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

teamhurtmore - Member

Who's the desperate party?

The one now campaigning with the lowest common denominations - xenophobia. Scared of Gordon Brown even!! The ones who define the debate in terms of them and us. Hide away in isolation rather than cooperate with close partners. Sad, sad spectacle.

No need to panic over rogue polls - CMD did that with Scotland. There are enough sensible people who can see through the narcissism and xenophobia.

Bring the vote on today, Lets get it over with before the xenophobia becomes hatred and even more intense. It's sad enough to watch already.

I'd just like to point out that there are plenty of people that are anti-EU and not xenophobic.

I'm more foreign than British by blood, although British by birth.
I'm not scared of foreigners, I just don't like the dictatorial nature that the EU has taken.
Unfortunately, most people here would rather shout about the £350,000,000 figure than discuss anything more pertinent, or just shout "racist!" at anyone that doesn't agree with them.

Step back from the trees and look at the forest.

xxx
sbob.

You are deliberately missing the point. The poster was offensive but has NOTHING to do with the Leave campaign or Grass Roots Out.

EDIT: Here is what Farage had tonsay to Hillary Benn

[i]Pressed on Hilary Benn's call for him to apologise, he replied: "I would ask for Hilary Benn to apologise for the crimes of Chairman Mao," adding that "Hilary Benn is as close to Chairman Mao as I am to Leave.EU".[/i]

Making up stuff to be offended at now.

You are deliberately missing the point. The poster was offensive

When you have decided which of these two contradictory views is your actual true position perhaps we can discuss it?
Its impossible to debate with you as your argument is all over the place

Did farage manage to condemn the poster or it's sentiment?

mikewsmith - Member

Did Farage manage to condemn the poster or it's sentiment?

Dunno.
Would you like to condemn the anti-democratic stance of the EU leader?

can you explain exactly what you want us to condemn and i will answer it just as directly as you just did there?

Its not hard farage is either ok with what happened and the sentiment or he is not ok with it

its not a tough question.

Nope, just wondered as farage is probably happy he got a nice ad for free so doesn't need to condemn or complain just keep a little distance.
That and not bothering to do the job he was elected to do in the EU Parliament while collecting his massive bag of expenses.

Junkyard - lazarus

can you explain exactly what you want us to condemn and i will answer it just as directly as you just did there?

I condemn anti-democracy, you may not.
Would be nice to know how you feel on the subject.
That's pretty straight forward.

That and not bothering to do the job he was elected to do in the EU Parliament while collecting his massive bag of expenses.

The EU are generous with their expenses, aren't they?
Nothing like generous taxation levels to keep everyone in tow, either?

I was rather hoping you would explain why he was anti democratic rather than just repeat the claim.
I condemn anti democratic people like the Saudis and North Korea
See it was not hard to answer questions - why do you think Nigel did not?

As I have repeatedly stated, Jean-Claude Juncker is happy to deny the democratic wishes of member states.
You've followed this debate enough to know this, I'm not sure why you would try and take a position of false ignorance on the subject.

No idea about Nigel, I'm not a supporter of him.

President of the European Union (or President of Europe) does not exist. Nevertheless the term is often misused to mean any of:

President of the European Council (since 1 December 2014, Donald Tusk)
President of the European Commission (since 1 November 2014, Jean-Claude Juncker)
President of the European Parliament (since 1 July 2014, Martin Schulz)
Presidency of the Council of the European Union (since 1 January 2016, The Netherlands)

The post was established in 1958 and is elected by the European Parliament, on a proposal of the European Council for five-year terms. Once appointed, he or she, along with the Commission, is responsible to Parliament which can censure the President. The current President is Jean-Claude Juncker, who took office on 1 November 2014. He is a member of the European People's Party (EPP) and is the former Prime Minister of Luxembourg. Juncker is the twelfth President and his First Vice-President is Frans Timmermans.

I'm obviously talking about the president of the European commission.
The clue was in me mentioning him by name.
Forest, trees. 💡
Petty point scoring is pointless.

why not use the power of the elected Parliament to stop him?

Because enough different people have been put in place to ensure that there will never be a majority against.
There is no power.

Only in your last post (while I was seeking clarification) the fact he is accountable to the Parliament makes his power more democratic even if his views are not.

Jean-Claude Juncker is happy to deny the democratic wishes of member states.

