Who is in and who is out?

[Inoffthered]

In or out we need and will have immigration, the numbers are not dependent on the EU.
We could take back our borders but we won't, like we could spend our 50, 40 or 20 million on the NHS but we won't.

VAT on domestic fuel and tampons could be scrapped but it won't.

Will we be better off?
The truth is we don't know what the economy will do and neither do they, no one can say what will happen either way nor can they say what would've happened either way.

Someone though will try.

Most of the EU control and human rights act stories i've read over the years have actually been false, whilst the stories we should be reading we're deemed to boring to print.

For all its faults i'm voting in, not for any political beliefs but as a human being and inhabitant of this planet think it needs fewer borders and boundaries not more.

You are right, a UK government may or may not do the things you listed above, but at least if you dont like it you can vote them out. The EU commissioners are unaccountable. It is an EU decision to regard tampons as a luxury item and therefore vatable, there is nothing you can do about it.
If the vote is to remain, then the expect vat to be applied on food as it is in most EU countries, and dont complain when it happens because there is nothing you can do about it (apart from grow your own).

Are you one of the Remaniacs that believes we are better in the EU so we can influence and change the way things are done? In his attempts to change the basis of our EU membership Cameron achieved nothing. Why does anyone think the EU will suddenly change if we vote in?

There is a whole raft of changes building up that have been suppressed to avoid undue influence on the referendum. I dont know whether you have seen todays Sunday Times? The Remainers scoff at suggestions that Turkey will be allowed to join the EU and claim the prospect of immigration from Turkey as being a scare story. The ST has leaked copies of memos suggesting that post referendum Turkey will be given the right to visa free travel. So although Turkey has not yet been admitted to the EU, for all practical purposes and the free movement of labour it may as well be.

The really chilling about the leaked memos was the discussion suggesting that similar concessions would be granted to Kosovo because the additional 1.5m likely immigrants would be "a drop in the ocean" compared with the number of turks that would migrate.

Now I have no problem with immigration but the fact that some unelected Eurocrat feels able to fundamentally impose a policy that will have major repercussions on society without discussion and without a legitimate mandates demonstrates contempt for the electorate and for that reason (among many others) I'm out.

 

[mind_the_goat]

OK,.. here's a short list of financial and industrial FUBARs from the EU then,.. (it was longer, much longer, but really tough reading. I have however edited this slightly due to those who have asked me to clarify some points. All of it has been fact-checked not only by myself but also many others.)

Find something that's gone the other way, I've looked and I just can't. If you think the EU is a good idea,
1/ You haven't read the party manifesto of The European Peoples' Party.
2/ You haven't had to deal with EU petty bureaucracy tearing your business down.
3/ You don't think it matters.

That's a hell of a list, I am thankful you edited it down.
I'm sure in the cases of companies moving their operations, help from the EU makes it easier, but I doubt if these have all occurred just because grants were available (I'm sure some did). Dyson for example, I didn't find the reference to the EU blunder but I found mention of doubled profits since the move, motivation enough with or without EU funding. British military contracts being awarded to other counties, annoying as hell, but isn't that down to the government getting the 'best price' for the taxpayer ? Besides, much of the work will be done in Wales, the first 100 are to completed in Spain, presumably so we can get them quickly, the rest will be assembled in Wales. As for the steel, UK government is fighting the EU not to impose higher import tariffs on Chinese Steel.
Further down the list you get to UK utilities owned by other European companies, this again is due to our own government, nothing to do with the EU at all. Much of our electricity is supplied by a French company in which the French government has a large stake, not the EU's fault if we decided to privatise all our utilities.

No, I haven't read the manifesto, but they are one of a number of parties, maybe the biggest, but in terms of influence it looks like a close call with the Party of European Socialists. the EPP is not the same as the EU.

"You haven't had to deal with EU petty bureaucracy tearing your business down", Correct, I would be genuinely interested in your experience. How confident are you this red tape will all be cut down if we leave? I've certainly dealt with national red tape, that seems pretty bad when you are wading through it, but some of it, maybe a lot of it, needs to be there in some form or another.
"You don't think it matters", would not be involved in this thread if I didn't.

Sorry, your post deserves a longer and more researched reply, but its late.
At the end of the day I doubt if anyone following this thread has had their mind changed by anything that has been said here (I'm curious, anyone ?) . I like to think I have been open to being persuaded but I'm still voting out....kidding.

