[Bullseye]

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Thu Feb 25, 2016 1:34 pm  

This debate is strangely reminiscent of the Scottish independence debate.

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Thu Feb 25, 2016 2:33 pm  

Bullseye wrote:

This debate is strangely reminiscent of the Scottish independence debate.

Let's hope it isn't as divisive and violent then.

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Fri Feb 26, 2016 12:36 am  

Britain does not and never has needed the EU. We are a great nation that pioneered the industrial revolution and parliamentary democracy, that set the benchmark for standards of liberty, that is a world leader in technological and scientific advancement, and that has, and always has had, a global outlook. We have no need or derive any benefit for surrendering our legal traditions, democracy or national sovereignty to an undemocratic, economically failing, demographically declining, insular and protectionist political union. The whole concept of Britain being in the EU is laughable and barely worth discussing. Indeed even the Remain camp have failed to put forward a single facts-based argument for remaining within this dying organisation, instead they resort to gross manipulation of statistics and ever-increasingly ludicrous disaster scenarios (no more wine or cheese, ISIS will bomb us every day, 3 million unemployed, alone in the world, king kong will destroy London etc etc). However for those who aren't Eurofanatics or unwavering in their belief in Britain the facts are as follows:

Economy

1). Britain is the EU's largest market. We have an annual trading deficit of £9bn so it is in the best interests of Europe to continue trading with us (indeed the Lisbon Treaty requires members to negotiate a free trade agreement with any departing member). It beggars belief to assume that the Germans will stop selling us cars, the Greeks will stop selling us olives, the French will stop selling us cheese etc. Therefore it is highly unlikely that Brexit will result in any significant job losses or economic disruption.
2). Britain makes an annual net contribution of £8bn to the EU and this is growing thanks to David Cameron's successful negotiation of an EU budget freeze whilst agreeing to increase Britain's contribution. We pay roughly double what we receive so every region, farmer, charity, university etc that currently receives funds from the EU could receive double the level of funding if we left the EU (alternatively the money saved could be used to increase spending on the NHS, education etc.
3). A cost-benefit analysis conducted by the Treasury whilst Gordon Brown was chancellor (and which was never published due to its preliminary findings which we only found out about thanks to a whistleblower leaking in to the press) found that GDP would be 8% higher if we had never joined the EU.
4). Only 10% of UK businesses are involved in trade with Europe yet 100% of UK businesses must comply with its legislation. The annual cost to the UK of complying with EU regulation is estimated to be £167 bn. The burden of complying with regulation is the number 1 reason given for the failure of small businesses to survive by their owners. Indeed this is one of the main reasons why big business supports membership as they can afford the costs of compliance whilst small companies cannot, thus it reduces market competition and encourages the emergence of monopolies (other reasons are it makes it easier for them to lobby as they simply go to the EU commission to get favourable measures passed rather than approaching 28 member states and they get substantial grants from the EU).
5). The impact on the EU on ordinary households is a net cost of £933 per annum.
6). The majority of British exports are not to Europe. Exports to the EU are currently 44% of our total and this is falling as the EU economy continues to stagnate as a result of the never-ending Eurocrisis. Brexit would allow us to eliminate the tariffs currently in place to discriminate against the growing economies of the world and establish free trade agreements with the likes of India, China, USA, Brazil etc. Indeed in a 2005 Heads of Commonwealth a Commonwealth free trade area was proposed which the majority of members supported and the minority that opposed refused to veto. However the idea was vetoed by Tony Blair, knowing that as an EU member we would not be able to participate. We therefore missed the opportunity to trade freely with the fastest economically and demographically growing bloc in the world, a bloc that will seen overtake the EU in terms of GDP.
7). Membership of the EU has decimated our fishing & farming industries.

Global Influence

1). Britain is the fifth largest economy in the world. We have the sixth most powerful military force and are one of only 7 nations with nuclear weapons. We are also one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council. The idea that we need to be within the EU to have influence in the world is laughable.
2). As a member of the EU we no longer have a seat at the World Trade Organisation. Instead we have 1/28th of a seat. Therefore we have lost our ability to have a say in important matters of global trade. Ominously the EU has plans to have a seat at the UN Security Council as a replacement for the current seats as national members that Britain and France currently enjoys.
3). Within the EU we have very little influence. Since joining we have opposed 72 measures proposed by the Council and have been overruled each time. When David Cameron was desperate to secure some meagre concessions to help him win the referendum he was given next to nothing by the EU. Within the EU Commission very few of the bureaucrats are Britain, within the Council Britain only has 1/28th of the total voting power and within the Parliament only 9.7% of the MEPs are British. Overall therefore we have next to no influence in the EU.
4). Some Leavers advocate a Swiss or Norwegian style association with the EU. Remain counter that those countries have no influence over EU legislation but must adopt them in full, thus Britain would be worse off than it currently is. Firstly this is incorrect in that Britain's demographic and economic importance is far greater than either of those countries so we would invariable be able to secure a much better deal. Secondly actually they only adopt 21% of EU rules and their EU contribution is far lower than ours, indeed if their deals were so disadvantageous as Remain claim then why do opinion polls consistently show very little public support for full EU membership?