In view of the possibility of seeing a hard and pure right and far-right win, I feel obliged to say that I don't like them. Apparently Austrians haven't appreciated this, but I don't give a damn: with the far right, no debate or dialogue is possible.

This is Juncker clearly stating that he wouldn't give audience to a democratically elected party.

Although I'm sure you already knew of this, if you didn't then you are too ignorant of the subject to converse with.
Take your pick.

mikewsmith - Member

Only in your last post (while I was seeking clarification) the fact he is accountable to the Parliament makes his power more democratic even if his views are not.

Take up my earlier suggestion Mike; read some of the questions and answers in the European parliament.
It's pushed me from a pragmatic remain to a vehement leave.

Nearly. 😆

I still have the fear.

so an elected politician refused to speak to a racist party and you are livid about the anti -democracy of this?

if this upsets you and your sympathies lie with the racist far right 😯 then please consider me too ignorant to be worthy of discourse with you

Junkyard - lazarus

so an elected politician refused to speak to a racist party and you are livid about the anti -democracy of this?

if this upsets you and your sympathies lie with the racist far right hen please consider me too ignorant to be worthy of discourse with you

If you bothered to follow what Juncker has said, you would know that "far-right" extends to any anti-EU party.

Remember the quote: "I may not like what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"?

Trees.
Forest.

You need to take a step back and have a think.

he said he would not speak to them not that they did not have the right to be racist far right morons

I dont speak with racists but anyone has the right to be a total idiot. Some of us like to exercise this right considerable more than others though

Good night (probably for some time!)

So you have agreed with me, that he would have refused an audience with a democratically elected party.

When the difference between racist and simply anti-EU gets blurred, then the problems arise.

Crumbs that lasted a long time

Your ad hom return may have bought me more time, thanks!

[img] [/img]

and so some good solid leave economics...

Ministers campaigning to leave the European Union say recipients of EU funding would get the same money if the UK votes to leave.
EU funding projects for areas including farming, science, and culture would be continued until 2020, they said.
They said the payments could be made more efficiently, allowing for more cash for priorities such as the NHS.

Looking at that list on the last page, surely the brexit mob will be happy about all the jobs being created in Eastern Europe via grants as this means there's less need for those chaps to come here for jobs?

Yep - and they haven't worked out (or been told) that they will still be done out of their own job, but just by someone in Romania, and not someone in Dagenham.

Would you like to condemn the anti-democratic stance of the EU leader?

Yes - also the anti-democratic nature of the Eurogroup, of the leader of the European Parliament, and of the boss of the ECB, as clearly demonstrated last year. Schauble confesses that the EU needs to be "less bureaucratic". Wrong, Wolfgang - it needs to be less of a vehicle for the German economy at the expense of Southern Europe.

However, there is a small baby in there with the very dirty bathwater.

Yep - and they haven't worked out (or been told) that they will still be done out of their own job, but just by someone in Romania, and not someone in Dagenham.

One easy way to avoid that would be a big old-fashioned devaluation, to bring UK labour rates in line with those in Poland and Romania.

Of course, that would mean imports would become more expensive (e.g. oil) so you could kiss goodbye to your increased NHS spending.

I ride past this every day. http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/manchester-citys-1bn-plan-for-eastlands-885113
Its part-funded by the EU development fund along with other grants etc etc that props up failing EU members (Spain with its massive unemployment etc etc). I think its wrong. In the case of the one I linked to it all benefits a private company. 'Jobs for local people'- these local people have specialisms, training or qualifications that will fit into Eastlands?

Its all rank. EU money goes to (yes some good) but also I think the EU needs a massive overhaul. Too many countries were allowed in almost as a barrier/to stop Russian influence post-block fall.

One easy way to avoid that would be a big old-fashioned devaluation, to bring UK labour rates in line with those in Poland and Romania.

If Brexit causes a big drop in the pound then this will be achieved.

If Brexit causes a big drop in the pound then this will be achieved.

Not unthinkable...

Australian shares have slumped to five-and-a-half-week lows, wiping out more than $30 billion, as investors sell out across major sectors on global fears that Britain may exit the eurozone.

Key points:

Shares among the big four banks have lead the losses
The ASX 200 tumbled 2 per cent to 5,209, while the All Ordinaries also slumped 2 per cent to 5,288
The ASX 200 is on track to post the biggest one-day percentage loss since February
The move followed overnight leads, after Wall Street fell for a third straight session, while European shares hit a three-month low.

