EU vote?
 

A local friend suggests they have already had a copy of the 'Stay in' leaflet from the gov. which we have been paying for. Should I have got one, or are they still sending them out, or did they cancel them as a result of the furore?

I am registered for postal voting, when should I be getting the papers for this please?

Our voting cards came on saturday .

Said leaflet arrived Friday .

My leaflet was sent back from whence it came. Complete waste of taxpayers cash and treating us l!me idiots :duh:

Should receive it by the end of this month Harry, but I don't think it is required? I may be wrong.

Strange there hasn't been a thread on the subject. Would be quite interesting:eek::eek::eek:

I got my leaflet on staying in, so there are delivering in Yorkshire.

Not got my postal voting papers yet.

Dave T

Me too Derek, I'm getting quite bored with it all.
I've no time for either Boris or Dave, what a pair of muppets!
In fact I've no time for any politicians to be honest.

Not received a "stay in" leaflet so far, have received The 2016 EU Referendum Voting Guide and the Postal Poll Card but not as yet the actual voting documentation.

I'm with you Derek. Those who want to stay spend most of their time scaremongering, saying if we leave we're doomed; those who want to leave say everything will be wonderful. How can you make a considered decision based on that :shrug:

Well, I will be voting for out, the EU's future looks very bleak at the moment and even more so if we leave. The EU as it stands now, is just not what we originally wanted to be a part of.

Most of those I have discussed it with have also said they will vote for 'out'.

I received my Postal Poll card this morning, not the voting papers - so I am not forgotten after all.

Think you're right Harry, the EU might just fold like pack of cards if we opt for out ;)
The French are looking at their own Frexit, as well as a few other countries ;)

Russ

In ? Out? I shall just shake it all about:D

Be no shortage of cheap office space in Brussels if it does!

10 minutes ago I heard on Radio 2 a professional commercial for the Leave camp. A pleasant and charming lady made no claims, no hysterics, told no lies. Just moderately toned requests to do this, that, or the other. A welcome change from the increasingly frantic jack-in-the-box antics of the other side and all the more convincing for it.

In my paper today a lifetime friend and political ally of Cameron, Steve Hilton, has broken cover and rubbished most of what his now former friend, I imagine, has said about the reasons to Remain. Hilton was extremely close to Cameron and is the one who advised him to go for the leadership. He was virtually live-in at No. 10 throughout Cameron's occupancy. This won't go down well at all.

Politicians are well aware that the majority of the UK population have had it up to here with the EU:mad:

Do you think they have put this Brexit to the public vote without a carefully designed plan to counter it if the great unwashed vote out? :shrug:

Vote rigging keeps springing to mind.

Call me paranoid.....


What?.......who said that?

Sounds fun, therefore probably against EU rules.

Out for me, I'm more concerned about what it will be like in 20 years when my children have to compete in the big wide world. Our population is now almost 65 million, 5 million of that total has been since 2002 according to Radio 2 yesterday, doesn't matter what way you look at it that rate of immigration to an island can only end one way.

Our door needs closing so we can build some homes for the people already here. No point letting more people in when we can't house the ones already here:shrug:

The government could use some of the £350 million they will be saving a week to build some new affordable housing, and it should only be available to people who have resided here for 15yrs at least. That would stop all this buying from abroad overnight.:mad:

Are you always this sensible this early .

:D.

Everything you have said is spot on.:}.

I agree with you but one of the Scandinavian countries (not sure which one) has a trade agreement with the EU but the caveat is they must have an open border policy. Even if we leave we will be tied in a similar way when we want to trade with the EU.
I am fed up of listening to it too, I wonder if we'd get our fishing waters back?

I agree Steve, we should be left alone to make our own decisions based on what we see and hear on the TV etc, after all if we are eligible to vote means we are adults and should be treated as such :shrug:

It may well be that the younger generation will sway the vote to in.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...endum-36363205

However with attitudes displayed by the contributor at 2:48 it would appear they don't care for anyone over 25? I think if I had been in the more mature and respectful group she would have been RESPECTFULLY reminded that she may not reach her 26(?) birthday.

Also at 2:34 - jeoprordise???? So we have someone training to be a teacher and who wants to work abroad as a teacher who cor spake propa. God help us.

I work with a number of foreign colleagues. One an engineer from Romania, fantastic guy, gentlemen and a good engineer. His stories about the Romanian revolution are gripping. Another from China, brain the size of a planet with a Phd. in electrical engineering. Both say we should remain, however the rest of my colleagues are for out, my family and friends around the country are the same.

Interesting times ahead. Trump as President, UK out of the EU by the end of the year.

The arrogance and disrespect of that young "lady" would only serve to confirm my decision to vote to get the hell out. And if I was voting to remain, would completely reverse my decision.

Norway I believe . So where does that get the 'leavers' ? looks like the present situation .
Problem is that there is no right or wrong Its all guesswork and probability . :shrug:

We wouldn't have to be a part of the EEA though. Iceland, Liechtenstein & Norway chose that route, but I wonder if you asked them now, if they'd choose it again?

I started off with heart saying Leave in big letters and head saying Remain because it’s not the best time to do it, save it for another day.

After seeing Frau Merkel opening the door to anybody and then cosying up to Erdogan (not the nicest man on the planet) with murmurs of reviving Turkey’s application for EU membership, added to the blatant lies and abject panic of the Remainders, I’m afraid to say my mind has changed to one of Leave for our own security.

Even if everything they threaten actually happens, it’s a price worth paying to avoid the consequences of freedom of movement that could lead to insurrection by EU Treaty.

We do not carry the casting vote in Council, we are, in spite of existing EU trade and the wider world economy, a minor political partner under the axis of Germany and its junior captive lacky France.

I just hope the moronic Trump is trumped by Clinton. And I never thought I’d back that silly filly either.

Trump ahead of Clinton by 0.2%

Innies ahead of outies 51% - 49%

Interesting how different the bookies are from the polls. I think some bookies are 1/6 to remain in. Out is 7/2.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...endum-36271589

Guess the bookies are more accurate? Didn't they get it right with the election last year and the Scottish referendum?

I'm only sensible when it's that early George, the rest of the time I revert back to being a big teenager:D

AAArrrrghggghhh pet hate alert, pet hate alert. ITS REVERT no BACK.

Oh I feel so much better now.:}:}

Sorry.:}:}:}

Another item from today’s Times:

J-C Juncker says the EU will use sanctions against any far-right or populist governments that are swept to power or office on the wave of popular anger against migration.

The power to do this was granted and passed into EU law in 2014. That was well publicised wasn’t it? Sanctions means force. It seems the definition of democracy, and the subjugation of nations to a non-elected secret committee that is beyond question, can be varied to whatever the Council wants. What price democracy now? The importance of this and it's significance is impossible to understate.

Source:
pistonheads > gassing station> news, politics &economics> Unelected EU Commissioners
(A brief leader – the rest requires a payment)

In my mind, your 2 paragraphs here are what the EU is all about. Germany, and what IT thinks is best for everyone.

I don't know about the election but they were spot on for the Scottish referendum. They had the outcome accurately forecast for a long time before. Some even paid out before the voting had finished.

I think they are a good gauge of what is going to happen.
i think it will be 55%/45% to remain.

Gggggggrrrrrrrrrrrr pet hate alert, pet hate alert. Being corrected by grammar nazi's for no other reason than to make themselves feel intellectual:mad:

Does it really matter if I put BACK after every word? No, it doesn't as long as MY post makes sense.:duh:

Ooooh that feels better:bowdown:

Can we keep on topic? There has been some interesting posts and I am almost made my mind up which way I`m going.
Ken.

We could listen to both sides of the argument until the cows come home, be evermore confused, annoyed, exasperated and still be undecided. Flipping a coin may help some, for others looking into the tea leaves at the bottom of the cup may work? Whatever the decision the hard work starts afterwards and it is vital for the good of the country that both sides come together.

Somehow I doubt the latter.

The main cause of confusion, annoyance and exasperation is the misuse of taxpayers funds (possibly illegal) to further a false debate, the deliberate misrepresentation of figures to bolster a thinly disguised attempt to hoodwink, and a refusal to engage equivalent opponents in open debate.

I'm referring to the storm of doom from the Remainders, the Leave side have thankfully largely refrained from reacting in similar fashion so far. Long-standing relationships have been destroyed already and probably, showing the deep disgust at what has been happening, forever.

