Brexit: the referendum

[H'ethetheth]

Are the costs so huge for an organisation covering 500-million people?

Well, I'll grant that whether or not the whole thing costs significantly too much, without the moving business, it would certainly cost less.

 

[H'ethetheth]

Careful, you'll be called a xenophobe, or something.

Are you under the impression that anyone called you personally a xenophobe, even by implication? If so, would you care to point out where?

 

[hodgy]

It really wasn't worth trying to have a sensible conversation on this subject, was it. I shouldn't have started the thread.

I was reading this thread for a while and considered commenting / discussing earlier but have been somewhat nonplussed by the derisive and borderline-insulting responses of many of the europhiles. I'll vote 'leave', by the way.

 

[jimbob]

A comedian made a point on some radio show at the weekend that if Britain rather than France had set up the EEC, we would have had an office above a fish 'n chip shop manned by 3 officials and a couple of secretaries. It would have sent a letter out every now and then asking countries to remember that this was supposed to be a free trade zone, so could they please make their trade freer.

Obviously, he was making his point for the comedic effect, but the principle of doing less, and doing it cheaper, would improve the EU immensely. IMHO, of course.

If you want a common market, you need standardization. Many states will already have existing standards that would need to be aligned and agreed on. This is going to be bureaucratic.

Parkinson's law will also come into play, but that is a small overhead compared to the benefits both with free movement of people and goods, and with dealing with the downsides of such as well - knowing that we have influence on the pollution standards, for example, when pollution is a cross-border problem. Bathing water quality is another, blue-flag beaches are a result of EU pressure that has improved the UK environment.

One minor but obvious example for the improvement of trade is that the EU has provided a standard for phone chargers - not every supplier uses it, the standard is not mandatory, but most Android phones in the world use the EU-standard. That was an example where the contents of the standard were less important than the simple existence of the standard in the first place.

I agree that the CAP is an absolute fiasco, as is the common fisheries policy - however I doubt that any British replacements would be that much of an improvement (YMMV).

 

[jimbob]

As an aside, the European Court of Human Rights is not part of the EU, but a parallel development and we are not going to have a referendum on leaving *that*.

ETA: There are lots of other European arrangements that would be messy to unpick.

And to think that in 1940, Britain was considering an act of union with France.

 

[angrysoba]

....and bear in mind that for some of us, some of those negatives are also positives. Personally I think that the European Court of Justice has been a net benefit for the people of the U.K. There have been a small number of apparently perverse rulings (but then again many of those have been through the filter of a largely Eurosceptic press) but then again there have been a much larger number of rulings where people's rights have been protected when national courts have failed them.

Likewise with the "A ridiculously expensive and intrusive bureaucracy". At least we have a single bureaucracy handling the affairs of 28 countries (as opposed to 28 ridiculously expensive and intrusive bureaucracies handling them in their uniquely inefficient ways).

Regarding loss of sovereignty, there's a continuum which at one end we have one world government and at the other Freemen on the Land. My personal view is that the larger the unit over which sovereignty is wielded, the less the risk of conflict, armed or otherwise (which is why instinctively I was anti Scottish independence (although an independent Scotland in a united Europe could have changed my mind).

I'm not that interested in arguments that the EU helps the UK to save itself from itself. There's surely nothing inherent to the EU that makes it a more enlightened organization than that of the UK. If there are particular stances on human rights and liberties that the EU takes, there is no reason they cannot apply in the UK. And it is surely easier for a British citizen to have some affect on British law and politics than it is for a European citizen to have an affect on European law and politics if only because of the comparative sizes.

For me, the loss of sovereignty is a big issue and I always thought that the anti-Scottish independence arguments that the Scottish would not be able to run their own affairs was insulting and counterproductive.

Having said that, I would probably still vote to stay in the EU - I don't think I have a vote, though. I would do so on the basis that getting some arrangement like Norway and Switzerland would rely on the good will of other European nations which we might not have if we left the EU.

 

[ceptimus]

People who don't fully understand a choice tend to prefer the status quo. Politicians campaigning in favour of a 'remain' vote seem to be mostly using scare stories to try and frighten voters into supporting their side.

It's an interesting speculation to try and imagine that the UK were not already an E.U. member - and to wonder whether people would vote in favour of joining now if that was offered.

 

[angrysoba]

People who don't fully understand a choice tend to prefer the status quo. Politicians campaigning in favour of a 'remain' vote seem to be mostly using scare stories to try and frighten voters into supporting their side.

It's an interesting speculation to try and imagine that the UK were not already an E.U. member - and to wonder whether people would vote in favour of joining now if that was offered.

I think they wouldn't vote to join because of the extra conditions that would be demanded of new entries. From what I understand, the UK would be expected to commit to the Euro as well as Schengen if we joined now.

 

[ddt]

Having said that, I would probably still vote to stay in the EU - I don't think I have a vote, though. I would do so on the basis that getting some arrangement like Norway and Switzerland would rely on the good will of other European nations which we might not have if we left the EU.

If the UK leaves, and still wants free trade with the EU, it will probably end up in the same boat as Norway. Part of the European Economic Area, which means part of the "common market" but having to adhere to the EU rules without having the vote to influence them.

