# Brexit The Movie



## Roughcut (14 May 2016)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTMxfAkxfQ0


----------



## Yorkshire Sam (16 May 2016)

While I must admit I am all for leaving anyway I have to say that this movie makes for compulsive viewing. No dire threats, no armageddon just a plain statement of facts ( from the leaving point of view obviously) of the case. Can the remainders not put their case for remaining without having to resort to threats in a similar format giving us the facts warts and all! It would be nice to have a balanced arguement.


----------



## DiscoStu (16 May 2016)

My phone won't play the movie but I agree that it would be good to see the facts from both sides. I guess the problem is that there are a lot of unknowns if we do exit such as trade agreements etc. I do think the stay campaign keeping implying that if we were to leave then trade would end etc. and I just don't buy that. There is a lot of scare stories being mooted but the fact is a lot of it is just unknown. 

It would be nice to have a list of facts ie what we get out of the EU and what we put in. 

It would be fine to list the unknowns as exactly that unknowns. So you have the facts and then all the other points tut need to be considered and evaluated. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Phil Pascoe (16 May 2016)

The main problem for those tempted to remain is remain in what? Whatever the outcome of the referendum, the EU will be a much different place after it, so what has gone before to a large extent is irrelevant. They've already postponed telling us by how much our membership will increase to pay for "the migrant crisis". Someone is going to have to pay for Albania etc. and by someone read Britain and Germany (France?) - and that's without mentioning Turkey. They insist Turkey won't be joining in a hurry - but they've recognised Turkish as an EU language. Curious, that.


----------



## AJB Temple (16 May 2016)

I was talking to a very well known political journalist at the weekend, who is quite well known for interviewing politicians. His off record view about the debate is that most people have already long since made up their minds about how they will vote and that there is very little evidence that the media, politicians or anyone else is having much influence in swaying it either way. He also suggests that most people have a very weak grasp of the economic arguments and very little knowledge, and not much desire to further that knowledge either. He surmised that most people will vote based on emotive reasons and that this (as an overall project) is not a very smart way to make such fundamental decisions. 

It would be interesting (to me anyway) to know what the vote preference is by area, gender and age band. Forums like this are deeply unrepresentative of the population as a whole I would think. Only perhaps 20 members are vocal on the subject.


----------



## mind_the_goat (16 May 2016)

Yorkshire Sam":lyiso5qf said:


> No dire threats, no armageddon just a plain statement of facts



Geez, I've never seen such a blatant piece of propaganda, So 1 minute in we see riots and a what looks like a Nazi rally. No scaremongering there. Did you really watch this and not feel you were being manipulated ? 
This has just reinforced my view that we need to stay in, the outers have nothing but this?


----------



## RobinBHM (16 May 2016)

AJB Temple":3ct4h25j said:


> I was talking to a very well known political journalist at the weekend, who is quite well known for interviewing politicians. His off record view about the debate is that most people have already long since made up their minds about how they will vote and that there is very little evidence that the media, politicians or anyone else is having much influence in swaying it either way. He also suggests that most people have a very weak grasp of the economic arguments and very little knowledge, and not much desire to further that knowledge either. He surmised that most people will vote based on emotive reasons and that this (as an overall project) is not a very smart way to make such fundamental decisions.
> 
> It would be interesting (to me anyway) to know what the vote preference is by area, gender and age band. Forums like this are deeply unrepresentative of the population as a whole I would think. Only perhaps 20 members are vocal on the subject.



Very well put and undoubtedly true, Im sure most people will vote based on emotive reasons. I expect that is also true of general elections.

One point made in the brexit movie: 'if we vote to stay, another referendum wont be another 40 years or more' -thats certainly something to think about!

Something I wonder, if we leave, what impact will it have on the reduced eu and remaining countries?


----------



## clk230 (16 May 2016)

Thought Politics was off the agenda


----------



## Jacob (16 May 2016)

I'm for in. I don't know quite why we are having a referendum anyway - we can pull out anytime if we really want to.
Can't be bothered to watch the movie as it is unbalanced by definition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrati ... pean_Union
We should stay in and work from within to improve it as necessary.


----------



## paulrockliffe (16 May 2016)

We've already been shown what happens when we try to reform the EU from within, the EU isn't interested in any of the reforms that the UK population might vote for

The agenda is integration. Once integration is completed the issues will disappear. That's the plan. Of course, that means an EU in 20, 30, 40 years time that virtually no one in the UK would choose, but then how will we do anything about it then?


----------



## Phil Pascoe (16 May 2016)

"We should stay in and work from within to improve it as necessary."
Forty three years our politicians have been saying that, and getting precisely nowhere.


----------



## Chippyjoe (16 May 2016)

Jacob":1nw2gt03 said:


> I'm for in. I don't know quite why we are having a referendum anyway - we can pull out anytime if we really want to.
> Can't be bothered to watch the movie as it is unbalanced by definition.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrati ... pean_Union
> We should stay in and work from within to improve it as necessary.




The reason for having a referendum is because we live in a democracy perhaps . (hammer)


----------



## Jacob (16 May 2016)

phil.p":2me3ziw3 said:


> "We should stay in and work from within to improve it as necessary."
> Forty three years our politicians have been saying that, and getting precisely nowhere.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04 ... ne-for-us/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 50626.html
http://www.theguardian.com/culture/vide ... r-us-video

Could go on - the remain arguments are endless and pretty convincing.
Not sure what the Brexit arguments are except it seems to involve paranoia and anxiety. Basically "nay saying"on a big scale.
Anybody involved in any local community stuff will encounter "nay saying" - it's a primitive first response for those who aren't clear what issues are, or who don't want to take a chance - it seems safer (and decisive) to say NO.


----------



## Jacob (16 May 2016)

Chippyjoe":k09c4klb said:


> Jacob":k09c4klb said:
> 
> 
> > I'm for in. I don't know quite why we are having a referendum anyway - we can pull out anytime if we really want to.
> ...