The Civil Service and other government agencies have been mobilised to support Cameron's position, again possibly illegal. Thankfully that misuse of state machinery will stop on Friday when Purdah starts (the prohibition of such abuses).

If both sides would only issue genuine and reasonable opinions, arrived at through honest study of known values, rather than deciding what they secretly really want and then producing preposterous fairy stories to achieve it, we would all be better off.

That’s the problem in a nutshell Ray. The Remainders appear to have taken the high ground here by the use of such "dodgy tactics" shall we say? As we know such tactics tend to be believed so much more easily.

Anyway, we have today received out polling cards. We are good to go as they say in the movies.

The BBC are suggesting they have opened some web pages (?) to disseminate the truth from the myths and down right lies being propagated by both sides of the debate. How unbiased that might be, I don't know.

A contrary view
 

I have yet to receive my voting card.

I am clearly in a minority of one here, but in for a penny, in for a Euro.....

Leaving the Euro is utter, utter madness. If we do, we will become an isolated and irrelevant small country at the edge of Europe. Barred from contributing to any European decision making, and there will follow years of economic stagnation whilst the government does little but negotiate a never ending sequence of trade deals. And the Europeans will do everything in their power to stitch us up.

And apparently stating the truth about life outside the EU is scaremongering? Well wouldn't you rather know now than find out the hard way in a few years?

Whereas the totality of the Leave thinking is 'of course we can do it alone, we are British'.

People also forget the wide range of employment laws that are protected by EU legislation. You trust a Tory government to look after your best interests?

Will any more major industrial companies build factories in the UK knowing exports have to subject to TBD trade deals?

Think the French will care one hoot about the 'Jungle' at Calais if we leave the EU? They will see it as a UK problem and nothing to do with them anymore.

Tax reform will stall meaning it's even easier for Google etc to pay a pittance of UK tax.

The list goes on. And I've not heard of a single credible economic report stating any benefits of leaving.

Worst of all, if the Leave camp win, we get Boris 'self-interest' Johnson as PM!

We are stronger together, and I sincerely hope the Remain side wins. Over and out

They did an article on the amount of money we pay in against the amount we get back. Presented by Charlie Stayt - made one think.

Pay in £361m/week.
Rebate £85m/week
Treasury £88m/week
Private sector money £27m/week
Cost £161m

To put this into context UK defence costs are some £851m/week, NHS and pensions are an awful lot more, sorry but I missed the figures on these – typing as it was on.

No please don't leave BtB, it's alternative perspectives such as these which we need. So stay around eh?

The EU is falling apart anyway, best let us not be a part of it. We get inundated with legislation which is disadvantageous to the UK, some of them plainly just stupid, as if someone has a sole aim in life of creating silly rules.

We can 'do it alone', we always did until the Common Market. It offered us advantages back then, when we joined - now it doesn't, we just have a prospect to look forward to of supporting many much worse economies since the EU began its power crazed attempt to rule the entire world. We didn't elect them, we have almost no real power in the EU, yet we are the strongest nation in the EU. We are one of the smallest, but massively over populated - a country where all of the displaced people head for consuming our resources. The generous man of Europe, with few rules in place to dissuade them.

The EU needs us, much more than we need them.

Bob, You're not in a minority! Plenty on here feel the same way! In fact that’s pretty much how I felt at one time. Long before Cameron went on his crusade and came with an empty bag and then proceeded to lie about it. And continued ever since.

Even today, a new ‘report’ from the Institute of Fiscal Studies has burst in with massive backing for Cameron’s position. Heralded as the only really independent organ, when you look closer all isn’t what it seems.

All their earlier predictions were hopelessly wrong in essence, from the EMF to Greece they were wide of the mark. They are independent as far as being a study and research group, university based, and funded by Europe! See below opinions from both Left and Right commentators – direct quotes lifted from Wiki – to give a balanced view:

The Institute for Fiscal Studies frequently speaks out on politically important issues and has at different times been criticised from both sides of the political spectrum. In October 2010, the leader of the Lib Dems accused the IFS of using methods that were "distorted and a complete nonsense" after it challenged government claims that tax and benefit reforms in the June 2010 Budget were "progressive”.

Left-wing think tank Tax Research UK stated in a report that the "Institute for Fiscal Studies is a body that persistently recommends tax increases that benefit the wealthiest in society at cost to those who make their living from work and the poorest in society".

On another occasion, the right-leaning magazine The Spectator published a leader stating that Institutes funded by research grants (which means, usually, tax money) will always argue for more expensive meddling by the state and that the Institute for Fiscal Studies was "the most striking example" of this.

It’s true the Leave campaign hasn’t given any future view of how the economy will fare, because neither they nor anybody else can! But, every budget that Osborne has presided over has had to be redrawn shortly after implementation, some in a matter of weeks. It is all guesswork.

I suspect voting will to a large extent be for who the public feel is the most trustworthy and believable. In any case, as things stand, whatever the result there will be no immediate change of government. So no civil unrest, plagues, or insurrection!

What no plagues? I was looking forward to seeing a pox on all their houses! :D:D:D

Depends where you live whether or not you get the official government leaflet. Only 9 million government leaflets when there's a lot more households. Local Tory activist told me but I cannot confirm, if you live in a "safe" Tory seat you won't get a leaflet because they believe you are guaranteed to vote to stay in.
Whatever the case, I'm not happy that my tax payments are being used to promote a biased view from a PM who promised a balanced referendum.

We had ours, safe Tory seat too.:shrug::shrug:

We had ours so I sent it back to the Tory party headquarters address that a member posted about, no stamp obviously:D

We joined in the 70's a 'Common market' and gradually over the years this has morphed into the EU, none of which was voted for in that referendum, it has often been said that the long term goal is an ever closer union, political and financial and that's a fact, that is what the eurocrats are going for, a slow creeping takeover of decision making!
Parliament will remain but end up as a rubber stamp for EU 'Directives'
I for one do not believe one word about the further guarantees and opt outs promised if we remain, they will find a way round all the promises and opt outs when they feel the need, the EU is a millstone around our necks.

Who will be next to be wheeled out from the list of world leaders to tell us how to vote eh!

How it is viewed from across the pond:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...87d_story.html

If you miss the links:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...html?tid=a_inl

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ans/?tid=a_inl

I was working in France a couple of weeks ago and the guys I was working with said that if we left the EU there would be a big call in France for a referendum on their membership.

There lies the big elephant they daren't mention. If the UK leaves there will be major pressure from several others to do the same. If they don't get it there will be a massive call for far-right leaders to take over and that will just not do.

EU leaders see UK leaving as the start of the rot leading to precisely what nobody wants, Fascist revival in the manner of Marine le Pen in France and similar events in Austria, so narrowly avoided last week. Of course it wouldn't occur to them that the way to avoid that is to heed the people and make changes. That would stop the gravy train in its tracks.

Well my mind was made up whilst watching Paxman in Brussels (BBC)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07c6n58
Interesting to note that both camps complained that the programme was biased, so perhaps for once BBC got it right, and in any case there is a limit on bias.
Brexit the video https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=br...&client=safari
Is also worth a watch, and even if you don't believe a single figure quoted, just the way the place works is enough for me.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The far right have been gaining strength for some years on the continent. It was particularly noticeable on my trip to Poland where I was advised NOT to leave the group I was with. To see swastikas and "White Power" in clear view on some main roads where I was staying was somewhat unsettling.

Very good point RE: heeding the people and making the change...

You raise a seldom discussed point Stuart, seldom because it can get out of hand. I'm sure good sense will prevail however.

This is a scary one and there’s a hesitation to post it, it’s relevant to the thread but another aspect. If anyone finds the following objectionable, please feel free to tell me and I’ll delete.

Time and again the spectre of Race emancipation scares the daylights out of the uneducated and bigoted knuckle-draggers in dark corners of the world. Allow sufficient generational gap and the horrors of deathly conflict fade, power hungry politicians sense the unrest, follow the money and get delusions of grandeur assuming they are the entitled ones and it starts again. It doesn’t matter how they describe their false objectives, Left or Right it’s always the same, the expansion of the Elite and the privileged few seeking to control the masses.

That’s what’s happening now, the influx of terrorised and impoverished people seeking a better life – not the much discussed financial aspect of banking and finance. All that does is reduce the argument to figures rather than humanitarian resolve. The arguments over this latest mess are all about the money. That’s a red herring and with care it could be totally avoided.