I think they wouldn't vote to join because of the extra conditions that would be demanded of new entries. From what I understand, the UK would be expected to commit to the Euro as well as Schengen if we joined now.

Or if the UK leaves and in ten years time concludes that that was not a smart idea and re-applies for membership.

 

[welshdean]

I'm of the mind that if we leave or stay, things will remain. [Edit: If we left ...] Would we not negotiate treaties for free trade, free movement, etc with our 'nice' Euro neighbours? We can just poo-poo the skint ones!

 

[angrysoba]

Some light relief. As the Tories split themselves on the subject of the EU, Jeremy Corbyn manages to bring them all together when they mock his irrelevance.

 

[Craig B]

In all sincerity, Craig, you seem to have thought more about some connection between imperialism and the EU than I have. I haven't anything to contribute on the matter, but would be interested in your thesis.

Here's an indication of the kind of thinking I mean.

In the BBC interview, his first since deciding to oppose Mr Cameron in the referendum, Mr Gove also said a vote to leave the EU would offer "a tremendous opportunity for Britain to recover its mojo", calling the union an "old-fashioned model"​

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35646004

noun US
a magic charm, talisman, or spell.
"someone must have their mojo working over at the record company"

influence, especially magic power.
"the name has no mojo"​

This magic influence that needs to be "recovered". What is it? What does Gove have in mind?

 

[Darat]

I'm of the mind that if we leave or stay, things will remain. [Edit: If we left ...] Would we not negotiate treaties for free trade, free movement, etc with our 'nice' Euro neighbours? We can just poo-poo the skint ones!

No - we would have to negotiate with the EU, not the individual countries that make up the EU.

 

[Darat]

People who don't fully understand a choice tend to prefer the status quo. Politicians campaigning in favour of a 'remain' vote seem to be mostly using scare stories to try and frighten voters into supporting their side.

...snip...

We have plenty of evidence to understand the current situation but the issue for me is that their just doesn't seem to be any positive argument for leaving that arises from evidence.

 

[Darat]

...snip...

For me, the loss of sovereignty is a big issue and I always thought that the anti-Scottish independence arguments that the Scottish would not be able to run their own affairs was insulting and counterproductive.

...snip...

What sovereignty have we lost and what would we gain if we left and what practical changes would that result in?

(From my view the biggest threats to our actual "sovereignty" is multinationals, for goodness sake we can't even manage to collect taxes on trade conducted in the UK, never mind control them, being a member of the EU does give us more weight to fight that loss of sovereignty.)

 

[MikeG]

Here's an indication of the kind of thinking I mean.

In the BBC interview, his first since deciding to oppose Mr Cameron in the referendum, Mr Gove also said a vote to leave the EU would offer "a tremendous opportunity for Britain to recover its mojo", calling the union an "old-fashioned model"​

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35646004

noun US
a magic charm, talisman, or spell.
"someone must have their mojo working over at the record company"

influence, especially magic power.
"the name has no mojo"​

This magic influence that needs to be "recovered". What is it? What does Gove have in mind?

I don't follow. I can't see any connection between what Gove said, (which was a bland empty soundbite), and our Imperial past.

 

[MikeG]

.........(From my view the biggest threats to our actual "sovereignty" is multinationals, for goodness sake we can't even manage to collect taxes on trade conducted in the UK, never mind control them, being a member of the EU does give us more weight to fight that loss of sovereignty.)

In what way does being in the EU help us "tackle" multinationals?

In what way does the inability to tax multinationals properly have any impact on our sovereignty?

We have plenty of evidence to understand the current situation but the issue for me is that their just doesn't seem to be any positive argument for leaving that arises from evidence.

We've only been a member of the EU for 40 odd years. We have plenty of evidence (at least a millenium) of how things are outside the organisation. There are also 170 odd countries which aren't in the EU, and their experience is good evidence of what life could be like outside the EU..........although clearly it would take a little research to weed out the irrelevant information.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

In what way does being in the EU help us "tackle" multinationals?

In what way does the inability to tax multinationals properly have any impact on our sovereignty?

Well cross border co-operation on tax avoidance and harmonised accounting and reporting laws should be more effective than unilateral action (should..).

The ability to raise taxes is a key part of sovereignty so I can see where Darat is coming from.

 

[Henri McPhee]

You really don't know anything about the Eu, do you?

You may be right about that. I have never really understood the common agricultural policy, or the European Commission, or the culling of the Scottish fishing fleets so that Spanish factory ships could grab our cod or mackerel, or the way that our our budget policy, and decisions about our health service, are decided by the German finance minister, or the way rulings by our Supreme Court can be overturned in Europe.

The economic danger of all this is that a currency speculator like George Soros in America, who supports the fascist beasts in Ukraine, and Sultan Erdogan in Turkey, and our Jewish lordships, can cause a sudden loss of international confidence, which would result in a sale en masse of foreign held sterling.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Some light relief. As the Tories split themselves on the subject of the EU, Jeremy Corbyn manages to bring them all together when they mock his irrelevance.

I'm embarrassed that our 'representatives' think so little of our democracy and voters that they act like badly behaved schoolchildren rather than debating the opposition. Is it any wonder that so many people are too cynical of politicians to even bother voting?