Yebbut the decision to go in in the first place was democratic and if we want to pull out in the future we can. So why now a referendum? There was a reason but I can't quite remember what it was.


----------



## RobinBHM (16 May 2016)

I cant see how we can pull out later if we want. It seems to me to be a once only chance to leave.


----------



## stuartpaul (16 May 2016)

mind_the_goat":622r3pw6 said:


> Geez, I've never seen such a blatant piece of propaganda, So 1 minute in we see riots and a what looks like a Nazi rally. No scaremongering there. Did you really watch this and not feel you were being manipulated ?
> This has just reinforced my view that we need to stay in, the outers have nothing but this?


Have to agree with you completely.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (16 May 2016)

"Without the EU, travelling across the continent could become more troublesome"
That's not scaremongering, of course.


----------



## Jacob (16 May 2016)

RobinBHM":20u36qcy said:


> I cant see how we can pull out later if we want. It seems to me to be a once only chance to leave.


Not so. Read the small print. Wouldn't be easy , but then it won't be now if we decide to quit.


----------



## finneyb (16 May 2016)

RobinBHM":yd130fam said:


> I cant see how we can pull out later if we want. It seems to me to be a once only chance to leave.



UK can pull out any time with 2 years notice. BUT as now it will take 10 years to unravel and rebuild outside the EU.
I'm for remaining. The Brexit film, as far as I watched, was citing 47 laws for a bathroom - I can understand that you need standardisation so that UK manufactures can sell to the whole EU and benefit from selling to the whole market on one production run. 

EU legislation is lead a lot of the time by UK Govt and companies, been very close to it at one time.

Brian


----------



## Jacob (16 May 2016)

phil.p":11s3mw7k said:


> "Without the EU, travelling across the continent could become more troublesome"
> That's not scaremongering, of course.


You mean you are frightened if immigrants?
On the whole they seem to be a good thing - their country's loss is our gain.
The out of EU immigration issue would be better dealt with by the EU en masse rather than state by state. Share the burden - in so far as it is a burden - historically immigration has almost always been a huge economic benefit.
I look forwards to immigrants arriving in our village. So far we have a handful (dozen or so total) of Germans, Dutch, Polish, Romanian, French. All lively bunch of hard working intelligent people highly welcome. We also have a few Scots, Welsh, Irish, people from Yorkshire. :roll:
By way of balance there seems to be a great number of Brits living /working abroad. Millions nationally. God elp us we don't want them all sent back here - moaning about the weather, the food and wine!


----------



## lurker (16 May 2016)

Jacob":319948s6 said:


> phil.p":319948s6 said:
> 
> 
> > "Without the EU, travelling across the continent could become more troublesome"
> ...



You might change your tune if you lived in Boston or Spalding or kings Lynne.
Anyway Jacob is an "in" so is BB automatically an "out"
Just wondering


----------



## Rhossydd (16 May 2016)

RobinBHM":143mzs5f said:


> I cant see how we can pull out later if we want. It seems to me to be a once only chance to leave.


By the same mechanism that we could now. However if the country was stupid enough to leave, rejoining would be far, far harder when the economic chaos had taken it's toll.



> He also suggests that most people have a very weak grasp of the economic arguments and very little knowledge, and not much desire to further that knowledge either. He surmised that most people will vote based on emotive reasons and that this (as an overall project) is not a very smart way to make such fundamental decisions.


This is the really scary part. So many people that don't understand the issues and won't make any effort to learn, will be be allowed to wreck the country's economy.


----------



## Jacob (16 May 2016)

lurker":1ujt7nm5 said:


> [
> You might change your tune if you lived in Boston or Spalding or kings Lynne.
> Anyway Jacob is an "in" so is BB automatically an "ou...


I blame the employers, gangmasters, landlords, lack of trade union protection, lack of council housing, etc, etc. 
Last people I would blame are the immigrants - I'd apologise to them for the sh|t state of our country.
I also benefit from the cheap fruit and veg they pick. Apparently there'd be a serious prob if they weren't there doing the work.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (16 May 2016)

finneyb":2r009pch said:


> RobinBHM":2r009pch said:
> 
> 
> > I cant see how we can pull out later if we want. It seems to me to be a once only chance to leave.
> ...


The standardisation to sell to the EU is fine - but I have to comply with expensive EU regulations even if I only sell to Bolivia or Mongolia.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (16 May 2016)

"This is the really scary part. So many people that don't understand the issues and won't make any effort to learn, will be be allowed to wreck the country's economy."
As someone pointed out in The Times the other day - if you want three opinions, ask two economists. That given argument works both ways of course.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (16 May 2016)

Jacob":3q9r56l5 said:


> phil.p":3q9r56l5 said:
> 
> 
> > "Without the EU, travelling across the continent could become more troublesome"
> ...


Could you please tell me where immigrants were mentioned? 
By the bye. If they are an economic benefit, why is our bill going up? (The amount not being publicised til after the referendum, note) to help pay for the "immigrant CRISIS" (as widely reported). We have Polish language notices in the schools (and Polish language "Shoplifters Will Be Prosecuted" notices in the market). I have nothing but admiration for them, but the system that keeps our council estates full of people sitting on their buttocks while importing unskilled labour is bizarre, to say the least.


----------



## harvestbarn (16 May 2016)

Any large company would not be allowed to operate without audited accounts cannot see why the EU should be an exception.

I think at the last referendum we were mislead we thought we were joining a Common Market not a super state where even the MEP`s cannot draft or change laws without the unelected bureaucrats agreeing to it first.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (16 May 2016)

"By the same mechanism that we could now. However if the country was stupid enough to leave, rejoining would be far, far harder when the economic chaos had taken it's toll."
Why would we wish to rejoin the only continent in the world whose economy is decreasing? (and I don't mean geographically, before some clown comments  )


----------



## DiscoStu (16 May 2016)

I find the economic thing one of the biggest reasons for leaving where would we be if we'd have gone in for the euro?