I did say I would pop back for a cheap holiday if the idiots got their way

Snob, you repetition of woods/trees/forest is interesting and as often probably reflects the mirror you are looking in.

The forest = the best arrangement for stimulating trade and investment in the UK while minimising the obligations
The wood - opting out of the Euro, Schengen etc
The trees - restructuring the EZ
The twigs - immigration, small cost if memberships, individuals

And look where VL are focused ? In the twigs and detritus on the forest floor.

Look up into the canopy and you see and excellent relationship that delivers benefits and relatively little real costs albeit that there are a few rotten Dutch elms in the midst.

So ok, perhaps we need to add simply foolhardy to xenophobes. Is that better?

Immigration has [b]always [/b]happened whenever the UK economy is in growth. This is a good thing. No new migrants would mean the country is going to the dogs.

However, problems occur when times are not so good and those same migrants are free to stick around because of a very generous welfare system and a free at source national health service. Many view this as a bad thing.

So maybe the best answer is a vote for Brexit. At least this would give the Ultra Right a mandate for a breakup of the welfare system, privatisation of the NHS, and a reduction in any workers rights under previous EU law.

But at least we will be able to put those lazy UK born benefit scroungers to work picking cabbages in Lincolnshire hey 🙂

And here's an interesting stat on beaurcracy for you

The cost of membership of the EU is < 1% of GDP
The total number of beauracrats employed by EU insitutions is 55,000 for a population of 500million - you do the Maths...

The cost of state pensions in the UK is > 8% of GDP
The total number of people employed to administer this? 91,000 among the 400,000 employed in UK central government. You do the Maths...

And we want more control??? Imagine the level of beauracrats in the UK needed to deliver that 😉

Wood....trees.....

Just interested to know because I know that I will be voting to remain but what level of job losses (even in the short to medium term) do the leaver's think is an acceptable level for your achieving your aim. Given the stress, worry and heartache loss or fear of loss of employment causes (I live close to Port Talbot - but this is not a steel industry specific point) I would have thought the answer would be none but as its a given this will happen on an exit what is the acceptable level of misery you are prepared to inflict.

And for what benefit, other than a warm fuzzy feeling of independence?

Thm, what criticisms do you have of the EU?

No ulterior motives here btw, just curious as to what you think are the failings of the EU and what you would improve?

teamhurtmore - Member

Snob, you repetition of woods/trees/forest is interesting and as often probably reflects the mirror you are looking in.

The forest = the best arrangement for stimulating trade and investment in the UK while minimising the obligations

The EU itself is favouring investment in non-EU countries over those in the EU to help facilitate its expansion.
How is this "the best arrangement"?

The cost of membership of the EU is

rising, is I believe the trend, and it will continue to do so as we absorb poorer nations and head towards even more central control (I know you will say we've been promised this won't happen, but the people at the top of the EU disagree with you).
Yay! Another lefty race to the bottom!

Poor form to mention immigrants and xenophobia in a post directed to me, when I have repeatedly stated I have no problem with Johnny Foreigner, and am possibly the most diversely European person on this forum!

And here's an interesting stat on beaurcracy for you

Yes it is interesting but as you've said elsewhere, we're beyond looking at facts now. Even our resident brexiter-in-chief has largely given up any pretence at rational argument. It's now all about xenophobia and dreams of Empire. Depressing.

The total number of beauracrats employed by EU insitutions is 55,000 for a population of 500million - you do the Maths...

But that's a dodgy statistic if ever there was one, because things like the rural payments agency employ 2000 plus UK civil servants but their workload is almost entirely the administration of EU funding and regulations, they're just not directly employed by the institutions of the EU.

I'm now voting to leave. An Australian-born, American-resident billionaire media owner told me it'd be for the best. And I'm pretty sure he's got my best interests at heart

Piece in the i today saying that yes, we have given up some sovereignty to be in the EU, but that it's worth it for the benefits we get. Pragmatically the best decision.

The entire EU bureaucracy is in addition to the individual governments civil services. No the EU doesn't oversee/manage 500m people, thats what the individual governments do. As for its cost we spend 2% of our GDP on the armed forces, so compare the EU cost as to what we spend on our entire military. Comparing to GDP is also wrong imo, we should look at cost ve total government budget. As noted our EU contributionnis the equivalent of 2% on VAT or 3% on income tax

Todays ECJ court ruling is a perfect example of a lack of control. The unelected EU Commission challenged our right to cut welfare payments to non-residents (note the actual proposal was massively watered down as we could not do as we wished). The case was won by the UK but the very fact it was brought shows why we need to Leave.

The case was won by the UK but the very fact it was brought shows why we need to Leave.

nah, it shows that there is a very good set of checks and balances in Europe

Piece in the i today saying that yes, we have given up some sovereignty to be in the EU, but that it's worth it for the benefits we get

You need to look at all the things we've given up and the loss of control over huge tracts of our economy. You need to look at the fact we PAY to be a member of a club so that they can sell much more to us than we buy from them. You need to look at the incompetance pf the EU in economic, immigration and foreign policy management

Then you need to decide if its worth it.

nah, it shows that there is a very good set of checks and balances in Europe

More likely it shows we have a referendum in less than 10 days!

@kimbers best of luck with that line of argument

UK Government wanted to stop benefits being paid based on calculations where families live abroad - EU prevents that
UK watered it down such that those benefits are index linked fo cost of living in that country - EU Commission challenges that in the ECJ

Fundamentaliy kimbers the Remainers lack trust in British justice and government and somehow think we are better off with unelected Europeans making those decsions for us. Good luck to you when you suddenly discover that the EU is being run to protect and coverup for the dire economic mismanegemt on the continent and to sustain their broken club via an increasingly closer Union of ever poorer new members.

More likely it shows we have a referendum in less than 10 days!

Bingo !

Jamba, what praises do you have of the EU?

No ulterior motives here btw, just curious as to what you think are the positives of the EU and what you think they do well?

Freedom of movement was my favourite aspect of the EEC.

The unelected EU Commission

The case was won by the UK but the very fact it was brought shows why we need to Leave.

You need to look at the fact we PAY to be a member of a club so that they can sell much more to us than we buy from them

Fundamentaliy kimbers the Remainers lack trust in British justice and government and somehow think we are better off with unelected Europeans making those decsions for us

Am I meant to be racist and not trust foreign unelected judges but trust UK elected ones?

The entire EU bureaucracy is in addition to the individual governments civil services. No the EU doesn't oversee/manage 500m people, thats what the individual governments do

That is because the main purpose of the EU bureaucracy is the EU bureaucracy.

That is because the main purpose of the EU bureaucracy is[s] the EU bureaucracy. [/s] to simplify business

We manufacture microwave radios and sell all over the world. 30 years ago, every country had a different standard and approvals process to meet, so we had to make 10s of product variants and spend a fortune getting each variant approved in each country via a different process.

Now, there are only two (effective) standards, ETSI and FCC. Just about everywhere on the planet (bar the USA) accept ETSI certification, which means we only make two product variants (rather than 10s of variants) and only go through two homologation processes (rather than 10s of). It saves us a small fortune in development and production costs.

We manufacture microwave radios and sell all over the world. 30 years ago, every country had a different standard and approvals process to meet, so we had to make 10s of product variants and spend a fortune getting each variant approved in each country via a different process.

Now, there are only two (effective) standards, ETSI and FCC. Just about everywhere on the planet (bar the USA) accept ETSI certification, which means we only make two product variants (rather than 10s of variants) and only go through two homologation processes (rather than 10s of). It saves us a small fortune in development and production costs

You are missing my point, my point is very simple, its a bureaucracy for the sake of a bureaucracy it is not for the benefit of microwave standards, I do admire your obvious specialist knowledge though.

footflaps - Member
That is because the main purpose of the EU bureaucracy is to simplify business

Well said FF. The xenophobic hysteria about regulations misses the critical point that a lot of work is done to harmonise standards for goods and services, to simplify business and to stimulate growth.

So what happens in the event of Brexit. Are these awful regulations going to be repealed? Will we introduce our own standards and regulations? How will they differ from the status quo?

You could make it up...

Fundamentaliy kimbers the Remainers lack trust in British justice and government and somehow think we are better off with unelected Europeans making those decsions for us.

You don't speak for me nor many others I imagine, so if you don't mind you can keep this kind of sweeping falsehood to yourself!

You missed theirs the bureaucracy has a point as it makes things easier

its a bureaucracy for the sake of a bureaucracy

seosamh77 - Member
Thm, what criticisms do you have of the EU?