The sickening thing is the flat refusal to admit to the real problem. Until the illness is correctly diagnosed, the right remedy is elusive and the illness grows to an epidemic. Just as nature abhors a vacuum, civil unrest creates the vacuum for the radicals to rise and fill it. There is actually room for migrants, given the will for assimilation and planned dispersal rather than dumping on unwilling hosts.

Interesting opinion from Theo on the Beeb News this morning... He intends voting for OUT, so as to stay in...

If Britain votes for out, the EU might wake up to the fact that so many member states are unhappy with the EU. The EU might then be pressured into changing its MO so as to be more sensible which would then enable us to stay.

If the EU had been at all interested in making substantial change Call me Dave might have come back from his recent 'negotiations' with more than just a pat on the head (and even that could/would be changed to a sharp slap should we take the hook and commit to remain).
THEY JUST ARE NOT INTERESTED AND CAN'T/DON'T WANT TO SEE CHANGE to their cosy sycophantic empire building!! It's mushroom land (and if haven't heard that before - "keep them in the dark and cover them in manure"); we are being suffocated in negative publicity to convince us that the UK cannot survive outside this 'club'.
Paxman got a good handle on what we stump up the current £350 000 000/per week (on average…) for - no strings, it's the 'membership' fee. In return we get £100 000 000/week refund (on average) with all sorts of strings attached - we are constrained on how/on what we spend it, and the UK rebate, which is a substantial portion of the refund, can be withdrawn/reduced at any time (it's an informal 'grant').
Joining the EEC back in 1973 was good for the UK (and then we were just 7, now it's 27 going on 33!! saddled with and managed by a European Song Contest style voting system….). We should not be seen as just fair weather friends to our EC 'partners' but we, and many of them, are being peddled a pup and a sickly pup at that. It's all changed and changing further for the worse trundling inexorably towards god knows what.
The EC is an arrogant, unaccountable, self serving, uncompetitive, inefficient and, sadly failing, behemoth.
"Stay in and negotiate change" is what Call me Dave proposes!! Cloud cuckoo land politics, IMHO the UK's 73 votes is just p…ing in to the wind of the +760 other votes - even if 'we' could attract some sympathetic allies from within.
Guess which way I'm voting…..

Well written!

One good point that was made on the bbc1 debate this evening.
A voter that is 'undecided', made the comment that the 'remain' campaign hadn't convinced him to 'stay' because they'd said nothing about EU reform all evening. All they'd done was talk about how good being 'in' is.

EU vote
 

We had ours 10 or so days back and you can't get much more of a safe Conservative seat than Generous George's - Tatton, Cheshire!

Hi.
Seems like Salmond is back pushing the Scots referendum if we exit the EU.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36393483

So I think he's goading the voters up here to vote stay so another split up the UK vote can be done.
TBH I'm sick of all this now, does he not see the jobs that are gradually going from Scotland, all this uncertainty has never gone away!

He revels in skulduggery, would slice of his nose and ears to spite his face.

I've not seen the SNP ever being up the subject of a second Scotland referendum. It's always one of the other parties who bring up the subject, perhaps hoping to scare the unionist voters into voting to stay. It's always assumed Scotland will vote to stay, But why not ask the same question the other way round, what will happen if Scotland votes leave, but the U.K. as a whole votes to stay?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I must admit, that when this issue came to the fore, I was in the "IN" camp. But after looking at the issues and the monies, out of your pockets :eek: I am now out of the EU.

The EU can be seen to falling apart. with member states closing their borders, States turning to the (far) right etc.... 1932 rears it's ugly head again throughout Europe. Better out than in IMO.

This is posted as a member and not as a Moderator:}

I will be voting out :) I'm not going to justify my choice tho haha

If anyone does need a little convincing:
I was browsing the Dft web site for some information on the new Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, when I stumbled across some statics regarding diesel vehicles. In summary, apparently in 2007 the UK government realised that the test procedure for new vehicles did not corespondent to legal life conditions. Then in 2011 the EU agreed that test procedure should be examined, and then in 2015, they initiated steps to change it. In other words, it takes them 8 years to discuss the problem before they even start to address it, and had it not been for the VW scandal, perhaps another 8 years to find a solution. Of course it might have something to do with the fact that Germany is the main centre of vehicle production.
I notice now, that we are beginning to hear suggestions that we can change the way the EU operates if we stay. I'm afraid we Scots are already wise to that one, because Dave used that tactic during the Scotland vote.
He didn't manage to change very much BEFORE the referendum, so how on earth can he expect to make changes when he no longer has the threat to leave at his disposal.
Perhaps you also noticed on question time last night, that whilst we obey the rules to the letter, and send cash all over the EU to the families of migrant workers, whilst I think it was Spain, just ignored the rules, and decided that a British ex-serviceman's medical care was too expensive, so he had to return to UK


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This might have something to do with it:
www.thetimes.co.uk (EU Army)

And in other la-la-land news Jeremy Corbyn says: "(Brexit could put) Parks , beaches and fresh air at risk". I kid you not.

Then there is the scandalous Saatchi & Saatchi poster. You'd think a Jewish firm would have the implications and the market for racial stereotyping pretty well understood. Still, 30 pieces and all that....

The wheels are coming off, methinks.

I'm not sure which way to vote at the moment, I think if those groups who wish to leave want to win I think they need some information on their plans. At the moment to my mind they've put very little information out there about how it will all work if we leave? Trade deals, people's right to live and work, our realtionship with the EU after leaving etc.

That's the elephant in the room for the leave campaigners - everything will have to be negotiated, and they can't give much in the way of hard information until the negotiations have taken place.

Believe me, we will be OK, it will not be all doom and gloom as they want you to believe. Let's show some balls and take control of our own affairs once again. Rule Britannia and all that :}

Possibly, but it's very difficult to convince people if there is no plan. 'We'll sort it out later' isn't much of a plan.

EU vote?
 

You questions are all answered out there somewhere, it's just a question of who to believe
http://www.betteroffout.net/the-case...out-withdrawl/
And perhaps
https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-m...ee-55-million/

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Not bad but I think they need something more positive and what they think will happen rather than catch up.

Everyone knows you can't guarantee the future. And a guess is just that, even if educated. The others interpret the past, leaving us to make a judgement about their methods, aims and reliability.

Trade deals: we already have historical trading and contemporary arrangements outside the EU. We trade with most of the rest of the world and the old Commonwealth would be delighted to extend trade. Following our full membership of EU we mainly traded within it to gain advantage of low tariffs, not because we were in trouble elsewhere.

Major industries still in the EU would be unlikely to close the book on partnerships already in existence - leave aside the number of foreign owners of highly successful UK businesses. With regard to the USA and the Obama ridiculous threat - rubbish! What queue was he talking about because there isn't one! The USA is only engaged in one trade deal at the moment -TTIP - there is plenty of scope for negotiation and they would be more than likely jump at talks.

The right to live and work is only relevant to those wishing to come here and we would then have the automatic right to refuse entry to those we deemed to be unsuitable to be here for any reason, a big advantage. We retain total control of who we accept as desirable or to our advantage.

I imagine there would be a degree of resentment from the leaders of the EU but doubt that would be for long - they would be trying for further negotiations to keep us 'in'. In the meantime, the money we pay for membership could be used to our own advantage.

On the question of the difference between net and gross expenditure of our membership costs (rebates and discounts in contention at the moment) it's true we get back some money. The point is we would pay nothing and the amount they presently keep we would retain and use on things we ourselves want, rather than ludicrous schemes invented just for the sake of spending it.. So Boris's £350 million a day is accurate! That is a phenomenal amount of money!

The Remainders are trying to force a vote by deliberately using worst scenario scare stories and trying to engender a fear of the unknown by denying our excellence and innovation and talking down the country. Disgraceful and shameful. The Leavers haven't got 'evidence' to marshal because it hasn't happened yet so can't be lied about.

Earlier I posted a link to an article about the putative EU army (already agreed to by Germany, France and Spain). Cameron said with our veto it couldn't happen. Unfortunately, he forgot about the clause in the treaty that allows the main veto to be overruled by any agreement forged between a group of nine members! Either he is a twerp or a liar. They want full sharing of resources, command and bases. Positioned in mainland Europe. Guess who will assume command? No contest.

