Unofficial Hexus Brexit Straw Poll - In, Out, Undecided?

[Corky34]

Whether or not we remain in the EEA/EFTA is something that the presiding government will have to decide if there is a Leave result in the referendum. <Snip>

And every other government going forward, i fully understand that, it's just i can't see any government no matter what end of the political spectrum they fall, ever wanting to withdraw from the EEA/EFTA, I'm not saying never just that it seem very unlikely that a liberal conservative or socialist government (those being the two main players) ever wanting to leave those trading blocks, it just seems the immigration thing is a bit of a red herring, with teeth.

[scaryjim]

A... it's just i can't see any government no matter what end of the political spectrum they fall, ever wanting to withdraw from the EEA/EFTA ...

if the vote goes Leave and the conservative MPs behind the Leave campaign allow the UK to remain in the EEA, it'll simply demonstrate how odiously two-faced they really are. Given the campaign so far, leaving the EU but remaining in the EEA should not be an option on anyone's plate. OTOH, the fact that the Leave campaign haven't come out and explicitly said they won't stay in the EEA says quite a lot, IMNSHO...

Besides, we can't unilaterally decide to be members of the EEA. AFAIK it would have to be ratified by a fairly hefty percentage of the existing EU/EEA membership.

Leave just has so many consequences that either we don't have a clear plan for, or that rely on someone else behaving in a particular way. It's such an uncertain course of action. I honestly cannot see any rational justification for it.

[Andy3536]

Leave just has so many consequences that either we don't have a clear plan for, or that rely on someone else behaving in a particular way. It's such an uncertain course of action. I honestly cannot see any rational justification for it.

Trouble is, so has remain.
There are dire consequences around TTIP, we're heading further and further into political union with talks of an EU border force, a navy, an army. We're tied to a completely failing economic region with no way of trading with the rest of the world off our own backs. Schools, housing etc are struggling now and can't take much more of 300,000 + net migration a year.
Lets not pretend that remain has all the answers and is a vote for the status quo. It isn't. There are unknowns to that too.

[Splash]

with no way of trading with the rest of the world off our own backs

Not an economist, but is this actually true? We can only sell to the rest of the world through EU? Because I can't see anything that suggests that this is the case here

EDIT - just to clarify: I'm not trying to push an agenda here, just to understand this particular statement which seems to be doing the rounds a lot. On the fence, but leaning toward remain as it stands.

[Andy3536]

Not an economist, but is this actually true? We can only sell to the rest of the world through EU? Because I can't see anything that suggests that this is the case here

Trade deals... Wording not the best though i realise.
Without trade deals, trading with the rest of the world is possible but at increased cost.
Whilst we are part of the EU, we can't go and get a trade deal with anyone. Only though the EU.
And the EU are terrible at it, taking years and years and then trying to push through something like TTIP???? No thanks!

[Zak33]

Here's a good moment of realisation.....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...endum-36485464

[Splash]

Whilst we are part of the EU, we can't go and get a trade deal with anyone. Only though the EU.

Again, I may be missing a point: is there something that stops us from being able to setup a trade deal with (for example) the US off our own back while a member of EU? I can't find anything documented.

What would be the costs of the setting up replacement deals in event of an "out" vote? All of the bureaucracy that would need to be put in place would obviously cost money.

As I said: currently leaning toward remain myself, but there are so many conflicting claims being thrown around by both sides that it's doing nothing but confuse folk like me. Perhaps that's the idea...

[Corky34]

There are dire consequences around TTIP...

The problem is our current government were the ones pushing for TTIP in Europe, the way things stand ATM TTIP seem very unlikely to pass as not only have there been wide spread protest's across Europe but Frances president said he'd veto it, added to that is both candidates for president from across the pond has said they don't like TTIP.

If anything I'd say we're in more danger of signing up to a TTIP style deal with the US by leaving Europe.

Again, I may be missing a point: is there something that stops us from being able to setup a trade deal with (for example) the US off our own back while a member of EU? I can't find anything documented.

My understanding is that while being a member of Europe we cede the ability to make trade deal to them, that's not to say we can't sell things around the word, just that Europe sets the terms of what preferential treatment we may get when trading with different countries.

As for setting up replacement deals should we leave (afaik) all deals would have to be renegotiated, so we'd have to replace all of these...

[scaryjim]

... What would be the costs of the setting up replacement deals in event of an "out" vote? All of the bureaucracy that would need to be put in place would obviously cost money. ...

Almost impossible to quantify. And the upfront cost of setting up the deal - the handling of negotiatoins, the repeated diplomatic visits, the civil servants employed to deal with all tjhe admin - could potentially be massively outweighed if the renegotiated deal was even minutely less beneficial than the existing one. And given the likelihood that Boris would be responsible for those negotiations (or whichever crony he appoints to the relevant ministry, anyway)...