I started out completely on the fence but as time has gone I've moved towards exiting. Part of the reason for that is that the in campaign fails to give me good reasons for staying in and only scare mongers the exit campaign. I would like the UK to control its own borders. I would like our courts to decide when we want to eject someone from our country and not be overruled by Brussels. I think the trade argument has its place but we are not going to stop trading with other countries. They want our business. 

I struggle to see what the disadvantages of leaving really are. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rhossydd (17 May 2016)

phil.p":uumgipfj said:


> If they are an economic benefit, why is our bill going up? (The amount not being publicised til after the referendum, note) to help pay for the "immigrant CRISIS"


You're confusing immigrants with refugees.

Try reading this, don't worry there's no scary big words;
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 26796.html


----------



## Rhossydd (17 May 2016)

phil.p":19btdir7 said:


> As someone pointed out in The Times the other day - if you want three opinions, ask two economists.


Except that most economists across the globe are saying that Britain leaving the EU will be a bad thing, not only for the UK, but for global economics.
OBR, BoE, IMF......

"The Times" as owned by Rupert Murdoch.
"A quote in the Anthony Hilton column for the Evening Standard, may give pause for thought as to how you vote in the EU referendum and otherwise:
"I once asked Rupert Murdoch why he was so opposed to the European Union. 'That’s easy,' he replied. 'When I go into Downing Street they do what I say; when I go to Brussels they take no notice.'"


----------



## Rhossydd (17 May 2016)

DiscoStu":2q18e3xe said:


> I find the economic thing one of the biggest reasons for leaving where would we be if we'd have gone in for the euro?


 But we didn't. Gordon Brown refused.


> I struggle to see what the disadvantages of leaving really are.


The stock market dropping (Got a pension fund or ISA ? that's linked to the stock market, you'll have less). House prices dropping, inflation rising whilst the economy stagnates leaving you poorer, fall of the pound (more expensive imported goods, more expensive foreign travel), higher interest rates, lack of inward investment by foreign companies so less good jobs.
But don't worry; there'll be a lot of demand for vegetable pickers and cleaners when there's no cheap transient labour from Europe to do the nasty work, so your children will at least have jobs.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

Rhossydd":1646yavl said:


> phil.p":1646yavl said:
> 
> 
> > If they are an economic benefit, why is our bill going up? (The amount not being publicised til after the referendum, note) to help pay for the "immigrant CRISIS"
> ...


There really is no need to be insulting. I can think of plenty of things i'd like to insult you for, but refrain.


----------



## Roughcut (17 May 2016)

Rhossydd":3ohis62z said:


> DiscoStu":3ohis62z said:
> 
> 
> > I find the economic thing one of the biggest reasons for leaving where would we be if we'd have gone in for the euro?
> ...





To be honest your replies to other posters in this thread come across as condescending.
Yes of course leaving the Eurozone would lead us to charging import duty on goods within the EU which currently are not applicable and more expensive travel within the EU.
However what facts and evidence can you provide that the rest of what you have written is true and correct?


----------



## DiscoStu (17 May 2016)

I don't see how the demand for housing will go down if we were to leave? And is house prices dropping actually an issue maybe it would help those that need to buy a house? 

Leaving the EU will not cut us off from Europe. Switzerland isn't in the EU and neither is Norway but they both trade and live within Europe without an issue. 

I suspect the stock market may well take a hit, but for how long? We are not talking about a decision that is for a couple of years, this is a decision that will affect our society for decades. I'm 42 and in my lifetime I've seen the UK gradually loose it's control and some of its identity. I'm not against immigration and I'm not against helping refugees but I do think we should be able to do it on our terms. If Europe was fair and each country took a proportional amount of refugees then I'd be pretty happy with that but understandably the refugees are coming to the wealthier economies with free health services so we are one of the countries hit with the impact. 

I find the economic argument difficult to swallow, even if there are some downward trends, they won't be for long. Our economy isn't as linked to Europe as it could be and I for one am glad that we are not in the euro. So being independent has worked for us there so why not elsewhere? 

I really did start completely on the fence with this and if anything was more for the stay in campaign but as time has gone on I just can't see the reasons to stay other than the fear of the unknown. If we are afraid of the unknown, then we really aren't backing ourselves as a country. It's about time we got a little more patriotic in this county. I don't want to sound like a daily mail reader but a little bit more belief in Britain would be nice to see. As a nation we have a huge amount to be proud of and I don't want to see that eroded away any further. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DiscoStu (17 May 2016)

Can I also just say, just because someone offers a different opinion to you, it doesn't make them an silly person or even wrong, so please try and respect each other's views without resorting to being rude. In fact when we resort to that it shows we have little else to offer in the debate. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

" I just can't see the reasons to stay other than the fear of the unknown."
If we vote to stay in, we're voting for the unknown. We've already heard that proposed increases in our membership are not to be announced until our referendum, and what will happen as even more European economies go down the Swanee? Albania? Why not? We've a capital full of Romanian crooks already - why not more? (50% of crime on the underground is committed by immigrants and 90% of cashpoint crime by Romanians - fact, not prejudice). What happens with millions of immigrants when Germany decides it's had enough and gives them European ID papers? Hungary issued 500,000 passports knowing full well that the recipients would move to other EU Countries. Seventy five million Turks with EU wide travel papers? Might bring down the cost of kebabs, I suppose.


----------



## Jacob (17 May 2016)

So it was fear of immigrants then! :lol: 
Yes a minority of people on the edge (for whatever reason) may turn to crime, but it's easy to forget that big crime in Britain is done via the city and offshore. The super rich are mega powerful and being in the EU is one way we can gather enough power to control them. Out and they are more powerful than us - as we see in London where they dominate the property market.


----------



## Cheshirechappie (17 May 2016)

Roughcut - thanks for posting 'Brexit - the Movie'. It does seem to be less hysterical than much of what is currently passing for public debate.

Brexit for me.

