Re: Brexit Anyone? : Tue Feb 23, 2016 12:45 pm  

Bullseye wrote:

A Brexit would be seen as a mandate by Euro-sceptics to do what they want. There’s a heck of a lot of mileage in “rolling back the excesses of the EU”. If a “leave” vote goes through in June there’s another 4 years for them to do just that.

It's surprising how little you can do in 4 years, especially as the Whitehall workload will be very high sorting out all the other "paperwork". MP's will have to come in at weekends and work over summer to get through everything (hey, 7 day a week government - there's a thought?). I just don't see it, if they prioritize binning human rights, workers rights and environmental legislation it will be very badly received. I don't think it's anywhere near a priority to do that. You simply can't say "f*** the environment" anymore and be in politics.
Europe has to change, a No vote is the best way I can see to make it do that. If we all say yes then it carries on as it is and the eurocrats slap themselves on the back and carry on with their social experiment.

The debate continues.

[DaveO]

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Tue Feb 23, 2016 12:50 pm  

Dally wrote:

Why? Just charge German exporters for part of the costs of running our government.

What do you mean "why?" Do you really not understand the fact that in order to access the single market nations have to pay towards the running of it? Do you think the other EU nations are going to pay the cost of running it and let us join for free? If you do then you are as I said, deluded.

I presume by the rest of your comment you mean if the EU wants a contribution from us to help run the single market you think we should charge them for access to ours? If so you haven't quite worked this out have you? There would be no "ours" we would (again) be part of the single market which is free trade zone so the idea we could then charge them for accessing "our" market is just idiotic. You can't impose tariffs in a free trade zone! The idea we can just slap a charge on the rest of the EU who trade with us is nonsensical and as equally deluded as your stance that if we quit we save all the contributions.

By the way the total cost of UK Government expenditure is about £750 billion a year. We pay about £8 billion to the EU. That is the gross amount, not the net amount after we get money back in terms of grants etc. So for what will eventually be less then 1% of government expenditure you want to quit the EU on the daft assumption this £8 billion is all going to go away when what will actually happen is we will remain one of the EU's biggest financial contributors (look at Norway) won't get any EU grants and won't have a say in the rules and regulations we have to comply with. Brilliant!

And after all that we then have to start negotiating free-trade agreements with all the major economies outside of the EU. You think that will cost nothing to set up and run? Do you think we will get as favourable a set of terms standing alone as we do as part of the EU?

[DaveO]

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Tue Feb 23, 2016 12:56 pm  

DHM wrote:

You simply can't say "f*** the environment" anymore and be in politics.

They can in the USA. Fracking being a prime example. Why do you think that kind of thing won't happen here?

The Tory party with a slender majority of 19 is already acting as if it rules rather than governs. It thinks itself above the law and if it does anything found to be illegal simply seeks to change the law.

[Bullseye]

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Tue Feb 23, 2016 1:05 pm  

DHM wrote:

It's surprising how little you can do in 4 years, especially as the Whitehall workload will be very high sorting out all the other "paperwork". MP's will have to come in at weekends and work over summer to get through everything (hey, 7 day a week government - there's a thought?). I just don't see it, if they prioritize binning human rights, workers rights and environmental legislation it will be very badly received. I don't think it's anywhere near a priority to do that. You simply can't say "f*** the environment" anymore and be in politics.

Well Cameron allegedly said to “cut the green crap” and it’s done him no harm. Changes to planning legislation mean it’s easier than ever to build in the face of local objection. If 4 years isn’t enough you can bet they’ll be using it as a main plank of their election campaign of 2020 to “reap the benefits of Brexit”.

The public are easily bought off or persuaded it’s in their interest. Look at austerity measures over the past 6 years. Most of those bothering to vote bought into it. The right wing media will spin changes to workers’ rights or environmental legislation in the same way that they’ve spun cuts to disability benefits or legal aid. These things will be dubbed as “too costly,” “a hindrance to business,” “a legacy of EU socialism imposed on plucky England,” and getting rid of them will make the country “more competitive” and will “create wealth”. I should become a Tory spin doctor. [/quote]

DHM wrote:

Europe has to change, a No vote is the best way I can see to make it do that. If we all say yes then it carries on as it is and the eurocrats slap themselves on the back and carry on with their social experiment.

The deal Cameron has got means it is changing for the UK at least. The rest can go on with “ever closer union”. Why take the nuclear option?