You have to start with the BIG one - the €. Flawed in design, flawed in execution. This will require a major rethink of how Germany interacts with the rest of the EZ and the issue of fiscal transfers.

Personally, I do not believe it can/will work. But at least, if they are going to persist, you have to put the correct structure in place.

Fortunately, we are not involved in this folly.

The EU itself is favouring investment in non-EU countries over those in the EU to help facilitate its expansion.
How is this "the best arrangement"?

I am focused on the UK. We trade with the EU and the RoW. The best arrangement is one that facilitates both - so we have beneficial access to the former and have as part of the EU beneficial trading relationships with many of the latter. Excuse me for focusing on the forest here, but that is a bloody good result.

Its your choice if you want to align yourself with those driven largely by xenophobia or foolhardiness. Nothing to do with me.

rising, is I believe the trend, and it will continue to do so as we absorb poorer nations and head towards even more central control

You do understand how this works?

Comparing to GDP is also wrong imo,

Why? The purpose of being part of the EU is to stimulate trade and investment, two of the principal drivers of national income/output. Makes sense to compare the cost with the benefit.

we should look at cost ve total government budget. As noted our EU contributionnis the equivalent of 2% on VAT or 3% on income tax

Still a good trade but a lousy stat. Are we suggesting that membership is the equivalent of 3% on income tax?

You are missing my point, my point is very simple, its a bureaucracy for the sake of a bureaucracy

Simple perhaps, but wrong nevertheless.

Imagine instead the same economic area with 28 different sets of national laws, regulations, specifications and procedures.

Which is simpler for business?

the Remainers lack trust in British justice and government and somehow think we are better off with unelected Europeans making those decsions for us.

No, we don't!

Indeed we don't. We understand the real as opposed to the exagerated notion of EU law making and the SMALL fact that as a matter of fundamentl UK constitutional law, the UK Parliament is sovereign (see 1972 ECA Act)

UK Parliament is sovereign

Worth repeating I feel..

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35766434 ]BBC FACT CHECK[/url]

Good link with the conclusion that

[b]"These developments do not fundamentally undermine the principle of parliamentary sovereignty, [/b]since, in theory at least, Parliament could repeal any of the laws implementing these changes."

In other words, the UK Parliament is sovereign. QED.

The purpose of a centralised system is to standardise by slowly chipping away other decentralise system to form one large system. In our case EU system replacing individual state systems with one large EU ones otherwise the system (EU) does not work.

Still a good trade but a lousy stat. Are we suggesting that membership is the equivalent of 3% on income tax?

My calculation based upon annual net cost of EU memenrship fee of £8bn - 2% VAT or 3% income tax

The UK Parliament is Sovereign as we can withdraw from the EU 🙂

Remain campaign is trying to suggest doing so is financial suicide

I get that, but so what?

Why is it better to compare the cost of membership with how much the UK government raises in taxation compared to with the level of national output/income?

Even if you want to use the stat and get into a stat fest - its a potential loss of 8% of income tax receipts versus a "cost" (sic) of 3%. As an investor, which would you chose?

The UK Parliament is Sovereign as we can withdraw from the EU

Remain campaign is trying to suggest doing so is financial suicide

and the link between the two is....?

I can't predict the future, I can make an assesment that focusing on high growth economies away from the stagnant EU is the smart way to go.

I also really struggle with the "we are not in the euro" argument. The euro is the EU, all countires have to commit to join, it is the medium term objective. The monumental ****-up they have made of it will condem Europe to decades of pain, and we want to tie oirselves ever more closely exonomically and politcally to that ? No thanks

Remember when pensioners won their case of lost pensions by appealing to the E.U?

They found the U.K. government guilty of not protecting the policies and looking away.

I wonder how many of them them would be still working or living on the street or dead because of the U.K.couldnt give a hoot which was around £4-6 billion.

Thank god for the E.U. as pensioners claimed back 90%.

What do we do when we're f'd in the rear when it's our turn with no E.U?

For myself: Brexit.
For the good of others: Remain.

Difficult choice.

Remain campaign is trying to suggest doing so is financial suicide

I can't predict the future, I can make an assesment that focusing on high growth economies away from the stagnant EU is the smart way to go

1) that is predicting the future as it will happen in the future and you have decide one will be stagnant in the future and one vibrant.
2) they are not mutually exclusive we can focus on that and be in the EU - in fat as we can now one wonder why the majority of our exports are to the EU etc

I can't predict the future, I can make an assesment that focusing on high growth economies away from the stagnant EU is the smart way to go.