As one of the Little People, I'd much rather be in a system in which the governing are accountable to the governed through the ballot box. I have virtually no political power, but I do have one vote, and at least under the current Westminster system, if enough of my fellow citizens think a current government is failing, it can be changed by electing another. Also, because the governing depend on public votes for their office, they do have to take some notice of public opinion occasionally.

Not so with the EU system. Our votes only give us the right to elect members to a talking-shop, one with no authority, or with no history of using any authority it might theoretically have to hold the decision-makers to account. The real decision makers are the unelected Commissioners (and the armies of even more unelected bureaucrats churning out regulations for everything), appointed by - well, who exactly? - and utterly unaccountable to those over whom they govern.

As for all the economic arguments - well, economists have to revise their forecasts of the economy for three months ahead, never mind years ahead. All these clever economists told us we'd be better off in the Euro, and turned out to be wrong. None of these clever economists accurately forecast the 2008 crash. Their 'forecasts' are at best blind guesses, and at worst outright propaganda in their own interests. In truth, nobody knows what the economic future holds, in or out of the EU.

The polls are quite interesting. Allister Heath in the Telegraph pointed out the other day that Project Fear has been been in full swing for some weeks, with predictions of economic meltdown, wars and all sorts of other horrors if we vote to leave, but the polls have not changed at all. For whatever reason, the general public are not swallowing it. Telephone and internet polls tend to give rather different results, too. Most people I talk to say pretty much the same thing; they're disgusted by the standard of public debate so far, from both sides. It's becoming increasingly clear that anybody looking for 'facts' in the debate is going to be sorely disappointed, or will have to go and find them for themselves. What 'factual' information I have seen has been pretty neutral on economics, ditto on security, and fairly consensual that short term differences will be slight, and the longer term is not very predictable.

Thus, for me, it comes down to being able to vote for those seeking to govern. Over the longer term, governments accountable to those electing them will act more in the interests of us than governments unaccountable to the electorate. Hence, Brexit.


----------



## Droogs (17 May 2016)

Rhossydd yuo stated:
*The stock market dropping (Got a pension fund or ISA ? that's linked to the stock market, you'll have less).* - This will only affect people in the short term. The first 5 years or so. Regardless of world events there is not a single stock market in the world which is worth less than in the past. They always rise over the long term, increased population sees to that in higher demand for goods and the steady increase of goods swells the the general wealth.


*House prices dropping + so your children will at least have jobs * - Regardless of what the job is they will at least be in a position to afford a home and should mean even less people being homeless.

i*nflation rising whilst the economy stagnate*s - Europe is the only major economic area that has a stagnating economy everywhere else is growing and as the poorer areas catch up to Europe's living standards the Eu's will only stagnate more


*fall of the pound (more expensive imported goods, more expensive foreign travel), higher interest rates, lack of inward investment by foreign companies so less good jobs* - this country is blessed with a huge pool of highly educated innovative people who are sought out by foreign companies to man their R+D which by and large is based in the UK. Take the motor industry for example. It would also encourage Brits to by British 


*But don't worry; there'll be a lot of demand for vegetable pickers and cleaners when there's no cheap transient labour from Europe to do the nasty work* - East European workers have been coming to the UK for this type of work for as long as they have been able to travel, even with tighter border controls - if someone has a job to go to then they would be allowed in to work.

I personally am on the stay side of the fence in general but can see the the advantages on the other. For me the greatest reason to leave is the undemocratic nature of the EU and it's unaccountability to the populace as a whole. There should be no decision making/power post that is not directly elected by the people. I admit that I have moved slightly more to the leave side due to the likely-hood of this position never changing unless something drastic happens. The EU as a free market and movement area is great but as an all powerfull "federal" autocracy it is not


----------



## Alexam (17 May 2016)

finneyb":33v0j4gi said:


> RobinBHM":33v0j4gi said:
> 
> 
> > I cant see how we can pull out later if we want. It seems to me to be a once only chance to leave.
> ...




Brian, If you believe that the UK Government and companies can control the EU legislation, then you have not understood the years that we have been members. If they did, why would there ever be a need to leave. Perhaps you need to look a little deeper into the facts and figures and really understand the problems that the UK faces by staying in. We need to stand on our own, continue trade within the Common Market and develop new trade routs with other countries that we are told we can't by the EU.

Malcolm


----------



## woodpig (17 May 2016)

This is pretty upbeat.

https://youtu.be/j0pwXLtvt2w

Staying in has its own risks.


----------



## Jacob (17 May 2016)

Alexam":15fx6wn3 said:


> .... other countries that we are told we can't by the EU.
> 
> Malcolm


This is wrong. 
In or out we can trade with whom we like, but IN _increases_ trade opportunities world wide:

"the EU does not prevent the UK from trading with the rest of the world – or the Commonwealth in particular. First of all, the EU has no impact on the commercial type of trade deals, like the £9 billion worth of trade deals between the UK and India agreed during the recent visit of the Indian Prime Minister."
quoted from this, which you should read:

http://euromove.org.uk/how-can-we-get-t ... monwealth/

There's a lot of this complete misunderstanding of the EU coming almost entirely from the Brexit side.

If we vote for OUT it will be down to massive misunderstanding of the issues by the Brexiters - they seriously need to check the facts and do a bit of research.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

Yes a minority of people on the edge (for whatever reason) may turn to crime ...
Jacob, they're not "people on the edge" turning to crime - they are criminals who come here for the pickings.
The population of Cornwall has nearly doubled since we joined the EU, and all around me hosing estates of hundreds and even thousands are being built and planned. No one has built a hospital, a surgery, a school, improved a sewer, laid a gas main, improved a road (other than a £30million+ part paid by yes, the EU (read you and me being told how to spend our own money) that goes ... effectively nowhere) for decades - yet we're expected to welcome thousands more mainly unskilled people. Before anyone starts about the agricultural industry needing them, many of the farmers are staunchly anti EU. (Our MP being one).


