The European Union: We're out...!!!

[Dave]

Is this Corbyn's real view on the EU.

[Dave]

If your still undecided worth a watch.

"Britain objected to 72 EU measures, and lost on every single one of them"

[BobBobBob]

I do agree with a lot of your sentiment there, I'm clearly going to vote leave, but do realize the path ahead for the country regardless of whether we choose to remain or leave is not going to be perfect, and in the event of vote leave winning there will need to be compromise, I just believe that's no reason vote remain and maintain the status quo because, perhaps we're a little scared of what may, or may not happen afterwards.

Totally agree with you there. I can be upfront and say that my decision to vote remain is partially motivated by caution, but it's not my only reason. If there were more of people like you on the leave side, I'd feel more comfortable myself voting to leave.

Can I just also point out, that £176 million a week is the UK's net contribution to the EU, our country does put in £350 million a week, of course what vote leave conveniently left out is, is we get back £74 million in rebates, £100 million goes into EU projects so such as collaborative science which is clearly dear to your heart , which leaves a net contribution of £176 million in my belief.

You're right that we put in £350 million and the £176 million a week is the net contribution, i.e. what we spend. On science specifically, some money comes back here for UK based research, but my contention is that we reap the full benefits of EU-wide science. It's not just the money, it's the organisation of different scientists working on different projects with shared knowledge. The success stories from this are effectively dividends that you can't put a pound value on.

And there are other things that the EU spends in countries other than the UK which have a benefit on the UK itself that you can't put a straight value on. A bulk of the EU budget is spent on agriculture. We import about a billion pounds worth of Spanish vegetables and fruit every year. It's of importance to us, at least in the short term, that Spanish farmers grow good crops. The next largest chunk of EU budget goes on regional aid. At some point in the great immigration debate we need to ask ourselves why people wish to come here. Perhaps improving their lives in their home countries is a more pragmatic way to reduce immigration. But for more direct measures against illegal immigration, the EU spends money on crime and border control. We benefit at least a little from that. There are many other examples. So, rather than a cost or a tax, I would consider the £176 million a week net contribution an investment. How we value that investment is going to vary from British person to British person, but it's not zero.

[Trojan 67]

The largest chunk of EU budget goes on . . .

. . . direct measures against illegal immigration . . .

[Gullscorer]

Bob, to cite a couple or more synonyms or even to repeat the same word can in some instances be regarded as redundancy, but is also a perfectly legitimate use of the language for emphasis to press home a point, or indeed to ensure precision and accuracy, which is sometimes necessary in conversation or debate.

But I cannot understand why you think my views are any more rigid than those of the Remainers. I suspect that you are missing the point of the whole thing, which is that nation states don’t have to be members of a political union (nor to have a single currency as many in the EU have done) in order to compromise, to trade, to collaborate, or to migrate.

And while immigration may to some extent be beneficial, it can also be the opposite if unlimited and uncontrolled. Nobody (apart from some Remainers) is saying that immigration from the EU will cease after Brexit. The important thing about immigration is that we should set the terms and ground rules and control our own borders, just as every other country in the world outside the EU does.

You believe the arguments for Remaining are the more persuasive, I believe the more powerful arguments are for Brexit. And we shall find out which are the more convincing after 23 June.

In the meantime, here are some interesting articles:
http://www.ukipdaily.com/jeremy-corbyn-brexit/
http://www.ukipdaily.com/why-are-we-in- ... for-trade/
http://www.ukipdaily.com/its-the-economy-oh-really/
http://www.ukipdaily.com/the-youth-vote/
http://www.ukipdaily.com/letters-editor-11th-june-2016/
http://www.ukipdaily.com/courant-times- ... june-2016/

[Gullscorer]

Beware the media’s presentations of the EU’s accounts !

Brussels writes the media’s headlines every year by claiming that their accounts have been signed off while admitting in the small print that a key part of them have not. For the last 20 years the proportion of EU “mis-spending” – Eurospeak disguising larceny and corruption as well as genuine administrative mistakes – has been well above the over-generous 2% threshold for allowable error.

In 2015 the 'misspending' reached 4.7% according to the auditors, or almost €7 billion – enough to build 70 hospitals..!!

The Commission has simply redefined the meaning of “signed off” to deceive the public because they are incapable of tackling the massive combination of unforgivable administrative errors, corruption, theft, and fraudulent misuse of public funds.

Vote 'Leave'.