As to the conflicting claims, that's because it's, again, almost impossible to accurately quantify any of the meaningful figures - there's too much uncertainty (although the Leave option is more uncertain than the Remain option, since we don't have a clear policy statement on what will happen should the vote go Leave). In a way, the whole campaign is a distraction from the real issue, which is whether we want Britiain to be an isolated island nation, making up its own rules and trying to distance itself from everyone else, or we want Britain to be a part of a genuine political and economic superpower*. It is, essentially, an ideological question, not at economic or political one. OTOH it's very hard to get people to change their ideological stance, so the campaigns are having to try to find other arguments to persuade people.

*And yes, I know my phrasing of the option is emotive and leading Being part of the EU brings all sorts of problems with it. I still think it's a better option than being a net importer on a global stage.

[peterb]

While I agree that both options have uncertainty, and therefore risk, associayrd with them, the risks are different in each case.

We're The UK to leave, any exports to the EU would still have to comply with EU regulations, but that would be a choice, not a dictat. Similarly trade agreements might require the UK to adopt some of the EU directives, but again, that would be a choice.

So as Scaryjim said, it is one of ideology, but one I'd phrase as whether we want the UK to be one voice in 28, forced to accept the views of a majority that may not be in the best interests of the U.K.,mor do we want to be an independent nation, free to trade globally, governed by an accountable Parliament?

[Corky34]

...forced to accept the views of a majority that may not be in the best interests...

Democracy, it may not be perfect but it's the best we've got.

[scaryjim]

... whether we want the UK to be one voice in 28, forced to accept the views of a majority that may not be in the best interests of the U.K., or do we want to be an independent nation, free to trade globally, governed by an accountable Parliament?

I guess the answer to that question depends on how accountable you feel Westminster is My take would be that we're already governed by a minority that doesn't have the best interests of the UK at heart anyway. But then I'm a bitter old cynic.

Democracy, it may not be perfect but it's the best we've got.

Meh, benign dictatorships are far better - you get stronger leadership and a clear direction. It's where most dictators go wrong - they take control then do what's in their own best interests. Take control then do what's in everyone else's best interests, and you'll find the populace far less inclined to rebel

More generally, my real concern about voting remain is that, whilst we'll technically remain a member of the EU, we'll completely fail to take part in the EU - we'll continue tiptoeing around the edges. We're like one of those people who goes to a night club then stands in a corner nursing a pint and complaining that the music's too loud and they never play the good songs. We need to put the pint down and start dancing, frankly.

[The Hand]

Meh, benign dictatorships are far better - you get stronger leadership and a clear direction. It's where most dictators go wrong - they take control then do what's in their own best interests. Take control then do what's in everyone else's best interests, and you'll find the populace far less inclined to rebel

Sounds like Huxley's Brave New World...

[scaryjim]

Sounds like Huxley's Brave New World...

Well, not quite - in that one the populace was manipulated continuously - even before birth - to keep them compliant. But there's no good reason that a totalitarian system can't also work for the benefit of it's members. Brave New World was an extreme version of an apparently benign totalitarian system. Where it is curious - particularly for the literature of the time - is in not being unarguably dystopian; in a lot of ways the lot of the populace is pretty good, but they're practically robots, programmed to enjoy and work and fulfil their designated function in society - they've pretty much stopped being people.

But that's probably a conversation for a different thread, to be fair

[The Hand]

Well, not quite - in that one the populace was manipulated continuously - even before birth - to keep them compliant. But there's no good reason that a totalitarian system can't also work for the benefit of it's members. Brave New World was an extreme version of an apparently benign totalitarian system. Where it is curious - particularly for the literature of the time - is in not being unarguably dystopian; in a lot of ways the lot of the populace is pretty good, but they're practically robots, programmed to enjoy and work and fulfil their designated function in society - they've pretty much stopped being people.

But that's probably a conversation for a different thread, to be fair

It's an interesting topic though. "Community, Identity, Stability" ..sounds like Cameron on the EU "Remain" campaign trail!

I think it's just a bit of contradiction - A benign dictatorship. If humans are really going to create one and remain in control of it then, it's inevitable it will be corrupted over time. Democracy at least acknowledges the human condition of not only wishing to change your rulers by peaceful and fair(ish) means, but also that of, if one power base remains in power indefinitely it inevitably becomes complacent and corrupt and the subjects are too apathetic, ignorant and powerless to change the system.

Just a thought really .. the seeds of an apathetic dystopia are in the EU somewhere! lol

[kalniel]

*cough* Philosopher kings! *cough*