EU Referendum

[websaway]

Oh, really? You're going to use the "don't mention the war" line of reasoning to rubbish the comments of Germany's equivalent of George Osborne?

Distasteful. Disgraceful.

I have no idea how you expect a debate to continue, on any level, when resorting to shots of such cheapness.

No apologies here Edwin. I don't like being dictated to by Brussels who at least have some credibility because we joined, so certainly not some German finance minister, who could be out on his ear tomorrow. I suspect we are not going to be dictated to by a single politician in Germany who has absolutely no power over us at all. He admits that if we go so will Norway and Holland so he is trying a bit of heavy handed scare tactics. We joined the EU, we are not run by Germany, although they have tried to control us in various ways before and came unstuck. And keep your politically correct standards for what you say and don't try to impose your measures on me. Merkel invited millions into Germany and caused chaos in Europe, I think they should be apologising for what they have caused and not threaten other countries.

 

[martin-s]

Even if they do, the UK will be out and therefore not a beneficiary of their reforms.

Unless there's another referendum.

 

[gimpydog]

As I posted already, that's exactly equal to the % of foreign nationals in Britain.

That is untrue. You are probably quoting Wikipedia and confusing "country of birth" - which is 13%, with "nationality" which is 8.4%.

So it follows that the non-UK national prison population is about 50 % higher than it should be statistically.

• "In 2014, 1 in 12 (8.4%) of the usual resident population of the UK had non-British nationality. This compares to 1 in 20 (5.0%) in 2004"

FACTS: http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...countryofbirthandnationalityreport/2015-09-27

Figure 3: 5 most common countries of birth in the UK in 2014

 

[Edwin]

Unless there's another referendum.

Sorry, you've lost me.

One thing both the Leave and Remain camps haven't disputed is the fact that if the UK leaves it will have to go through exactly the same application process to rejoin as any other country would when joining for the first time. (This argument was also put forward extremely forcefully during the Scottish Referendum)

In other words, having been a former EU member doesn't cut any corners if it came time to re-join. And the process for becoming a EU member is extremely long-winded and exigent, and requires the unanimous consent of every EU country.

So a future referendum on accession would be the very first and least of the hurdles in the way of the UK re-joining the EU...

 

[BREWSTERS]

Frank Field (one of the few Labour Leave supporters) warned a few hours ago that the Labour party is likely to lose a million votes because of its Remain stance.

If that's true, doesn't that show their official position is against their own self-interest, not in line with it?

MP's voted in favour of attacking Syria against the views of the majority of people - they don't care because their loyalties lie elsewhere. If anyone believes that top MP's work in the interests of their constituents, please, show me the evidence. There is a huge amount of evidence showing they don't.

In the case of Brexit, they're scared that leaving would bring down the whole EU super state. Which it likely will do.

 

[martin-s]

Sorry, you've lost me.

One thing both the Leave and Remain camps haven't disputed is the fact that if the UK leaves it will have to go through exactly the same application process to rejoin as any other country would when joining for the first time. (This argument was also put forward extremely forcefully during the Scottish Referendum)

If the Brexit shockwave around Europe is big enough, the rules might change. Who knows.

Allow a bit of grey into your black and white thinking - if the landscape changes, you adapt. The EU operates in its own self interest. If UK membership at the cost of changing a bit becomes in their self interest, they may change.

I'm not saying it's going to happen, I'm saying that the world after Brexit might look different, so why rule it out 100%?

In a scenario where we vote leave, we have a two year exit negotiation period. Who's to say what that might bring.

 

[BREWSTERS]

Oh, really? You're going to use the "don't mention the war" line of reasoning to rubbish the comments of Germany's equivalent of George Osborne?

Equivalent of George Osborne? So this guy's qualifications to run the economy is a history degree too? Or was he at school with Merkel? Maybe he's got a longstanding coke addiction perhaps? Or is he a shareholder in his family business which has paid no corporation tax for years despite being able to pay out sizeable dividends?

You're right....disgusting!

 

[Edwin]

Allow a bit of grey into your black and white thinking - if the landscape changes, you adapt. The EU operates in its own self interest. If UK membership at the cost of changing a bit becomes in their self interest, they may change.

That grey comment should, in fairness, apply both ways...

You're right, there's a possibility that the EU will have to change to accommodate the UK in ways it has never accommodated other countries, post-Brexit. Stuff changes all the time - so it could happen.

