EU Referendum date set ....

[jwatkins456]

The most terrifying thing about us leaving the EU?

Our government, the BRITISH government, will be allowed to think entirely for itself? No restrictions whatsoever, virtually, that is scary!

[Andy3536]

The most terrifying thing about us leaving the EU?

Our government, the BRITISH government, will be allowed to think entirely for itself? No restrictions whatsoever, virtually, that is scary!

If the UK government does something you don't like, you can always vote for the another party.
If the EU does something you don't like, you can't do anything. They are completely unaccountable to the people of Europe.

[kalniel]

If the UK government does something you don't like, you can always vote for the another party.
If the EU does something you don't like, you can't do anything. They are completely unaccountable to the people of Europe.

Don't you vote for your MEP?

[HalloweenJack]

looks like Daesh are doing what they can for the BREXIT campaign.....

[peterb]

Don't you vote for your MEP?

The European Parliament has more limited powers, and a lone voice against the other European nations is likely to be swamped. However an MPs job is to represent his constituents in Parliament, as is an MEPs, but an MEP is less likely to achieve a successful outcome because of the EU monolith.

[kalniel]

The European Parliament has more limited powers, and a lone voice against the other European nations is likely to be swamped. However an MPs job is to represent his constituents in Parliament, as is an MEPs, but an MEP is less likely to achieve a successful outcome because of the EU monolith.

So is that just a symptom of the fact the more people you have in a democratic system the less 'impactful' any one individual's opinion is? Same way that if you are a RoI citizen your represented opinion has more sway in the Assembly in comparison to say an English citizen does in the UK Parliament?

The counter point to that would be to say that as a neighbour, EU's decisions still affect the UK greatly so better that UK citizens have their fair share of a say along with all other EU citizens.

[Andy3536]

Don't you vote for your MEP?

Yes, but MEPs have very little power. It's the European commission that has the power in the EU. (who we don't get a say on)
You just need to look at how the voting for the president of the EU commission to know this is something we really shouldn't be part of. A good number of countries had reservations about the now 'president' Juncker. But because he was Angela Merkels choice, and all the nations that were part of the Euro zone were going to vote along the same lines as the strongest economy in the euro zone. No one stood against this 'dead cert' so he was elected unopposed. Even though he's the very embodiment of the 'European project' of a federal Europe.
He's all for the removal of democracy, as proved by his comments regarding the French referendum on the EU constitution.

If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue

And of course, lets not forget his other great quote.

When it becomes serious, you have to lie

[peterb]

So is that just a symptom of the fact the more people you have in a democratic system the less 'impactful' any one individual's opinion is? Same way that if you are a RoI citizen your represented opinion has more sway in the Assembly in comparison to say an English citizen does in the UK Parliament?

Yes, that's true, so the requirements of the U.K. will be swamped by the other nations. I think David Cameron did well to get the concessions he negotiated, but ultimately it does reform the fundamental problems with the 'Eurpoean Project'. We can't set our own minimum rates of VAT for example.

The counter point to that would be to say that as a neighbour, EU's decisions still affect the UK greatly so better that UK citizens have their fair share of a say along with all other EU citizens.

Yes, and that is a strong argument... but, as above, David Cameron negotiating with all that is at stake for the EU (as well as the UK) hasn't managed significant reform of the overall aim of complete political integration.

[kalniel]

Yes, that's true, so the requirements of the U.K. will be swamped by the other nations.

So the same as the requirements of my town being swamped by the rest of the country in the UK. It's not ideal - and hence why we have the provision of more local governments that deal with local matters (supposedly - thanks Torys for trying to wreck that as much as possible).

That should be what the EU is set to follow - and hence the crux of the (failed) concessions that were/are still needed - decisions better taken locally should be allowed to be. But only if they're not going to affect the rest of the country (or EU) in this case.

But my point is it's fairly analogous - we still have the same system in the UK, despite its problems - my town can't set it's own VAT rate separate from the rest of the UK, regardless, so it can't by itself be a terribly important reason to reject EU membership.

[Andy3536]

So the same as the requirements of my town being swamped by the rest of the country in the UK. It's not ideal - and hence why we have the provision of more local governments that deal with local matters (supposedly - thanks Torys for trying to wreck that as much as possible).

That should be what the EU is set to follow - and hence the crux of the (failed) concessions that were/are still needed - decisions better taken locally should be allowed to be. But only if they're not going to affect the rest of the country (or EU) in this case.

But my point is it's fairly analogous - we still have the same system in the UK, despite its problems - my town can't set it's own VAT rate separate from the rest of the UK, regardless, so it can't by itself be a terribly important reason to reject EU membership.