It was agreed in the surrender in 1945 that Germany would never again be allowed to organise and retain armed forces. One generation later, what's happened to those formal agreements and conditions? Nato is the saving grace, not failed unelected politicians. This issue is far too important to allow to slip by unnoticed. The necessary habit of vigilance appears to be an early casualty.

I'm sure that's all true, however I think they need to starting spelling out how they wish it to be, not so much the EU will do this and that. I'm sure the other side is doing something else, however they wish to change the status quo not keep it, the emphasis is on them IMO. Plenty of work to be done yet. :}

Those who wish us to stay, generally have their own agendas for doing so, equally, those wishing for the out vote, also have their own agendas:shrug: We, the populace, the voters/deciders, have to make our minds up purely on whose agendas are the least disruptive:duh: I have never voted in my life, as in my opinion, they're all the same, but, for this, I will make my decision to vote for my country, not a political party:cool: Just my opinion btw, not forum thingy stuff;):D

I only started to bother to vote in the past few years. Not indifference, there just wasn't anyone worthy of my vote.

This one is an unmissable one for me, I will definitely be voting.

What irritates me, is the dishonesty of the present government. The two sides of the debate were each assigned a lead group, and budget limits imposed on each. Now, whilst the Brexit movement are slogging along merrily within budget, it wouldn't matter one jot whether the remains had a budget or not, because the government has already blown it completely out of the water.
Brexit tell us Turkey is about to join, and hey presto, oh no, Britain would be able to veto that. (Note COULD, not WOULD) but then we hear that the veto could be over ruled, so perhaps we are not in control after all.
The government are repeating the tactics used on the Scotland vote, blatant scaremongering, and by having no plan B, they couldn't be questioned on it. Then half way through the debate, throw a spanner in the works by saying "of course you won't be able to keep the pound" (whose pound is it anyway) and move the goalposts and offer massive reform if we stay. In the end, we voted to stay, without knowing what we were actually voting for.
With that in mind, I fully expect to read in Monday's paper, that we are going to completely re-negotiate our terms with the EU, notwithstanding the fact that we achieved zilch from the last round of negotiations.
I don't need to be told exactly what the world will be like if we leave, I have a fair idea of what I think it should be like. I will also know that my taxes are not going to that top heavy self appointed institution over whom I have no redress, and if the UK government are not behaving in the way which I think appropriate, then I will at least have the opportunity to say so at the ballot box.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This is what I posted on another car forum about the same question

It's such a terrible shame when politicians are so unable to engage with the electorate that people decide to abstain. Was there ever a more damning condemnation of a government or a bigger waste of the franchise that so many millions have fought and died for?

I don't just mean the 20th century, though that was bad enough, I'm talking about all the centuries before, all the invasions, all the defences of our way of life, all the challenges a country faces and all the work put in by those that thought it was worth working for. The young man at Jutland (mentioned earlier in another thread) who at 16 years did what he did because he thought it was his duty had not got the privileges we have but still he....well, you know what I mean. To see merely a generation or two being enough to throw all that away is a tragedy.

Don't abstain. The last general election suffered the same fate and now we are governed by the 25% of the electorate that bothered to go out and vote for what we have now got and that lies to us so easily. 25%? 25%!! That's not democracy, that's surrender. It's no good then complaining 'they have no idea about ordinary people, they decide what they want and to hell with us'.

If you can't decide because you don't have enough information, if you doubt the wild claims being made, then do your research. The answers are there if you look and are easy to find. These days of on-line discovery make it an easy thing to do. I have no computor skills whatsoever so if I can find it anyone can! If you are not sure where to look, ask somebody! They won't mind - they'll be impressed! And you will have your say based on effort rather than resignation!
That's me done for today, off to beddybyes to dream of wonderful things to come.

I too would hope that you do go out and vote, I certainly wouldn't to win a vote just because the other side didn't bother to vote. It's only when everyone goes out and registers their vote that the result has any validity.
I just hope your decision is not based on the rubbishy we are being fed, the irony is that a lot of it is coming from the government, and not the official campaign teams.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I have to say that over the last few weeks I've never felt so annoyed with any government as I do now.

David Cameron knew all along what he was doing, he reluctantly gave us an EU referendum because UKIP were stealing Conservative votes (remember nearly 4 million people voted UKIP at the last general election), but knew he would simply rig the whole thing from start to finish, he has pulled every string going, from getting Barack Obama and various 'think tanks' to tell us how bad it will be if we leave (most of whom incidentally are funded by the EU). Tell us that WW3 will start, that holidays will be more expensive, that pensioners will be poor, the list truly does go on, there is another 'shock horror' headline every single day, they've obviously spent time coming up with a list which they are simply running down.

Then spending £9million pounds of tax payers money on a TOTALLY one sided leaflet, setting up a website (https://www.eureferendum.gov.uk/) with TOTALLY one sided information on it, which now, because of 'purdah' rules has a notice at the top saying that 'no further material will be published', but IT'S ALL STILL ON THERE! They don't need to publish anything else! The website should be taken down, full stop. I've also seen countless adverts on YouTube and other social media sites funded by my own government telling me how bad it will be if we leave and that therefore I must vote to stay in.

I guarantee you, that IF we vote to leave the EU, it simply will not happen. Dave will go straight over there, do some further 'negoations' (which will have already taken place behind closed doors) and then come back asking us again, a bit like Ireland and the Lisbon treaty. This phoney 'renegotiation' will probably be relating to the freedom of movement. One thing I think we pretty much all feel is that David Cameron is a down right liar, so why is he hell bent on us remaining? I strongly suspect it's simply because the political classes all stick together so that he can have a nice little number over in Brussels when his political career ends in this country. The old boys club firmly in action.

So, according to the recent clarification of the stats., the £350 million we give per week (£50 million per day!) that is paid from US, the taxpayers....... :shrug::eek: ....to the EU is a 'false' figure as we get £240 million back from that £350 million per week

That still leaves, £110 million pounds that we "lose" :eek::duh:

The last time, IIRC, that a hospital was built cost £55 million...... (albeit a few years ago:o).... But that, in today's costs, probably, would be 1-2 new hospitals PER WEEK!! (Not, that we need 2 hospitals per week;), but there are other infrastructures that need to be addressed, and rectified, for example our roads and the regeneration of our manufacturing industries (depleted after the 2003 EU Way Forward document that was 'D Noticed' for publication in the UK and some other EU countries ( a copy of which I no longer have... mine was lost when my PC crashed in 2005:o:eek: It was published in France, translated to German, and then to English) and has now vanished from the internet..... :shrug::shrug:))). Do you trust the EU - I do not, and never have done ... More cover-ups than duvets/blankets on a cold night......:banghead:

So what can £110 million per week pay for ? :shrug:

For those that want to vote.... (Welsh Liberal IN logo :eek:) (Who got decimated in the last election ;))
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...5b&oe=57CB0AA4

...:suckers:


Let's put our own house in order before we pay for other countries to try to put theirs in order......;)

http://www.weeklybolt.com/wp-content...a7-520x245.jpg

Sorry for the "rant".......:getmecoat::smilie_re:

Guess which way I am voting ;);) My allegiance to Great Britain can be seen....:D:D

I post this as an ordinary Club Member and NOT as a Moderator:}

[B]
'His Party's vested interests Paymasters call the tune and he plays it.NAUGHTY WORD-'
[B/]

Who do you believe that the paymasters are?

I don't know about rig, but yes world leaders have an opinion on the referendum. Most seem to favour us staying in apart from donald trump and Vladimir putin ( that I've read anyway) and I'm not sure they are overly persuasive.
The other stuff you mentioned is coming out by the boatload by both sides. It appears to be near armegedon if we vote in/out depending on what you read. I think both sides should be more positive.

The leaflets are to be expected they reflect the thoughts of the government. I know they bother many people, but I'm not one of them. The government does have an opinion and no surprise it publishes it.

Wraymond..

I didn't bother to vote, simply because there was no one I felt worthy of my vote. I don't normally vote for parties, but the first time I bothered to vote I voted UKIP. I felt they had something to offer and they deserved my support.

We have an almost useless MP, but a local councillor worthy of my vote. I dislike speeches, I am impressed by action rather than words and promises. My partner has never voted, ever, but gives no reason for that not wishing to vote.

I posted my postal vote this morning with a cross in the "OUT" box.:}

It is so obvious to me that Barack Obama has been asked to say what he did. Although it would be in America's interest for us to remain so we can be there puppet within the EU anyway.