[Alpine Joe]

[Dave]

https://www.rt.com/uk/346495-eu-army-brexit-french/

French admirals back Brexit, say it would slam ‘screeching brakes’ on EU army plans


http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/ ... rmy-Brexit

And Mr Duddridge, the Foreign Office minister for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, warned: “The EU is a secretive organisation that doesn’t want documents in the public domain that recognise that it’s a federalist attempt at a state with all the trappings of a state, including a European police force and European army.

“If people knew the truth of where the EU might be in a few years, let alone a few decades, there would be a resounding vote in support of Brexit.

“The EU has a federalist vision and it will inch towards it if it can’t leap towards it, and it will do it secretly if it can’t do it openly and publicly.”

Asked if he felt the Government would be able to resist calls for an EU army in the event of a Remain vote, Mr Duddridge said: “The Conservative Government is against plans for a European Army, but we’re inching towards that and I don’t think it’s realistic to think that we’d be able to stop those, certainly not stopping other countries doing it.

"We’d get sucked into it as we’ve got sucked into every other bit of the European super state.”




More reasons to vote Leave.

[Dave]

This article was not posted by IDS, Boris, Gove or any other Tory, nor by Nigel Farage. It was posted by Labour leave.

It seems suggest that the NHS is under threat from TTIP, which we'll have to accept if we stay in the EU.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/want-save-nhs- ... eu-1564821

Jeremy Corbyn recently said he would veto a trade deal called 'TTIP' if he became leader. He is right to do that. This deal is a major threat to British jobs, working people and public services, especially the NHS. But it will not be possible for Jeremy to veto this deal if we remain a member of the EU. We will be forced to accept its damaging consequences.

TTIP is a trade deal that is currently being negotiated behind closed doors between the EU and US. It will make it easier for American companies to access British and EU industries – from healthcare to manufacturing – and vice versa. As with all trade deals, it will mean giving American companies unrestricted access to sectors of our economy in return for them doing the same.


Most worryingly, this trade deal is being stitched up away from the eyes of the public, as well as democratically elected politicians. Career bureaucrats in Brussels who we do not know – and, more than likely, are not British – are bargaining away access to many of our key industries, industries that support the jobs of millions of people across the country. The safety and security of millions of working people is being jeopardised to enable multinational companies and their rich shareholders to make bigger profits.

[Gullscorer]

Under the TTIP treaty, US corporations will have unprecedented powers over any of our public health or safety regulations. If any European government tries to bring in laws pertaining to social, health, or environmental standards, US investors will have the right to sue in the US courts for loss of profits, in a judicial system which will be unavailable to European governments, companies, or individuals.

Under the treaty, European (and British) food safety standards will be at risk, and the EU economy will be opened up to unfair competition from giant US corporations despite the disastrous consequences for European producers, who must meet far higher standards than those in the USA.

Under the TTIP, we would be unable to prevent the privatisation of education and the NHS. The dividing of the NHS into NHS Trusts, and the proposed conversion of all schools into Academies, are already part of the long-term secret strategy to privatise health, education, and practically everything the powerful wealthy elite can turn into private profit. But under this treaty, the Government would be powerless to prevent the ultimate privatisation of all our vital public services. If they attempted to do so, US corporations would be able to sue them for loss of profits.

[madgull]

Madgull, I'm not angry, nor in tears.

I'm simply amazed at your gullibility and naivety (or is it knavery) in putting forward, in response to cherry-picked points made by Brexiters*, arguments which are either patently and self-evidently absurd or which have already been thoroughly debunked and destroyed either in previous posts on this thread or elsewhere by the Leave campaign.

Independent readers and undecided voters are already seeing this for themselves and are choosing Brexit in massive numbers.

Perhaps it's also time you questioned the wisdom of your own position..

*Except perhaps for the first one: 'we can be like Switzerland and Norway'. This is an argument I've actually heard from only one (ostensible) Brexit supporter. The vast majority of Switzerland/Norway arguments in fact came from pro-Remain people who warned that we 'would be like Switzerland and Norway'. Nonsense. As the world's fifth largest economy we can be like the UK. In trade negotiations with the EU we will be in the driving seat, since we buy far more from EU countries than they do from us, so they have more to lose. But the questions of free trade, free markets, free movement of peoples, and political union, have all been more than adequately dealt with on this thread and elsewhere.

Ah, the time-honoured debating tactic of not actually refuting the central point of your opponent's argument, but simply calling your opponent naive. I picked these statements because they are the most common arguments that I have seen by a long way. Rather than engaging in the whirlwind of damned lies and statistics, I am using logic, backed up with a few independently-verifiable facts.