But equally, I hope you can agree there's a possibility the UK will flat out fail to get a decent trade deal. Either because the only deal that makes any economic sense requires "free movement of people" (thus negating control of immigration) forcing the UK to turn it down, or because the other EU countries refuse to go along with what they perceive as an attempt to strong-arm them, and decide to make up the "UK shortfall" in some other way (e.g. by accelerating trade deal negotiations with other potential non-EU partners, such as the USA or China)

 

[martin-s]

But equally, I hope you can agree there's a possibility the UK will flat out fail to get a decent trade deal. Either because the only deal that makes any economic sense requires "free movement of people" (thus negating control of immigration) forcing the UK to turn it down, or because the other EU countries refuse to go along with what they perceive as an attempt to strong-arm them, and decide to make up the "UK shortfall" in some other way (e.g. by accelerating trade deal negotiations with other potential non-EU partners, such as the USA or China)

It's fair to say that a trade deal could take a while, but I suspect it'll be pretty much the No.1 priority for both sides. Either way, I think a "reasonable" (compromise?) trade deal is pretty much a certainty.

 

[Edwin]

It's fair to say that a trade deal could take a while, but I suspect it'll be pretty much the No.1 priority for both sides. Either way, I think a "reasonable" (compromise?) trade deal is pretty much a certainty.

It's likely to be more urgent for the UK than the EU (since the UK has a drop-dead deadline to work against, after which all the existing trade rules automatically stop applying) but I'm sure it will be top of mind on the EU agenda for the 2-year notice period, at least.

BTW, it's interesting** to see just how much of this kind of negotiation goes on all the time at an EU level.
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/118238.htm

(** for a certain shade of "interesting")

 

[martin-s]

Pretty important for Germany too I suspect

 

[Edwin]

Pretty important for Germany too I suspect

Oh, definitely. After all, the UK's the second largest contributor to Germany's trade surplus, after the USA...

One potential snag is that Germany's surplus is mainly based on selling "stuff" i.e. goods, which have historically been much easier to conclude trade deals over than services. So they may bend over backwards to get a "goods" trade deal sorted out (which the UK needs too) but drag their heels over a "services" trade deal which the UK needs even more (around 80% of UK trade is in goods) but which is of much lesser importance to Germany.

 

[signature]

Unfortunately not. It was nearly 13% in 2013. That's "foreign nationals", so doesn't include dual-nationality etc.

​

my 5% is based on the immigrant population not the percentage of immigrants in the prison population. The reason my statement was even if the total prison population are immigrants that's still less than 10% of the immigrants population.

 

[gimpydog]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

"SHUT UP" Izzard

 

[BeachLife]

Trade Agreements....another smokescreen to baffle the masses... ...The list of countries the EU does have agreements with, is frankly pathetic.

BTW, it's interesting** to see just how much of this kind of negotiation goes on all the time at an EU level.
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/118238.htm

A WTO map of the number of Trade Agreements world wide can be seen at https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/rta_participation_map_e.htm

For a list of the trade agreements between the EU and others, see http://rtais.wto.org/UI/PublicSearchByMemberResult.aspx?MemberCode=918&lang=1&redirect=1, or for a list of worldwide agreements see http://rtais.wto.org/ui/PublicAllRTAList.aspx

According to the WTO data linked to above, the EU has the highest number of trade agreements in the world. Not including the current negotiations with Canada, India, Japan, USA (TTIP), Eastern Africa Community, West Africa States, and others.

 

[BREWSTERS]

Forget Trade Agreements....they're bandied about as if people now what they involve....it's to take minds away from real issues. The EU DOESN'T HAVE any trade agreements with any of our largest trading partner countries. NONE!!!!! Nil; zero; zip; nadda; the square root of jack! None.

These are the countries that have EU trade agreements - prepare to be underwhelmed;

Kosovo

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Serbia

Ukraine

Montenegro

Albania

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Faroe Islands

Norway

Iceland

Switzerland

Algeria

Egypt

Lebanon

Jordan

Israel

Morocco

Tunisia

Palestinian Authority

Syria

Colombia and Peru

Central America

Iraq

Madagascar, Mauritius, the Seychelles, and Zimbabwe

Chile

Mexico

South Africa

Turkey

San Marino

Andorra

Papua New Guinea and Fiji

Korea

Cameroon

Still think that 'trade agreements' matter? We likely do more trade in one week with China or Japan than all these countries in a year.

 

[Edwin]

Forget Trade Agreements....they're bandied about as if people now what they involve....it's to take minds away from real issues. The EU DOESN'T HAVE any trade agreements with any of our largest trading partner countries. NONE!!!!! Nil; zero; zip; nadda; the square root of jack! None.