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

"In or out we can trade with whom we like" - but we have to kowtow to EU regulations and absorb costs imposed by them when dealing with non EU Countries.


----------



## Jacob (17 May 2016)

phil.p":2otxqfz9 said:


> Yes a minority of people on the edge (for whatever reason) may turn to crime ...
> Jacob, they're not "people on the edge" turning to crime - they are criminals who come here for the pickings.
> The population of Cornwall has nearly doubled since we joined the EU, and all around me hosing estates of hundreds and even thousands are being built and planned. No one has built a hospital, a surgery, a school, improved a sewer, laid a gas main, improved a road (other than a £30million+ part paid by yes, the EU (read you and me being told how to spend our own money) that goes ... effectively nowhere) for decades - yet we're expected to welcome thousands more mainly unskilled people. Before anyone starts about the agricultural industry needing them, many of the farmers are staunchly anti EU. (Our MP being one).


Are houses being built in such vast quantities? I doubt it but if true this would be a good thing - we have a housing crisis country wide not just Cornwall. 
Blame "austerity" for the lack of investment. If we are out and austerity is still in vogue then things will get worse.
Are you saying that half the population of Cornwall is now EU immigrants? I doubt this too. Do you have any figures?

Start here: https://www.cornwall.gov.uk/council-and ... opulation/


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

No, I didn't say that, I didn't even imply that. It's little to do with austerity, more to do with a reluctance on the part of any politician to openly admit that our population is increasing relentlessly. Go into many pubs and the only accent you'll hear is estuary English - speak to many of these people and they'll tell you they've moved to Cornwall to get away from immigrants. I'd sooner have the company of many of the Poles, personally.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

Actually the population is further boosted by housing authorities from outside the County part paying new social housing development then shipping people down - the GLC started the ball rolling decades ago. Can't blame foreigners for that one.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

"Are houses being built in such vast quantities?"
The main reason the £30million road was pushed through according to a County councillor friend was because there were plans in the pipeline for 7,500 houses. The local press has published that it's 5000. I don't know where the people who take the houses think they're going to work.


----------



## kdampney (17 May 2016)

Both sides' plans seem to revolve around each campaign issuing unsubstantiatable statements every other day, and then rubbishing the other's statements with flat contradictions.

* "Brexit will leads to more wars." -> "Leaving will lead to more peace."
* "Brexit will result in greater prosperity." -> "Staying in will result in more wealth creation."
etc. etc.

The whole thing seems just like the Scottish Independence campaign, where there's a modified-status-quo VS a leap-into-the-unknown/seizing-our-destiny (depending on your point of view). Few 'facts', lots of opinions, difficult to judge objectively what to do, so people will go on emotion. My thoughts were that Scotland would survive on it's own after a few years of disruption, but would it be any better than if it stayed? Perhaps not. And those are my views on Brexit too, though I'm still open to factual arguments.

There's a lot of talk about the EU Commissioners being unelected - they're nominated by each nation's government, and the President is very unlikely to overturn the nomination. So in that sense they're not dissimilar to our House of Lords...


----------



## stuartpaul (17 May 2016)

The sad truth is nobody really knows what will happen whether we leave or stay. Unfortunately by the time the 'real truth' is known it may well be neigh on impossible to do anything about it.

For example, if we leave and it all goes chest up will they have us back? Highly unlikely. Arguably leaving will be easier further down the road (someone mentioned 2 years notice?).

I find some of the emotional arguments put forward (not just here but wider) that at least we'd be 'in control' if we left rather short sighted. You won't be able to trade with 'Europe' (last time round 44% of our trade) if you don't comply with their standards and rules. For example, trying selling something without a CE mark?

So many people appear to have the 'island fortress' pull up the drawbridge mentality from the 1940's that I find it scary. We're in the second decade of the 21st century and to believe we can make it on our own just isn't right.

Another way to think about it is do you want Boris as Prime Minister? Because if the vote is to leave DC will almost certainly have to resign as he have no further clout within the Tory party and I reckon Boris will get the job! Scary or what?

Boris and Donald as the terrible twins?


----------



## Cheshirechappie (17 May 2016)

kdampney":3pxi5gse said:


> There's a lot of talk about the EU Commissioners being unelected - they're nominated by each nation's government, and the President is very unlikely to overturn the nomination. So in that sense they're not dissimilar to our House of Lords...



The difference is that the House of Lords can only revise legislation or advise government, but don't take the decisions. The decisions are taken by government, drawn from elected members of the Commons. Thus, the decision-makers are drawn from the directly elected (mostly - the occasional Lord is asked to serve in a government role). The decision-makers are thus directly accountable to the electorate. 

In the EU, the Commissioners take the decisions, which are then (theoretically) scrutinised by the European Parliament, which is composed of elected MEPs. In practice, the EP has never voted against a Commission dictat, so the elected members act only as a rubber stamp to decisions made by the appointed few, who are unaccountable to the electorate.

The Westminster system isn't perfect, but it is far more accountable via the ballot box to you or I than the EU system.


----------



## Cheshirechappie (17 May 2016)

stuartpaul":2g2hnrcr said:


> The sad truth is nobody really knows what will happen whether we leave or stay. Unfortunately by the time the 'real truth' is known it may well be neigh on impossible to do anything about it.
> 
> For example, if we leave and it all goes chest up will they have us back? Highly unlikely. Arguably leaving will be easier further down the road (someone mentioned 2 years notice?).
> 
> ...



Well on the last point, I think we could do worse. Before Reagan became US President, a lot of people said, "He's only a B-movie actor". He turned out to be OK as president. For Prime Minister, I've seen far worse candidates than Boris. Sure, he's got a huge ambition, but that's a fairly common trait among politicians of all stripe. Perfect? Probably neither of them, but nor are the other options.

Could the UK stand on it's own? Of course it could. Why do we need our hand held? It's the fifth largest economy in the world, not a third-rate back-water. Besides, our security alliances (NATO, for example) don't depend on EU membership. On trade, we could well be better off trading round the world and taking opportunities as they arise rather than waiting for a monolithic bureaucratic bloc to catch up with where the action is and negotiating on our behalf.