No we don't have the same system.
In the EU, MEPs have very little power. It's an unelected executive commission that controls the direction and main policies of the EU. When you vote for an MEP, they have no influence at all over what this commission does.
It would in effect be like say that no MP in the UK could be prime minister, and the country was run by a political body that wasn't elected. While the MPs deal with all the stuff that's not interesting. (bendy fruit and veg legislation mabee???)
When you vote for your local MP, at least you are having your say in the nationwide political debate. However limited that may be. But when you vote for an MEP, you are in no way having any influence on the direction of the EU. Lets face it, there are now vast amounts of EU skeptics elected right across Europe to the EU parliament. Doesn't change a thing.

[Saracen]

Yes, that's true, so the requirements of the U.K. will be swamped by the other nations. I think David Cameron did well to get the concessions he negotiated, but ultimately it does reform the fundamental problems with the 'Eurpoean Project'. We can't set our own minimum rates of VAT for example.
.....

Is that "it does reform" a typo?

I think Cameron did well to get what he got, but I can't see how it puts even a small dent in the problems with the EU Project. It might have put a light scuff in an out of sight place, but never mind dents, it didn't even scratch the paint.

As for "done well", hmmm. The EU seems to think they went to extremes to accommodate him/the UK, and bent over backwards. The mere fact that they think that illustrates the core problem with the EU. To them, a minor scuff in the paint is a major concession that took weeks of negotiating at the highest levels.

....

Yes, and that is a strong argument... but, as above, David Cameron negotiating with all that is at stake for the EU (as well as the UK) hasn't managed significant reform of the overall aim of complete political integration.

And there it is, the overall aim .... complete political (and economic, fiscal, etc) integration. The concessions made are of the order of finding acbunch of people screaming for help at the top of a burning building, and instead of phoning 999, you shout, telling them that we'll water the plants in their garden, so don't worry.

The bulk of the machinery that is the EU doesn't want reform, doesn't see the need. They want more of what the EU is, not less, and certainly not "reform". So, they offer the absolute minimum fig leaf they consider they have to, to cover our PMs .... erm .... exposed position, on this. It wasn't an offer of reform or any real concession. It was political cover for Cameron, who'd got himself into an awkward spot, with his .... 'position' .... hanging out, exposed as the duplicity it was, where he pretty much had to come home with something he could pretend justified campaigning for in, because it was obvious he was going to from the get-go.

That's what the referendum is about .... do we, the people of the UK, want to be a region in a United States of Europe, or whatever they call it, governed from Brussels, or not.

All the rubbish the Westminster elites are nattering about, bandying one set of puerile statistics against another, one side trying to scare us about staying in, and the other trying to scare us about getting out, with the media idiots ganging on every word, trying to look intelligent by micro-analysing all the drivel, enturely misses (perhaps deliberately) the core point that this is about what we want our country to be, and even whether we want it to be a country at all, or a smallish region of a political body called Europe (though arguably, "Europe" should include Russia, and not include Turkey, but that's politicians for you).

[Galant]

Hmmmm,

Here's an interesting one - an exercise in spin maybe?

A couple of days ago on March 21st PwC released a study looking at two possible scenarios for Brexit and what might result.

An initial article I read on this, from a pro-Brexit stance said the following:

"PwC offered two alternative scenarios compared to remaining in the EU: the first with a free trade agreement between the UK and the EU, and the second with World Trade Organisation rules governing our trade. Under both these scenarios, UK growth was projected to be higher after 2020 than if Britain remained in the EU. The area of dispute is what would happen between now and 2020, with PwC arguing that there would be pain." (Cityam.com - "The CBI has admitted defeat – and the economic case against Brexit is collapsing")

However, citing the same study, a number of other sources have written that, "CBI warns Brexit could blow £100bn hole in economy and cost 950,000 jobs" (The Independent), and , "Brexit could cost UK a million jobs and £100bn says PwC study" (International Business Times).

The report itself (available here) summarises it's key findings as follows:

"We estimate that total UK GDP in 2020 could be between around 3% and 5.5% lower under
the FTA and WTO scenarios respectively than if the UK remains in the EU."

"By 2030 this post-exit uncertainty should be resolved, but we estimate that the net longer term impact of
other changes related to EU exit could result in total UK GDP in 2030 being between 1.2% and
3.5% lower in our two exit scenarios than if the UK remains in the EU (around £25-65
billion, at 2015 values)."

"We estimate average GDP per capita (in real terms) could be
between around 0.8% and 2.7% lower in 2030 in our two exit scenarios than if the UK
remains in the EU."

"Average real UK GDP per capita in 2030 would, however, be around 25% to 28% higher in
2030 than in 2015 in the EU exit scenarios, as compared to an estimated 29% increase with
continued EU membership."

"In the short-term, our results suggest that employment levels fall by 1.7% and 2.9% relative to the
counterfactual in 2020. Over the longer-term, total UK employment (the number of people
employed) in 2030 could be between around 350,000 and 600,000 lower in our two exit
scenarios relative to remaining in the EU."

"As with any economic modelling exercise, our estimates are subject to many uncertainties."

Economics is not my strong suit. Not even close.

Anyone have any thoughts?