For not being like Norway and Switzerland, are you saying that the EU will make an exception just because we're the 5th largest economy in the world? Or do you think that the rest of Europe will simply swallow up that measly 10% of intra-EU trade that we account for - just like Germany did between 2014 and 2015 when UK exports dropped - and leave us to deal with the hole in our economy? As a percentage of total economy, our trade with the EU is worth more to us than their trade with us is to them. By the way, the EU aren't stupid, if they make it seem like countries can just break away willy-nilly and then get everything they want without being part of the EU, they're inviting the organisation to fall apart. I have seen no-one except Leave campaigners suggest that any such deal will be forthcoming.

I also think that you're underestimating the power that Norway had in THEIR negotiations with Europe - They are the EU's largest source of primary aluminium, and let's not forget the fact that it supplies the EU with 31% of its natural gas and 11% of its crude oil. Let's not even get started on how much sway Switzerland has on the international stage with its banking system. You think getting a good deal is beyond the countries ranked 6th and 9th (higher than any of the EU) for GDP per capita (in other words, how well they're doing for a country of their population)? Oh, the UK is down in 25th on that one. Funnily, pretty much all of the major EU players are above us as well, maybe we're not as powerful as we think we are.

Interestingly, despite you saying that these arguments are 'cherry-picked', I took a quick browse of your posts on the first page of this thread, and summarised the gist of each of them:

20 Jan:
We need to control not only our own borders, but our own destiny.

22 Jan:
We pay more than we receive.
Make our own laws / control our own destiny.
Control our borders.
Make our own trade agreements.

4 Feb:
The EU is undemocratic.

10 Feb:
Make our own trade agreements with the EU.
NHS under stress due to migration > control own borders.

So, you talk about having tighter controls on immigration (20 Jan, 22 Jan, 10 Feb), paying more than we receive (22 Jan), having greater sovereignty (22 Jan, 4 Feb), make our own deal with the EU (like Switzerland and Norway have done) (10 Feb), and be economically better off due to making our own trade deals (22 Jan, 10 Feb). Seems like I'm 'cherry-picking' all of your primary arguments.

I would invite you to argue - in your own words, using logic and reason, not just posting links to non-independent sources - how any of the refutations are incorrect.

[Dave]

On TTIP it comes down to who you trust. The EU, national governments, or USA.

The Dutch people voted no in a referendum on the EU-Ukraine deal, ok the turnout was 32 % but they are going to ignored.

Juncker warns Dutch voters over major consequence of Ukraine referendum, as well as warning the people of the UK. The people of the EU are becoming tired of this, exit from the EU isn't just a British thing, it's growing every where, including France.

And some want to stay in this club, and continue to be bullied and rail roaded, it's believed that the UK government has objected to 72 EU measures and lost on every single one of them.

The people of Greece voted no in a referendum on their latest bail package, the EU stamped on them, pretty much said tough luck, the Greek government caved in, and the people of Greece ignored.

President Obama wants TTIP agreed before he leaves office, and judging by some of the things said on his visit to the UK and Germany, wouldn't doubt it for a minute.

Labour MP Kelvin Hopkins says; In the EU, trade deals are decided solely by Qualified Majority Voting in the European Council. His vote (Corbyn) couldn't – and won't – stop it going through.

As a Labour MP, I argue that the only real way to avoid this possible scenario is to vote to leave the EU.

Is he right ?

Then of course there's the court of justice of the European union, who I believe can impose policy change on the national government of a member state, could they be used to impose TTIP ?

The French government do not support TTIP, however;

Will the French be bullied into accepting TTIP, who knows, will they end accepting it anyway who knows, once TTIP is ratified, it will take 20 years to undo it.

The IFS are the latest to warn against Brexit, 10 % funded by the EU I believe , and indirectly funded by the British government, like all the rest have a vested interest, and will not bite the hand who feeds them, none of these financial organisations are truly independent.

It's down what we as individuals believe, and who do you trust ? there are people on both sides lying to you, the only real way to protect ourselves against any of this, and further political integration, is to vote leave.

[Alpine Joe]

madgull

By the way, the EU aren't stupid, if they make it seem like countries can just break away willy-nilly and then get everything they want without being part of the EU, they're inviting the organisation to fall apart.

madgull is right on this point, as what sort of judgement would it pass on the E.U project if we were allowed to leave and then be seen to be thriving ?

