[Closed] EU Referendum - are you in or out?

@molgrips £10bn indeed subject to many variables and could easily be more

And could just as easily not exist at all. So best not go on about it eh?

What they said early on was 'Facts don't work', and that's it. The remain campaign featured fact, fact, fact, fact, fact. It just doesn't work. You have got to connect with people emotionally

But he is right, one of the biggest problems of the Remain campaign was it was very dry, to get through to people you need to paint pictures which illustrate the facts.

...or paint buses that abuse them

"winning side"

You reckon that the good folks of rotherham are going to end up on the 'winning side' in the long run

Don't confuse ignorance with winning...

I must have posted a dozen times just read every post with [IMO] ... [/IMO] thats what I do.

Say that as much as you like, in no way does it justify the relentless postings of unsubstantiated nonsense presented as fact, or arguing that black is white and ignoring the facts of the matter. You might even have a good point under all that gibberish but no-one can tell because you're the boy that cried wolf.

And could just as easily not exist at all. So best not go on about it eh?

As for link tennis we can all find links to support our views.

just read every post with [IMO] ... [/IMO] thats what I do

Not all opinions are created equal though. Everyone can express their opinion but to expect every opinion to be treated with equal value is just plain stupid/journalism. If an opinion is laughable, expect it to be mocked. If an opinion is backed by facts and shows a degree of thought it can expect at least some acceptance, even if others disagree with the sentiment.

@Graham that same logic applies to sales, you don't sell stuff by listing the spec.

I think that this goes to the heart of the matter. Neither side should have been selling anything. They should have been presenting the spec.

@Graham that same logic applies to sales, you don't sell stuff by listing the spec.

I must have posted a dozen times just read every post with [IMO

Its not its just being wrong

The world is flat is not an opinion its just wrong.

Erasmus is outside the EU is not an opinion its just wrong and a demonstration of the, supreme, breadth of your, wilful, ignorance.

I don't know why you keep arguing with Jambalaya. In his position, working in the city making money, Brexit makes perfect sense. Less regulations and an open free market to screw even more people. The fact that he admitted that even his own children voted stay, says it all for me.

I don't know why you keep arguing with Jambalaya. In his position, working in the city making money, Brexit makes perfect sense.

No it doesn't - in fact quite the opposite. Just look at the share prices of UK and EU banks since the vote.

Plus uncertainty is killing volumes as is uncertainty re the passporting of services

Speaking of opinions and money grabbing types, I found this in the Guardian.

Make of it what you will.

The top donor was the stockbroker Peter Hargreaves, who gave £3.2m to Leave.eu. He explained his enthusiasm for leaving the EU thus: “It would be the biggest stimulus to get our butts in gear that we have ever had … We will get out there and we will be become incredibly successful because we will be insecure again. And insecurity is fantastic.”

We will get out there and we will be become incredibly successful because we will be insecure again. And insecurity is fantastic.”

Once we've become successful, won't that put us back in a secure position similar to the one we were in before brexit. What do we do then? Leave the WTO? Or is this nonsense just another way of avoiding saying you don't like immigration??

Eventually, the UK will leave the planet, stating that the Earth was "so yesterday" and the UK could do better dealing with other planets, despite not knowing whether there is any life on any of them.

Unfortunately the plan to leave will preceed any plan to build a space station or moon Base...

Once we've become successful, won't that put us back in a secure position similar to the one we were in before brexit

I think he means that we will be successful in a way we can never be whilst in the EU.

I think he means that we will be successful in a way we can never be whilst in the EU.

No, what he means is that he will make lots of money.

No, what he means is that he will make lots of money.

This frankly is absolute and total bollix. I have made it clear numerous times that Remain was the betfer outcome for me financially in the narrow sense. "The City" is heavily Remain out of vested interest. What is best for the country and thus me in broader terms is Leave.

So all you Remainers what do you think about this, ex-EU head takes big (and very well paid I imagine) at Goldman Sachs. Numerous news coverage (especially in France where they are incandescent)

[url= https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/13/france-former-european-commission-boss-goldman-sachs-job ]Kerching Kerching[/url]

I think if GS want to pay him handsomely then that's probably what's going to happen.

Not the first time, not the last, and I'm not sure of the relevance.

The "insecurity is fantastic" comment was the one I found most interesting. That's the guy who was bankrolling the leave campaign remember.

Did you also see that campaign spend was 54:46 not far off the vote? Of course you can't buy votes with spend though can you?

But he is right, one of the biggest problems of the Remain campaign was it was very dry, to get through to people you need to paint pictures which [s]illustrate[/s] [b]completely misrepresent[/b] the facts.

Fixed.

So all you Remainers what do you think about this, ex-EU head takes big (and very well paid I imagine) at Goldman Sachs.

Politician takes well paid job after political career has ended

Makes you think, eh 😉

What is best for the country and thus me in broader terms is Leave.

And what about Boris "run away" Johnson taking a highly paid position as foreign secretary?

And what about Boris "run away" Johnson taking a highly paid position as foreign secretary?

He will lose money dumping his column and book deals

[quote=jambalaya ]I must have posted a dozen times just read every post with [IMO] ... [/IMO] thats what I do.

Where exactly does jamba live? ISTM that defence needs geographying - the "French Chateau defence" is a bit unweildy.

Resident in the UK @aracer

from your chateaux in France

Chateaux aren't what they used to be - 50m2 😉

Some say he's Boris Johnston's style consultant...

Some say he wrote Andrea Leadsom's CV...

All we know is he's called Jamba 😉

(Sorry bored in a Westminster hotel room and I've been watching Top Gear - strangely there's nothing going on around here tonight, a mile up the road perhaps but not here)

There's isn't a Jam defence. He just keeps on going regardless 🙂

"And what about Boris "run away" Johnson taking a highly paid position as foreign secretary?"

He will lose money dumping his column and book deals

Well he has a huge ego to feed.

good* analysis here

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2016/07/14/everything-you-need-to-know-about-theresa-may-s-brexit

*good as in it agrees with my established beliefs, some people may disagree, but hey are wrong 😉

OK, which way is this cookie going to crumble?

Farmers were promised ongoing subsidies to match those from the Common Agricultural Policy

The options appear to be:
- We remain in single market (or a version of) and everything stays sort of the same. We can carry on subsidising farmers at about the same rate as the EU did.
- We fail to negotiate a relationship with the EU and revert to WTO trading nation status. However, to do this we have to either a) negotiate to get a percentage of the EU farming subsidies (long and hard as you have to get consensus from every single EU member) or b) accept large tariff rate quotas (oh yes, tariff rates and quotas don't disappear with the EU) and stop subsidising farmers.

To be clear, I voted remain. I believe in the EU as a protective and progressive force. But the minutiae of the mechanisms of leaving and the horse trading that there will be is weirdly fascinating. I suspect that farming subsidies will disappear if we don't manage a single market style compromise. But there are so many variables.

For those similarly fascinated - you can read up on it below. I'm not going to explain in full as it's much better set out in the FT.
https://next.ft.com/content/5741129a-4510-11e6-b22f-79eb4891c97d

Bonne fête nationale ! (à celles et ceux qui se sentent concernés)

The options appear to be:
- We remain in single market (or a version of) and everything stays sort of the same. We can carry on subsidising farmers at about the same rate as the EU did.
- We fail to negotiate a relationship with the EU and revert to WTO trading nation status. However, to do this we have to either a) negotiate to get a percentage of the EU farming subsidies (long and hard as you have to get consensus from every single EU member) or b) accept large tariff rate quotas (oh yes, tariff rates and quotas don't disappear with the EU) and stop subsidising farmers

outside the EU we can do what we want in compliance with any other agreements, the difference is that we create our own scheme for our own farmers without having to report up to Brussels for permission

the current implementation of single farm payments is a mess with many farmers not getting money in a timely manner, how much is UK incompetence and how much difficulty complying with EU rules is what we have yet to find out

You don't get do you, rules on tariffs and rules on subsidies go hand in hand. You want tariff free access to EU market, then you don't control your own subsidy rates. And you don't take part it setting the rules anymore. More control handed over to the EU as a result of this "give our country away" decision.

Glad I'm not an exporting farmer or fisherman.

The rest of the world happily trades with tariffs in place. If we had to I'm sure we could too - and we'd be charging tariffs on imports as well, of course.

we'd be charging tariffs on imports as well, of course.

You mean [u]we'd[/u] be paying more for everything we buy, apart from orange and hope bits? But wait they're made from aluminium which we... Ah. Sounds great!

Waiter! Cheque please!

But wait they're made from aluminium which we... Ah. Sounds great!

You understand the concept of 'added value'?

Lump of aluminium comes into UK at one price
Manufactured bike frame exported at higher price
'Value' has been 'added'

"You mean we'd be paying more for everything we buy, apart from orange and hope bits? But wait they're made from aluminium which we... Ah. Sounds great!"

*Everything* we buy? Really? Nobody in Britain buys anything from outside the EU?

Average tariff is 3pc, we'd cope.

But they have added value now, at the price they are now. Making them more expensive just makes things less affordable, so we buy less. We import aluminium ingots from Sweden now at some price per tonne and turn them mainly into swarf and shiny things. Adding 9% to the raw material price helps nobody, except the exchequer. And even he's not that much better off as the vat revenue falls through the floor.

Yes everything we buy, because everything we buy at some point, needs fuel to move it around or process it. Unless we suddenly find a way to convert Brent crude into heavy crude suitable for making petrol, diesel and heavy diesel, instead of the plastic and fertiliser it usually goes off to make.

Edit: it makes good petrol, but naff diesel.

I might be misreading this but looks like aluminium is tariff free for import from almost everywhere and it's inevitable wed start on the standard EU tariff rate 'cos there'd be no time to legislate for anything else:

https://www.gov.uk/trade-tariff/commodities/7601202010#import

Lots of good stats on UK trade figures here by the way:
http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/bulletins/uktrade/may2016

It will be interesting to see how these change in the future.

In fact, on reflection, I reckon tariffs on raw raw materials are unlikely to be a problem. Hard to see why a UK Govt would want to tax imports of raw materials - they'd want manufacturers to have cheap materials. The kind of things they'd be looking to discourage would be car imports (which the EU already does) and stuff we produce here (Steel!).

We can be sure we'd start with the CCT and tweak it for our own purposes. For instance, do we have a wine export industry to protect? No? In which case we can remove the large CCT import tariff on wine.

All academic 'cos I don't think we're leaving, but interesting none the less.

But they have added value now, at the price they are now. Making them more expensive just makes things less affordable, so we buy less. We import aluminium ingots from Sweden now at some price per tonne and turn them mainly into swarf and shiny things. Adding 9% to the raw material price helps nobody, except the exchequer. And even he's not that much better off as the vat revenue falls through the floor.

Where is that 9pc coming from? Why would a UK govt want to put a tariff on Aluminium? Even the EU doesn't and it sounds like the EU does produce some Aluminium so they'd have more reason to than the Uk.

Yes everything we buy, because everything we buy at some point, needs fuel to move it around or process it. Unless we suddenly find a way to convert Brent crude into heavy crude suitable for making petrol, diesel and heavy diesel, instead of the plastic and fertiliser it usually goes off to make.

You're seriously claiming we import our Diesel Tariff Free & from the EU? Tax is a MASSIVE portion of the price of Diesel.

Glad I'm not an exporting farmer or fisherman.

@kelvin farmers and fisherman where pro-Leave quite substantially so I understand. Do you really think they don't fully understand the EU and its subsidies and trade barriers and thought about all of that before voting. As for "exporting" well our domestic market is easily able to support our farmers and 80% of the fish caught in our waters are caught by EU boats. Fishermen would be perfectly happy with export tarifs on fish as the Spanish etc boats can't easily catch those fish anywhere else.

We do not have to accept a free-trade deal of the type we currently have. We can negotiate something more specific to our needs or have none. The vast majoriity of the world's trade is under WTO rules of which the EU is a member and we will be as an independent nation. The US, China etc do huge amounts of business with no trade deal. Germany, France and Eastern Europe do huge amounts of business with Russia likewise with no deal.

Its hilarious
May has brilliantly thrown all the responsibility for the impossible negotiations at the feet of Johnson, Fox and Davies (Gove just considered too duplicitous even for a brexiter!)

Davies has already he said he wants us out by xmas 2018

as a pragmatic remainer, she knows that those 3 dont have a hope of delivering all the bullshit they promised.

what does she really think about Borris..

"Boris negotiated in Europe. I seem to remember last time he did a deal with the Germans, he came back with three nearly-new water cannon".

80% of the fish caught in our waters are caught by EU boats.

Are UK boats not going to other EU countries' waters to fish then? If not, why not?

I'm starting to become rather fond of Theresa May, if she is actually as scheming as I'm starting to suspect...

Game of Thrones and The West Wing have nothing on this.

Maybe this is good for the UK, this kind of high drama is surely going to increase peoples interest in politics - is it not?

Kimbers - are you thinking this is starting to look like May is stitching up the quit squad? Because the thought hasn't crossed my mind. No,no,no, not at all.

My suspicion with May is that emotionally she wants to leave Europe, but she is more ruled by her head than her heart.

We'll see.

Its hilarious
May has brilliantly thrown all the responsibility for the impossible negotiations at the feet of Johnson, Fox and Davies (Gove just considered too duplicitous even for a brexiter!)

Hilarious indeed.

And IDS was an the telly trying to put the responsibility for delivering "Brexit" on May's lap. Strictly speaking correct, but nobody will see it that way and it was pitiful watching him try to deflect responsibility. IMHO the three Brexiteers are going to fail to 'leave', and take the blame. If they work it out and make a success of it, May will be taking the credit.

OOOh and Andea Loathsome now has to tell farmers they are going to loose their subsidies

[img] [/img]

Of course. Missed that.

I did wonder why she'd got that brief.

Best tell thebees the sound he can hear is laughter not crying.

Priti Patel - International Development

Yep. Still on theme.

Are UK boats not going to other EU countries' waters to fish then? If not, why not?

Thanks for your views and wow, those stats. Gosh I love stats.

Anyway, I've been looking into the whole farming issue and apparently Northern Ireland alone exports £1 billion food to the EU. If you look at Defra stats "Northern Ireland’s food and drink export trade with the EU brings in over £1bn to the economy. Meat exports account for over a quarter of this export value, at £280m, with dairy and eggs a close second at £240m." That must be quite important for a bit of the economy which was rather held back until the peace process took effect.

Fascinating. The whole UK food and farming industry is worth a tidy £27 billion to the economy, and we export £18 billion. Go us. Just to quote from Defra "Of the UK’s top 20 export markets for food and drink products, £9.37 billion goes to EU countries and £4.33bn goes to non-EU countries."

So anyway, if/when we become stand alone WTO members, they won't let us subsidise our farmers (and export) so what do we do? Pesky rules. Stop subsidising farmers or take the inevitable tariffs on cheddar? Or whatever.

For the panel's consideration: [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07k08xd#play ]"Why Did People Vote Leave?" on The Briefing Room (Radio 4)[/url].

Give it 5 minutes and try not to make yourself too hoarse!

@kelvin farmers and fisherman where pro-Leave quite substantially so I understand. Do you really think they don't fully understand the EU and its subsidies and trade barriers and thought about all of that before voting.

Yes, I think they don't fully understand…

A) how many of their problems are down to UK government decisions, not EU directives
B) how leaving the EU doesn't isolate us from decisions made by governments of other countries
C) the links between subsidy rules and trade barriers

Fishermen would be perfectly happy with export tarifs on fish as the Spanish etc boats can't easily catch those fish anywhere else.

Um, are you referring to foreign boats operating under British quotas that were sold to them after privatisation? Or foreign boats accessing our waters under international agreements that don't end when we leave the EU? Either way, if they land in their own ports, they'll take the fish tariff free... Unlike our own fisherman who rely heavily on selling into other EU countries.

I do love the Remainers attempts to twist stuff

David Davies is a long standing eurosceptic who campaigned for Leave. I am sure he's delighted with the role. He was also favourite to win the leadership before Cameron exploded onto the scene.

Liam Fox will focus on International Trade, ie not the EU. Perfect, full time role negotiating for Britain and lining up the great deals an unwieldy 27 member EU cannot deliver

Boris Johnson, Foreign Secretary focuing on international relations again with a bias for outside the EU

Overall is May who knows her Premiership will be judged on how she delivers Brexit, she is very much in charge and responsible.

they won't let us subsidise our farmers

I missed that, can non-EU countries not export produce from subsidised farming into the EU?

This article implies we an subsidise out farmers, but it might be wrong:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/02/how-brexit-would-affect-british-farmers/

It also contains the snippet that we pay more into the CAP than we get out:

we pay £6 billion a year into the CAP, but our farmers get only £3 billion back. British farmers are effectively subsidising their competitors

In other news, google suggests egg Tariffs into the EU are high. India and Ukraine seem to manage to export into the EU, but I'd guess the UK might struggle. So AFAICT egg exporters would lose out. (But I've no idea how much margin there is in eggs.)

Yes, I think they don't fully understand…

I think they understand far better than any of us.

As I understand it you cannot just catch fish and just pay a tariff.

[b]jambalaya[/b] - Member
I do love the Remainers attempts to twist stuff

[img] [/img]

Yes, I think they don't fully understand…

Evidence of that? I'd have thought Farmers and Fishermen would have a detailed understanding of all this, the only farmer I know knows it inside out - it's his livelihood. (Mind you, I have no idea how he voted.)

I am sure he's delighted with the role.

Maybe Davis is.

In contrast Boris's attitude since the vote has seemed to me to be one of serious backtracking. If he was relishing delivering "Brexit" he hid it well.

Jambas, mon Amis, you are surpassing yourself. Even Hannan has given up pretending about this shit now, You guys won, you don't need to make it up any more. It's ok.....

Le Bojo got a less than cordial reaction to his facetious ending to his speech at the July 14 dinner tonight.

Of course we can subsise our Farmers, the EU does exactly that already. We can do the same outside the EU

We import 60% of our food, there is no need to export anything at all.

We import 60% of our food, there is no need to export anything at all.

You are aware that most of what we can grow in this country wouldn't allow for a balanced diet? We have to export some of what we grow because it can't all be consumed in this country. And we can't grow more (or any) of what we need without major infrastructure investment and centralized control of farming to ensure we have what we need for the whole population (ie. outside of market forces). Unlikely to go down all with the tory crowd is it?

. And we can't grow more (or any) of what we need without major infrastructure investment and centralized control of farming to ensure we have what we need for the whole population

If the EU can use tariffs and subsidies to influence what gets produced by farmers the UK can just as easily. If the EU can manage without centralized control of farming, so could the UK.

Maybe Davis is.

I think he knows it's a poison chalice, and was straight in with "Collective Decisions" in an interview I heard earlier.

Jambas, mon Amis, you are surpassing yourself. Even Hannan has given up pretending about this shit now, You guys won, you don't need to make it up any more. It's ok.....

Le Bojo got a less than cordial reaction to his facetious ending to his speech at the July 14 dinner tonight.

Hannan was always focused on democracy and global trade and less on freedom of movement. I and many others don't agree with his Newsnight statement on freedom of movement.

French politicians who've had their precious EU given the two-fingered salute in sense of humour failure, no surprise there really. Anyway they needed a distraction from their president spending €120,000 per anum on a hairdresser.

And we can't grow more (or any) of what we need without major infrastructure investment and centralized control of farming to ensure we have what we need for the whole population

WTF ! Farmers grow and rear what EU dictate via subsidies. They absolutely hate it thats why they voted Leave. We can produce much more than we do presently and we can do it more profitably. We will still import food I am sure but we'd do just fine with no distored EU "free trade". I watched a TV report of some terrible treatment of cattle in Italy the other day, animal welfare standards are widely ignored in Europe and the rules hugely abused. The EU food passporting system was responsible for horse meat in our burgers. I'd be glad to see the back of it

"straight in with "Collective Decisions" in an interview I heard earlier."

😀

Love it.

Was the eu to blame for the hairdressing bill or foreigners?

We can produce much more than we do presently and we can do it more profitably. We will still import food I am sure but we'd do just fine with no distored EU "free trade"

We will do fine ...are you not leaving now?

[quote=jambalaya ]animal welfare standards are widely ignored in Europe and the rules hugely abused.

So now we're out, the rules don't apply to us and we can ignore animal welfare standards too>?

If the EU can use tariffs and subsidies to influence what gets produced by farmers the UK can just as easily. If the EU can manage without centralized control of farming, so could the UK.

Think of the variety of food that can be grown across the EU climatic range year round and compare that to the UK. We can't even be calorific sufficient let alone nutritionally sufficient. We have no choice but to import at the moment and for the forseable future.

The subsidy system is a bit of a mess though. Although I suspect my reasons for thinking that are markedly different to the those of the right wingers.

FWIW I work at an Institute dedicated to agricultural improvement. The facts surrounding food security in the UK and wider world are truly frightening. While some of you may be experts in free market trading you know FA about food production as used to stop people starving or becoming malnourished rather than selling it for profit. The people I work with are global experts in it and they always look terrified when the topic of UK food security gets discussed.

And people illegally putting horse into the food chain were responsible for horse burgers not eu passporting. But now the gin is getting to my head so I'll stop here.

So now we're out, the rules don't apply to us and we can ignore animal welfare standards too>?

or we could ban meat that doesn't meet our welfare standards, massive benefit to UK farming

Hold on, who owns most of the UK electricity suppliers?

[img] [/img]

is this really OK?

is this really OK?

No, it demonstrates the failure of EU competition policy

or are you suggesting they are going to turn the lights off?