[peterb]

The problem is the longer ahead you forecast, the less reliable that forecast will be. By 2030, the EU may have collapsed for other reasons, regardless of Brexit. I do think that the EU is scared of Brexit in case it encourages other nations to do the same.

A report of a million jobs lost is, I suspect blatant scaremongering!

But the key line is the last one "subject to many uncertainties"

[Galant]

Found this piece by John Longworth rather curious. The author is the former head of the British Chambers of Commerce (for what that's worth) and he makes some intriguing arguments, but it also reads rather simplistically in places. For example,

"Exports to the EU constitute about 13% of Britain’s GDP, with 17 % going to the rest of the world. We have a massive trade deficit with the EU (with whom we have a trade deal) and a trade surplus with the rest of the world (with whom, for the most part, we have no trade deal). I have found that, by and large, the businesses who only export to the rest of the world want to leave Europe. It is understandable, as they suffer the burdens of membership of the union but have none of the supposed advantages. Being in the EU is making them uncompetitive in the world market.

The remainder of the economy is domestic. This means that overall, 87% of our economy and the vast majority of jobs are subject to the burdens that flow from being in the EU but prosper entirely independently of it."

And, "Anti-Brexit multinational corporations, which represent only around 5% of the businesses in Britain, are short-termist and narrowly focused.

Their primary drivers are quarterly reporting, twice-yearly dividends and fat end-of-year executive bonuses – but rarely planning beyond a three-year horizon. They benefit from the barriers to market entry created by EU regulation and public procurement rules. They can produce cheaply and sell expensively by segmenting the European market. They can also avoid paying tax by operating across EU borders.

They are, in other words, economically rational in their own interests but not particularly concerned about the future of the people of Britain or the wider business community."


But then there's this, which sounds more like pure spin - the "best" business people are moving to 'out':

"By contrast, the business people signing up daily, as individuals, for the leave campaign are among the best and most successful in the country. They are the voices of the real economy, and representative of those who generate the vast majority of our output. They are the grafters who have the good ideas, the ones who employ most of our people and who risk their own money. They are the ones committed to local communities."

Although he goes on to make this point about how these people are viewing the EU, "It is these business people who tell me every day why they think staying in the EU carries a dire risk. The risk is that in the future, the eurozone will make all the economic decisions and Britain will have no say. They are also worried about the avalanche of regulation that could follow a vote to stay."

And here's his summary/conclusion:

"It is these people who, like me, have done business around the world, who know that taxpayers’ money that Brussels currently wastes could instead be invested in Britain: in public services, in infrastructure and in such things as steel production. We will be able to make our own trade deals around the globe, just like Norway, Switzerland and Iceland. Most importantly, we will be able to take back control of our own affairs, political and economic, giving us more certainty in a very uncertain world."


Has anyone else read or seen anything of note on the subject of possible British trade outside the EU?

[Galant]

"Leaving the EU would be an act of political arson that risks the destruction of international order, the former foreign secretary David Miliband has said.

In one of the starkest warnings of the referendum debate so far, Miliband argued that the impact of Brexit could extend far beyond the UK and that it could have a disastrous effect on the rest of the world.

Writing for the Guardian before delivering a key speech in Westminster on Tuesday, he said it would amount to “giving up on our alliances” with the rest of the world... “It means forsaking our position at the negotiating table and abandoning our international responsibilities – unilateral political disarmament. No nation in human peacetime history has voluntarily given up as much political power as we are being invited to throw away on 23 June.”

Good grief! And they accuse the Brexit Brigade of scaremongering! It's as if Guy Fawkes was resurrected and signed up with Spectre. Anyone seen any photos of Brexit leaders stroking white, Persian cats?

Hang on, it gets better:

"“The British question is not only one of what we get out of Europe. It is also one of whether we want to shore up the international order, or contribute to its dilution and perhaps even destruction,” said Miliband, who now heads the International Rescue Committee in New York."

Wait, what? International Rescue Committee?



If we vote 'Remain' do we get to join the Thunderbirds?

And speaking of British questions, another question might be, are there any possible down sides to staying in the EU. Or else, can Europe do better than the EU? Or maybe even, is this the only option we have? Could any of those be the British question? Or 'a' British question worth asking, maybe? No? Alright then, never mind, carry on.

“Britain cannot solve these problems alone. But we do more in and for the world than our modest size would suggest. At our best, we lead in defending the values, building the structures and defining the substance of international cooperation... If the world is increasingly divided between firefighters and arsonists, then Britain has for centuries been a firefighter. This is no time for Britain to join the ranks of arsonists and there should be no doubt that Brexit would be an act of arson on the international order.”

Yes, and that's exactly right Dave. But one might argue that it's those values, structures and substance that are on fire, being burned down by generation after generation of European political machinations.

But still, thanks for keeping watch Dave.

Hang on, is that a loose thread? You might want to cut that off.



Full Article - The Guardian