We have to accept that there will be some very powerful forces desperate to do what they can to make us fail. Whether that will involve other Central Banks trying to undermine sterling, or the U.S or the E.U doing what they can to harm British trade, we have to prepared for that and accept it might well happen.

Personally I believe that in the medium term Europe is an economic basket case, with so much debt piled up that they'll not be the market we should be pinning our hopes on anyway. Add in the social and cultural problems that are looming and the chance to jump into the current lifeboat and get ourselves out is far too good to miss.

Britain's economy is being sustained by artificially suppressed interest rates, and a huge glut of money printing (Quantitative Easing) so the problems we've stocked up will come crashing down on us (and also in America) before too long whether we're in the E.U or outside.

In the end trade, economic forecasts, and crystal ball gazing on who is willing to trade with who, are issues for politicians to argue over at election time. You don't call a Referendum to discuss the Balance of Payments.

Yesterday I was reading an article written by the Daily Telegraph's International Business Editor, who titled his piece: 'Brexit vote is about the supremacy of Parliament and nothing else: Why I am voting to leave the EU'

Nobody has ever been held to account for the design faults and hubris of the euro, or for the monetary and fiscal contraction that turned recession into depression, and led to levels of youth unemployment across a large arc of Europe that nobody would have thought possible or tolerable in a modern civilized society. The only people that are ever blamed are the victims.

There has been no truth and reconciliation commission for the greatest economic crime of modern times. We do not know who exactly was responsible for anything because power was exercised through a shadowy interplay of elites in Berlin, Frankfurt, Brussels, and Paris, and still is. Everything is deniable. All slips through the crack of oversight.

Nor have those in charge learned the lessons of EMU failure. The burden of adjustment still falls on South, without offsetting expansion in the North. It is a formula for deflation and hysteresis. That way lies yet another Lost Decade.

Has there ever been a proper airing of how the elected leaders of Greece and Italy were forced out of power and replaced by EU technocrats, perhaps not by coups d'etat in a strict legal sense but certainly by skulduggery?

On what authority did the European Central Bank write secret letters to the leaders of Spain and Italy in 2011 ordering detailed changes to labour and social law, and fiscal policy, holding a gun to their head on bond purchases?

What is so striking about these episodes is not that EU officials took such drastic decisions in the white heat of crisis, but that it was allowed to pass so easily.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/201 ... thing-els/


Whether the Eurocrats get their economic decisions right or wrong, the British people don't feel any part of the set up. They just see a massive bureaucracy churning out laws by the tens of thousands and we don't seem to get the opportunity to get rid of these extremely important people via the ballot box. Wasn't it Baroness Ashton who rose to the position of First Vice President of the European Commission, having never been elected to a single position in her entire life ?.

Britain is far from perfect, and we've brought on many of the problems ourselves. But I'd rather we be free to make our own mistakes, and accept the consequences of that, that be ruled by the faceless European elites who never have, and never would willingly give the British public a ballot paper with their name on.

Even if we should have to tighten our belts for a bit in order to get these European dictators off our backs for good, June 23rd will tell us how many consider that to be a bit of Economics they'll willingly accept.

[Gullscorer]

Methinks madgull is clutching at straws. As I pointed out to him, the arguments in his earlier post have already been thoroughly debunked and destroyed, and I'm not going to waste time repeating myself on his account.

I support the 'Leave' option partly because over the past few years it has generally been the Brexiters who have provided the logic and the facts, being for the most part thoroughly moderate in their language and guilty of, if anything, nothing more than modest rhetoric, whereas I have seen and heard nothing from the Remain campaign which is other than ridiculous, mendacious, irrelevant, or scare-mongering, backed up by far-from-independent sources.

The Remainers are getting desperate; their 'project fear' has become 'project threat'. Expect more of the same over the final week of the campaign, along with a last throw of the dice, perhaps in the form of a new EU agreement or promise to make everything alright and put all our fears to rest. Perhaps they really do believe we're all idiots..
http://www.ukipdaily.com/wait-theres-bombshell-coming/

[madgull]

Methinks madgull is clutching at straws. As I pointed out to him, the arguments in his earlier post have already been thoroughly debunked and destroyed, and I'm not going to waste time repeating myself on his account.

Again, saying that I'm 'clutching at straws' is not debate. I thought you were a great fan of debate? Here's the thing about your second sentence: all of the Leave arguments have been thoroughly debunked and destroyed...see, rhetoric isn't actually an argument.

Of course, if you're afraid, either that I may be a better debater than yourself, or that you do not have the better argument, then I am more than happy to claim the walkover... :} :~D