Should I stay or should I go now? - The EU Referendum Thread

[Psychosplodge]

I thought Brits like lo line up in queues.
Like is a strong word, more it seems the most civilised way to do things


Don't forget Europe will want those deals too, front half of the queue at least.
You'd assume. It depends how much the businesses want the business compared to how much the political elite wants to "punish" independent thought and scare smaller economies into remaining


I noticed a focus on the economic side of the argument, aren't there any 'convinced Europeans' who think the EU is a good idea on itself?
Only a few nutters.
Remain seems to be "it's sh*t but potentially more sh*t if we leave" Leave seems to be "it's sh*t but we can sort our own sh*t out if we leave"


On the topic of sovereignty, what is the UK's stance on glyphosate for instance?

It's available on amzon


The EEC as a trading idea? worked to a degree, whether it was a mistake to enter and erect trade barriers with previous trade partners? who knows. The EU? The EEC+even more corrupt political elite than we already had? terrible idea.

[Haighus]

I would imagine the UK government's stance on things like glyphosate is similar to it's stance on other harmful chemicals- they will conform to the EU, and then allow them as soon as they get the chance if suitably lobbied by some big wealthy industry behind closed doors, like with the neonicotinoids last year, and have tried to do again this year... which, as soon as it got leaked from behind said closed doors, kickstarted a massive petition campaign to keep them banned. I don't have much faith in the current government to maintain environmental standards if we leave the EU at all. At least not if they can get their pockets lined by some big company that is trying to exploit a chemical somewhere...

[grimmas]

I like to use it to kill weeds on my path.

[Haighus]

I like to use it to kill weeds on my path.
As have many people, but if it is harmful would you stop using it and use something else instead? People used to think thalidomide was a great medicine for treating morning sickness (which it worked very well for), then they discovered the side effects. Chloroform was widely used as an anaesthetic before agents with less dangerous side effects became available. Cars no longer use leaded petrol. Asbestos is a very effective insulator and was widely used, but causes cancer and lung fibrosis. Glyphosate is clearly an effective herbicide, but if it is harmful being a good herbicide shouldn't prevent it from being removed from the market.

I will note that many of the above examples are still in use in developing countries or in uses other than the ones they are rarely used for today, such as thalidomide now being used as a chemotherapy agent.

[Aegwymourn]

As a side note the last I heard all studies on Glyphosate have been inconclusive. Has something new been published to suggest otherwise?

[Mr Mystery]

Not from a brief Google.

EU doesn't appear to have banned their use.

[grimmas]

As a side note the last I heard all studies on Glyphosate have been inconclusive. Has something new been published to suggest otherwise?

Yeah inconclusive on the health effects thing. Positive on killing weeds on my path though 😊

[Mr Mystery]

Seem the Electoral Commission has asked for an extension on the voter registration deadline.

The website crashed last night from 22:15 onwards, presumably because of lots of Johnny Come-Lately's (note to foreign types, this is a different thing to a Johnny Foreigner. Unless Johnny Foreigner has also attended past due) realised they hadn't registered yet.

[Kirsten]

there is a suggestion that a lot of the late registers are young people, and that the Brexit campaign are against extending registration because young people are more likely to vote in, but what the truth of that is I don't know.

[grimmas]

Who knows? It's been the theme of the whole referendum.

They should extend it though very important to make sure as many people who can vote, do vote

[Mr Mystery]

And whilst about to link to an interesting article about on the Beeb....

I think I just heard the Daily Express spontaneously combust. Only time will tell if they took Farage with them in a chain reaction of bigoted nonsense (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36480764)

[Psychosplodge]

i hope they check the people registering aren't already registered.
One ****wit on the radio was complaining this morning that she couldn't get registered last night but she always votes in elections so was moaning, but assuming from her own comments she voted in may she'll already be registered. How much bandwidth was wasted on muppets like that?

[Mr Mystery]

I'd rather people feel the need to double register (I did, just to make sure because of change of address) than assume, and be left without a voice.

Oh dear.

Apparently, Douglas Carswell of UKIP 'doesn't accept the UK would face EU tariffs if we left'.

Well, I'm reassure by that statement. What with him being an expert on the matter and all......oh. Wait. No he's not.

[Mr Mystery]

Well, the polls are all over the shop, and far fewer conducted in the past week or so than pundits expected.

Some show a strong lead for Leave, others Remain continuing to lead, other neck-a-neck.

Betting odds are changing, with Leave making up some ground.

It's all to play for as we hit nearly the last week of campaigning. Can we expect more 'dramatic' ship jumping from our not-at-all-thinking-of-their-career MPs? Will there be a Leave vote? I seriously, seriously hope not. I don't want to live in the dark ages.

[Mr Mystery]

Also....I just....I just..I can't even. I mean. Seriously. Seriously seriously? Where is *that* money going to come from? The £350,000,000 a day which Gove said would instead go the NHS? (the one he wants to privatise?) (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36523764)

Why can't people see Leave are living in cloud cuckoo land?

[Psychosplodge]

I'm not sure how they can say that, it would be down to the chancellor to make the decision on what to spend it on wouldn't it? It's entirely possible it could be spent like that, but there's no guarantee.

No, remain are mostly made up of the middle class champagne socialists that made labour alienate their core voters, and the idiots that that honestly seem to think an out vote means they won't be able to go for their two weeks in magaluf.

The Labour MPs "jumping ship" as you put it might be more in line with the views of the party membership than the parliamentary party. They seem to think so.

[Mr Mystery]

So far, it's just been a Conservative MP who jumped ship, because of Leave being less than truthful about the amount we spend to be in Europe.

For me, Remain is made up of the vast majority of people I know - the only one I know for certain is Leave is my pub's landlady. The rest of the denizens are firmly Remain.

God I really hope we don't leave. Really, really hope.

Mind you, around this time for the Scottish Referendum, it looked like they might Leave....but we know how that one played out in the end.

[grimmas]

I think I know only one person who is "IN" so I suspect it's very dependent on the circles you move in and I work in Kent so it is very localised given that Mystery lives there I believe. I would add there is a few in the undecided camp.

Of course in my circles the utter disgust people feel towards both Cameron and Corbyn could be having an affect.

[Psychosplodge]

No there was two reasonably local to me Labour MPs they might not have reported it down south. I think it was him who had a go at livingston in the corridors of Westminster about anti-Semitism and the bassetlaw one(Dennis Skinner?) I think.

I hope the leave percentage is a good clear win not one or two percent. *shrugs*

It did seem to show that polls are pretty meaningless.

[Mr Mystery]

Oddly, I've never been contacted for any kind of poll, ever - so who exactly is being asked?

I'm dubious about any Daily Express poll, because they usually boil down to 'you do want to leave Europe, or would you prefer to poop on Diana's memorial, GOD SAVE THE QUEEN'. Same for the rest of the gutter press really.

- - - Updated - - -

The shameless and repeated lying from Leave is what gets my goat.

They either simply cannot deliver on any of them (leave EU, retain the Single Market but exclusively on our terms. HOW???) or have absolutely no intention of doing so (channelling money from EU to NHS, when we know Gove wants it's privatised entirely, and Boris would see it charge the patient).

Then there's the exploiting of tragedies elsewhere to stir up xenophobia. It's just been an utterly vile campaign of lies, misinformation and chicanery from the get-go. And some might say 'hurr, that r politics'....but it's rarely this clearly dishonest and based on nothing.

- - - Updated - - -

Stupid Europe. Always telling us what we can't do.

Oh no....wait a minute. Seems that's an absolute pack of lies as well! (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36526158)

Interested to see what affect that might have on the thing.

[Psychosplodge]

Literally both sides have engaged in massive htperbole. I mean Cameron said he'd back out if he didn't get meaningful reform. Then came back with nothing and said leaving would cause world war three. I mean ffs. Then we've got a pro eu groupof MPs talking about effectively ignoring the result. It's an absoloute farce. Like Grimmas says though I don't think there's any undecideds left. I'm not sure how many really existed before the campaigns started.
All it seems to have done is show none of the current 650 wankers can be trusted with anything.

- - - Updated - - -





Stupid Europe. Always telling us what we can't do.

Oh no....wait a minute. Seems that's an absolute pack of lies as well! (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36526158)

Interested to see what affect that might have on the thing.

The point is Mystery it should never go before an EU judge.

[Mr Mystery]

Why not? It's a European matter, is it not?

And it rather shoots down the whole 'arrrgh! All the foreigners are ganging up on us all of the time, even though how Europe works is pretty much identical to Whitehall with it's hordes of unelected civil servants, except that we've got a Veto on stuff we don't want, and that single Veto is enough to stop stuff we don't like'.

[Psychosplodge]

No. It's the law of this country and is exactly the issue with the EU. Our courts and parliament should be having the final say.

[Mr Mystery]

But it's not.

It's EU law. Therefore, a matter for their courts, because we're a member of the EU and have to work within their rules.

Plus, that was a concession wanted, and now we have it. But of course, the EU just doesn't work, and is out to get us. It's just a big mafia to kick Britain over and over and over again with it's ethnic legs. At least, that's what Leave would have the proles believe.

[Psychosplodge]

But it is.
That is the exact type of infringement on our sovereignty that is the reason many want out.

[Mr Mystery]

Eff Sovereignty. It's a pointless, jingoistic term. We live in an era of increasing globalisation - we cannot and should not cling to the notion we're a big player on our own. We're not. At all. We're a minnow compared to the US and China, not to mention other rapidly developing (if currently somewhat stalled) economies.

See the freedom of movement thing? We had a veto, and we didn't use it. That's utterly different from not having a veto. Don't blame Europe when the problem you have is with your own Government.

[Psychosplodge]

:rolleyes:
We're not the the mediocre player the remain campaign has made us out to be either.

[Mr Mystery]

Yes we are. We're a net importer, I believe.

We cannot compete with the likes of China or indeed the USA for manufacturing because the have the economy of scale that we simply don't. Sure, what we make is damned high quality (it has to be!) but in a capitalistic market, that's just not enough.

Seriously, what have we got to negotiate with? Cups of tea and a nice scone? How are we meant to level the playing field? What's in our corner? Because Leave haven't illustrated that at all.

In fact, they've given no facts whatsoever.

[Psychosplodge]

Quality manufacturing rather than quantity manufacturing?
We're clearly somewhere up there or we wouldn't be the fifth largest economy.

[grimmas]

Quality manufacturing rather than quantity manufacturing?
We're clearly somewhere up there or we wouldn't be the fifth largest economy.

Beat me to it.

Also if we are a net importer having free trade on items comingin actually reduces our revenue. Also it makes us a very attractive prospect for other wanting to deal with us.

Biggest lie told by Remain, that out means having to build a big wall around the country and refuse to talk to anyone else in the world.

[CoffeeGrunt]

And ultimately it still comes down to accusations of lying either way. This referendum has been a disgrace.

[Psychosplodge]

And ultimately it still comes down to accusations of lying either way. This referendum has been a disgrace.

pretty much

[Mr Mystery]

And ultimately it still comes down to accusations of lying either way. This referendum has been a disgrace.

Probably perspective bias, but Leave haven't said a single truthful thing in their entire campaign. There best 'arguments' are demonstrably false.

Take 'unelected law makers'. Then go actually look into it. Lies, lies and damned lies.

[Psychosplodge]

Definitely perception bias :p
Probably for all of us.
I certainly can't see how you can stretch elected to cover the commission as they're appointed and they're the ones that make the laws aren't they?

[Mr Mystery]

No, they propose the Laws, which are then voted on - again, one single Veto from any member state, and the law cannot pass.

[Psychosplodge]

Not on all issues, some is some sort of majority voting by population or something isn't it?

- - - Updated - - -

in fact what are the actual point of MEPs if the commission and member states do everything?

[Mr Mystery]

Well, if it's UKIP MEPs, seemingly it's all about hypocricy and riding the same gravy train they're apparently so very much against :p

[Psychosplodge]

Repatriating as much money as possible to the UK you mean? :D
No was out in birmingham once and saw how they wasted money in a pub. probably a dozen barely touched but opened bottles of wine were left on the table when the left. Apparently at least one of them was an MEP for the area as one of their bodies tried talking to our group.
I have no doubt the tax payer picked up the bill for that somewhere along the line.
I have absolutely no issue lumping them in with all the other politicians when it comes to abusing their position.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Personally, I'm just voting Remain because it seems to be the best option from my point of view. There's no definitive figures, no meaningful discourse, or anything to really sway me hard in either direction.

[Mr Mystery]

This is what your non-UKIP MEP actually does (http://www.europarl.org.uk/en/your-meps/what_do_they_do.html;jsessionid=8A239EB0653D493FAE 4B7A6BCF2BB5D9)

[Psychosplodge]

What a handy neutral source :D

[Mr Mystery]

I don't think there are any neutral sources for such things.

And still better from the Horse's mouth than Das Daily Fail telling us what it really, really wishes MEP's actually did, even though it bears no relation whatsoever to reality :P

[Psychosplodge]

lols.
Like the threats from the president? :rolleyes:

There shouldn't be any EU laws for them to discuss.

[Mr Mystery]

I think we're just gonna agree to disagree on that one :p

Important thing is, the EU isn't the monolithic entity the most rabid Leave campaigners would have anyone believe. It's no more or less democratic than our own Parliament. Plus, we've voted in favour of something like 97% of EU laws that affect us.

That's pretty good going, no?

[Psychosplodge]

I think we're just gonna agree to disagree on that one :p

Pretty much :)


Important thing is, the EU isn't the monolithic entity the most rabid Leave campaigners would have anyone believe. It's no more or less democratic than our own Parliament. Plus, we've voted in favour of something like 97% of EU laws that affect us.

That's pretty good going, no?

maybe, maybe not. It's undeniably more corrupt than ours.

[Mr Mystery]

Nah.

I mean, look at the referendum campaign, aka Boris Johnson's Job Interview. Nasty, internecine conflict hijacking the biggest decision we'll make a country, possibly ever.

Besides, wherever power resides, so does corruption. It's sad, but that's human nature, after all. But when we get our way 97% of the time (not to be confused with what the gutter press demand), it doesn't hit us at all.

[Psychosplodge]

Like the extra £2bn Osbourne wasn't going to pay? but caved and did it in three payments? If that's the 3% we lose its not doing us no favours.

[Mr Mystery]

Well, we had to pay it on account we'd agreed to. Same as any other financial arrangement.

Osbourne saying he wasn't going to was just flim-flammery to appeal to Eurosceptic Tories, nothing more, nothing less.

[Morgrim]

I'm frequently seeing a "but there are unelected officials making decisions about us!" argument against the EU.

I thought Britain still had a hereditary House of Lords? And a quick search shows that the ones that aren't born into it are appointed by the Queen for life. So... you already have unelected officials making decisions about you, and by voted to leave will still have unelected officials making decisions, so why are the European ones so much worse than the English ones?

[Psychosplodge]

The parliament act can be used to bypass the house of lords. And theoretically the hereditary peers acted in the interest of the country as they were in the lords longer than politicians are in the commons, and have probably been brought up with a sense of duty/obligation to the crown/system. The current system of giving failed politicians a life peerage is something of a farce.

[grimmas]

I'm frequently seeing a "but there are unelected officials making decisions about us!" argument against the EU.

I thought Britain still had a hereditary House of Lords? And a quick search shows that the ones that aren't born into it are appointed by the Queen for life. So... you already have unelected officials making decisions about you, and by voted to leave will still have unelected officials making decisions, so why are the European ones so much worse than the English ones?

Because they're British ones (not just English) not foreign ones and they don't have the power to create legislation. They are a body that scrutinise the legislation coming through from the House of Commons.

[Mr Mystery]

Still undemocratic at heart. Spesh as far as I can recall, once you're a Lord....you're a Lord, and there's not a damned thing anyone can do about it.

[Psychosplodge]

On paper I would imagine the monarch could strip a title?

[Mr Mystery]

Seems it can be done, but only under specific circumstances (http://www.echo-news.co.uk/NEWS/11401961.So_can_Lord_H_be_stripped_of_his_title_/)

[grimmas]

The were acts in 2014 & 15 that meant that peerages could be stripped for various things, non attendance and serious criminal offences being some of them.

[Psychosplodge]

http://www.spiegel.de/international
Interesting reading for a foreign perspective. Ignore normal internet wisdom and have a look at the comments.

[Mr Mystery]

But....but we never read the comments, because we value our sanity.

[Psychosplodge]

I've read three articles now and only seen about four or five comments out of a couple of hundred that are like the reason we don't read the comments

[Mr Mystery]

I dunno. First few on that one were all 'why are you writing in English, DAMMERUNTBLITZEN!'

[Psychosplodge]

lols maybe the top one was too new to have been moderated?

- - - Updated - - -




32. The EU
robbiepdunn 06/13/2016
As an Irish man the EU has been a disaster for Ireland mass unemployment mass emigration homelessness hospitals destroyed by austerity cuts. Mass suicides and despair a bankrupt country destroyed by crooks and parasites in Brussels and Dublin. The EU is a scammers paradise Ireland paid 46% of the European bank debt and the Germans are at the heart of it YOU have destroyed my country Better off out the Brits are right and that takes a lot for an Irishman to admit. I am in Brisbane Australia where hundreds of thousands of young Irish people have had to come over the last few years because they have no hope in Ireland. The EU is totally out of touch with the realities on the ground Its full of Liars scammers and thieves Robbie Dunn Brisbane


I wonder how many Irish have emigrated in search of jobs?

[Mr Mystery]

Except.....the Irish economy was done over in the financial collapse of 2008ish, which was of course precipitated by the American sub-prime stupidity finally catching up with them.

Property boom ended, meaning hundreds if not thousands of builders out of work, with the knock-on affect that had. UK was lucky in many ways - we got hit pretty hard, but had a better diversified market, rather than 'all eggs in one basket', so could begin recovery a lot quicker. And we didn't have the debt Ireland did.

So to blame the EU seems utterly incongruous, when it was stupidity in the USA that effed everyone.

[Psychosplodge]

There's certainly no denying that contributed. And we bailed Ireland out regardless of EU because they're even more tied to us than the EU are.
The Irish aren't considered foreign under English law are they?

[Mr Mystery]

Kind of yes, kind of no. Kind of.

From what I've very recently gathered, if we do leave the EU (oh god I hope we don't. I don't approve of suicide), Irish citizens won't need a passport to enter the UK, and vice versa, which is unique for a European country and the UK.

[grimmas]

The Irish economy boom was in part fuelled by EU grants and once these went it's economy was unsustainable. It wasn't just the property thing which was a symptom rather than a cause. Same problem with Spain just giving money doesn't help unless it builds a self sustaining economy. Of course I wouldn't be too shocked about emigration from Ireland their greatest export has always been people.

Irish people are considered foreign but not as foreign than others. It all to do with the agreements about NI and how people there may choose their Nationality

- - - Updated - - -

I would add that labelling greater ties with the US of A as a Brexit plus point leaves me somewhat cold considering they've spent the last 100 of so years trying to do our legs. I'm fairly sure they will not be doing anything that doesn't help them significantly more than it helps us.

[Al Shut]

Ignore normal internet wisdom and have a look at the comments.

If they are representative of other Spiegel articles there should a tenor in favor of a Brexit ('Reisende soll man nicht aufhalten'. 'Don't stop travellers') with an undercurrent of favoring a Stay if the UK abides to the same rules as everybody and stops blocking further European integration. ('Keine Extrawürste' 'No special arrangements'). Plus a healthy dose of complaining about imbalanced reporting and the number of pro Stay articles.

[Psychosplodge]

Not quite, maybe thats the german language section?

No extra sausage :D

[eldargal]

Has this been posted?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ck-HllzW0AAG4A-.jpg

[Psychosplodge]

I've certainly seen it before, might have been elsewhere though.
Mystery you're probably the other person in here the most you seen it?

[Mr Mystery]

On FB I think? Not that it matters, it's here now!

Oh, and the Stock Market has caught a cold because of a possible Brexit.

But of course, everything will be fine. Vicars on Bikes. Happy children. Chaste Wimmens. No foreign types. Massive industry. Good weather all year round.....

[Psychosplodge]

Oh, and the Stock Market has caught a cold because of a possible Brexit.

And that's nothing to do with Osbourne and all his threats of tax rises today?

[Mr Mystery]

More than likely not, no.

Because the experts have been warning of this, and have been roundly poo-pooed by Brexit, because apparently it's all going to be fine, because reasons.

[Psychosplodge]

Last week the pound was up, or maybe the week before. And we were still having a referendum then as well.

[Mr Mystery]

Except now Leave have closed/opened the gap....

Market jitters shouldn't be ignored, and Osbourne's latest doomsaying came after.

[Psychosplodge]

Of course the markets having jitters. All the people that are slagging off an exit are in these cushy advisory roles where there is little impact on them personally if they're wrong.
Whereas you've got 2/3rds of the ftse1000? is it? staying out of it completely - because if they're wrong it costs them money.

[Mr Mystery]

And very, incredibly few people of any note saying it's worth the risk.

[grimmas]

The market is down everywhere not just the FTSE. I guess we are important if our decisions can cause such widespread issues 😉

[Mr Mystery]

Yeah. And if/when we screw the global economy by voting out like a bunch of petulant children, I'm sure they'll welcome us with open arms and open minds when it comes to thrashing out new trade deals.

Or, you know, we'll get the rubbish end of the bargain as we're a net importer, but a tiny percentage of their export markets.

But it'll be fine, just fine because Gove, Boris and Farage (all incredibly trustworthy chaps and not at all dodgy) said so. I mean, they've said how. But apparently it will be.

- - - Updated - - -

And here's how I perceive the answers from Leave to very ****ing important questions

http://viz.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Screen-Shot-2014-10-16-at-09.55.41.png

[grimmas]

I don't think calling people names is going to change people's minds. (Not politicians mind they deserve to be called names)

Yep they are dodgy but then again so are Cameron and Corbyn. Neither side is particularly trustworthy that's why people are having a bit of trouble with this ones.

[Psychosplodge]

Its not going to be some BS utopia but its certainly not going to be armageddon either is it?
Nobody even seems to know how important we are, I'm pretty sure one of those german articles I was reading earlier referred to us as both their 3rd and 5th largest export market in the same article (unless of course they were playing monty python fluxx at the time of writing)

- - - Updated - - -

Theres 450 of the dodgy buggers that want to remain. Lesser of two evils and all that :p

[grimmas]

Of course if we do leave it's entirely possible that the EU could experience other departures.

[Psychosplodge]

Probably a certainty if we go and the country doesn't implode.

[Mr Mystery]

Thing is - Boris is only for Leave because he sees the keys to No.10.

Gove wants Leave because he seems hellbent on decimating employment protection and other stuff I consider kind of important.

People correctly have concerns about the TTIP - but we're not the only member states with serious concerns about it. But that's the negotiated one as a single (more or less. Arguably. In theory) cohesive entity which put together is the world's second largest economy. You think TTIP is pants (and it is! Make no bones about it)....what sort of deal do you think would be proferred to a minnow like us on our own? Especially with psychopaths beating their way into No 10 being left to negotiate and arrange it, many of whom would happily privatise the NHS?

There's just far, far too many unknowns. We have advantage in Europe. We're exempt from further federalisation. We have Vetoes - and despite what Gove and Co. would have us believe, not using it and not having it are entirely different things.

Nobody has been able to point out a single European Law which has been disadvantageous to the UK. Fishing Quotas? They're about preserving fish stocks (no, not the ones on the stove :p ), and ensuring the industry has a future. Without that, you think being a Fisherman sucks at the moment? Imagine it when there's no cod to be caught, because we ate it all.

This is the maddening thing to me. Every argument Leave has come up with has been bunkum, or a gross misrepresentation or over simplification of the actual facts.

Leave isn't a political movement based on rationality. It's one based on wishful thinking and hidden, dangerous agendas.

- - - Updated - - -


Of course if we do leave it's entirely possible that the EU could experience other departures.

Possibly. Depends how much of an example they make of us if we did Leave.

And make no mistake - they very much would have the power to screw us mightily.

[grimmas]

But only by hurting themselves, the Germans are bricking it and at the very least the Spainish will be mightily concerned.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36526839

Of course it may just be a game of Brinksmanship being played for greater concessions (as I believe the Scottish referendum was)

[CoffeeGrunt]

I've basically handled Leave arguments in two ways so far. If they say it's about all the money we're losing, I ask them exactly how much we're losing. Most of the time they don't have a figure, when they do I point out that it's typically the basic cost, ignoring the rebate we get, plus all the financial benefits of being a part of the EU. I also point out that even the Home Office doesn't seem to know the exact amount, because there's a lot of money saved at the individual and business level that the HO wouldn't take into account. Therefore, it's hard to justify if you don't know whether it ends up being a net positive or negative after all that.

The second question is if someone takes the angle of the EU controlling our laws. I ask, "which laws?" They normally say, "a lot of them, like most of our laws are written by the EU."

I then request three specific laws the EU dictates to us. The answer is almost always, "I can't think of any." I point out that if you can't think of any, you either haven't researched the matter enough, or the issue isn't nearly as massive as you thought. Occasionally someone does point something out. Fisheries Laws, Anti-Monopoly Laws and one or two others pop up, but those are things set in British Legislation too, and therefore do not factor into the discussion as leaving the EU would have no effect.

The final argument is on either, "making Britain great again," or, "taking back our sovereignty." I normally laugh that one away. A sheikh in Saudi Arabia decides to stick two fingers up to America, and increases production of oil to drive down the price. America endures it because Russia is also suffering as a result, and it's a good way to slap Putin on the nose after Crimea. America then adds Iran into the equation, driving it further down after a slight recovery. Iran and Saudi Arabia engage in a p*ssing contest due to their historical dislike of one-another, and so the price bounced down again.

This fiasco will have cost the UK 120,000 jobs (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-36491937) by year-end and our oil and gas revenue for the country dropping to the worst it's been since 1969 (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524588/Statistics_of_government_revenues_from_UK_oil_and_ gas_production_May_2016.pdf):

Low oil prices in 2015-16 combined with continuing high levels of investment and
increasing amounts of decommissioning expenditure have resulted in
Government revenues declining to -£24 million, their lowest levels since records
began in 1968-69. In 2014-15, the figure was £2,150 million

So when a p*ssing contest like that cripples a major industry and hurts the country, I find it laughable when people start claiming Britain has any leverage in a global market. We don't, at least not in that one. Not even the EU as a whole does, and Norway's very offshore-oriented economy has been hurting harder than our's has.

Who honestly looks at the interconnected world we live in, and thinks, "boy, Britain sure is big enough to tell America, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Iran what to do in order to preserve its interests?"

[Psychosplodge]

Sovereignty isn't a laughing matter. It's not about an individual being able to pick out specific laws. It's about never having an essentially foreign court deciding if we can enforce our own laws. The example Mystery showed us yesterday iirc. Should never have gone before a foreign court.
It shouldn't say EU on our passports, driving licences, or registration plates yes minor but thin end of the wedge minor.

[grimmas]

Russia is about number 12 in the world economy list. We're 5th. I doubt anyone (including the USA) tells them what to do. Of course we don't have to tell anyone what to do it's about trading with on mutually beneficial terms, on which at the moment we are being told what to do and not necessarily to our benefit.

Of course whether or not we'd be no 5 without EU membership is very much up for debate.

We could just go for the French approach and just ignore EU mandates when we feel like it.

[CoffeeGrunt]

I don't understand how we can't anyway? If we can Veto them, at least? Health and Safety legislation is highly localised, and fishery laws clearly affect only some countries with fishable masses of water, so I don't understand how we're not able to decide our own laws anyway?

I'm not big on sovereignty. Must be because I'm a Scot. It doesn't do an awful lot.

[Haighus]

I don't get the arguments about fishing, it seems to be highly localised. Overall, Britain does well out of the fishing quotas, because we have a lot of coast. It is the areas that share waters with the continent that are hit hardest; on the other hand, the Atlantic side tends to do pretty well. Not to mention it is about sustainability- if too much gets fished, there isn't any fish left.

'Splodge, you keep mentioning how European law should not impact on British law, yet there are many examples of International laws that directly impact the UK. No one is talking about how the Geneva convention takes away from our Sovereignty, yet it technically does, as International tribunals can try British citizens for War crimes if they commit them, regardless of British law on the situation (it so happens that the two do line up, but if that wasn't the case, Brits could still be tried for such acts). You could argue that the Geneva convention is morally right and therefore it is ok, but we have agreed to all the EU laws too, so must've considered them right. I don't see how it is much different frankly.

[grimmas]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/15/brexit-working-class-sick-racist-eu-referendum

A nice little article on why the "Brexiters are stupid" line being taken by Middle class Remain supporters is counterproductive and on a wider scale is very much how the middle class left is driving the working classes away from Labour.

[Psychosplodge]

'Splodge, you keep mentioning how European law should not impact on British law, yet there are many examples of International laws that directly impact the UK. No one is talking about how the Geneva convention takes away from our Sovereignty, yet it technically does, as International tribunals can try British citizens for War crimes if they commit them, regardless of British law on the situation (it so happens that the two do line up, but if that wasn't the case, Brits could still be tried for such acts). You could argue that the Geneva convention is morally right and therefore it is ok, but we have agreed to all the EU laws too, so must've considered them right. I don't see how it is much different frankly.

Basically this from the first page of the thread. More specifically we should be able to remove our lawmakers at an election if we're unhappy with their performance, which we can't do by any stretch of the imagination in the EU.

Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. Generally, the courts cannot overrule its legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change.Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. Generally, the courts cannot overrule its legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change.

We saw what happened in the pacific theatre of WW2 when countries don't comply with the geneva convention. It makes sense to have a set of rules for warfare.

[Mr Mystery]

Yet we can still stop any EU law. With our Veto. Which cannot be stripped away. Because in order to do away with Vetoes (because, worst case scenario).....would require a vote where, surprise surprise, Vetoes could be played.

Just takes the one.

And I'm yet to have any EU law pointed out that has had a negative impact on the UK.

[Psychosplodge]

We don't have a magical all encompassing veto that we can use for everything. Some decisions are made on somesort of majority vote.

It doesn't matter It shouldn't exist. I'm sure if I was either a lawyer or had run directly up against one example would exist.

[Mr Mystery]

But they do exist. And we signed up for it. As a nation. Yep, even Maastricht. PM spoke for us, as he was authorised to do so.

So basically, nothing at all has ever been foisted upon us by 'barmy faceless unelected white British male hating Brussels Bureaucrats'. EVER. It's a lie. We as a country we inherently complicit in all this coming to be.

So the Leave campaign have to stop painting us as innocent, unassuming victims. We agreed to it. We ratified it. We voted for it.

It. Is. Democracy.

A given person not liking the result simply doesn't change that.

[Psychosplodge]

It's not like there was an anti EU party in the early 90s Mystery. The Tories were the closest and they took us into maastricht. I'm assuming they knew they'd lose a referendum hence not offering the public one, Labour did the same with Lisbon.

I still haven't seen any positive reasons to stay from remain, just end of the world if we leave. I mean if we reverse the issue would you honestly vote to join the current setup?

[Mr Mystery]

So what you're saying, is that the current state is the will of the people?

And that's now bad?

Who knows? Your question is inherently rhetorical, as we'd be in a totally different place as a country if we were joining now.

[Psychosplodge]

No. The people were never really offered an alternative.

[Mr Mystery]

Our elected representatives did their job - there's no compunction for a referendum, otherwise they'd never get anything done (would be nice though!).

And this is what bugs me about Leave (not you specifically, for clarity of the casual thread reader). All the EU stuff? We've already had our say, and got what we wanted the vast majority of the time.

So to me, it's akin to Labour, the current official opposition, demanding their constituencies leave the UK, because the Tories are in power.

[grimmas]

Actually there was never a vote so we don't know what the will of the people was (on membership of the EU the EEC was not the same thing). That's the point of the referendum to find out what the that will is. Like the one's that were performed in NI and Scotland lets actually find out what people actually want instead of trying to tell them what they think or doing what's in their best interests with out asking what they are.

[Psychosplodge]

When every party is pro EU saying the electorate had a choice is misleading

[grimmas]

So to me, it's akin to Labour, the current official opposition, demanding their constituencies leave the UK, because the Tories are in power.

Like the SNP?

[Mr Mystery]

Kind of. Ish.

SNP need to shush about another Scottish Referendum so soon - although if there is a Leave vote, I can see the sense in it - why be damned by Westminster if there's a chance you can rejoin.

'Splodge - Tories are traditionally Eurosceptic, so it's not entirely true to say there was only pro-EU parties.

But hey, I'm a socialist. I have no mainstream political party representative of my views. Corbyn is a massive step forward there though, as previously we had the choice of Tory, Diet-Tory or Full Strength Kick The Poor And Blame The Foreign Insanity Tory in the shape of UKIP.

So I know what it's like to be a put-out minority, politically speaking.

[Psychosplodge]

Tories are traditionally split. At least for as long as I can remember.

I'm a floating voter. tbh none of the parties really represent my views well at all.

[Mr Mystery]

But regardless. Nothing has been foisited or forced upon the UK by the EU. NOTHING.

Yet you won't find anyone in the various Leave campaigns prepared to admit that.

Theirs is something purely ideological - and ignores facts and risks completely.

[Denzark]

Yet we can still stop any EU law. With our Veto. Which cannot be stripped away. Because in order to do away with Vetoes (because, worst case scenario).....would require a vote where, surprise surprise, Vetoes could be played.

Just takes the one.

And I'm yet to have any EU law pointed out that has had a negative impact on the UK.

Umm... Repeated inabilities to deport convicted criminals from foreign countries because of article 8 of the ECHR?

Iraqi's making claims against the Armed forces using - you guessed it - ECHR - which were subsequently found to be vexatious and false, with the ambulance chasing solicitors representing them subsequently criticised heavily by the judge?

Arts imports licenses - VAT added due to EU.

EU trying to pass a directive ordering ports to use different suppliers for different services. Works in european super ports, complete mess in smaller UK ports.

End of Weekly recycling collections - EU landfill directive.


There are loads of examples almost too many to quote. And don't forget that the UK Government's own figure they have pushed out during the referendum as a 'fact' was that over 50% of UK law has some input from or been raised because of, EU law.

Lets not confuse EU 'law' as meaning just criminal law - it means statutory regulations.

[Psychosplodge]

I still think the problem with ECHR isn't the ECHR its the modern interpretation of it.
But again it shouldn't be being enforced by an EU court.

[Denzark]

Don't forget that pre-ECHR, people in the UK were not getting black-bagged like Stephen Fry in V for Vendetta. And they wouldn't be post-brexit.

[Morgrim]

https://www.buzzfeed.com/matthewchampion/brexit-flotilla

Yes, it's Buzzfeed, but the other news articles didn't have good pictures. The Leave and Remain campaigns engaging in naval warfare on the Thames! Using hoses and boarding actions and very loud megaphones!

[Kirsten]

I am not a fan of Geldof, but got to respect his stance on this.

and Farage claiming to be a fisherman's friend when he didn't bother voting on any of the EU fishing debates that occurred whilst he was an MEP...

[Psychosplodge]

Geldorf's an attention seeking tax dodging prick that'll do owt to get on TV.

[Kirsten]

certainly true, but he is completely right that the referendum isn't about him or people his age, it is about young people, and he did a video to encourage young people to vote that was pretty good.

[Mr Mystery]

Just heard from a reliable source (an Engineering friend of mine, and she's lovely) that....


Construction projects are starting to be put on hold now due to uncertainty with the Brexit vote. This is how recessions begin! Big big projects worth millions of pounds, think of all the people employed on those projects from the Engineers to the window fitters! Very, very worrying people

But of course, Gove said potential mass unemployment, deep recession are mere bumps in the road, and everything will workout just peachy. Because reasons.

[Psychosplodge]

London? Or somewhere that matters? :p

[Mr Mystery]

Well, so far as I'm aware, she works on Rigs and that - so not her industry specifically.

But we've seen before, when building dries up, the economy tanks.

Oh, and £100,000,0000,000 has been wiped off the stock market.

Go Brexit! Nothing can go wrong!

[Psychosplodge]

Deustche bank was contradicitng you yesterday. Basically no one actually knows.

[Mr Mystery]

Contradicting which part?

[Psychosplodge]

They apparently reckon the stock market will grow on Brexit.

[Mr Mystery]

£100,000,000,000 losses in a matter of days suggests they're not right.

[Psychosplodge]

You've sneaked an extra 0 in there :D

[Cutter]

You've sneaked an extra 0 in there :D

Practically a banker.

[Mr Mystery]

You've sneaked an extra 0 in there :D

Cheers for the spot! Will correct before people think I'm doing a Faragove :p

[Psychosplodge]

Whats a factor of ten between friends? ;)

[Mr Mystery]

Erroneous? :p

Though as ever, hats off to all involved.

Highly contentious political thread, 38 pages in, no bannings or trouble, despite things getting heated.

Well done us. We may now qualify as grown-ups.

You big smelly poo.

[Psychosplodge]

:p
I'm assuming that's cause we all assume the other side(in the thread) is merely wrong not the spawn of satan incarnate?

[Mr Mystery]

Nah, I think you're a big smelly poopoohead :p

But seriously. Can't be many threads of such size on such matters which haven't devolved.

[Psychosplodge]

All that southern livings made you soft you numpty :p

I suppose it helps that there's only probably about twenty posters.

[Mr Mystery]

Even so, it's going well :)

[grimmas]

I hate you all 😜

On the stock market. It doesn't take much for that to change. I'm fairly sure it goes down more often than a premiership footballer. It also bollocks it's not even actual money just a notional idea of money. Though good use of Tabloid sensationalism "8 gazillions of pounds WIPED OUT!!!!!" 😉

It's alright though Remain are getting Gordon (f**ked the country) Brown and John (even Mystery's got to admit his comments in favour of the IRA are a bit dodgy) McDonnell to comment on the, possible, economic Armageddon arising from Brexit, it's almost as if they are actively trying to get me to vote against them.

[Mr Mystery]

Wasn't Gordon Brown - it was the American sub-prime market, and tabloid hysteria causing a quite possibly avoidable run on Northern Rock....

[grimmas]

He defo sold off all the gold at knock down prices way before that and he was the chancellor of the Exchequer it was his job to to stop/deal with it.

[Caedes]

He sold it at a time when gold was dropping in price, it is generally sensible if you have a large amount of your assets tied up in a depreciating commodity to diversify which is what he did. It is only with the benefit of hindsight that the decision looks bad.

[Psychosplodge]

Not really. Its a gold reserve for a reason. It's supposed to be there to prop up the currency isn't it?

It was shortermism to give him cash to waste.

[grimmas]

Well eveyone one else at the time seemed to think it was going to go up again, which it did, and they laughed all the way to the bank after taking it off his hands. Also you don't sell at the bottom if you don't have to and he didn't have to.

[Mr Mystery]

As opposed to the selling of the Post Office, Trains, Water, Lekky, Gas, Public Transport, Land Registry, public shares in banks....all of which we totally sold for top dollar, and not at all in dodgy deals to those terribly nice blokes one went to school with for a rock bottom price so they could make a quick buck?

[Psychosplodge]

I've literally seen a letter from Blunkett when he was an MP saying they would have had to sell the post office as well because the EU were insisting on it.

[Mr Mystery]

And the rest?

It's not the selling, it's the stupidly low prices they achieved...and no doubt tipped their friends off.....

[Psychosplodge]

Post Office, Trains, Water, Lekky, Gas, Public Transport, Land Registry
tbh I believe all of these should have been retained in public ownership

[Mr Mystery]

I'm dead against privatisation, as I'm sure is well documented here, but when it's sold for a song to make already wealthy folks a quick buck, it rankles even more.

I mean, how much worse off are we all for those privatisations? Look at trains. I live on the London/Hastings line. The only London/Hastings line. So where's the vaunted competition to ensure competitive prices? Oh, that's right. There isn't one.

Brighton-London, Zones 1-5? Annual Season Ticket is £3,764.00.

Tunbridge Wells-London, Zones 1-5? £4044.00.....

£340 more, for a journey half the sodding distance.....and by the time the train gets to T Wells, it's already rammed.

That's.....that's not competition. That's 'ha ha, rubes! We've gotcha by the short and curlies, and can charge you whatever we damned well please, because there's nowt you can do about it! MWahahahahahahA!'. I'm lucky the Coach is a practical alternative.

[grimmas]

tbh I believe all of these should have been retained in public ownership

So do I. But let's not forget many were sold off after the Labour Government of the late 70s really messed up the country (3 day week, power shortages and the like) it's why it took so long for Labour to get back in (as new Labour ). The state we were in was absolutely dire we'd become a global joke (even Argentina fancied a pop) and that was emergency stations time.

Also Lady Thatcher RIP isn't making much comment on the EU referendum.

[Mr Mystery]

No, it was Neo-liberal Thatcherite idiot greed.

What are they going to sell next, that what worries me!

[grimmas]

No, it was Neo-liberal Thatcherite idiot greed.

What are they going to sell next, that what worries me!

We're not going to agree on the first part.

I'm with you on the second though, they're lining up the emergency services next. Using anything available to discredit them wherever possible, to line up for a G4S takeover who are quite clearly incompetent (but very close to the home Secretary)

[Caedes]

I would have a look at these two links
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5788dbac-7680-11e0-b05b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz4BkXNzMWv
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2008/03/gold_and_gordon_brown.html
The money was used to invest in other currencies, in fact since the BBC article was written the shortfall between the increased value of gold and the value of the currencies purchased has gone down to 2Billion. That calculation is neglecting the devaluation caused by dumping gold on the market of course which would mean that that much gold is never worth the market price for gold.

[Psychosplodge]

copy and paste the FT one its behind a paywall

[Mr Mystery]

We're not going to agree on the first part.

I'm with you on the second though, they're lining up the emergency services next. Using anything available to discredit them wherever possible, to line up for a G4S takeover who are quite clearly incompetent (but very close to the home Secretary)

Yup.

All about lining their own pockets, and those of their chums.

Take the Land Registry - why privatise that? What was the rationale? What's the justification? Same with everything else.

Public transport especially. Again, I'll use trains. I used to work in Tunbridge Wells, and had around £200-£300 a month disposable income, on a salary of £13,200. First train ticket for a month? £432.... So even though I was taking up a far better paid job (£22,000 to start), had it not been for my parents coughing up, I'd still be stuck at a level not far above economic inactivity.

Those prices trap people where they are, particularly if they've been out of work for a while - imagine having been on the dole following redundancy, and not being able to afford to look beyond walking distance, because you'll be a month without money? It's lunacy.

Nationalise it again, and any potential losses can be offset by greater workforce mobility, helping to ensure a more competitive work market for companies, and a wider pool of jobs for those looking, not to mention generally increased tax revenues and a reduced benefits bill, because people have a far better chance of finding a job, regardless of whether it's well paying or not.

As a result of Mum and Dad helping me, I'm now earning a little over triple my former wage....I pay more in council tax, benefitting my local economy. I have more disposable income (around £600 a month, after all bills, including luxuries like broadband and that). As I tend to spend locally, that also helps my local area. I also pay far, far more in Tax and N&I. I also have private medical care through work, so if I do go a bit wonky, I won't have to burden the NHS (and I'm all for that!). In short, I'm more than ever a net giver to the country.

Privatisation = madness. The ultimate in short term gains. The second you do it, you're just whacking a profit margin on the service, driving prices up, and forcing too many to struggle to pay their necessary bills. Water? I pay for in. I pay for out. Two different companies, and I have no choice in who they are. Energy? Quick to pass on rising costs of wholesale/production, pretty much never pass on cuts to the same. They act as if they're contractually entitled to a certain level of profit.

Just.......eurgh.

- - - Updated - - -

And it all just got incredibly serious (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/jo-cox-shooting-man-who-shot-labour-mp-shouted-britain-first-says-eyewitness-a7085656.html)

Jo Cox, Labour MP for Batley & Spen has been shot and stabbed. It's been reported that the attacker shouted 'Britain First' as they attacked.

My blood is boiling. Do you see what happens when you focus a campaign on outright lies about immigration?

[Psychosplodge]

I'm surprised a 60-70 year old had heard of them, aren't they just a fb group?

[Asymmetrical Xeno]

holy sh1t thats terrible, the poor woman :(

[Mr Mystery]

52 year old has been arrested.

Almost certainly a Biffer if they're that age but look waaaaay older.

Of course, the phrase and the 'political party' are two different things.

[Caedes]

Surely this lays bare the extraordinary foolishness of Gordon Brown’s announcement, 12 years ago this week, that the UK Treasury would sell off some of Britain’s gold holdings?
Actually, no. On this one occasion, Mr Brown’s decision was the right one. Let speculators go gambling on a shiny metal, if they want to. For most governments in rich countries, holding gold remains a largely pointless activity.

With hindsight, of course, Mr Brown could have gained a better price by waiting. At current rates, the $3.5bn the UK received selling bullion between 1999 and 2002 would have been closer to $19bn. The difference at current exchange rates, by the way, would be enough to cover a little over three weeks of the UK’s expected public deficit for the fiscal year 2010-2011 – not negligible, but hardly pivotal.
Mr Brown, his critics say, must be kicking himself. Similarly, the French no doubt still suffer sleepless nights for prematurely taking profit on their Louisiana claim by offloading it to Thomas Jefferson in 1803. And had I put my life savings on Ballabriggs at 20-1 before last month’s Grand National, I’d be writing this on a solid platinum laptop while being sprayed with pink champagne in my new beachfront villa in Barbados.
That is the way of things with speculative assets. The truth is that no one has a good explanation why the gold price is currently where it is. The familiar story – a hedge against inflation or government insolvency – is flatly contradicted by the low yields and inflation expectations in US Treasury bonds. The volatility of gold (and other precious metals – witness the huge drop in silver prices this week) merely underlines the risk of holding it. The $1,500 landmark is a nominal price: had governments listened to the bullion fanatics and loaded up on gold in the last big bull market in the early 1980s, they would still be waiting to earn their money back in real terms.
More substantively, criticism of Mr Brown’s sale also betrays a misunderstanding of why a country such as the UK has gold at all.
In common with most rich nations, the function of British foreign exchange reserves is not for the government to manage wealth on behalf of the country. British citizens do that themselves. The UK does not have a sovereign wealth fund that aims to maximise returns, and nor should it. It is not a big net oil and gas exporter such as Norway – UK net foreign exchange reserves are about $40bn, equivalent to 2 per cent of nominal gross domestic product, while Norway’s sovereign fund has $525bn, equivalent to almost 140 per cent of its GDP.
Nor does the UK pile up foreign assets by persistently selling its own currency to manipulate the exchange rate, as does China. It is notable that the much-vaunted official purchases of gold over the past year are mainly by countries such as China and Russia – and, to a lesser extent, Mexico – with big excess reserves.
UK reserves are there mainly for precautionary reasons – to intervene in currency markets to stop a run on sterling or to pursue monetary policy objectives. Yet gold is badly suited for this task because, despite recent interest from private investors, a large proportion of global above-ground stocks – 18 per cent in 2010 – is still held by governments.
Any attempt to sell off large amounts quickly risks driving down the world price, which is what happened after Mr Brown’s announcement in 1999, leading to an international agreement between central banks to restrict further sales.
A precautionary reserve asset held for intervention purposes whose price is likely to fall the instant it is used to intervene is singularly pointless. Of course, central banks selling into a rising market like today’s may not have the same impact as in 1999, but who knows what demand for gold will be like if and when the intervention is needed?
There remains only one other main reason for governments to hold gold – to set monetary policy by linking the national currency to the gold price. This remains as bad an idea as ever. It would have meant sharply tightening monetary policy since the fall of 2008. This would have been madness.
Private investors, and sovereign wealth funds out to make returns, can punt their money on what they like. If they choose to plonk it down on the blackjack table of the commodity markets, that is their decision. But there is no good reason that governments that hold reserves for purely precautionary purposes should feel the need to follow them.

FT article text by Alan Beattie

[grimmas]

Well if these companies can run services for such a nice profit the government should be able to do it and maintain it as a revenue stream.

[Mr Mystery]

So why sell them in the first place?

Ah yes. Political ideology and making a quick buck over, y'know....common sense.

[Psychosplodge]

its an interesting idea Cades, But I think the final paragraph of the BBC one is relevant




But the stewards of our wealth would surely try to learn from their mistakes. And, in this case, Gordon Brown’s error was probably to place too low a premium on gold’s bothersome habit of retaining its intrinsic value over the very long term.

[Kirsten]

well Britain First are a fascist hate group, wannabe paramilitaries posing as a political party. violence by them, or inspired by them, was inevitable.

[grimmas]

So why sell them in the first place?

Ah yes. Political ideology and making a quick buck over, y'know....common sense.

Because they weren't at the time all these thing were being paid for from public money they weren't even self sustaining let alone making a profit the NCB was another. And the country was in no shape to make them work we were close to done. Unfortunately they'd been mismanaged to such a point they were a liability, have a look at Greece for what happens when it doesn't get sorted.

I do think now that we can make it work though, older and wiser and all that but not if we just do the same thing.

[Mr Mystery]

You mean the early-to-mid-90's?

K.

[grimmas]

Well labour didn't reverse it so....

(And it all started way before that)

Although we are in agreement on what we'd like to happen though.

[Caedes]

its an interesting idea Cades, But I think the final paragraph of the BBC one is relevant

Personally I agree with the point made in Alan Beattie's article, for wealthy governments speculating on gold is a gamble and one that rarely pays off. Having a diverse portfolio to mitigate against potential future runs on a currency is IMO much more sensible. If you look at this particular topic from a more partisan POV then it is ripe for misunderstanding and political point scoring, which is exactly what happened in the press.

[Psychosplodge]

Such is the nature of our press.

[Denzark]

Why not wait until we see if he meant 'Britain First' the internet right wing group, 'Britain First' in the context of brexit or 'Britain First' in some other real or imagine slight to the country. Or, 'Britain First' because he couldn't find his tin hat when he woke up.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Sadly the MP has died, as I'm sure you all know. The exact motive of the perpetrator is still being discerned at this time. It was a very specific target, so who knows what the perpetrator was thinking? Scary that they had access to a gun, though. :S

As far as privatisation, it's a toughie. If done properly it can be a real boon, but it has to be done with the aim of establishing a competitive market that drives industry and ultimately provides a better service. The current privatisation of space travel in the US is probably the best example, with NASA now contracting launches out to private companies, who compete to win launches for satellites and ISS resupplies using their own designs.

In that example, it means that NASA no longer has to worry about launching of assets into space and can allow others to handle it, using their resources. They can then consolidate funding onto pushing the boundaries of space travel, and leave the day-to-day regular work to companies that can make it work. Hence Blue Origins, ULA and most notably, SpaceX growing to fill the void with a host of options that are already driving down the price of putting objects into orbit, creating what might arguably be a second space race. Stuff like reusing rockets to put materiel into orbit more cheaply is the sort of thing only a dedicated company could achieve - NASA managed the shuttle, but in the end the cost of turnaround meant that it failed in that endeavour.

The problem is that our public transport has only token levels of competition, and the selling off on NHS assets has pretty much none. Once a company is handed the contract, they have it, it's done. I'm not sure if there's annual reviews and rebidding, but there should be. Other companies should be able to provide the service, and if they do it better, they should take over. That's how you leverage capitalism for the benefit of the customer.

But we simply aren't doing it properly, and to be fair, it doesn't seem to work most of the time - just look at the US healthcare system as an example of well-established privatised healthcare that doesn't seem to deliver.

Also Mystery, if your friend on the rigs is referring to rig construction projects being cancelled, or other offshore stuff, that'll be the oil prices not Brexit that's pushing that. They just nosedived $6 down to $46 dollars again after a steady recovery, and the industry's fearing the upcoming winter.

[Kirsten]

the murderer had far right ties to a pro apartheid group, and an american neo **** group from whom he apparently acquired a manual on making your own gun.

[Mr Mystery]

Also Mystery, if your friend on the rigs is referring to rig construction projects being cancelled, or other offshore stuff, that'll be the oil prices not Brexit that's pushing that. They just nosedived $6 down to $46 dollars again after a steady recovery, and the industry's fearing the upcoming winter.

Nope. Big building projects in general. She followed up to say she's now aware of at least 3 major construction jobs canned and two engineers laid off due to Brexit.

Wonder how many builders and others involved in projects now have to look elsewhere for work?

All because we're looking at thumbing our nose at Europe due to lies and made-up propaganda.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Nope. Big building projects in general. She followed up to say she's now aware of at least 3 major construction jobs canned and two engineers laid off due to Brexit.

Wonder how many builders and others involved in projects now have to look elsewhere for work?

All because we're looking at thumbing our nose at Europe due to lies and made-up propaganda.

I think you'll find all those honest, hard-working Brits are losing their jobs BECUZ OF THE IMMIGRUNTS MATE! :P

[Mr Mystery]

Fascist :p

[CoffeeGrunt]

Fascist :p

Hag (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbWbwD2nQvg)! :P

[CoffeeGrunt]

Pretty great teardown of the utter debacle BrExit has been, and the circus the media has turned it into. Strong language, but this video manages to nail a few truths to the whole thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGC5S3ag1q0

Overall, I'm really unsure about the whole thing, and am probably still leaning towards Remain.

[Denzark]

German Foreign Minister criticises NATO. One of my problems with Remain's integrity is the downplaying of the role of NATO in providing security for the EU. And now this German seems to think Poland can't hold exercises within its own borders.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36566422

[CoffeeGrunt]

When you dig into it, surprisingly little is actually a part of the EU. I've even read some sources claiming that the free trade isn't an aspect of the EU membership either and is negotiable in a manner similar to Norway.

Again, it would be fantastic to have a proper media dedicated to disseminating information in an unbiased manner, but that just isn't the modern-day press, is it?

[Haighus]

Including the ECHR, which was created pre-EU, and from it's founding had a European court system designed to give oversight to signatory nations in order to ensure there were no breaches of the convention, and to punish those that do. Leaving the EU won't change that, unless we specifically opt out of it.

[Psychosplodge]

German Foreign Minister criticises NATO. One of my problems with Remain's integrity is the downplaying of the role of NATO in providing security for the EU. And now this German seems to think Poland can't hold exercises within its own borders.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36566422

It's surprising how the "official" line seems to have become "the EU has kept the peace for the last half a century" When NATO was doing it before the EU existed.

[Mr Mystery]

When you dig into it, surprisingly little is actually a part of the EU. I've even read some sources claiming that the free trade isn't an aspect of the EU membership either and is negotiable in a manner similar to Norway.

Again, it would be fantastic to have a proper media dedicated to disseminating information in an unbiased manner, but that just isn't the modern-day press, is it?

Free Market is, but kind of isn't.

If you're an EU member, you get access. Hooray and huzzah!

Norway? Isn't an EU member, but has access to the Free Market.....by paying into Europe the same way we do, but have absolutely no say in what goes on.

Gross over-simplification of course, but from that jumping off point - why would we want to follow Norway's example, as it solves none of the issue Leave keep harping on about (basically, Foreigners, TOOK YR JURRRRB!)

[CoffeeGrunt]

To be fair though, Norway pays an order of magnitude less into the EU than we do. Norway pays 447M Euro per year, (http://www.eu-norway.org/eu/Financial-contribution/#.V2erbPkrKM8) on average, compared to our £55M - 71M Euro - a day figure (https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/), pre-rebates, etc.

Granted, Norwegians don't get the same rights on voting for stuff (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/27/norway-eu-reality-uk-voters-seduced-by-norwegian-model), so their approach does solve the, "take our country back," approach and arguably makes things worse in that regard, but it does save a f*cktonne of money.

[Mr Mystery]

Still leaves us in the lurch with no say. And considering Leave claim the EU is undemocratic (it isn't, as it turns out), seems a stupendously stupid arrangement - same trade deals, no say, still paying in.

[Psychosplodge]

You're stretching the term democratic if you accept it applies the the EU.

[CoffeeGrunt]

There's still a fair argument that it moves democracy an extra step away from the people. In the UK, you have 64M people represented by 650 MPs, so one per 100,000, more-or-less. For the EU, you have half a billion people represented by 751, so one per 666,666 people.

We can see the internal problem in the UK where a power can be voted in as winners with only 1/3rd of the country actually wanting them, and the EU exacerbates this by a factor of seven. The problem is more to do with the fact that as you try and preside over a larger population, the percentages that don't agree with you become larger and larger. If it were scaled up to a world parliament, you'd need the population of a small town in representatives to cover everything, which would be a diplomatic nightmare. Even then, you could have a billion people left in the lurch due to those small percentages.

A very good example someone pointed out to me is the Tampon Tax. The EU has blocked the UK's attempt to remove its luxury product tax status for the last year, though it is now allowing us to do so (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35834142). That's a fairly strong point that negatively affects a lot of people here, (half the population.) It wasn't malice, just incompetence that meant women had to pay more for an essential sanitary product. It does beg the question of whether we'd see such a change if the Referendum wasn't happening, but that's the cynic in me speaking.

Either way, I find myself starting to consider the Leave argument the more I look into the actual facts presented.

[Psychosplodge]

That's ignoring the commission voting process where the likes of Luxembourg (about 500k people?) have equal weighting to the UK.

[Mr Mystery]

Europe is an imperfect beast - I don't think anyone is claiming otherwise.

But we can play a hand in reforming it, and we absolutely should play a hand in reforming it.

The Referendum has shaken Europe up somewhat. If reports are to be believed, other countries (including France, whom if you believe the Daily Mail runs Europe entirely in partnership with Germany for only their own benefit. Which is nonsense and bunkum) are also making moves to demand reformation or departure.

As I said at the beginning - better to be at the table complaining about the menu, than rifling through the bins for scraps.

Now, let's tear down a recent myth from Leave. That of Fishermen.

THE EU IS INTRACTABLE!

Or indeed, not as the case turns out (http://www.fishfight.net/)

OUR QUOTAS ARE UNFAIR!

UK Fishermen have a larger per-capita quote than other European countries, and it's Westminster that's responsible for doling them out. If your quota is too small, it's not Europe that's at fault!

FOREIGN FISHERMEN FISH OUR WATERS!

Yes they do. Because the UK sold some of our quota to them. Again, issue is Westminster, not the EU.

FARAGE IS ON OUR SIDE!

No he's not. He's a political opportunist. He voted against banning discards. So please do try again on that count. He no more cares for you than Little Pablo from Brazil cares about you.

[Psychosplodge]

But due to various vetos, voting blocks, and competing ideologies it is literally impossible to reform.
The EU pro-federalists won't take a close vote to remain as a warning to reform, they'll take it as a sign of weakness.

[Mr Mystery]

And who are these mysterious pro-federalists?

And you are aware we're exempt from a Federal Europe? We're about as close as can be to having our cake and eating it on that count - so again Leaving makes little sense in the face of facts.

Had Leave started off with a truthful campaign with frank facts, rather than deliberately misleading, outright lying and courting the far-right bigot, we'd have a far more informed referendum. As it stands, it's 90% ARRRGH, DARKIES!, which in this day and age is pretty pathetic. And that's tarnished the Leave campaign somewhat. Look at Farage's poster, which he claims is 'the truth' (when it isn't. At all).

Leave has allowed the focus to be hijacked from legitimate concerns, to conflating refugees with illegal immigration, and legal immigration with criminals. It's a shoddy campaign run by shady characters.

[Psychosplodge]

Its not mysterious though at all is it? Juncker is openly pro-federalist. The german politicians appear largely pro federalist.
And in reality how much will that exemption actually work? If they're making rules to support a federal EU we will suffer more than being out.
The campaign has only been "arrgh darkies"(ironic considering the makeup of the EU) if you ignore the rest of it.

[Mr Mystery]

Yet 'Arrrgh Darkies!' is how the campaign is perceived, because that's been the focus of Das Daily Heil and Express etc.

[Kirsten]

there are no benefits to leaving. the Brexit campaign makes no sense at all, it is literally just 'let's all leave the EU, give up our free trade deals, and then negotiate some free trade deals. like the ones we just gave up...'

The economy will be worse off, we will still have to accept immigrants and EU laws in order to trade with them, leaving is totally, completely, pointless.

also John Oliver did a fantastic video about it
https://www.facebook.com/LastWeekTonight/?fref=nf

- - - Updated - - -


Yet 'Arrrgh Darkies!' is how the campaign is perceived, because that's been the focus of Das Daily Heil and Express etc.

not to mention Farage's outright Na zi propaganda poster.

[Psychosplodge]

The economy will be worse off, we will still have to accept immigrants and EU laws in order to trade with them,


I doubt south korea is doing either of those

[CoffeeGrunt]

Yet 'Arrrgh Darkies!' is how the campaign is perceived, because that's been the focus of Das Daily Heil and Express etc.

Except Leave has some valid points. You need to stop targeting who is making the argument and target the argument itself. It doesn't matter if Faraga, Gove, the Daily Mail and Express all support it, because they also support breathing, being alive, and a million other agreeable things. It's an ad hominem fallacy to disregard an argument because of who is making it, rather than the argument as it stands.

America isn't part of "the group," nor is Canada, or China, Russia, etc, but they're hardly, "digging through the bin for scraps."

[Mr Mystery]

USA is it's own Europe. Russia has vast resources, and exports Gas etc. Same with China.

What do we have?

As for the arguments - I'm sure there are - but Leave have buried them beneath cheap xenophobic rants and outright lies.

[Kirsten]

aside from anything else, the UK cannot be left to the Tory party to break up and sell off as they scrap worker rights, human rights, and any other rights they can.

[Psychosplodge]

The rights survived the tories of the eighties and nineties. Their majority is wafer thin. I don't think its a genuine threat.

[Kirsten]

tories are always a threat, there is no guarantee Labour will win the next election. and the UK sure as hell wont survive another five years of tories in charge, there wont be anything left.

[Psychosplodge]

There's no chance in hell labour will win the next election. They've alienated a massive chunk of their traditional working class voters. The odds are a lot of them will stay at home rather than vote tory though. So **** knows what will actually happen.
They may have attracted Nick Clegg's students with corbyn but I've heard so many middleaged lifelong labour voters say they won't vote for him. Its shocked me because you can literally field a 2"x4" with a red rosette round here.

[Kirsten]

too many Tory-Lite Labour MPs who refuse to rally around the party

[CoffeeGrunt]

Finally, an informed opinion from an expert who has spent 20 years teaching the operation of EU Law at the University of Liverpool weighs in with a very comprehensive opinion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USTypBKEd8Y

[Mr Mystery]

Apparently, 30-somethings like myself and younger aren't well represented in opinion polls.

Makes me wonder just likely a Leave vote is now, as it's suggested that broad age group is largely in support for Remain ?

[Psychosplodge]

Yet to meet anyone IRL above 30 that openly supports remain.

[Mr Mystery]

I know more than a few - again, I think I know no more than 10 people, yourselves included, who are in favour of Leave.

As mentioned before - perception bias is a sod!

[Psychosplodge]

Yep.
Said before it appears to me largely a North/South divide.

I wonder what demographic stats they'll give us to look at afterwards?

[Mr Mystery]

Is that before or after Farage, Das Heil, The Scum and The Express (one day I'll have a pithy name for that rag) have asploded in rage?

[Psychosplodge]

lols.
You're that confident?

[Mr Mystery]

Yup.

Much of the Leave campaign apparently 'don't recognise their country anymore', so will struggle to find their local polling booth, if they're even literate enough to have registered to vote :p

We saw similar 'to the knuckle' polls for the Scottish Referendum, yet Better Together scored a fairly decisive win of 55% of the vote.

And for this one, Polls apparently point to London being predominantly Remain - which is a fair old chunk of the population right off the bat at a little over 10%. Add in the home counties where Leave isn't as dominant as they'd like...I'm confident it'll be a Remain.

[Psychosplodge]

*shrugs*
We'll see come friday. Do we have an estimated result time?

[Mr Mystery]

Coco-time in Dectober?

Bookies seems to reckon Remain is a 72% chance now.

[Al Shut]

Europe is an imperfect beast - I don't think anyone is claiming otherwise.

But we can play a hand in reforming it, and we absolutely should play a hand in reforming it.

I wouldn't hold my breath. With the threat of a Brexit of the table the UK will loose a lot of leverage in any reform negotiations. Whatever promies Cameron got earlier is all the Uk will get

[Mr Mystery]

I doubt it to be honest.

The whole Brexit debacle has seemingly highlighted desire for EU reform elsewhere. Increased Federalisation doesn't bother me in the slightest, but if others in Europe are against it, who knows what will eventually happen?

[Psychosplodge]

I doubt it'll take all summer/autumn to count :p

This (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/19/eu-referendum-result-polls-britain-europe) was first result when asking about the result declaration

[Path Walker]

Its the "Don't Know" voters what will decide it, and "Don't Knows", as we saw in the Scottish Independence Referendum, tend to stick with the status quo when it comes to it.

I'm quietly confident that the Remain vote will win. Leave has been painted as a pretty stupid choice (because for the vast majority of people, it would be) and there are only so many people out there willing to make a stupid choice for the sake of their own belligerence.

[Psychosplodge]

Mystery It is literally impossible to reform.
The only way anything is going to change is for someone to leave. The politicians will just carry on as before.

[Asymmetrical Xeno]

Personally I think revolution is the only way things will get better, preferably something akin to the icelandic revolution as I do not believe in violent revolutions. Sadly I doubt anything like that will happen.

[CoffeeGrunt]

I don't understand how reform is so impossible, and what reform are we looking for, exactly? We vote for our MEPs, they vote on our behalf, how is that any less democratic than Parliament?

I didn't vote to send Eurofighters into Syria.

I didn't vote on any aspect of this year's budget.

I didn't vote for tighter criteria on disabled people.

In a nusthell, we don't get to vote for an awful lot in Britain, so I don't understand how the EU is worse than that? It doesn't help that a third of the EU MEPs voted in are Eurosceptic (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28107633), which feels somewhat like hiring vegans to work at McDonalds.

[eldargal]

Farage is whining that the Leave campaign had the momentum until Jo cox was murdered. Well gosh, who would have thought that running a xenophobic nationalist campaign consisting of lies and dogwhistling could turn out to to have negative consequences? Christ, its almost like there is a ****ing reason we as a society started frowning on that kind of thing...

[Mr Mystery]

I don't understand how reform is so impossible, and what reform are we looking for, exactly? We vote for our MEPs, they vote on our behalf, how is that any less democratic than Parliament?

I didn't vote to send Eurofighters into Syria.

I didn't vote on any aspect of this year's budget.

I didn't vote for tighter criteria on disabled people.

In a nusthell, we don't get to vote for an awful lot in Britain, so I don't understand how the EU is worse than that? It doesn't help that a third of the EU MEPs voted in are Eurosceptic (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28107633), which feels somewhat like hiring vegans to work at McDonalds.

I think it is important we have Eurosceptic MEPs, as otherwise we risk blind 'yes-men'. However, that ceases at UKIPs door, as they only get in to raid the gravy train by maxing their expenses, and refuse to partake in any meaningful manner.

I mean, just look at the wankers....

https://stevehynd.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/ukip.jpg

Though not quite as funny as Paul Golding of Britain First at the London Mayor outcome, natch.

[Denzark]

So, in other news: Will Straw is caught out wanting to use the death of Joe Cox to 'Remain's' advantage. The tape of this if you can be arsed, is on Guido Fawkes website.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/20/leader-of-pro-eu-campaign-accused-of-morally-unacceptable-plot-t/

The Times- which has come out for Europe, headlines with Baroness Warsi defecting from Leave to Remain. Except if you read a lot of press, a MEP called Daniel Hannan asked her to join the Leave campaign and she declined - so it is not actually clear what she defected from.

Both side are disingenuous, but you can tell when Osborne at short notice threatens 2% on low rate tax and 5% on high rate that they are literally sh*tting bricks about this. Luckily Comrade Corbyn and 65-odd rebel Tories have said they won't vote such a budget through. Oh and Cameron saying it will affect pensions because he knows the older generation loathe the EU - probably because it was not what was voted for when they joined the EEC way back when.

[Psychosplodge]

I don't understand how reform is so impossible


Because you need a majority or no one with a veto to change things, and the countries that receive funds or are more pro federal EU hold that majority. The only thing we can do is dig our heels in and make further integration more difficult.

[Mr Mystery]

Yet we have exemption from further integration, so I'm not sure there's an issue there?

[Psychosplodge]

Because we're not going to get any reform either though are we? And even the remain supporters are publicly talking about the EU being broken and the need for reform.

[Mr Mystery]

Yet that's not an uncommon feeling within EU member states.

With any luck, an avoided Brexit will highlight that desire, bringing the issue to the fore.

[Psychosplodge]

Unless other countries start electing more eurosceptics nothing will change.

[CoffeeGrunt]

The myth about being forced to accept the Euro and become the United States of Europe is a slippery slope fallacy. That's not what thursday is about, nor is it what we're voting for at that point in time. It's about whether the EU, as it stands, is more beneficial to be in than out.

With every expert I can find saying In, that's the direction I'm going in. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Psychosplodge]

We know that the other major players effectively want a USE. That's pretty undisputed.
We know we have supposed safe guards in place to stop us being forced into - but that doesn't mean we wouldn't suffer as a result of further integration by the others.
It's still about sovereignty more than anything for me. And the only way to secure that is to leave, plus Osbourne promised me 20% cheaper houses.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Gunna direct you to the University of Liverpool video in reply to that statement on British Sovereignty:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQanMs2Pskc

[Psychosplodge]

Yeah the laptop speakers at work aren't gonna let me hear that even if I had the bandwidth for it.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Look it up when you get home. Surely this vote is worth 25 minutes of your time?

[Psychosplodge]

It is. But I'm pretty past the point of changing my mind. There is no way I could bring myself to vote remain. The best (from a remainers POV) he could manage is convince me not to vote at all.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Blind dogmatism isn't the foundation of a sound decision, is it?

[Psychosplodge]

There's so much wrong with the EU on a fundamental level that will never change CG.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Like what, though? From what I gather, you dislike the bureaucracy and dislike the lack of sovereignty, both of which are issues which have been blown out of all proportion repeatedly. You have no faith in reforms, but haven't said what reforms you'd like.

It really saddens me that this entire campaign will be decided by kneejerk reaction and "gut feeling" rather than what is actually best for everyone. :/

[Psychosplodge]

I have zero faith in politicians generally.

Its simply too many people, with too many agendas and too many directions. Its starting to resemble the Administratum.
It really needs dialling back to more resting on the individual nations. I can't see them doing anything for our benefit if we stay, and as Alric? said that's it then the threat of Brexit is off the table and we've marginalised ourselves.

[CoffeeGrunt]

It's also kinda unavoidable. We have to prescribe to international standards, like it or not, and our industry benefits from the CE standard, guaranteeing the ability for it to be sold in any EU country. That ability is vital, so long as your product complies with CE, it'll comply with national legislation. No need to produce different products for different countries.

It's something that's being put into place globally in pretty much every field. So that kind of bureaucracy will continue unabashed.

The EU is apparently stealing our sovereignty, but I've never seen anyone complain about the Wassenaar Arrangement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wassenaar_Arrangement), which dictates our Export and Import protocols from a governing, international body, and also decides what countries we are allowed to export to, and what we are not. It also requires paperwork for items transferred within a set time or the assets are seized, and the exporter is banned for a set time.

For example, my job involves shipping equipment that is basically an civilian evolution of WWII-era sub-hunting acoustic monitoring gear, and so there is a long list of countries we are not allowed to export to under any circumstances. The ones we are allowed to export to, required a six month process of securing the Open Individual Export License for every particular piece of equipment that met the criteria.

Has nothing to do with the EU, and is far more restrictive.

Everyone quotes about the EU dictating everything, but when an auditor inspects your facility they'll be doing it to the ISO Standards (http://www.iso.org/iso/home.html), who govern standards for everything from health and safety to food safety, etc, etc. These standards are stringently adhered-to, expensive to hire auditors for, and essential for any industrial or commercial business of any significant size.

Again. Has nothing to do with the EU, and is far more restrictive.

Everyone's talking about restrictive EU bureaucracy, and seemingly forgetful or ignorant of the hundred other international bodies that actually do restrict the operation of businesses, (though for good reason.)

You want to avoid multinational governance? You're living in the wrong century. The world only works because everything is tied together by treaties, standards and laws dictating what standards equipment must be used to, because otherwise international trade would be impossible.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Not to mention that if you watch the Liverpool Uni vid, he points out the fact that our law to a fundamental level references EU legislation, and Parliament passed acts to allow judges to reference it, (because otherwise it could be thrown out the court as not being British law.)

This has evolved to the point where, if we did leave the EU, we would lose all these laws to "regain our sovereignty." This process would involve a requirement to rewrite all the laws to fill in the gaps, amend loopholes, and anything else that could be exploited.

It would also need to be done immediately, because the courts never stop. Therefore it would be fasttracked without parliamentary input and certainly with no civilian vote. A massive rewrite of our entire justice system with not a single person voting on it in any capacity? Yeah, taking back our democracy!

And the person in the video - a professor of Law with a career of 20 years who specialised in EU Law in their PhD - claims that the most optimistic government estimate places this process as taking two years. Two years of a half-written justice system? Yeah, that'll really let us take control of our laws, and not hand cases over to whoever paid the best lawyer to exploit all the new loopholes!

And that's the most optimistic. His estimate was ten years based on studies he put his current class through, who were asked to review the rewrite to the Law as their project, (because if it happens, they'll be the ones doing it.)

Not to mention that, if we did want back in the EU, we'd need to go for the Swiss approach, (because the Norwegian approach removes sovereignty without any vote to protect yourself.) This means we will have to negotiate everything, one-by-one, a process that results in a hilarious number of specific agreements (https://www.eda.admin.ch/content/dam/dea/de/documents/publikationen_dea/accords-liste_de.pdf) and is still in progress decades later. Hardly trimming down on bureaucracy.

The most eye-opening thing the Uni of Liverpool vid shows? Well, you know how everyone thinks there is no extensive study into exactly how much the EU influences British business, and how much money in brings in? Well, there is. It's called the UK-EU Balance of Competences (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/final-reports-in-review-of-eu-balance-of-competences-published), and is the most extensive survey ever conducted in the history of the British Government. It is f*cking massive. It covers everything.

But we haven't heard about this at all? Why is that? Why does it take an independent professor of law to point out to the populace that this resource - which allows us to fully measure EU interference - even exists? Lords claim the Tories buried it (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/28/lords-accuse-tories-burying-eu-powers-review), but it's an accusation I won't put too much stock in.

Biggets review in British history of our EU relationship, and it hasn't been brought up once this year on the news, isn't advertised at all, and well, not a single politician I've heard has cited it.

Isn't that strange?

[Psychosplodge]

That's exactly the situation that should never have been allowed to occur.
Leaving would also appear to make his position somewhat redundant wouldn't it?
It is surprising that the report you cite wasn't more widely referenced though. Especially among the pro-EU MPs.

[CoffeeGrunt]

That's exactly the situation that should never have been allowed to occur.
Leaving would also appear to make his position somewhat redundant wouldn't it?
It is surprising that the report you cite wasn't more widely referenced though. Especially among the pro-EU MPs.

His situation as a Professor of Law? Hardly. Especially since he's very knowledgeable of all the laws we'd have to replace, and exactly in what manner we'd need to do so. Not to mention training students to work overseas is useful, hence why so many Universities in the UK offer American Law courses. Dude might actually benefit if we left the EU.

[Psychosplodge]

True. There is that.
I'm sure we'd manage. It's not like English law has ever struggled to make it up as we went along.

[Mr Mystery]

But it's the 'who' rather than the 'how' of replacement laws that worry me.

Gove and Jonson? No. Thank. You. Don't trust them. Don't like them. Don't respect them.

Again, it harks back to Gove saying he considers EU Employment Laws to be 'excessive', but refusing to say what exactly he means, or exactly which parts. Seeing the pig's ear he made of education whilst in charge of that, I don't want that slavering little toad anywhere near laws intended to protect me as an employee.

[Denzark]

Leaving the EU has risk associated. It absolutely does. But people need to consider risk versus reward. Walking away from something that has a negative effect on you is not small minded. Not taking risk is small minded.

The EU is like being in your family home. And then having someone you faintly know from somewhere, who lives miles away, in a different town, tell you how you can run some aspects of your home. And then tell you where you can do your shopping. And then try and get you to let a stranger live in your home. And take some extra of your saving away and spend them on a vanity project in town next door to theirs that you have never been to.

Its ridiculous.

Safety from War? NATO.

Security from terrorism? Well France and Belgium are big EU supporters, ask them how that went.

Economy? Their chosen currency and surrounding economics is pish because one size doesn't fit all.

The economic experts voting 'remain'? Yes, I know them well. Every single one identified the 2008 crash and put mitigation in place. Oh hang on, no they didn't. So why can their forecasts of doom be relied upon now?

Why did George Osborne only inside the last fortnight of campaigning tell us tax would need to rise if we leave - surely that is obvious with his financial omniscience and forethought?

Why did Cameron tell pensioners in the last fortnight (not before) their pensions would be eroded - threat much?

And supposedly the 'British people' in yet another poll, said they would respect the opinion of someone they could trust - that well known political commentator, genius level intellect and leading light in international diplomacy - of course I mean David Beckham.