I strongly feel that the government shouldn't take a position! And certainly not spend tax payers money and use the power of the civil service on it! This is the sort of thing Putin and Kim Jong Un would do. Not what I expect from a western democracy. David Cameron could've simply given us the referendum, campainged himself for the IN campaign whilst sticking to their spending limit. (Not that spending limits seem to bother him!) That would've made a fair referendum. Anyone who cannot agree with that level playing field, which would be nothing but fair, is clearly all for IN and is quite prepared to allow our government to rig the outcome at any cost.

I think the constant bombardment of stats and counter stats is all academic and at the end of the day the outcome either way is crystal ball gazing but with an OUT even more so. Ultimately it's down to emotion - you either want to part of Europe and with it take the negatives and positives or cast adrift and see what appears over the horizon For me? I'm voting IN. Why...?

I accept that Europe isn't perfect but no-one is selling a utopian political and economic dream and neither can the OUT campaign. I think an OUT vote could trigger a chain of events be it another referendum in Scotland or further countries leaving the EU that could bring instability to the region that we've generally enjoyed since the end of the war. Yesterday the BBC pooled all the economic think from both sides and the general consensus is that the UK will experience economic shock for at least 2 years and the EU saving will be used to shore up the economy and steady the ship. I doubt anyone would argue that the UK economy is currently in good health that can withstand such a shock. An OUT vote will then dominate UK politics with hammering out new trade deals with other partners and will take our eye off the ball with other national and global issues that require our attention. And who's going to lead these negotiations - messers Johnson and Farage? I'm also voting for my kids future - I don't want to find them disadvantaged down the line if this has gone Pete Tong. Both want to go into science as a career - UK science and research is a net beneficiary of EU funding so what happens if the tap's turned off? If, say, in 15 years time we recognise that BREXIT hasn't worked and we want back in then I suspect the humble pie in political and economic terms that we'd have to swallow would be too much for us to stomach so then what....:shrug:

It may not be perfect but it's predictable and by staying in the UK and other countries feeling similar sentiment can push for change albeit slowly. There you go I've said my bit..:}

I'm not sure that there is much more behind what he said than just that. He thinks it's in our and their interests to remain.

How can the government not have a position? His government (with some disagreement ) is in favour of remaining, it seems fair enough to me that they spell out why they think that. I don't think that is rigging anything.

Totally agree with you Gman2. I find it utterly depressing that the Out camp have no interest in the economic arguments, and just ignore the damage that will be done if we leave. No one is really disputing it, it's just a matter of how long it lasts.

I'm very glad the government has an opinion on the matter, and is willing to spend some money stating the facts. What they've spent is a pittance compared to how much the country will be financially disadvantaged by if we leave.

And if the Leave campaign was based on anything but wishful thinking, here's some questions I'd like answered:

What will happen to all the Europeans currently working in high tech industries and the NHS? Will they be allowed to continue? And what about new workers? I guess they will be allowed to apply for visas. Will that make us more or less efficient?

What does Boris perpetuate the big fat lie about us sending £350 million a week to the EU? Tell the truth Boris!

What will happen to mobile data roaming charges in Europe that the EU got reduced? Will they go up?

Will we able to travel to Europe at will anymore?

Will European students be able to come to our universities and bring much needed revenue?

How will the City fare? Europe has been gunning for it for years, will financial institutions have to move away because of restrictions placed upon financial transactions?

Who will protect us from anti-competitive behaviour by the likes of Google and Microsoft? (The EU prosecuted them for stitching us all up for years.)

Who will enshrine in law workers rights to holidays and maximum possible working hours, as I assume the working time directive etc will no longer apply.

What will happen to all the other laws that actually protect us from government and big business abuse? Will they all be abandoned? What will happen in the interim?

Seeing as how Boris is only interested in becoming PM and sees the referendum as his chance to achieve this, I doubt he cares much about the reality of life outside the EU.

A few excellent and well thought out posts from Gman2, topman and bobthebuilder above gents. :bowdown::bowdown::bowdown:

No question that both Call me Dave and Generous George have gone down (way, way down) in mine and Mrs. Rabbit's esteem - and historically we've been enthusiasts:shrug: of the party:eek:
UK politics aside, this is about the country and the future (Mrs. Rabbit and my personal future only measures at best 20-25 years…). All arguments need to remember that we ARE already well entrenched in the EC - a major financial contributor (not too many of them in the 27) and the SOLE member state that is currently doing comparatively well. The EC cadre must be concerned that if we try to leave that will
a) send out a signal for other like tending States to start proceedings to do the same i.e. domino effect = high probability bye bye EC as we know it!
b) no State as deeply involved (and arguably important) as the UK has EVER left the Club so who would like to predict what that might bring down on the remaining members - a lot of pressure to seriously consider fundamental changes to what was initially a really good idea??
High stake gamble by Call me Dave or even a win win strategy - perhaps.
c) European military force? Chocolate poker effectiveness never mind the undoubted huge cost (more 'free' dough to tap into).
The EC structure is fundamentally flawed for most functions other than producing/instigating standards for all sorts of 'things'! It's a self supporting, self serving, fantastically high overhead parasitic bureaucracy - existing for it's own good. The old visionary ISC/EEC ideals have long gone - lip service and grey suits/bean counters have usurped the 'beautiful european game'.
Just consider the recent shambles 'they' made of resolving(?) a migrant crisis; dilly/dally, followed by unilateral dictates all over the place, followed by more dilly/dally misguidance and misdirection, misery for multiple 100's of 1000's both in and out of the flow of humanity, even more dilly/dally and then (lightbulb decision) pay a mercenary, non-member, regressive country a huge amount of 'our' collective monies to manage the problem….effectiveness 2, smug meter reading 99 - and the problem shifts elsewhere!!
Britain has managed to successfully trade with the world for 100's of years (and sort of ruled the world for 200 years, generally for the better).
I'd much rather keep my 600 odd scallywags in Westminster, wholly accountable to me and my fellow electorate every 4 years (under our arguably flawed but well tried respected system of government, law making and Courts) than the utterly unaccountable 800 odd Brussels/Strasbourg scoundrels and their European Courts who appear to go their own way.
It's going to hell in a hand basket and I don't want to go there quite yet.

Where I work we are "encouraged" to Oot out of the Working Time Directive...

I once worked somewhere like that, I didn't stay long.

Thanks for that Harry, I wasn't referring to you! Your earlier post prompted me to go off at a tangent on something that I could not remember being mentioned before! Once started..... Just a generalisation!

Couldn't disagree more, sorry.

I find it totally and wholly unacceptable for any government to be telling me how to vote, be it a referendum or otherwise. Members of the government can give their opinion (under the rules which those wishing us to leave should also stick to). But they should not be doing that as the government and spending tax payers money on it.

Also, if I worked for a company which attempted to tell me how I should vote either way, I wouldn't work there long either.

My opinion is based mainly on immigration, my son who is a UK Citizen from Birth, decided a few years ago to teach English in a foreign country, he chose the Republic of Georgia (just for reference a non EU Country)

Whilst there he met a girl and the relationship developed eventually leading to marriage (in Georgia) this was three and a half years ago. They were living in Georgia however he was encouraged to come back to the UK to complete his degree, mainly for job prospects.

He came back and took up his final year of study, his wife was allowed to come to the UK but only on a Family visitor visa, this would allow up to 6 months stay but then have to leave for 6 months.

For them to come and reside in the UK my son had to prove that he was working or had independent savings of £18,500 a year to support him and his wife, if they have a child this amount will go up.

Anyway whilst here she has to abide by certain conditions, she cannot work voluntary or paid, she cannot attend any educational courses and she must have private health care as she cannot use the NHS, she cannot access any UK benefits.

Now the story progresses, my son completed his degree with First with Honours, the University recognised that he had firsts in every assignment and immediately offered him employment, with a salary that met their needs.

His wife has now had to return to Georgia as her second family visa has reached its 6 month period, she now has to apply for a visa to reside in the UK, his will last if granted for two and a half years at which point it will be reviewed to make sure they are still together and that they meet the required financial target.

What she has to do for her visa,

In Georgia obtain a certificate to say she has been tested and is clear of TB
She has had to sit an English Exam, to show she can speak and write basic English
They have to provide documented proof of earnings, also documents of marriage, along with wedding photo's, e mails and other communications all proving that the marriage is not a scam. We have to provide proof that we sponsor her stay in the UK until they can find a home, now all this comes at a cost, and it will be in excess of £5,000

Do Not get me wrong, if the system says this is the way then so be it.... but why then do we allow the 'Free Travel of all these people' people that are not in a financial position to help themselves let alone contribute to our society.