These are the countries that have EU trade agreements - prepare to be underwhelmed;

Kosovo

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Serbia

Ukraine

Montenegro

Albania

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Faroe Islands

Norway

Iceland

Switzerland

Algeria

Egypt

Lebanon

Jordan

Israel

Morocco

Tunisia

Palestinian Authority

Syria

Colombia and Peru

Central America

Iraq

Madagascar, Mauritius, the Seychelles, and Zimbabwe

Chile

Mexico

South Africa

Turkey

San Marino

Andorra

Papua New Guinea and Fiji

Korea

Cameroon

Still think that 'trade agreements' matter? We likely do more trade in one week with China or Japan than all these countries in a year.

Here are the other countries that the EU has trade agreements with:
- France
- Germany
- UK
- Netherlands
- Belgium
- Spain
- etc. (mentally insert the other EU countries here)

Just because it's all wrapped up neatly (at the moment) into a 28-state mega-deal is not the same as saying there are no trade agreements between EU countries! All those will also need to be renegotiated. As will deals with Norway, Switzerland, etc.

 

[BeachLife]

Forget Trade Agreements....they're bandied about as if people now what they involve....it's to take minds away from real issues. The EU DOESN'T HAVE any trade agreements with any of our largest trading partner countries. NONE!!!!! Nil; zero; zip; nadda; the square root of jack! None.

The only figures I can find quickly, by the CBI, show that being part of the EU, and consequently its trade agreements, gives the UK access to 1/3 of the total world markets by value.

Not including the current negotiations with Canada, India, Japan, USA (TTIP), Eastern Africa Community, West Africa States, and others.

When the EU completes the Japan and US agreements this will increase to 2/3. If all are signed then it will give access to 88% of world markets by value.

If we leave the EU then we will have trade agreements with 0%, initially at least.

 

[Toonz]

When I'm ill, I see a doctor. When I need legal advice, I turn to a lawyer. When I need help with my accounts, I go to an accountant. When I need the plumbing fixed, I call in a plumber. In other words, I turn to experts.

So why has being an "expert" at something suddenly morphed into an insult? In the eyes of the Leave camp (especially during the debates) the word "expert" itself seems to produce a feeling like stepping in dog mess. Just watch their faces whenever a Remain camp person says "experts say".

Could it be because an overwhelming majority of experts support Remain? You cannot, with a straight face, read through the following list and say that the weight of expert opinion is the same on both sides...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endor...om_European_Union_membership_referendum,_2016

I think you've nailed it.

It's a classic trick of these charlatans who engage in populism. They'll always aim their attack at the more intelligent/informed of society in order to pander to the egos of the less intelligent/less informed, even when they know that the arguments of the former are correct. It's one of the oldest political tricks in the book. The tabloids and mid-market papers do this all the time.

"Experts" is just the latest variation on this technique. Other common lines of attack that you hear from the Trumps, Palins and Farages of the world include "the metropolitan elite", "the sneering elite", "the intelligentsia", sarcastically pronouncing the word "intellectuals" by over-ecunciating each syllable, and so on. Basically it's pandering to people's ignorance and lower instincts, saying "These people, with their facts and information and things that you're too stupid to understand - they think they're better than you, but they're not, are they?!".

The perfect encapsulation of this was Farage's "Common Sense Express" tour of Britain a few years back. Never mind the experts - it's the bloke down the pub who knows how to sort this country out, if only they'd put him in charge. It's all quite straightforward really, we can solve all the problems in the country with just good old fashioned common sense.

Lest we forget how Farage cultivates his image at every opportunity - with a pint and a press crew. Populism at its finest.

The polls and ratings tend to lift the lid on this. Boris scores well above average on likeability and PM material but has been rated well below average by fact checking organisations. A fraud cut from the same cloth as Trump, but more clever because he's cultivated this likeable image of bumbling buffonery. Nobody suspects the buffoon of being calculating. A buffoon is dumb. A bit like us.

As I said elsewhere, there are intelligent arguments for leaving the EU (and there are populist arguments being made by the remain camp), but it annoys me no end when I see the leave side relying so heavily on these tactics because they fool good decent people, not just the mean-spirited, small-minded ones. I'm thinking in particular of those who claim to be defenders of the less privileged and less well off and seriously believe that IDS, Whittingdale, Grayling, Fox, etc are going to lead them into a brave new world of better living standards and fairness for the ordinary man and woman on the street. You just need to look at the backstory of these people - in many case, the recent backstory - to see what they're really about.

 

[AlistairM]

I watched his new documentary on putlocker a few weeks ago. Interesting for Americans I suppose but I found it boring. But to counter what he says on the referendum in the video here's a word from David Icke.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies