Forum menu
As our leader threatens to pull us out again what affect would it have on the EU?
Are we a useful asset or are they planning a party for once we're gone?
Does any other EU leader want out?
We'very spoken at length about the affect on us so let's try to keep it about them to save going over old ground.
They'd miss us. We'd miss them.
It's a panic policy by Cameron. The odious little shit recognises the threat of UKIP and the problems in his own party and will do anything to stay in power.
UK Politicians are only focused on 5 year cycles of looking after themselves. None of them work for the long term interest of the country
Woe is me
Miss who?
it would be bad for Ireland...
Yes (title)
Negative
Useful asset
Yes
Both sides would lose something and gain something. It is a panic measure by the mainstream parties to react to UKIP who have hit a popular nerve.
I'm in favour of EU reform. I like the idea of free trade and freedom of movement for workers. I'm not sure/don't really understand how much political control the EU has over our parliamentary authority, and that is the grey area that gives Farage and his cronies room for growth.
Worst scenario is the UK government sets an arbitrary date for a referendum regardless of whether the terms of the EU have been amended. Which is what Dickhead Dave has done, of course.
Depressing to watch QT last night with first two questions on immigration and education. Not a straight or factually correct answer to either question in first 20 mins. Made it easy to turn off.
Like most Tory PMs/leaders, CMD is facing his party's Achilles heel - Europe - compounded by the fact that people swallow UKIP BS. The last time this happened he promised lots of nice sweaty promises. Let's see this time.
One day, there will be a proper debate on Europe.
[quote=zippykona said]As our leader threatens to pull us out again what affect would it have on the EU?
I thought there would be a referendum first 🙂
Lets get down to the important issues here?
Will it effect our ability to be ludicrously overcharged for a Bratwurst in any of Britain's city centres during December, while drunk?
I'm in favour of EU reform. I like the idea of free trade and freedom of movement for workers. I'm not sure/don't really understand how much political control the EU has over our parliamentary authority, and that is the grey area that gives Farage and his cronies room for growth.
I'm not sure you can have free trade and freedom of movement without giving up a substantial amount of sovereignty. Both require a level playing field which implies common standards, regulations, etc.
Dave is reacting to the (perceived) threat of UKIP in the same way he reacts to everything. Panic, masked by a veneer of faux outrage, followed by ill thought through opportunism, for short term political expediency. All to placate the rabid nutters sat behind him. With little consideration of where he might be taking the rest of us in the process.
Dave doesn't want us out of Europe. Because Dave does what he's told by his corporate backers. And they sure the hell don't want us out of Europe. The scary thing is that he's busy painting himself into a corner, where he could end up pulling us out of the EU by mistake
I pulled out by mistake once. Turned out to have been a wise move.
Yes they would miss us. I think if the UK where to withdraw there would be pressure within other countries for the same, bizarrely if we did pull out immigration policy would be revised within the EU in my view. It's major issue in other countries too. This would be one of the major impacts politically, there would be a huge movement for change with anti-EU politicians empowered by a UK exit. Should the UK exit the 100,000's of EU immigrants coming to the UK would look to the richer EU nations instead. I personally believe from a trade perspective not much would change, the Germans are very keen to sell us cars, the French agricultural products etc. So trade deals would be done retain the status quo.
@binners none of the three established parties want to exit Europe because as a minimum it's disruptive and more likely economically damaging. However the public want material changes which cannot be delivered whilst remaining in the EU, its a bit like he Scottish Yes vote, people voted Yes even though they would be economically worse off as they want to be in control of their own destiny.
jambalaya - Member
However the public want material changes which cannot be delivered whilst remaining in the EU
No I don't!
As we are the 4th biggest contributor to the budget (2011 figures on Wiki) and our net contribution in 2009 was ?3,865 million Euros, then you'd have to think from simply a monetary perspective, yeah they'd miss us.
TBH if the UK talking of walking makes the EU start becoming more accountable then it would be worth it IMO.
TBH if the UK talking of walking makes the EU start becoming more accountable then it would be worth it IMO.
Yes, as accountable as our parliament. Oh, hang on...
Binners is spot on, A tory party once again looking in on itself, tearing itself apart over Europe, and we suffer the consequences.
I personally believe from a trade perspective not much would change, the Germans are very keen to sell us cars, the French agricultural products etc. So trade deals would be done retain the status quo.
Yeah, we could be like Norway where we still pay for access to the EU, still have to comply with their rules, but with the added bonus of not having a say over the writing of those rules.
As we are the 4th biggest contributor to the budget (2011 figures on Wiki) and our net contribution in 2009 was ?3,865 million Euros
I believe our net contribution for the years after that has been in the region of 8 billion per annum, leaving us the EUs second biggest net contributor for some time.
So yeah, they'd miss us!
if we did pull out immigration policy would be revised within the EU in my view. It's major issue in other countries too
Why have they all been on record saying free movement is essential and founding principle? Can you give me quotes to support this ?
I personally believe from a trade perspective not much would change
Ah the we will keep the pound argument - we can leave but keep everything we want.
as for immigration [ 2012 figures]
Germany reported the largest number of immigrants (592 200) in 2012, followed by the United Kingdom (498 000), Italy (350 800), France (327 400) and Spain (304 100). Spain reported the highest number of emigrants in 2012 (446 600), followed by the United Kingdom (321 200),
Its a myth to think only we get immigrants or we get the most. Still facts are irrelevant here lets bang a nationalistic drum and think if we ended /controlled immigration and left the EU all the problems associated with market capitalism and globalisation would end as the free marketers UKIP would save us. Not a solution and the problem is not caused by the EU or immigration
The problem with pulling out is even UKIP still want to [free ] trade] with them.As noted above to do this we have to harmonise. We are either in the club that decides the rules of harmonisation or we are not in it but if we want to trade we have to harmonise. the alternative is tiny us haggling with massive them and we will get scrwed.
In businees neither the EU nor the UK want to leave and both will lose. they are bigger than us so we are more ****ed than they are. Car industry for example
I'm not sure/don't really understand how much political control the EU has over our parliamentary authority
UK parliament is still sovereign. It can bugger off any time it likes.
What control were you thinking of, pacifically?
the arguments are largely the same as those regarding scotland leaving the UK, and equally valid. it was rather amusing ( in a bang your head against the wall way ) hearing them argue both sides during the run up to the scotland vote.
i'd likely be out of a job to start with. i work for an american company and one of our reasons to exist here is that we're 'in europe'. i dare say we may be given the option to move to germany or something...
*lob*
Yeah but once all the old people have died we'll have another vote and jump back in.
*leg it*
Maybe they'd miss us, maybe not, either way life goes on. The trouble with politics is wise people have nothing to do with it. What I mean by that..is the decisions that get made are not based on wisdom. Wisdom doesn't know conservative or labour or ukip, or any other agenda based thinking..
Germany reported the largest number of immigrants (592 200) in 2012, followed by the United Kingdom (498 000), Italy (350 800), France (327 400) and Spain (304 100). Spain reported the highest number of emigrants in 2012 (446 600), followed by the United Kingdom (321 200),
Isn't the UK quite a lot smaller that the other countries? Isn't our population density quite a lot more too? From what I can see the only major countries with higher PD are India, South Korea, Japan, Phillipines and Vietnam.
We're not far off Germany actually, 23 more people per square kilometre.
Netherlands and Belgium higher by a long way.
As always, commerce would simple ignore/sidestep and position itself appropriately. The political hot air is irrelevant at the end of the day. Noise, nothing more.
We're not far off Germany actually, 23 more people per square kilometre.
The UK's population density is skewed by having huge areas of Scotland with very low density. Both urban and rural density is probably much higher in most of the places where immigrants are likely to want to go.
I'm not saying the EU does have control over our parliament or not. I'm saying I don't know the answer on that point, it might be UKIP propaganda or a lazy excuse trotted out by recent governments when tbey can't be bothered to fix something.
I'm not convinced you need a level playing field for free trade and movement of workers. Each country can have it's own systems within it's borders whilst still maintaining these freedoms, it's up to tbe businesses and individuals as to whether it is worth trading/moving.
So how do we do it? Are these new garden cities touted a while back a good idea? We need housing, jobs etc. Cities are becoming more and more unpleasant to live in (I think; maybe it's just me being a mean spirited git)
There are a couple of different figures being knocked around. This one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_population_density
says the difference is 36 (262/226) and going by the figures above, the gap is going to widen. The UK took 2.03/m2, Germany 1.66/m2 and Italy 1.16m2.
I saw a thing on the news last night that Switzerland are having a votey thing on immigration because they're feeling a bit cosy. Their PD is only 198/m2!!!
Their PD is only 198/m2!!!
I think you missed a "k" off that stat.
Why have they all been on record saying free movement is essential and founding principle? Can you give me quotes to support this ?
JY how is your French and German ? Can post you lots of links from politicians. Have a look at election results from the anti-EU parties (almost all have similar anti-immigration stances), all these parties are on an electorial vote surge. See those lists of immigrant figures, there is a groundswell of public opinion against immigration there too. The core EU members (France and Germany) have freedom of movement at the center of their EU policies so you have the political rhetoric but their voters are increasingly turning against that.
My trade argument was nothing to do with the pound, its to do with the fact we are a rich country and buy lots of stuff, the Europeans are very keen to keep selling it to us.
No I don't!
@Lifer, sorry yes I appreciate people was a bit general, "many" or "an increasing number of" should have been added to "people"
I'm not saying the EU does have control over our parliament or not. I'm saying I don't know the answer on that point, it might be UKIP propaganda or a lazy excuse trotted out by recent governments when tbey can't be bothered to fix something.
Well they do, we have passed numerous laws or policies which have been overturned in the European Courts as well as many times we have been unable to enact the legislation we want as we know it will be overturned. See Camerons statement today on insisting EU immigrants must work 4 years before claiming in work benefits, we cannot make that law as it will be overturned by Europe (it was already during the Thatcher years).
England's pop density = 413/sq km
We (UK) don't get and probably never will get the benefits of a unified Europe like the French and Germans (in particular) do.
a) we're an island nation, our neighbours are physically distant and we have a strong streak of bloody-minded independence/isolation which comes from that
b) by the end of WW2, France and Germany were trashed - economically, physically and mentally. It was the third time they'd wrecked each other's countries in less than a century - Franco-Prussian War 1870, WW1, WW2 and they realised they had to do something to stop them doing the same again - the human cost was too much as well as anything else.
That's where EU comes from - a very rational fear of Europe destroying itself again. We don't quite get this - partly because we weren't invaded in either WW1 or WW2 and UK, whilst economically on it's knees, came out as a victor and UK soil hadn't had foreign boots trampling all over and wrecking it.
UK leaving risks the whole European project falling apart so to the OP, yes I think EU would miss us. We also need to understand some of the above and recognise our own responsibility not to be the catalyst for a break-up - it's unlikely to do anyone in Europe any favours.
Call for reform, yes. Threaten to leave. Not helpful...
That's where EU comes from - a very rational fear of Europe destroying itself again.
Or maybe it comes from a Luxembourgish politician looking for a larger, more equal market for Luxembourgish mined goods.
The EU would miss the UK but probably not half as much as the UK would miss the EU. A lot of the scare stories that were used against Scottish independence would be the reality if the UK left the EU. Chances are it would push a second Scottish vote to the fore as well.
Call for reform, yes.
What would you reform?
Debating Europe as is, is frankly a waste of time. It cannot by definition exist in its current form.
To succeed under the current structure, you need full monetary and fiscal union. This will offset the problems of having a fixed exchange area in a region that is incompatible with such a structure. The problem, the biggest member is resistant to what that implies. So you may end up with a variety of currency blocks which will be funny where the French end up. UK unlikely to sign up to such a structure.
Without that, you cannot have a fixed exchange rate. So we end up with a free trade area based in he five pillars and flexible exchange rates. That has a chance of working but the core do not want that. UK likely to support this structure although the myopic Xenophobes will still want an assymetric approach to freedom of people!!!
God knows what buggers muddle we will end up with instead. Which reminds me, it's Friday and no religion bashing thread, what's going on?
Debating Europe as is, is frankly a waste of time. It cannot by definition exist in its current form.
It can. The EU is like FIFA. No matter how bad it gets. No matter how unfit for purpose. How corrupt. How incompetent. It just ploughs on like a supertanker, those at the top wilfully burying their heads in the sand, while banking their fat salaries, and taking their backhanders.
Because when it does hit the iceberg (and I completely agree with you that without absolutely fundamental reform to the whole single currency nonsense, it must), then like the bankers after the crash, the people who caused it will simply walk away, unscathed and unaffected. While the rest of us deal with the disastrous consequences
Reforms?
I'd reform the tax and banking system. Out go all the unfair tax regimes and advantages designed to attract inward investment. Companies would be obliged to pay tax on profits in the country the profit is made. Nationals working in member states and non-EU states would be obliged to pay the difference between the foreign tax rate and the tax rate in their home country to their home country (unless they were prepared to give up their nationality). Banking with a non-EU bank would be illegal.
I've got more but that's some initial food for thought.
Jam thanks for a broad sweeping statement that say some parties [ not in power] in some countries in europe dont like free movement. Unfortunately, that moving of the goalposts, is some way from proving your outlandish claim that if we leave one of the founding principles of the eu - free movement of people- will cease. Can you prove that with a credible source ?
TBH its hyperbolic BS and if you believe it you are [s]nuts[/s] wrong.
Its a founding principle nothing will rip it apart other then the union being ripped apart. I think Farage would agree with me on this
FIFA comparison is harsh as nothing is as corrupt and undemocratic as that place not even China
The EU is a large juggernaut moving towards ever closer integration I do agree that nothing is likely to stop it becoming a federal state of europe
Edukator - Given that Jean-Claude Juncker, the present European commission president, was the man responsible for setting up Luxembourg as a tax haven. The one that now drains tax receipts from the rest of Europe, and enables Google, Apple, et all to set up their 'tax efficiencies', what do you reckon the chances are of that happening are?
EU membership, the gift that keeps on taking.
Good news, another black hole in yet another set of unaudited accounts. Guess who's going to have to contribute?
From your link
The hole in EU spending has been identified by the European Court of Auditors
In what sense are they unaudited*?
* which means not having been officially examined.
In the whole history of the EU, their accounts have [i][b]never[/i][/b] been signed off by the European Court of Auditors.Junkyard - lazarus
From your link
The hole in EU spending has been identified by the European Court of Auditors
In what sense are they unaudited*?* which means not having been officially examined.
That is not what you said and it is still not true
Moreover, the EU Budget has not been “rejected” or “refused” by the auditors – its payments have been consistently found subject to significant error for the past 18 years. This is hardly good news, but it isn’t as serious as some headlines imply.
https://fullfact.org/factchecks/has_eu_budget_rejected_auditors_18_years-28593
For example if a farmer claims for sheep he does not have then that is both fraud and an error.You may swish to consider how many errors we make in benefit payments or tax collection or ta credits etc in the UK [ not fraud but errors] before saying headline grabbing stuff like that. Its part of the Daily mail Anti EU flag flying pseudo fact folk have heard so often they repeat without actually investigating what it means[no offence]
You need to scratch below the surface and you can say the samething about the UK budget
Its hardly great in terms of error and plenty there to object to IMHO but no different from many other countries including us. Never signed off means never 100% accurate which will be true for all countries accounts and all large organisations.
Dont look at the UK MOD and the contracts they service iirc many of them have been found guilty of systematic fraud/overspend
The Comptroller and Auditor General has qualified his audit opinion. Among the reasons for his qualification are the exclusion of the government-controlled bodies that, in the C&AG’s view, should have been included to comply with the International Financial Reporting Standards.
the auditors voiews of the UK 2009-2010 report for example
http://www.nao.org.uk/report/report-of-the-comptroller-and-auditor-general-whole-of-government-accounts-2009-10/
I am sure there is similar out there for other countries but THM and /or aracer will be better informed than I am.
I'm pretty sure Europe would get along just fine without us.
Well they do, we have passed numerous laws or policies which have been overturned in the European Courts as well as many times we have been unable to enact the legislation we want as we know it will be overturned.
This is bobbins. The EU doesn't control the UK. If the UK passes legislation that is incompatible with European legislation that they've already signed up to, Parliament has a choice: either change the UK legislation or piss off from the EU.
What you're saying is a bit claiming I'm a slave because my employer won't let me wear a clown suit to work (which would better suit my level of professionalism). If I don't like the rule, I can piss off.
Banking with a non-EU bank would be illegal.
Ah, good old protectionism.
How about trying to be serious about reforming European zombie banks instead of protecting them?
I've got more but that's some initial food for thought.
There's enough indigestion already....
One day, there will be a proper debate on Europe.
! very much doubt that.
Personally I think the EU is good thing (basically preventing Euro War and standing up to the Yanks and Asians) but of course we can negotiate to make it better. You can negotiate on anything. Of course EU would miss us (and vice versa, see above) but that wont be necessary because they will give us what we largely want. Move on.
They wont give us largely what we want they will say these are the rules ofthe club stay or leave as would any club of 27 members who had to listen to one member who constantly moaned from the edges of the club and then demanded you all change your rules to accommodate them.
Why do you think we will get what [s]we[/s] those ont he right who hate Europe ask for ? What quotes have you seen that make you think this?
Why is "The Man" so against the EU surely it's good for business and greed is good,right?
Junkyard - lazarus
They wont give us largely what we want they will say these are the rules of the club stay or leave as would any club of 27 members who had to listen to one member who constantly moaned from the edges of the club and then demanded you all change your rules to accommodate them.
Like France do then? How many times in recent years have they decided they won't pay or do something and the UK has picked up the bill?
Like France do then? How many times in recent years have they decided they won't pay or do something and the UK has picked up the bill?
Don't know - how many times? Or is that just a Mail/Telegraph meme, and has little basis in fact?
The UK's population density is skewed by having huge areas of Scotland with very low density. Both urban and rural density is probably much higher in most of the places where immigrants are likely to want to go.
That's true of all countries with cities.
Japans population is almost entirely based in coastal cities.
The Philippines has islands such as Palawan that are sparsely populated.
The UK's population density is skewed by having huge areas of Scotland with very low density. Both urban and rural density is probably much higher in most of the places where immigrants are likely to want to go.
That's true of all countries with cities.
Japans population is almost entirely based in coastal cities.
The Philippines has islands such as Palawan that are sparsely populated.
Nationals working in member states and non-EU states would be obliged to pay the difference between the foreign tax rate and the tax rate in their home country to their home country (unless they were prepared to give up their nationality)
That's really stupid. Then someone who goes to work somewhere with low tax and low public services ends up paying high tax (between country of citizenship + country of birth) and getting low public service.
I don't know why you're so keen to stop people moving from bloated high tax jurisdictions like France to other places. If states are providing such a poor deal in terms of tax and public services that large numbers of people want to move away from there, then then should fix that problem at home instead of sinking their fangs into the money of citizens living abroad.
Nationals working in member states and non-EU states would be obliged to pay the difference between the foreign tax rate and the tax rate in their home country to their home country (unless they were prepared to give up their nationality).
That's total nonsense. I pay income tax where I live as I use the services here. Why should I pay in the UK or France, as both are my "home country" (whatever that means) but I don't live in either of them.