Then on top of this the EU demands we take refugees and is looking at another possible five members been introduced into the fold, five members that cannot support themselves.

I am not a racist.... I AM Prejudice

I am old enough to remember my dad campaigning strongly to Say NO to the 'Common Market' he like others foreseen what was to come.

My Vote is OUT

I reject your disagreement, because your consensus is not required for me to congratulate selected members for their posts that I consider to be excellent. Your disagreement is misplaced, sorry. :D;)

You may of course hold and express your own views of their posts. :}

It is perfectly reasonable for a business to have a position on the in/out debate from the perspective of what is good for the business. I think most people confuse this with the company trying to tell them how to vote.

A government should most definitely have a position.

Of course the government should have, and publicise, it's position on whether it thinks the nation should stay in or out. This is the most important decision that will probably be made in a generation.

The problem is, that as it is so split up the middle, the Tory party was not able to state a position at the last election and so it doesn't really have a mandate to say 'In', and so snakes like Gove and Johnson are free to say 'Out'. If you disagree with what they've done, feel free to vote them out next time:D

I would hope and expect any responsible government to hold a view of what they think is best for the country. They should also back that view with adequate data and tell the public what and why they think what they do.

Unfortunately the record is less than encouraging when all sources of information they use are in receipt of government funds or EU funds. That wouldn't be so bad if the level of trust was otherwise reasonable.

Critically, time and again the government has not only been hopelessly wrong with predicting economic performance but also downright untrustworthy in many other areas of commercial, legal and social affairs. The credibility gap, or rather chasm, is a result of downright lies and dumb deceit across their whole range of responsibility. It's not surprising there is conflict and mistrust, they lack what they have the nerve to call themselves - honourable.

Mine arrived this morning too, and was back in the post within the hour with an X in the OUT box as well. I was in such a rush to get it back in the post, I initially missed putting the signed slip in the outer envelope, I just caught it in time with the seal still moist enough to re-open it. :duh:

Now now. Members of the Cabinet have the freedom to vote as they feel fit, likewise every other MP no matter what side they sit.
Likewise they should not be denigrated for wholeheartedly supporting a particular viewpoint. Just because they don't support the same position of our PM and Chancellor (amongst others) doesn't give Michael and Boris serpent status. I wouldn't dream of saying Call me Dave was a snidely turtle because he turned over on his shell, drew his head in and proceeded to deceive us once he returned victorious from his negotiations with J-C Junker and his mates.
Come on, fair is fair.

I will be voting for sure and as previously stated I'll be voting out, purely because of the immigration issue. I'm not racist but a small island can only support X amount of people and in my opinion we are rapidly closing on that figure.

With respect, you are rather missing the point. Because the government did not (and I think I'm correct on this) include 'staying in' as a manifesto pledge, people can complain that they have no mandate to state their 'in' position as they are doing now (at tax payers expense). They obviously did this as the party is totally divided over the issue.

By and large, I'm sure the politicians - and public - take the side they do out of conviction. Not Boris however..... otherwise he wouldn't have been saying in February how good the EU is or taken so long to decide which side he's actually on!!

He's taken a punt on 'Out' winning, Cameron's position being untenable and guess who then becomes PM. Not somebody anyone voted for, that's for sure.

And talking of anti-democratic, when are those accusing the EU of being as much going to object to the House of Lords? :D

Drove down the M6 and had to laugh at the OUT campaign with "Vote leave and join the world". They love their sound bites but what's actually on the table - the UK going it alone in the world? Really? How many countries in the world are truly independent from their neighbours - I'll save you the time - none, zip, zilch. Even the big hitters like China and the USA are part of a regional trade gang and with that comes paying into the pot and / or negotiating concessions. So guess what - who are our closest chums - the EU and it's with them that we do the bulk of our trade! So why has the OUT campaign want to reject the Norway, Swiss and Iceland model - 'cos these countries still need to pay to be part of the EU gang but have no say at Brussels and still take the bulk of the legislation! Norway has to retain all the EU’s product standards, financial regulations and employment regulations. So if we leave it's likely that we'll have to re-negotiate some form of access to the EU and pay (albeit less) Brussels and still cop EU "red tape" and take a financial shock in the process. Oh I get it - we'll negotiate with rest of world and forget about the EU - so disregard what I've said above... :duh:

I'm sure it won't have escaped anybody's notice that, after 40 years, all our goods and services, regulations and international standards are already EU friendly and in full compliance.

So, er , what renegotiations would be necessary? Or is that apparently huge and insurmountable hurdle in some small way irrelevant? In addition it won't have escaped anybody's attention that 'we' are far and away the most careful of the 27 nations to adhere strictly to the EU code, unlike the nearest and dearest of our neighbours, among others.

Now Bliar has piped up for the Remainders. Suicide or what?

There's questions over say the right to live and work, either uk citizens to live in the eu or eu citizens to live here. When coming to that sort of thing it's always a bit tricky :}

....so where's the economic plan post BREXIT then ;)

But there is a huge difference between the House of Lords and the EU commissioners.
I don't actually understand how the EU actually works, I don't think anybody does, and that's the first difference, but the second and more worrying difference is that it's the unelected EU commissioners who actually produce the laws, and even though we can sometimes veto the ones we don't like, it is by no means always the case. I believe for example, they recently created a new directive withdrawing the veto in certain circumstances, so in actual fact, they might even withdraw it entirely if they so wished, and there is nothing we can do about it.
The House of Lords on the other hand, can't make or amend any laws. They can however block new laws which they consider to be bad laws, and in my view that's a good thing. Without that protection, the present government could steam roller through any law they wanted, perhaps that the tax rate should be increased to 110%


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The eu comissioners don't produce the laws, they can propose them. But the actual creation iirc is up to European parliament.

A veto is just that, it is given up not taken away.

The HoL can block the laws but only for so long, after so long (3 vote? ) it then goes through.

You say you don't know how it works, plenty of information online.

HTH :}

Jimbo, see post 79 (mine).

I'm assuming most of us might not want to emigrate to EU once UK starts going it's own way. After all £18 billion a year extra will help a lot with NHS, Housing etc. That's not a guess, that's the figures now, without any guesstimate fairyland increase for inflation. That's only Boris's 350 million a week, including the rebates and discount, that we can add together to make it worthwhile!

The commissioners make up the law, they decide what is wanted or desired from the point of view of the guiding principles of the union. They pass the draughts to the assembly for voting on by the MEP's. The council then approve the law they have deigned to offer. The commissioners are not elected, they are appointed by the assembly. The MEP's are not voting for the Council. they are approving what the council do. Dissent is very rare diminishing to never.

I wouldn't think so, I was more thinking about what rules are we going to set up. What about expats living in the eu, who will have a right to work here or learn here? What about eu people that are here now, will they have to leave.

Many questions for those parties so chosen in this referdum to answer, i wonder if any one has thought of that sort of thing?

I'm pretty sure they are voted in, not by general voting but by voting within the parliament itself. The council is a seperate function from the commision.
The laws propsed are often modified and compromised long before they arrive for open voting by the parliament. Much like many other governments, no one would propose a law they knew would be voted down. Comprises are sought gained and traded off, such is politics. Isn't politics the art of compromise.

Good question, but equally, where's the economic plan post remain? There isn't one is there, because in reality we don't know what's going to happen in the future.
Of course the economy will probably suffer for a short time. Maybe up to two years did someone say? Well l would be inclined to agree with that, because it will take two years to negotiate our way out.
The Remain campaign likes to rubbish the 350bn figure quoted by Brexit, but I have yet to find an alternative one that is backed up by some facts, and even though we have never actually handed over that amount, I understand it is near enough the actual top line figure. The initial rebate is voluntary, so no reason to believe it will continue in the future. Approximately half is paid back in grants, mostly to farmers, but we have no say in the allocation. It's a bit like you giving me you pay cheque, and leaving me to pay your bills and do your shopping. I might decide you should have a new BMW, whilst the bank were busy placing an eviction notice on your house.
If the government are so certain we will face economic disaster should we leave, why are having a referendum in the first place? Are we to believe that Dave deliberately placed this countries economy at risk? Isn't it because the Tories have a split in their party, and at the same time they are loosing votes to UKIP? So in other words, public money is being used to shore up a rift in the Tory party.
If the government have a right to campaign, why is it wrong for the BBC to have a political bias? Why is it considered necessary to have a electoral commission? What is the point of said commission setting and authorising who can campaign, and what they can spend?
There's not much point in any of that, if the government are going to run there own campaign alongside the official campaign teams, and especially if they are using the public purse to do so and thereby ignoring the electoral commission rules.
By acting in this way, it will make little difference what the outcome of the poll is. The loosing side will always believe they have been cheated, which is exactly why the Scottish people are still shouting for another poll, and why those that backed the union before are so terrified that there might be another, because there is no guarantee who might win.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Why do you keep wrongly stating we send £350 million a week to the EU. We don't!

https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-m...ee-55-million/

And with the big hit we will take on GDP on leaving, the economy will contract so who knows what the final position could be. We won't suddenly be £18 billion better off. Especially if we have to cough up for EU trading rights as other 'non EU' nations do. But without any influence of course.