The industrial revolution happened the Britain. One reason it happened here is because we had a very hands-off government, one that allowed people to just get on with it, unless experience showed that legislation was necessary. It didn't happen in Europe because their approach to government was much more authoritarian - everything's banned unless a committee specifically allows it. That approach remains the case today, and is the reason why Brexiteers get so hot under the collar about EU regulations - it just isn't the way we're used to doing things.

For me, the clincher is being able to vote for the people who govern, and hold them to account directly through the ballot box. However, there's also much I dislike about the EU approach to governance, which I think is tending to stifle economic activity; it certainly hasn't been much good for the people of Greece and the southern Mediterranian. Is 50% youth unemployment in Spain a price worth paying to save the Euro? I don't think so.

The EU has had it's day as a way of governing, and is showing it's severe limitations. It's time to move to something better.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (17 May 2016)

Many seem to have fixed views and simply support that which most closely aligns to their preconceived ideas rather than critically examine the points that are made. Examples include:

- placing more reliance on Brexit campaigners that the economy will boom freed from EU shackles, than the opinion of world leading economic authorities. Whilst the man in the pub may have a view, I would rather see a doctor about medical matters!

- the statement that the EU is not audited is incorrect. The EU has been audited - the last figures are for 2014. It did find material issues with some 4-5% of payments made - not necessarily fraudulent but often spent for purposes other than intended. Whilst not good and leaving room for improvement, few if any public bodies could claim that all money was efficiently spent, on the items intended, and without error. 

- nature of EU migrant workers - on average recent migrants have higher qualifications (degree level) than UK workers but often work in jobs for which they are over qualified. They are not all crop pickers - it is estimated that approx. 40% are in skilled jobs. There is a nationality bias however with Eastern European doing proportionately lower skilled jobs.

- EU will be keen to set up trade agreements with UK - often citing the BMW example. For EU to sign a trade agreement requires the consent of all members who may have conflicting views - eg: Citroen, Renault, Fiat who would be happy to sit behind a tariff barrier to restrict imports of UK built Honda, Nissan etc cars. UK manufacturers may also welcome BMW tariff barriers to protect their domestic UK market. 

- Similar conflicting pressures will apply to most areas of trade. Setting up new agreements assuming we wish to restrict the free movement of labour and avoid other onerous EU regulation will be far from easy or swift. 

Overall I think the first 5 years will be particularly difficult economically and it is a matter of faith, not analysis whether in the longer term (10 years +) things will be better or worse. We have little or no idea what we will get with a Leave vote as it is subject to negotiation and compromise subsequently. A Remain vote is probably a vote for mostly more of the same - both good and bad. 

In terms of sovereignty and political accountability The EU is far from perfect, but I am not convinced that our home grown political elite are in practice brighter, more competent or less remote than their Brussels counterparts.

If it was an easy question to answer there would be no need for a referendum - but we should at least ensure we vote on the basis of what is objectively or reasonably supportable, not spin and misinformation.


----------



## MIGNAL (17 May 2016)

If Norway are 'out' of the EU, how come I (or any other EU member) can go their freely and look for work? They cannot stop me. 
Doesn't sound like they have much control of their borders as far as I can see. Same with Iceland.


----------



## lurker (17 May 2016)

This is getting more boring than the sharpening thread
Is your finger itching yet Bob 
Go on!
You know you want to.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

" Citroen, Renault, Fiat who would be happy to sit behind a tariff barrier to restrict imports of UK built Honda, Nissan etc cars. UK manufacturers may also welcome BMW tariff barriers to protect their domestic UK market. "
In reality is that such a dreadful thing? UK built Hondas and Nissans will go up price in France and Germany and BMWs and Renaults will go up here. Bad news if you are a disciple of one brand, but it doesn't mean you'll be on shanks pony for the rest of your days. Hardly important in the greater scheme of things.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

I've just heard Tim Schmidt from the Eden Project on the 1.00pm BBC news how racist the people who want out of the EU are. I looked to see what the major sources of income for Eden are ... yeah, you guessed ...


----------



## Yorkshire Sam (17 May 2016)

I have followed this thread with fascination and can see that there is a lot of different opinions... good news for that. Can I just make a plea to all those who argue one way or another that come the day please vote! Whether you leave or stay please vote. This will be only the second time that I have been asked to vote on something about the EU.. and I am 70!

But my first vote asked me whether I wished to join a Common Market ...a trade partnership. No one has ever asked me if I want to join the political union of Europe which is what we have ended up with. Before you do vote ask yourself a couple of questions ... how many commisioners of the European Union can you name? Can you even name a British one. Who elected these many commisioners?

While I can't name all the member of the British cabinet, nor the shadow cabinet, but I do know some of them and I even know some people who actually voted for them. I havent a clue who put the commissioners in power.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

Sorry to be pedantic - you didn't vote on joining, you voted on whether to stay in. If the vote had been on going in, the outcome might have been different.


----------



## Jacob (17 May 2016)

I find more interesting hearing the views of a random mob of woodworkers rather than the usual political busy bodies. Members of this forum probably are a good cross section - representative of the country as a whole.
I don't like the general veto you get on political chat, not just here but everywhere. I think people _should_ talk about politics, religion, you name it. We can all read any amount of hysterical nonsense in the press but somehow aren't allowed to talk to each other.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

Try this one for size -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tg4goZxXRZk


----------



## Jacob (17 May 2016)

phil.p":hgfrnzx9 said:


> Try this one for size -
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tg4goZxXRZk


Shouldn't believe these soundbite propaganda snippets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... _Mechanism


----------



## Jacob (17 May 2016)

The good news on EU immigrants is that according to HMRC and other sources they pay their way. Not only do they do the work they also pay more in tax than they take in benefits. Win Win!!