Sovereignty

1). Between 55%-84% of our laws (depending on whether you believe the House of Commons library, independent think-tanks, EU officials or the German government) are made by unlected bodies in Brussels. We have no power to elect or remove these law makers.
2). Membership of the EU means that we have no control of our borders when it comes to EU migrants. This increases the pressure on UK governments to bar non-EU citizens from migrating into this country as they must respond to continued public hostility to mass migration by focusing on the whole area it can actually control. This means we have the absurd situation whereby we ban Indian doctors, Chinese engineers etc from entering this country to fill skills shortages whilst allowing unskilled Europeans to enter. Not only is this economic nonsense but there is also an underlying racism that white Europeans can come freely whilst it is very difficult for Africans / Asians to come here.
3). The European Arrest Warrant and various measures to do with policing that Theresa May opted into allows UK citizens to be arrested in this country by foreign police for alleged acts that aren't even crimes in the UK. They can then be transported to foreign countries for trial, during which they do not enjoy the same protections of habeus corpus, presumption of innocent until proven guilty or trial by jury that they can enjoy in this country. There have been numerous cases of people arrested under the EAW and taken to France, Greece and Hungary where they have been detained for months without any charges being presented. Clearly cross-border cooperation is necessary to fight crime but bi-lateral extradition treaties, as we have with many non-EU countries (e.g. the UK), are sufficient to ensure criminals accused of genuine crimes for which the prosecuting country can present clear evidence of guilt are a far better method than the EAW.
4). The EU plans to harmonise members' legal systems. Given that our legal system is unique it is likely to mean abolishing common law and replacing it with that used on the Continent. We can therefore wave goodbye to habeus corpus, trial by jury and presumption of innocent until proven guilty.

Terrorism

1). Despite the claims of either camp it is unlikely that either Remaining or Leaving will increase / decrease the risk of terrorism. Most terrorism plots are uncovered through the intelligence sharing of the 5 eyes network (non-EU) so leaving will not reduce our ability to detect plots.

Immigration

1). Studies show that immigration has £NIL effect on GDP capita. Whilst it benefits the rich from having cheap labourers (as Lord Rose of the Remain campaign said his reason for supporting the EU is that reduces salary costs for employers), it makes the poor poorer by depressing wages (the lowest wages have been estimated to be £10.67 per hour if we hadn't had the mass migrations from Eastern Europe rather than minimum wage as currently), increasing competition for social housing and increasing unemployment.

BBC, Charities & Big Business

1). Never trust these organisations as impartial sources when it comes to the EU. All receive substantial funding from the EU, with 15 of the 36 FTSE signatories to Cameron's "In" letter receiving a combined £94m in grants and the BBC receiving £4m per year from the EU.

Other

1). The EU has not brought peace to Europe, NATO has. Since WW2 the American superpower has occupied Europe and entwined the majority of nations in the NATO alliance of mutual defence. Seriously which European country would have started a war that would have brought them into conflict with the US?
2). The EU has not brought the UK prosperity. Our prosperity since the 70s is due to the market reforms of Thatcher, not being part of the EU.
3). Social and environmental legislation would have been passed by UK governments, regardless of membership of the EU, as a result of the move away from a manufacturing-based economy, trade union membership and 13 years of Labour government.

Overall the EU is an anachronistic bureaucratic empire that is a relic from the 20th century. It has no place in the 21st century and is highly detrimental to the British ppl and small businesses. Of course the rich and big businesses like it as it destroys competition, undermines social mobility and depresses wages, as well as making it easier for them to lobby for favourable legislation. Inevitably it therefore appeals to Tory, Labour and Lib Dem politicians who invariably act in favour of their wealthy donors. It is therefore a question as to whether we think our politics should be conducted in accordance with the economic interests of the ordinary majority or the wealthy minority? Should we be an independent self-governing democratic nation or a province of a failing empire administered by an unaccountable bureaucracy? Should we honour the sacrifices our ancestors made to resist European domination or should we repudiate their legacy? These are the questions we should contemplate ahead of 23rd June. Anybody who cares about this country and its people should vote Leave.