Why is this always framed by the Brexit mob as an either/or?

teamhurtmore - Member
seosamh77 - Member
Thm, what criticisms do you have of the EU?
You have to start with the BIG one - the €. Flawed in design, flawed in execution. This will require a major rethink of how Germany interacts with the rest of the EZ and the issue of fiscal transfers.

Personally, I do not believe it can/will work. But at least, if they are going to persist, you have to put the correct structure in place.

Fortunately, we are not involved in this folly.

From a uk perspective, what are the negatives as you see them?

Jamba, i'm expecting your submission on the positives from a uk perspective before lunch time! 😆

Just curious for balance purposes, as you are both argument basically from a good/bad point of view, it's too polarised.

Has [url= https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardelli/what-do-eu-know ]this article[/url] been discussed yet?

It reports on some polling by MORI that shows the difference between what people believe about the EU and the reality.

Those polled believed that:

- the UK was the 2nd largest contributor to the EU (in reality we're 4th);
- that 27% of the EU budget was spent on admin (in reality it's 6%);
- that 30% of international investment in the UK comes from the EU (in reality it's 48%, ~£496billion)
- that 15 out of every 100 UK residents were born elsewhere in the EU (in reality it's 5);
- that 14% of child benefit claims were for children outside the UK (in reality it's 0.3%)

Shows the power of misinformation and scaremongering. Not to mention the difficulty in seeing through the nonsense to make an informed choice.

(For the record I'm undecided but swinging heavily toward Bremain at the moment)

I can't predict the future, I can make an assesment that focusing on high growth economies away from the stagnant EU is the smart way to go.

As has been pointed out above, the two are not mutually exclusive - in theory or in practice

I also really struggle with the "we are not in the euro" argument.

Clearly, but it is very simple. We are not....

The euro is the EU, all countires have to commit to join, it is the medium term objective.

Can you think of any exceptions?

The monumental ****-up they have made of it will condem Europe to decades of pain, and we want to tie oirselves ever more closely exonomically and politcally to that ? No thanks

Economically - yes. The EA is only growing slightly less than us and faster than some EM economies. Either way it remains one of our biggest markets. Common sense tells you to focus on the arrangement that facilitates trade with this region the most. An easy answer...

Politically - no. And we are not.

the UK was the 2nd largest contributor to the EU (in reality we're 4th);

and as a percentage of GNI we make the lowest contribution of all member states. Its a bloody good deal and madness to throw it away. Who is talking about suicide??

Joe - of course I am going to focus on the big issue as its fundamental to pretty much everything else. Remember woods and trees as sbob reminds us!!

Judging by the standard of living of my European colleagues, I can't help thinking a Euro superstate (but that the end goal or not) might not be a terrible thing.

Even if we lose out somewhat economically (and I've no belief that is actually true once the whole balance sheet is added up) I can't help thinking it's a price worth paying for stability.

We aren't in the Euro. There are reasons to join and stay out I have some sympathy with, but it isn't even a question in this debate.

It's a heart rather than head decision. That or just see that odious Gove wants out, and therefore staying in is clearly right.

Just in case it's not already ^^

Why is this always framed by the Brexit mob as an either/or?

Binners because the 28 members of the EU have a very different agenda than do we the UK, the fifth richest country in the world. Also an organisation like the EU is a political supertanker, changing course is so slow its impercetpable. As pointed out the EU has agreed trade deals with the Palestinian terrirrories and Moldovia but no deal with China, Japan or the US

As far as exonomics go

Remain is most likely a short term gain financially for me but a medium and long term loss of huge proportiona

Remember when pensioners won their case of lost pensions by appealing to the E.U?

They found the U.K. government guilty of not protecting the policies and looking away.

I wonder how many of them them would be still working or living on the street or dead because of the U.K.couldnt give a hoot which was around £4-6 billion.

Thank god for the E.U. as pensioners claimed back 90%.

What do we do when we're f'd in the rear when it's our turn with no E.U?

ECHR is not the same thing as the EU - as we keep getting reminded every time the [b]other[/b] side try to use a European court judgement as proof we don't make our own laws.

Judging by the standard of living of my European colleague

25% Youth unemployment and 10% overall would suggest that's not the whole story