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016 ... urance-gap

By and large taking in immigrants has always been highly beneficial to the recipient country. 
Not always of course - the American indians, Palestinians, Australian abos didn't get a good deal!


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

The same government sources and HMRC that won't tell us how many of them are high rate tax payers? Why don't they just tell us and nail the myth. Oh... hang on ...

"The Cyprus bank recapitalization was funded by converting bank deposits into equity " 
Hmm ... theft, in normal parlance. OK when the EU does it.


----------



## RobinBHM (17 May 2016)

It seems there was plenty of propaganda and controversy the first time around

http://www.vernoncoleman.com/howthebritishmedia.htm

Its interesting that Charles de gaulle vetoed Britain's application to allow time for the CAP to be fully set up before we entered and had a say. (I dont know if thats actually true or more propaganda). 

I am finding it hard to find information about leave or remain that is fact, rather than propaganda.

My fear is that the EU is grossly inefficient due its size and needs major reform but a vote to stay feels like an endorsement to no change and a path towards a federal state with the UK powerless to influence.

If we exit then in order to trade, we will still need to comply with much EU leglislation, so there wont be as freedom as we might imagine.

At least the economiv problems of Greece, Spain etc has scuppered any thoughts about expansion of the euro zone.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

Heath kept the giving away of our fishing grounds secret until hours before we signed up - he knew there would be a riot if he announced it earlier. I don't know about De Gaulle - it wouldn't surprise me a jot.


----------



## MMUK (17 May 2016)

So much for the outcome of WW2. Who says the Nazi party is dead? Seig Heil Merkel! The Germans are at it again, trying to unite Europe!


----------



## Jacob (17 May 2016)

MMUK":29rzie6v said:


> So much for the outcome of WW2. Who says the Nazi party is dead? Seig Heil Merkel! The Germans are at it again, trying to unite Europe!


But they weren't doing it democratically. The Poles didn't have a referendum on whether or not to be invaded and they didn't have a two year opt out option. 
Germany is a very different and a very civilised place nowadays.


----------



## rafezetter (17 May 2016)

mind_the_goat":3pbej68m said:


> Yorkshire Sam":3pbej68m said:
> 
> 
> > No dire threats, no armageddon just a plain statement of facts
> ...



Ok SO apart from the theatrics (which was not theatrics at all but actual footage of the unrest caused by the economic strife in the euruzone, particularly greece); what else about the video did you find as "fake" or "not based on sound theory" or even "it all looks a bit iffy to me" ? 

Please state your case. Properly, with long words and facts to back it up.

Somehow I really doubt you watched all of it because any sane person with any level of education and grasp on economics, even at a very fundamental level cannot fail to see the example used of switzerland being the - pay attention here -_* wealthiest*_ per capita of NORMAL, EVERYDAY people not just the 1%,_* healthiest*_, *employed* and generally content nation ON EARTH, not just the eurozone.

There's a reason why Switzerland is seen as the best education system on earth, it's just not much talked about because unless you are stupidly rich, a Stephen Hawking genius or connected you have zero chance of getting in, getting a chance to go to space is easier for a foreign national.

And all because - wait for it - they have been outside the EU for the entire time.

Now before you start on the fact that they remained neutral in the war, so did a lot of other countries who were / are not doing as well as them, although I agree it did them no harm to speak of, but if you go by growth of an economy since the war, Germany, China and Japan have us all beat hands down and as is stated in the vid they were the losers of those conflicts, with sections of their manufacturing and industry utterly riven.

There are other factors of course, they only have a small standing army (the rest are sitting down, boom boom), and they decline to get involved with other expensive conflicts, but the single biggest drain on the UK's foreign policy is the money paid to the eurozone for scant little return.

The figures of cost vs reward are scandalous, and if more people knew there would be no debate, it would be unanimous by all people whom are generationally rooted in the UK. I won't mention the details, as you won't beleive me - so look them up for yourselves.

If you have children of any ages under 60, you need to vote out or you will be shackling them to a crucifix to carry for the remainder of their lives and their childrens and possibly childrens, childrens.

Mind the Goat - ignore the "theatrics" and just pay attention to the facts - the actual facts - they are easy to obtain and even the remainders cannot refute them.

Find the most intelligent person you know and ask him / her or, failing that - ask your children if you have any, what their choice is and vote the same way, back them up regardless of how YOU feel, because if you don't, it won't be YOU paying the price, will it?



Jacob":3pbej68m said:


> MMUK":3pbej68m said:
> 
> 
> > So much for the outcome of WW2. Who says the Nazi party is dead? Seig Heil Merkel! The Germans are at it again, trying to unite Europe!
> ...



The best way to invade a country now? make the natives think it was their choice; it's cheaper and more effective. 90% of the population of USA doesn't even know that 1/3 of it's country is owned by the "commie chinks" (as how the redblooded, all american, sports loving patriot would put it), and the 10% that do, hide the fact as best they can because they know, they *KNOW* it'll come back one day and cripple them. Permanently.

There was a sentence used recently in a Political drama program called "Madam Secretary" (highly recommended) where she (the Secretary of State) was talking to the chinese envoy about a possible war with China and he replied: "War? we don't need to go to war .... we will just reposess you".

Now what you might ask has this to do with the eurozone, and it's simple; if a group or country not democractically chosen by us is making the rules and laws we have to abide by or face prison (or has in USA's case another force in play of "you do what we tell you or else"), we are under thier control; annexed by proxy.

How much simpler can it be stated before those that think the eurozone is a good idea will learn it's a fatal mistake?


----------



## Cheshirechappie (17 May 2016)

Jacob":18uo53n6 said:


> Germany is a very different and a very civilised place nowadays.



Many a Greek citizen might beg to differ, given what German bankers have done to the Greek economy in the last couple of years. The Italians are not too impressed, either.