David Beckham, the latest endorser of Remain. He's such a nice man and looks good in his y-fronts, he even named his son after where he was conceived.

I despair of the British public but people are worried about being bandied as 'quitters' (David Cameron speech) or 'racists'. I can only hope that in the same way people don't like to tell pollsters they are tory voters for fear of being branded as 'snobs' or some such classist crap, that they're not telling them they want to get out, and we have a surprise out vote.

It is better to have tried and failed than to never have tried at all, we should see life outside the EU and look after ourselves first.

[Mr Mystery]

I completely disagree with your final point.

This isn't a game. This is really incredibly important.

As CG linked to, most of your issues aren't issues. I'm far from convinced being in the EU has anything like a negative impact on me.


The EU is like being in your family home. And then having someone you faintly know from somewhere, who lives miles away, in a different town, tell you how you can run some aspects of your home.

So, like being in Wales or Scotland, and being told what do from Westminster? Or being outside the Home Counties and London, being told what to do by Westminster?

It all falls apart I'm afraid.

Economic Experts - forgive me if I feel they have a far better handle on such things than say, Farage, Gove, Jonson et al, who have offered only bluster and nonsense when asked such questions.

As for Leave being branded racist - as covered before, the level minds in that camp have been utterly drowned out by a focus on xenophobia, bigotry, flag waving and nationalist nonsense. That's not Remain's doing. I mean, you have seen the frontpage of the Leave press even before things got rolling with the referendum? You....you did actually see UKIP's poster yeah? Because if not, here's a copy for you...

http://www.edp24.co.uk/polopoly_fs/1.4580739.1466080499!/image/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_630/image.jpg

It's not even an accurate portrayal of EU migration. And every time someone on Leave tries to discuss facts, St Nigel of I'mnotaracistbut opens his chinless gob and spouts forth yet more incorrect bile.

As for Migration? To be in the EU, after our (guaranteed) rebate? £12.9 Billion, according to the Beeb.

Office for National Statistics claim migrants contribute £25 Billion to the economy....sounds like profit to me. So not convinced migration is at all a concern.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Yes, I know them well. Every single one identified the 2008 crash and put mitigation in place. Oh hang on, no they didn't. So why can their forecasts of doom be relied upon now?

Gunna need proof that the ones saying that BrExit will cause a UK recession are the exact same people that failed to predict the previous recession, otherwise it's an utterly irrelevant point that boils down to, "I will never, ever trust economists because this one time they were wrong."


The EU is like being in your family home. And then having someone you faintly know from somewhere, who lives miles away, in a different town, tell you how you can run some aspects of your home. And then tell you where you can do your shopping. And then try and get you to let a stranger live in your home. And take some extra of your saving away and spend them on a vanity project in town next door to theirs that you have never been to.

Funny that, because in a home you'd need planning permission from the local council, as well as inspection by certified gas and electrical bodies to ensure any such work you did was safe. You often need the permission before you undertake any work, and if you don't get it? Bad luck. Not to mention having to abide by certain regulations, preventing you from working noisily at certain hours, or building in a way that obscures the sun for others. There's also the demand to hire in certified individuals to undertake the work. So you definitely do get a body telling you how to run some aspects of your home as it is, for the benefit of yourself and others around you.

The "stranger living in your house" is a silly analogy, not even close to how immigration works. Should've used a 'neighbour moves in next door' analogy, really, but then that isn't as scary, is it? I forgot, sorry, fear is what the opposition is using...

The last point is basically Tax.

If it's better to have tried and failed than never tried, then please Denzark, go put your house, your savings and your possessions on England to win the Euros. Payout's pretty hefty. Who dares wins, right? Better to have tried and failed, right?

[Psychosplodge]

Considering one side has appears to have about a 50% chance of labelling you racist if you support the other it would hardly be surprising the polls aren't showing much.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Can we please have the discussion move to pointing out why we're voting for our respective sides rather than sh*t-smearing and accusation towards the other side?

[Psychosplodge]

The Euro financial work you mentioned earlier in the thread that would be lost.

The ECB is already trying to force onto the continent

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36581659

- - - Updated - - -


Can we please have the discussion move to pointing out why we're voting for our respective sides rather than sh*t-smearing and accusation towards the other side?

That was more a reflection of the why the polls might be showing a fifty fifty split, like why the remain vote in Scotland was under estimated - because the nationalists "publicly shamed" people. It wasn't intended as an outright attack.

[Mr Mystery]

Read some stuff online...

Seems Leave reckon it would 'free up businesses from EU redtape'.

Except surely, if we want to continue to trade with the EU, we'll have to meet the same safety standards, yes? Doesn't that mean we wouldn't be 'freed up from EU redtape'?

[CoffeeGrunt]

The Euro financial work you mentioned earlier in the thread that would be lost.

The ECB is already trying to force onto the continent

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36581659

Uhuh, and the European Court of Justice blocked the move. So London carried on as usual.

[Psychosplodge]

for now.

[CoffeeGrunt]

That's not how courts work, though. You can't just keep trying the same case over and over again until you get the result you want.

[Psychosplodge]

Didn't they do away with double jeopardy?

[CoffeeGrunt]

Double Jeopardy was with regards to the court trying a person of a crime, and was removed because cases needed to be reopened in the event of new evidence. Doesn't pertain to this instance because there's no evidence and no-one being prosecuted.

Plus double jeopardy was specifically removed from British law.

[Psychosplodge]

I thought it was to stop them reopening without new evidence?

Based on Lisbon/Ireland I'd expect them to carry on till they get the answer they want.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Doesn't mean it'll actually happen.

[Psychosplodge]

We're all going to do what we believe is best. And due to the farce that is democracy* the most popular will win.

*Unless you all want me to be a benign dictator, democracy with a constitutional monarch seems the least worst system

[Morgrim]

Considering the whole world is gradually becoming more globalised, and the initial idea of the European Union was to tie the continent together so that they would never kick off yet another world spanning war, I'm finding the vigorous objection to integration weird from an outsider's perspective. I thought the point was to unite into a global superpower, since the planet has progressed to the point that no individual nation within the Eurozone has a hope of regaining that position due to sheer lack of people and size and resources. Individual European nations are tinsy tiny little things that can be driven across in a day, and when european nations were superpowers they were huge globe-spanning things with the actual bit in Europe-proper just being the capital.

I mean, Britain's only got two shots at returning to power, and that's as part of Europe or by somehow convincing the Commonwealth to integrate more tightly. And given both Australia and New Zealand are making increasingly republican noises, that's not going to happen. (No idea on Canada. Nobody is suicidal enough to suggest that to India. Any other large players I'm missing?)

[Denzark]

I completely disagree with your final point.

This isn't a game. This is really incredibly important.

I entirely agree. The point being that arguing for the status quo and trying to claim you can reform despite all evidence to the contrary - it is worth the risk - especially if you don't believe the doom saying - I don't - coupled with a decision that I would need to be worse off £500 per month take home guaranteed before I even considered voting remain for economic reasons.

As CG linked to, most of your issues aren't issues. I'm far from convinced being in the EU has anything like a negative impact on me.

That's your opinion.


So, like being in Wales or Scotland, and being told what do from Westminster? Or being outside the Home Counties and London, being told what to do by Westminster?

Actually for the first time I can sympathise with the jocks who wanted out. I now understand how they could prize independence above all else. There is key differences though. Firstly, Scotland joined by an Act of Union, after which Scotland had its massive debts paid off. The UK joined the EEC which then expanded into something completely different. Scotland gets far more out of being in the UK than vice versa. Whereas the EU benefits far more from us being in. I place the country above most else in political/power terms. Scottish citizens - and Welsh and Ulstermen, can rest assured that the politicians in Westminster, can be found on ballot cards somewhere within that national boundary. No UK citizen can say that about MEPs from outside the UK - so there are great swarthes of those over whom there is not recourse or redress.

Economic Experts - forgive me if I feel they have a far better handle on such things than say, Farage, Gove, Jonson et al, who have offered only bluster and nonsense when asked such questions.

Every side can trot out a pet expert. I believe very few of them. But when a billionaire like Dyson says it can be done, I tend to respect that.

As for Leave being branded racist -


As for Migration? To be in the EU, after our (guaranteed) rebate? £12.9 Billion, according to the Beeb.

Office for National Statistics claim migrants contribute £25 Billion to the economy....sounds like profit to me. So not convinced migration is at all a concern.

Migration may not be a concern to you. My home county is Norfolk. When wages amongst low paid workers are depressed by cheap foreign labour, where school class sizes go up disproportionately, same with doctors lists, same with dentists list, it hits harder than in urban areas. Its not racist to think so. I saw a well written piece today that pointed out its not the well paid professors, MPs, economists etc - who can afford private healthcare and whose kids may go to private schools - who need to be concerned about that. Certainly irrespective of result David Cameron and his lovely and incredibly wealthy missus will be OK - except for the small vote of no confidence coming his way.


Can we please have the discussion move to pointing out why we're voting for our respective sides rather than sh*t-smearing and accusation towards the other side?

An entirely reasonable question, so in no particular order here goes.

1. To ensure that the only people in the business of making UK law and government policy, reside within those national borders, so they can be held to account by the citizens and laws of the people within those national borders.

2. Because unrestricted migration from the EU increases risk and outright threat to infrastructure (NHS, financial, housing, welfare) and national security - especially when the plan is for Turkey to join, and they have porous borders with Arabic countries. NB the FCO website actually states they have consular offices in Ankara and loads of smaller Turkish cities working towards them joining the EU.

3. Because EU countries have a proven track record of disregarding EU law to their advantage and our disadvantage. Examples: When British beef was declared safe post-mad cow disease, the French refused to import it in contravention of EU law. Spain ignores freedom of movement at Gibraltar borders and allows Algerciras to pump raw sewage in the vicinity of Gibraltar.

4. There are numerous examples of convicted criminals using the ECHR to avoid deportment. The latest I read about today in the DT.

5. Because I have seen repeated comments/interviews with EU MEPs who want greater integration. We cannot guarantee that in the future, who France/Germany sends to Strasbourg, won't work even harder for it, as per point 1.

6. Because doing so would allow us to focus on meaningful political and economic relationships elsewhere. I don't consider the threats of economic disruption to be an impediment - because take the German car industry. They import 20% of their goods here. They don't want their government or the EU to jeopardise that sort of market share in a fit of petulance.

7. Because of all the threats from remain supporters - I don't do relationships based on fear and coercion.

8. Because I like Europe and even some Europeans - I don't like the undemocratic byzantine EU.

9. Because the EU plan for finances is based on the Euro - 1-size doesn't fit all financially and the Euro is not as good a currency as the Pound. They have no financial credibility.

10. Because the poorer EU nations get disproportionately more money from the richer EU nations and I disagree with sending the money there.

11. I never want to bail out the PIGS countries.

There's probably more but thats scratching the surface.

[Psychosplodge]

I mean, Britain's only got two shots at returning to power

Did you not know Morgrim? The invasion of france is planned for Saturday.

[grimmas]

Did you not know Morgrim? The invasion of france is planned for Saturday.

Didn't you get the memo? It's Argentina they've been ask for it after all 😉

[Psychosplodge]

I thought they were the week after?

[Psychosplodge]

I'm genuinely surprised to see the Germans commenting in this manner

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36596060