now on the losing side more than any other nation
When votes are taken, the UK has recently been on the losing side more often than any other country.
It still voted on the winning side nearly 90% of the time over the past six years, according to academics at the London School of Economics.
So the UK has to accept some EU decisions that it didn't vote for.
Not every decision is equally important. We also point out that simply counting votes lost doesn't take into account how strongly British officials feel about them compared to the votes they won.

 

[Cliftonville]

As you often quite correctly tell me, these are opinions albeit in the instances you quote, well informed ones.

What Dougan is dealing with is a matter of FACT. Whatever your feelings on the subject, "the law is the law" and there is no changing it (without appropriate action)...

Gisela Stuart uses facts. She worked on the inside on the EU's constitution. She is no lad down the pub .. "I'm voting out cos we be told how straight nanas have to be ...!"

The law is the law. I agree with Gisela Stuart that leaving an organisation that is having to bale out member states, and override democracy to impose savage austerity on the these states is appropriate action . Its broken. Unfixable.

 

[Captain Jack Sparrow]

4). Fine, if we want out then sobeit BUT, we agreed to this in the first place. The alternative is that we can do what most of the rest of the EU members do and ignore the bits we don't like...

Just to point out, I wasnt born when the UK voted to go in to the EU (im showing off now as im not as old as most of you ). I certainly didnt agree to it

Out of interest, what was the reason the UK joined the EU in the first place? It certainly wasnt for how the EU is today. A lot of my older family members who were old enough to vote back in the 70's have said they will be voting out this time as what we got now is not what was on the table back in the 70's when voting to join the EU.