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Tue Feb 23, 2016 1:41 pm  

DHM wrote:

I guess it is an enormous organization and you are bound to lose touch a little with what's happening on the street, but it's ridiculous now.
For some it's a social experiment, but they are so insulated from the effects it simply doesn't matter to them if it fails or succeeds. For others it's a place they can go to score points at home - Cameron came back like he'd cured cancer this week. I didn't think he could get any more puffed up with self importance but I was wrong on that one. The balloon soon deflated though when Boris stuck the knife in (by the way Boris, if we want to increase trade with the rest of the world outside Europe we are going to have to f******g go there - so stop bitching about a 3rd runway at Heathrow - CDG has 4, Frankfurt has 4, Schiphol has 6 etc.. etc..).

Does Boris come on this site?

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Tue Feb 23, 2016 1:42 pm  

Bullseye wrote:

I suspect if we did leave then this would push the Conservative Party (and Government) even further to the right as the swivel eyed mob would be firmly in charge. The likes of IDS and Liam Fox would be in positions of real power.

If anyone thinks we would then just keep the “good bits” of the EU like worker’s rights, environmental legislation etc you’re deluded.

That kind of stuff is seen as “red tape” and would be cut.

For that reason I’m saying Remain.

hat level of short-term thinking on such a key, long-term issue is, frankly, ridiculous.

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Tue Feb 23, 2016 2:27 pm  

DaveO wrote:

Fracking being a prime example. Why do you think that kind of thing won't happen here?

Is it? Fracking will go ahead or not with or without the EU. Cameron already, with the help of a few other EU countries, put paid to any legislation to blanket ban it back in 2014. Local poilitical pressure is the only effective limitation. That won't change if we are out of or in the EU.

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Tue Feb 23, 2016 2:44 pm  

Bullseye wrote:

The deal Cameron has got means it is changing for the UK at least. The rest can go on with “ever closer union”. Why take the nuclear option?

His deal was agreed in principle a long time ago. Limiting benefits for EU migrants for a 7 year period (in line with what other EU countries already effectively had when they first admitted the East European countries), not being forced into the Euro (never happening anyway in reality - easy give away), right to opt out of any further political union (had that already), some waffle about non-Eurozone countries being better protected - only got a delay on that one not an outright veto - so effectively nothing.
Not really game changing for me. The purpose of the summit that seemed to last an eternity, seemed more about what a lot of the little boys at the table could squeeze out for themselves by being awkward.

There is a lot of cynicism in British politics but maybe this will be a catalyst to get people more actively involved and voting. I sense that at a local level it's much harder for British politicians to sell BS to us, industry lobbying is harder, we don't like it. So they do it all in Brussels where we can't see what's going on. Corbyn's election and his steady support with the public despite some major issues with his own party suggests that maybe if we ditch the distraction that is Europe we can re-engage public interest and increase accountability. I don't think having governments that run 3-4 terms is really healthy, but we get that (I think) because the fear of changing anything outways the possibilities if we change. I prefer to be optamisitic about change.

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Tue Feb 23, 2016 2:50 pm  

DHM wrote:

Europe has to change, a No vote is the best way I can see to make it do that. If we all say yes then it carries on as it is and the eurocrats slap themselves on the back and carry on with their social experiment.

Am I to presume by that, the U.K. leaving the E.U. will cause them to realise the folly of their actions & totally re-structure their whole political ethos?

If that was to happen, all well & good, unfortunately we’ll no longer be part of it to reap the benefits.

[DaveO]

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Tue Feb 23, 2016 3:25 pm  

DHM wrote:

Is it? Fracking will go ahead or not with or without the EU. Cameron already, with the help of a few other EU countries, put paid to any legislation to blanket ban it back in 2014. Local poilitical pressure is the only effective limitation. That won't change if we are out of or in the EU.

I meant fracking as a prime example in the USA where you can "simply say "f*** the environment" anymore and be in politics."

You were suggesting you can't just do that, so it didn't matter if we were in or the out of the OU because it would be unacceptable to "f*** the environment". Now you are arguing that Cameron has in fact "f*** the environment" with his legislation on fracking. He' still in politics!

So that is your original point shot down in flames by yourself!

That is, if he can do that with fracking (with or without the EU's help) he can do it over other environmental legislation that is imposed by the EU (if we leave).

Your example just proves what you said originally that essentially it would be politically unacceptable to "f*** the environment" so we are safe, is nonsense.

We need legislation to protect it and Cameron and Co will rip up any EU legislation that does so at the first chance they get. They won't be spending time re-implementing it into UK law for our benefit that is for sure.