I'm not convinced I'm right, I can think of plenty of reason for voting out (and have several more from this thread), but I intend to vote in. To me, many of the brexit arguments contain too many assumptions that cannot be backed up. The arguments here have been mainly good but there are enough loose threads in them for me to pull out, so not managing to convince me.
Brexit are making a big issue of trade deals, could it be that Europe has not signed deals with the whole world because the terms are not good enough for Europe, or the concessions required are too much? TTIP seems a good case, UK government very keen on signing but it looks like a bad deal and requires giving away more of that valuable sovereignty to boot. It doesn't look like the rest of Europe is prepared to do so. This seems to me a case where democracy is working extremely well in the EU with EU citizens taking areal interest and making a difference. Another argument is that we don't need trade deals to trade, how can lack of such deals be a reason to leave?
I don't buy in to the undemocratic, uncountable arguments either, it's simply not true that the UK has no influence. If we chose to send UKIP MEP's to represent us then that's our stupid fault. The commission do not function autonomously and do not operate as a dictatorship. I blame the tabloid press for many people view that it does.
I don't trust our current government, but I trust much much less the one we may have if vote leave wins. potentially that may only be for a couple of years but I believe a lot (more) of damage could be done in that time. The only thing that both sides seem to agree on is that a leave vote will cause the economy to crash, While I don't believe growth is sustainable indefinitely (I'm not even sure growth is the right thing to pursue at all) but on a purely personal level I don't want another crash right now.

I'll see you all on the other side.

 

[Jake]

What part of this is wrong - "If we left the EU with no trade deal – inconceivable given the tariff free zone from Iceland to Turkey – our exports would face EU tariffs averaging just 2.4% . But our net contribution to the EU budget is equivalent to a 7% tariff. Paying 7% to avoid 2-3% is miss-selling that dwarfs the PPI scandal!" Peter Lilley.

The stats. Lilley is understating the tariff % that would apply under WTO rules (eg 10% on cars), and relying on the £350m/week bare-faced lie for the membership costs side of the equation. Business for Britain (pro-Brexit) estimates that tariffs could cost British business up to £7bn pa, which is about the true annual cost of membership. Others put the potential tariff hit much higher.

 

[rafezetter]

I live in a shared house of 6 rooms, and half of them have at one time or another been taken by foreign nationals working at HP, Rolls Royce and the MoD sites nearby and of the couple of dozen of those I have personally met in the 11 years I have lived here, not a single one has ever ever complained bitterly that getting access to the UK for work was so ridiculously hard, so as to give them pause to consider accepting the job.

And of the dozens and dozens of those I would say quite easily 95% of them were NON EU NATIONALS.

And I'm betting a lot of the EU based nationals working here are also not spending 100% of their income in the UK either, so that isn't an economy boost but the equivalent of a slightly left on tap, slowly pouring UK pounds out of the economy.

There is a good reason you have seen dozens and dozens of these workers pass through your shared accommodation. The multinational corporations that employee these skilled people will often bring them to the UK on fixed length visas so they can be trained on UK methods and get to know fellow team members, before being sent back to their home countries to continue the same job on a much reduced salary. They are generally not employed by the companies when they come to the UK but are already employed by them in another location. The value if this to our economy is a whole different issue.
I'm sure you are right that if we deported our European workforce we could quickly replace many of them with people from other places, but I fail to see how that solves any of the migration issues people seem concerned about. It just replaces one set of migrants with another, and may result in an even higher proportion of locally earned salary to be sent out of the country.

If you work out the per capita funds sent out of the UK by offshore workers it looks to me as if a significant proportion stays in the UK, the 5.5K per person figure I mentioned earlier is actually too high as I assumed the 11Bn sent 'home' was just by EU workers.

I wasn't saying that should we leave the EU all of the EU nationals should be deported, far from it, several are still friends of mine. If they are here and working I have no issue with them per se (leaving the money drain out of that particular argument), I was referring to Jacob and others' insistance that an open doors policy for EU nationals is not just desirable but an absolute requirement to keep companies in labour.

Other parts of the employment problem are the benefits system being too easy to gain from, and that almost literally overnight after the work place pension schemes were introduced for all workers contracted for 30 hours or more (for qualifying companies over a set, but small size; to change in 2018 to ALL employees earning 10k or more, guess what's going to happen then...) - a huge portion of positions with little responsibility changed to less than 30 hours - often 20 so the job is split between 2, to avoid the employers pension costs. 20 hours isn't a living wage, and often the contracted hours are set in such a way that a person would find it difficult to work two different 20hour contracts. I spent a long time, years, claiming benefits in part because of that very reason - I regularly saw positions of management like a keyholder retail store manager with a ZERO HOURS CONTRACT, and absolutely no way to check if you would be one of only two or three or half a dozen.

No-one and I mean NO-ONE in their right mind would accept such a contract, whom is not in a position whereby other support is available from family or partner to cover the majority portion of the household budget.

And here's the kicker, if you apply and manage to get an interview to get a feel for the company, and get offered the position but it's obvious it's going to be difficult for you and turn it down, your benefits get STOPPED. No if's, but's, maybes, or "but I can't live on that sort of money" will save you.

And if you DO take the job and then require top ups on a monthly basis for housing benefit etc, I've been reliably informed because of the differing amounts week on week, the process is horrific, and one of the reasons why the whole benefits system is being overhauled to a "one application, one payment scheme" in a few trial areas (but Bristol will be last), instead of having to apply for work benefits, housing benefits and council tax benefits to three essentially seperate entites.

So a portion of the people branded as "feckless, workshy and parasitic layabouts" are anything but, but are not being offered anything that is remotely acceptable for their lifestyle - usually single british people, living in expensive private rented accomodation, (because they are single), and without the availability of being able to lean on family for support, or where the choice of "work hard for a few years and put up with living in little more than a 8x4 room", take the money and go back to country X where you can make that money last 5x longer" is possible.