----------



## Jacob (17 May 2016)

Cheshirechappie":3akqxuul said:


> Jacob":3akqxuul said:
> 
> 
> > Germany is a very different and a very civilised place nowadays.
> ...


http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... te-stay-eu

http://www.anothereurope.org/

A lot of people are thinking beyond the failings and successes of the past few years - towards another EU.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 May 2016)

Another Europe might well be possible - but not while this one exists.


----------



## rafezetter (17 May 2016)

Jacob":3gh3w4y0 said:


> Cheshirechappie":3gh3w4y0 said:
> 
> 
> > Jacob":3gh3w4y0 said:
> ...



Jacob - the greeks with intelligence know which side of the toast is buttered. If the EU failed or otherwise disbanded overnight so would Greece.

Greece would become like Syria in a matter of hours.

It's the same situation in Greece as it is in UK right now except diometrically opposite - the few greeks who know what they are talking about state they MUST remain inside the EU or die. The rest of the population is too stupid to understand, and are just angry they are being forced to pay back money that doesn't belong to them; not even grasping that that money has kept them from going back to the stone age, ungrateful ****s.


----------



## Flynnwood (17 May 2016)

Jacob":u9aoaxws said:


> Germany is a very different and a very civilised place nowadays.



Two thirds of Germans are against Merkel being re-elected. Think about it.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (17 May 2016)

The opinion polls show an age related diversity of views - those under 50 have never known a UK outside the EU, have only second or third hand memories of the war, and have no memory of a time when Britain was "great" - cricket on the green, empire on which the sun never set, industrial supremacy etc. 

Some see the EU as the final act of WW2 with unification of Europe by stealth under the control of Germany. Many members of the forum (probably skewed towards the more mature) may have very personal memories of the conflict. But the young may only see the war as a piece of history from which (hopefully) some lessons can be learned. My granddaughter (3 years old) may never remember meeting anyone with a direct memory of the war! 

We also argue for concepts of political accountability, and democracy. There is an inconsistency between UK which is one of the most centralised in Western Europe, and the desire for UK government to wrest control from dominating EU control. A real commitment to regional and local decision making would make the argument more convincing. Thus far the only real delegation to the regions has been prompted by the Scottish referendum outcome.

Sovereignty - the concept of a clearly identified self-governing state with absolute free will is possibly a casualty of the late 20th century. The only models of complete detachment from the international community may be found in N Korea and previously Albania - neither of which work. In practice we have sacrificed national control in the interest of a greater international good through NATO, UN, WTO etc. To remain competitive we are reliant on international exchange of goods, communications, science, skills etc. It is doubtful whether any first world state can reasonably aspire to absolute sovereignty without some democratic sacrifice.


----------



## MIGNAL (17 May 2016)

That's true. All these old codgers voting out when the young want in. May as well be unselfish and vote remain. We've done our deeds, had our time.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (18 May 2016)

The young will want in as they have rose coloured glasses and no knowledge or experience. I cannot blame them, but they need protecting from themselves sometimes.


----------



## Yorkshire Sam (18 May 2016)

phil.p":27y3hh21 said:


> Sorry to be pedantic - you didn't vote on joining, you voted on whether to stay in. If the vote had been on going in, the outcome might have been different.




Sorry you are wrong. This was when we first joined the common market. Up till then we were not involved. The older ones may remember that even then France didnt want us to join and kept blocking our entry!


----------



## MIGNAL (18 May 2016)

phil.p":3vy4f5nt said:


> The young will want in as they have rose coloured glasses and no knowledge or experience. I cannot blame them, but they need protecting from themselves sometimes.



That's under 18's. Those that age and above are sent to war. They don't want old codgers ruining their future.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (18 May 2016)

Yorkshire Sam":3ksnwvyg said:


> phil.p":3ksnwvyg said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry to be pedantic - you didn't vote on joining, you voted on whether to stay in. If the vote had been on going in, the outcome might have been different.
> ...


Sorry, you are wrong. We joined in 1973. The referendum was in 1975 - whether we stayed in or got out. Easily googled. 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/date ... 499297.stm


----------



## Jacob (18 May 2016)

Terry - Somerset":oulssv5e said:


> .... Many members of the forum (probably skewed towards the more mature) may have very personal memories of the conflict. ....


I doubt it. 
I was born in 1944. I don't remember a thing even though I was within hearing range of one of the last buzz bombs to hit (I'm told). 
To remember anything much you'd have to be getting on for 80. To be a participant you'd have to be 90+


----------



## MIGNAL (18 May 2016)

Yeah but a lot of 60+ year olds on this forum _think _they are in WWII. Actually many probably think they are still running a 19th century cotton mill.


----------



## Jacob (18 May 2016)

MIGNAL":kqac5abw said:


> Yeah but a lot of 60+ year olds on this forum _think _they are in WWII. Actually many probably think they are still running a 19th century cotton mill.


And they see the expansion of the EU as victory for Hitler.
BTW Hitler is no longer with us, apparently. Somebody should tell them. :lol:


----------



## whiskywill (18 May 2016)

Jacob":24m6avwr said:


> I'm for in.



That's the best reason for leaving that I have seen so far.


----------



## MMUK (18 May 2016)

MIGNAL":1zkqwc1m said:


> That's true. All these old codgers voting out when the young want in. May as well be unselfish and vote remain. We've done our deeds, had our time.




I'm not old, according to my birth certificate anyway, and I'm voting out. (hammer)


----------



## woodpig (18 May 2016)

phil.p":2fwm97xv said:


> The young will want in as they have rose coloured glasses and no knowledge or experience. I cannot blame them, but they need protecting from themselves sometimes.



No need, most of them will have been far too busy exercising their thumbs on a mobile phone to even have considered registering to vote.
Too late, I expect (hope) they will suddenly realise they can't vote! :lol:


----------



## MIGNAL (19 May 2016)

Even if the old codgers sway the vote I have a gut feeling that this is what we will end up with:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... gian-model

Not much of an 'out' vote. Of course I could be wrong but the idea that we can somehow become detached, masters of our own destiny, in control of our borders. . . . . I just don't buy it. We'll see.


----------