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:24 am  

David Titan wrote:

The idea that we need to be within the EU to have influence in the world is laughable.

USA, China and Japan, the 3 single largest economies in the world can't get enough of British goods, especially luxury goods with British heritage and royal warrants, they literally go mad for the stuff. To think leaving the EU will suddenly see the Chinese not want to buy Burberry or the Americans not want to buy Barbour is as you say laughable. The Germans knew what they were doing when they bought the Rolls Royce and Bentley marques.

Aston Martin are creating a new plant in Wales to produce the new DBX. It will create 750-1000 skilled jobs and will see the majority of it's sales in China and USA. It's actually being built to appeal to a younger American market. How many do you think will be sold in Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia and do you really think Aston Martin care?

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Fri Feb 26, 2016 8:29 pm  

DaveO wrote:

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?

That is why I, as the employee of a medium sized manufacturing business that exports all over the world (including Japan and China) will be voting to stay in. A straw poll at our senior management's monthly meeting resulted in 1 out, 5 in and one absentee. The MD voted in so, it would appear that my employer has considered to be in the company's best interest to be in the EU.

It does amuse me when UKIPers say we can negotiate new trade agreements with the rest of the world. They seem be to naively assuming that we can secure better terms as a single entity than we can as a part of a trading block of half a billion people.

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Sat Feb 27, 2016 3:40 pm  

The notion that any nation can retreat within its sovereignty whilst the rest of the world - like it or not - is being integrated into over-arching power blocs which are the precursor to the first vestiges of global governance is completely LUDICROUS.

What is being proposed as an "exit" from Europe is nothing like an actual exit - the last nation to attempt such being Yugoslavia. And we all know what happened next.

Likewise, throughout this entire tedious debate almost no mention has been made of America's position. Which is odd because America is VERY interested in what takes place in Europe - not least because it is perceived both as a competitor and thus a threat.

Indeed, America's number one strategic goal for the past century (above oil even) has been to prevent - AT ALL COSTS - an alliance between the EU (but most importantly Germany) and Russia. Nothing brings the US state-department out in cold sweats quicker than the thought of German industry marrying itself to the vast resources of Russia.

No one would blink an eye at the suggestion that the US routinely attempts to influence the politics of third world nations and spends billions of dollars doing so. Which begs the question - if the United States is prepared to go to such lengths making sure some tin-pot dictator wins power over rival nationalist groups in central Africa - what would it do to effect political change in the EU where ... you know ... things REALLY MATTER?

The truth is Britain has been the tool of United States foreign policy since Churchill sent William Stephenson scuttling over to Washington carrying the "family jewels". For years we've served to keep Europe weak, divided and under the dominance of Washington. And we've performed that task heroically.

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Sun Feb 28, 2016 3:17 am  

Please, please, please vote leave. The EU is a subdivision of the coming global government. If the UK votes to leave the EU it will seriously damage the globalist New World Order agenda.

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Sun Feb 28, 2016 1:00 pm  

This thread is going in the direction of 'Lunatics corner' at an alarming rate...

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Sun Feb 28, 2016 6:17 pm  

TheButcher wrote:

This thread is going in the direction of 'Lunatics corner' at an alarming rate...

This is rich coming from someone whose entire contribution to this site is the equivalent of elevator muzak. Seriously, I can't remember a single post you've ever made which stimulated my imagination. You are a monument to mediocrity. Well done!

Re: Brexit Anyone? : Sun Feb 28, 2016 10:28 pm  

Well, I spent 2 very long days at the Northern Powerhouse Conference in Manchester on Thursday & Friday, alongside a distinguished selection of business 'leaders' and a few politicians. Not all from the North, it should be noted - in fact, the spread was hugely varied.

This discussion came up many times and people were surprisingly willing to offer their opinion. Almost without fail, the verdict I heard was 'out'. Many of the reasons have already been offered in this thread so I won't repeat them, but needless to say the feeling is the EU has become a restraint and a burden, and a costly one at that. There's very little the EU brings us economically we can't achieve alone.

I'll be voting out. The EU is a rapidly failing project. Yes, freer trade benefits us all, but this idealistic idiocy of 'ever closer union' and open borders is a potty and dangerous concept, especially when those who dreamed it up have us by the 'nads and are too arrogant to listen to opposition to their

I work with many Germans and have spent plenty of time in Germany in the last few years. Merkel's popularity has crashed and if you don't think the immigration situation is out of hand - try travelling by rail in Germany. You'll soon see first hand.