All the scare story's you read about how our economy will go into a huge decline makes me laugh. Unemployment will go through the roof. Food and energy prices will rise as well as inflation. If we were to vote out of the EU tonight for argument's sake ,the scare mongers are making these dire predictions based on that we will have all ties severed with the EU by the next morning. It will take years for us, after an out vote for us to be completely free from the EU. Business will have plenty of time to adapt to the changing market. The scare mongers make out, it will be like a light switch being turned off and the shock of instant change will send shock waves throughout our industry. In reality it will be a slow progressive change. I really am undecided which way to vote. There are so many different angles on this to take into consideration. I do think though if the country does decide to stay in we will never get the opportunity again to get out in the future. If another referendum where to come around in 20 years time our country would have so many EU citizens registered as British subjects the vote for out would be in a huge minority because it's obvious they would vote to stay in. 80% of the staff where I work are from Europe. There's got to around 250 polish / Bulgarians there. On a personal basis there all good decent hard working individuals who just want to earn a decent living and provide for there family's. I get invited around to BBQs and enjoy a good social life with a lot of them but it does beg the question on how much of a strain it all puts on our health service and housing. Rental prices have gone through the roof because it's in such high demand. It's also ironic to see that a lot of the Polish workers do not like the Bulgarians workers where I work because they feel they are taking there jobs. One other thing that makes me feel I would vote for out. I have seen it happen so many times at work over the years You will have a European guy working over here who will go back home to visit his wife. 8 months later she decides to come and stay in the UK with her fella and is heavily pregnant from when he last visited her. She has the baby here then goes back home. Because the baby is a UK citizen she's now entitled to claim for UK child benefit back in her home country. This happens all the while and the amount of money going out of our country each week in benefits must be mind boggling.
The world's gone mad. :-))
I'm think I'd better hide behind the sofa now with my tin hat on :-)

If you understand how the EU works, you must be the only one who does, maybe you can explain to me what our MEP actually do, (apart from apparently loose 80% of their votes) but what do the actually vote on? I do know that it has taken them 9 years to agree with our government that vehicle emission tests did not reflect real world conditions, and I believe similar time to agree trade deal with USA, neither of which have reached a conclusion yet.
What I do know, is that the elected members have no powers to make directives, which are the rules that must be obeyed, these come from the unelected commissioners, a bit like an upside down version of our system.
Early on in this debate, I was lead to believe that there was nothing to fear from the EU making decisions that might be detrimental to UK, because we could always use our veto, however I later discover, that if (I think nine) countries agree, our veto can be overruled.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't 18bn/year work out at something like 346m a week?
Now I know we don't actually send that amount, but that is the top line figure, and any deductions or returns is entirely out with our control


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes your sums are right. But we don't send £350million a week, the rebate is applied first. Then the amount that comes back must also be included to calculate the net contribution.

As the link shows, the total contribution generally changes in proportion to the headline contribution, so although people might like to claim it's not guaranteed or deterministic etc, it pretty much is.

Nothing honourable about any of them Ray. Just watching them on PMQ's most Wednesday's and the way they act makes my blood boil to think that they are actually running our country. :mad: :box:

Well done Harry :bowdown: ;)

Had some German colleagues visit the office last week and they are very worried about the UK leaving the EU.

Reason ... due to the large contribution that the UK pays into the EU they are worried that their taxes will increase to make up the UK shortfall should we leave.

Let's face it Steve, this country is looked upon as a soft touch. Which we are, of course :shrug:

No i don't think I'm the only one at all. :} the MEP vote on proposed laws much the same as ours do. Trade deals are something that would be outside their scope, again much the same as ours. For example the last uk - china trade deal it was the PM and the Chancellor that went and signed it off.

We do have a veto, but only in some areas.

HTH :}

Some interesting viewpoints.

But, I fear that the whole debate is being over-complicated. There is only possble outcome, that regardless of which way the vote goes, we will blame Europe for all our self-created problems and moan for ever.

If the vote is to stay in, then the EU and the rest of the world will have conspired gaint us and our interests.

If it is to leave, then the EU will have conspired against our interests so that they can keep control of our past contributions and punish us for our dissention by damaging our national interest and ruining the economy etc.

There you have it - only one possible outcome - we blame others and moan for ever. Interestingly, it will be the same people moaning one way or the other.

On the question of what has the EU done for us?

-clean beaches and rivers
-cleaner air
-lead free petrol
-restrictions on landfill dumping
-a recycling culture
-cheaper mobile charges
-cheaper air travel
-improved consumer protection
-better food labelling
-better product safety
-single market competition
-no paperwork or customs for exports throughout the single market
-freedom to travel
-labour protection and enhanced social welfare
-smoke-free workplaces
-equal pay legislation
-holiday entitlement
-the right not to work more than a 48-hour week without overtime
-strongest wildlife protection in the world
-EU representation in international forums
-EU diplomatic efforts to uphold the nuclear non-proliferation treaty
-European arrest warrant
-cross border policing to combat human trafficking, arms and drug smuggling
-co-operative counter terrorism intelligence
-laws to protect the rights of the ordinary citizen

What has the EU ever done for us?

My brother in law is German and they have a phrase that amounts to "the brits always get the extra bit of sausage from the table" so it's quite interesting how we're viewed from mainland Europe.

I have no doubt that they are worried but when it comes to the plain economic facts we both need each other. If we vote to leave then where are we going to sell the bulk of our goods and services that until now go to the EU. If, upon exit, we want to continue with this relationship then we need to re-engage with Brussels in some form and I shudder to think how long that would take. If we don't want to send a further penny to Brussels (that appears to be the issue for many and yes I'd like to see the amount being less than it is) then where to next 'cos Europe would become a very difficult nut to crack to the detriment to UK business.

I don't think the Outers have even gone as far as drafting their economic plan on the back of a fag packet yet ... :shrug:

Neatly summed up MSS and I can personally vouch for some on your list as contact with European partners forms part of my daily business. Although I suspect you'll be getting a counter-list shortly ;)

Many of these things would still have happened had we never joined the EU though.

For instance would we still be running the majority of our cars on leaded petrol today if we were outside the EU? I think not. ;)

I think that list is a mixed bag, some of them they have done, some that they have done I'm not sure that they've achieved a great deal. And some we are quite capable of doing on our own, some not of course.

No but that's a good example of laws affecting us even if we aren't in the eu.

I'll repeat what I said a posts back; the company I work for "encourages" new employees to Oot out of the European Working Time Directive...

How many others do?

What's the point of it?

Its sad that companies flout the law. You can opt out, but there's always people ready to think they don't have to follow the law.
The idea was to stop people working too many hours.

Also dangerous. This is a large bus company in London...

After training and passing test the attitude is thus; You're no good to us if you don't sign this. So sign up, or leave, having to pay all of the training costs...

Mine did!

But then I was always more than happy to work what ever hours were needed, to get the job done.