They sit on the benefits system out of self preservation that at least on benefits they will get their rent paid and food on the table; every. single. month.

But even leaving the EU won't force employers to change their contracts system to remove this black hole of uncertainty many workers and prospective workers, face.

 

[RogerS]

...
I don't buy in to the undemocratic, uncountable arguments either, it's simply not true that the UK has no influence......

I disagree. If you do the research you will see that there have been virtually no instances when our MEPs have objected to something and the result went their way.

Cameron returned from his negotiations with almost diddly squat.

What part of the 'Commissioners are not elected' don't you understand ?

 

[RobinBHM]

James Dyson said he has seen no UK directives go through, mostly because large european companies block vote.

In theory staying in europe would allow us to have a say. In practice history shows that wont happen.

The eu commissioners are now threatening they will make it difficukt if we leave. Why? because they are worried that other distgruntled countrids, like Italy will want to leave too.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

"Brexit are making a big issue of trade deals, could it be that Europe has not signed deals with the whole world because the terms are not good enough for Europe, or the concessions required are too much?"
Maybe because the EU is thoroughly incompetent? or maybe as has been said before - they cannot get 28 Countries to agree to anything?

 

[Jake]

"Brexit are making a big issue of trade deals, could it be that Europe has not signed deals with the whole world because the terms are not good enough for Europe, or the concessions required are too much?"
Maybe because the EU is thoroughly incompetent? or maybe as has been said before - they cannot get 28 Countries to agree to anything?

If that was the case, why is everyone on the Brezit side so adamant that getting a new FTA with the EU is going to be a piece of pish?

Just have to look at WTO (non) progress to understand that these things are very hard to negotiate.

 

[RogerS]

"Brexit are making a big issue of trade deals, could it be that Europe has not signed deals with the whole world because the terms are not good enough for Europe, or the concessions required are too much?"
Maybe because the EU is thoroughly incompetent? or maybe as has been said before - they cannot get 28 Countries to agree to anything?

The latter. They have been trying for a deal for ages with some of the S American countries but the deal is blocked by France and others.

It's a damn sight easier for one country ie us to negotiate a trade deal.

 

[RogerS]

"Brexit are making a big issue of trade deals, could it be that Europe has not signed deals with the whole world because the terms are not good enough for Europe, or the concessions required are too much?"
Maybe because the EU is thoroughly incompetent? or maybe as has been said before - they cannot get 28 Countries to agree to anything?

If that was the case, why is everyone on the Brezit side so adamant that getting a new FTA with the EU is going to be a piece of pish?

Just have to look at WTO (non) progress to understand that these things are very hard to negotiate.

They might be hard to negotiate but frankly everyone seems to be trading quite well without them in many areas. So trade agreements ? Who cares ?

 

[Stu_2]

Out, without a doubt.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

"If that was the case, why is everyone on the Brezit side so adamant that getting a new FTA with the EU is going to be a piece of pish?

Just have to look at WTO (non) progress to understand that these things are very hard to negotiate."

Possibly because Mercedes, Volkswagen, Porsche, BMW, Renault, Citroen, Peugeot etc. realise they need one PDQ?- and ultimately it's French and German money that talks. The leech Countries will be bribed to shut up.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

"The stats. Lilley is understating the tariff % that would apply under WTO rules (eg 10% on cars)..."
He's not necessarily underestimating, he's quoting an average.

 

[Woodmatt]

Once we have voted who does the counting to come up with the result?Being a complete cynic my concern is can they be "leant on" by Cameron and his cronies? I understand a number of Birthday honours have gone to Remain campaigners so for me this would just be a step further to suit his ends.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Someone posting in The Times has been telling us for several weeks the result is 52/48 for remain.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

A few more that are extremely difficult to argue with -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/1217 ... he-EU.html

 

[RogerS]

That's a great post, Phil, and he raises a good question about the lack of a cohesive plan post-Brexit. We really do need to be out.

 

[woodpig]

Someone posting in The Times has been telling us for several weeks the result is 52/48 for remain.

If that was the case then "that's your lot for another 30 years". If it was 52/48 for Brexit I have no doubt there would be another vote "just to be sure". :roll:

Out.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I think you miss the point.

Another -
"Miriam Durantez Gonzalez, the arch-Europhile aka Mrs Clegg, blasts Cameron's renegotiation and warns Brussels is not reforming:
.
"The European Union is crying for reform. Proper reform. Not that Mickey Mouse negotiation that the Prime Minister did. The biggest reform that the EU needs is growth... In my life I have never gone through another moment when I have thought we are in the history books."
.
"This is the renegotiation Cameron is asking you to vote on - and even Miriam says it's Mickey Mouse..."
From Guido Fawkes' website
.
http://order-order.com/2016/06/14/miria ... off-messag

 

[Phil Pascoe]

and another -
http://www.cass.city.ac.uk/__data/asset ... Models.pdf