You ask all these questions, but haven't they already been answered many times over.
Europeans living and working here; is there any reason why they would not be allowed to stay? There are already people of ALL nationalities living and working here.
The 350m IS the correct top line figure, even Boris will admit we get perhaps half of that back, but his point remains... We have no control over either how much we get back, or what it is spent on, and of course there is still rather a large sum that we DON'T get back.
Roaming charges.. Well perhaps I'll grant you that one, but do you really believe that to be sufficiently important? And even if the are abolished, the providers must surely recoup the money elsewhere, so if you don't pay roaming charges, you will simply pay more elsewhere.
Traveling in Europe; can't you already travel the whole world? Can you really imagine Spain saying Sorry, we don't want British tourists anymore.
European students: student exchange programmes already operate outside the EU, and are generally considered beneficial to all. I can't see any reason why we want to change that.
How will the City fare: well perhaps it is the City who are calling the shots here, but there is a whole world out there that they already operate in, and unless you are saying the UK economy can't operate outside the EU. Of course the EU could put restrictions on financial transactions, but then we could put restrictions on EU imports. There has to be a balance.
Restrictions on Google etc. Can't see why we can't do that outside the EU, after all, it's a global market place and we already have to cooperate with many other countries to counter tax evasion. And, as you say, it has taken the EU many years to act.
Workers rights: surely not beyond the capabilities of our own government, who we actually can kick out should we not approve of there actions.
It will take several years to negotiate our way out of the EU, so EU laws won't disappear overnight. Perhaps we might loose some laws that we rather like, but we can still make that known at the ballot box.
And even if we do get Boris as our next prime minister, which I rather doubt, he to will have to face the electors quite soon afterwards.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Polly, and new EU workers coming to fill needed posts? Out of the EU it will cost more and add delays.

£350m is an irrelevant figure, we NEVER hand that much over. Boris might as well claim we cough up a gazillion pounds a week since we'd get most back. Even the rest of the Out campaign is too embarrassed to claim we pay that much.

Of course we will still be able to visit Spain. But without the right to free travel it will become more bureaucratic, in both directions.

We could indeed put tariffs or constraints on EU financial transactions or trade, but as we are so much smaller that the combined might of the EU, who will win that battle?

You think the UK government will have the guts to take on Google etc? Just remind me how much tax courageous George extracted out of them? At least the French are doing something about it, we just caved in.

Workers rights? Frankly I don't trust the conservatives to protect them.

I think it's alarmingly likely we have Boris as PM by the autumn. Tory MPs are already openly challenging Cameron, and we'd be stuck with him for 3 years.

Yes that’s the whole point! It’s a closed vote by the beneficiaries of the system and with no democratic imperative. Voting for the gravy train by its passengers is not attractive.

I think it mirrors quite a lot of governments, I think they are similar to senior civil sevrants here in the UK (although not identical). Although they aren't voted in, many important jobs don't even have a vote closed or otherwise in this country and I'm not sure that's overly bad. It would be nice to vote everyone of importance in, however you end up too many elections. At some point you have to let, whatever system of government you have, get on with it.

OK Bob, let's lay the ghost! £350 million pounds a week is the total of what we send as a gross figure. We receive a discount on that together with various grants resulting in a net figure. That's not in dispute and never has been although the amount being bandied about by various national figures has led to contentious misunderstanding, often deliberate.

The truth is the amounts the EU retains that come back as grants are project-specific, we have no control over how that money is used. In addition, the 'discount' is calculated after our 'membership dues' are subtracted. So the combined real world total is that £350 million a week that we would retain total control over and would be able to use as we see fit rather than being told what we can use it for.

I give up. We don't send £350 million a week to the EU. Please read the link. :shrug:


If you ask to borrow £20, I agree to lend you £10 and then you only return £5, my exposure to you is £5. In these circumstances it would be wrong to claim you've cost me £20, when in fact you've cost me £5.

As a wider issue yes, you may be right. But it is rather satisfying that we have the sanction of refusing to continually vote them in. Ultimately we get what we deserve in our politicians and as the national mood changes we can change direction. With the EU, they refuse to change their intended direction whatever constituent members say. It's even worse than an elected dictatorship, it is, effectively, communism. That's why the USA wants us in, they don't understand the European Left.

Agree it's quite tricky, it's a three legged stool. We could of course remove them, but that could cause problems that we won't forsee.

Communism, that's a bit strong.

Usually, it's only the UK and a few fringe countries that are always trying to change things. So the (large) majority get their way, which I believed was democracy!

On your other point, it looks as if you would agrue that Communism achieved through democracy is worse than a dictatorship, which is an interesting outllok on life.

I feel that some of the ideas about democracy, rights etc. here are a bit mixed up.

Of course it is! Note the small 'c', 'effectively' and the reference to USA in the following sentence.

Given the (large) majority being who they are and at least one of them being almost entirely dependent on EU largesse for their agriculture whilst also failing to comply with whatever EU laws they choose to ignore, and the other telling them what to do, it's hardly democracy! The stated aims of ever-closer political union and maintaining the current political make-up run against every thing we stand for. The definition of democracy doesn't change with the wind. The EU is about to change again with the influx of yet more dependent States eager to take subsidies at the expense of others in the full knowledge they enter already impoverished. They badly need help but offer nothing in return except obedience as a way out of their decline.

You misquote me. I believe I said effective communism (with a small 'c'), and elective dictatorship. These qualifiers have long been established as reference points in mitigation of hard-line absolutes.

Most definitions of democracy do not include, and even specifically exclude, tiers of legislature and government holding absolute and unaccountable sway over the elected representatives. That system of government ended with Oliver Cromwell.

I'm afraid to say that's a false and misleading diversion! I'm reluctant to go into why because it would take us away from the point! However, your analogy assumes that the borrower has no liability to pay in full, ever, and the funds going to the EU are borrowing. They are not.

Again: The membership costs, the rebate, and the discounts are the only factors. The rebate is effectively for this purpose added to the discounts and they are subtracted from the membership costs, leaving a balance to be paid to the EU, this being the net membership costs.

We then receive grants to fund EU inspired projects over which we have absolutely no control and including contributions to pay for compliance with EU regulations. The projects may well be contrary to what we want to do in our country and will invariably follow EU directives.
Can't put it plainer than that.

I really don't know where you get your understanding from.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...uk-350m-a-week

If you rely on what The Guardian chooses to tell you, even if there is a truth in the reference you are quoting, I would not accept any of your arguments to stay.

To an extent that explains your standpoint. I trust you get 'facts' from alternative sources?

The Guardian, and I'm not criticising for the sake of it, is infamous for taking the EU side. You will no doubt be familiar with the drubbing and ridicule the, say, Daily Mail gets for taking the views they do? Well, the Guardian is the equivalent and opposite number!
For instance, they quote as Biblical the Full Facts organisation for their 'facts'.

That outfit says: "A membership Fee isn't the same as the economic cost or benefit...". Really? That statement alone is enough to tell you about the grasp of worldly realism in their sphere! Come on Bob, get out more!!

You're right - in future I'll get the "real" facts on the EU from the paragons of unbiased press ie The Daily Mail or The Express...:eek:

How about the Telegraph? Sufficiently pro 'Out' for you?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...he-big-claims/

Here's another from The Telegraph - easy to understand article on the implications for UK business and the alternative trading models that are on the table:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...british-trade/

Not sure they're advocating the "clean break" scenario tbh.

Thanks for that. The link you gave had 6 or so questions divided between Remain and Leave with their source giving their opinion on the 'truth' of each. I presume they mean accuracy; I'm not prepared to call anyone a liar.

A couple of questions were impossible to guess at. Otherwise they said 3 of the claims quoted by the Remain side were wrong and 2 on the Out side were wrong. One on the Out side was inconclusive. That's pretty well even steven really. Unless of course they were selecting questions on the basis of what answers they felt they could realistically test.

One of the rebuttals on the Out side I won't accept because I've done my homework and am sure of the answer. That's the infamous £350 million and it all depends on how you view the claim I made earlier about membership fees being included as a cost. So, your source, presumably quoted because it might help the argument, comes out roughly equal on both sides. That's not too bad, a draw!

That leaves the value of the esoteric/emotive around traditions and patriotism. There's no accounting for that other than your own conscience and who would challenge that, it being beyond cold measurement.

Thanks. That says something I'd not seen in print before, maybe it's been kept quiet. A frank admission about what happens post-Brexit. During the first two years nothing happens because there will be attempts to renegotiate the terms in order to reverse the result of the vote. What? You can't reverse the result of a referendum! It doesn't actually say that a second referendum will be held. I wonder what they could possibly mean. Do they mean us?

So it's exactly down to what I said a few days ago - I reckon for the bulk of voters it's an emotional decision at the end of the day. Unfortunately emotion is not a strong foundation to base an opinion on but it is what it is as they say.

Your guess is as good as mine. :shrug: No wonder the poor British voter is bamboozled on what's being fed to them!