The EU Referendum - Thursday 23 June (with voting poll)

by **Dolphin Ziggler** Thu 25 Feb 2016, 8:02 pm

Now it is official (and some guy with a green admin name has ruined the other thread) I shall put this here for you to discuss the referendum.

by **ShahenshahG** Thu 25 Feb 2016, 8:05 pm

Does out mean I won't be able to bring over weed with impunity?

by TRUSSMAN66 Thu 25 Feb 2016, 8:55 pm

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Now it is official (and some guy with a green admin name has ruined the other thread) I shall put this here for you to discuss the referendum.

He only called you an idiot.........I get called that when someone is complimenting me..

by **Dolphin Ziggler** Thu 25 Feb 2016, 9:08 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Now it is official (and some guy with a green admin name has ruined the other thread) I shall put this here for you to discuss the referendum.

He only called you an idiot.........I get called that when someone is complimenting me..

The guy with the green admin name is me, Truss. I shot, locked and ran, like my mentor taught me. But I really do want you lot to be able to have a chat without me ruining it and this is the place for it

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 26 Feb 2016, 9:04 am

Can I veto the use of the word 'Brexit'?

(Actually, I can - I can put it in the swear word filter and auto-change it to 'EU exit')

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 26 Feb 2016, 9:06 am

Brexit

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 26 Feb 2016, 9:13 am

Try that again, smart guy.

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 26 Feb 2016, 9:17 am

EU Exit

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 26 Feb 2016, 9:18 am

Give Julius anything I.T related and he breksit

by **navyblueshorts** Fri 26 Feb 2016, 9:33 am

ShahenshahG wrote:Give Julius anything I.T related and he breksit

by Adam D Fri 26 Feb 2016, 10:11 am

I thought it was short for bed &I breakfast bedsit. Everyday is a school day.

by Duty281 Thu 03 Mar 2016, 7:26 am

https://twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/status/705074311657291776

Not the brightest thing to say if you're backing 'Remain'!

by TopHat24/7 Thu 03 Mar 2016, 9:34 am

Can't even tell what forum that was or who was speaking.

Paying stupid people more money to do a worse job indeed is "not neccessarily a good thing".

But yes, let's go back to ripping off old grannies again, that's a great idea.

by Mad for Chelsea Thu 03 Mar 2016, 10:31 am

the problem the "Remain" camp face with their campaign is perfectly encapsulated by this morning's arguments over the Calais camp/border. When the French Interior minister says the Le Touquet agreement would likely be torn up if the UK leaves it's dismissed as "scaremongering", and that is their easy response to any argument for the UK remaining.

Advantages the UK get out of the EU could all be kept outside the EU.
Any bad things that could ensue won't, that's just "project fear".

The thing is, I'm yet to see any sort of plan for what our relationship would be to the EU were we to leave. It would be nice if those backing the "Leave" campaign could outline what they think would actually be the scenario in this case.

by TopHat24/7 Thu 03 Mar 2016, 10:40 am

The French would never tear up the Le Touquet agreement though, in reality, or at least not in a way that would move 'the Jungle' to Dover which indeed is scaremongering.

French gov't are the largest shareholder and biggest beneficiary in/from Eurotunnel so they'll do nothing that threatens its existance. The UK could go back to being an island and, whilst painful, the French would suffer more.

The Leave campaign can't say what the system would be post-EU because nobody has any actual idea. DC is roundly slated for the poor deal he's just negotiated - why would folk believe we'd suddenly get some stunning deal if we left?

This whole thing is remarkably similar to the Scottish referendum. I, for one, hope it goes the same way.

by Duty281 Thu 03 Mar 2016, 11:08 am

Mad for Chelsea wrote:the problem the "Remain" camp face with their campaign is perfectly encapsulated by this morning's arguments over the Calais camp/border. When the French Interior minister says the Le Touquet agreement would likely be torn up if the UK leaves it's dismissed as "scaremongering", and that is their easy response to any argument for the UK remaining.

Advantages the UK get out of the EU could all be kept outside the EU.
Any bad things that could ensue won't, that's just "project fear".

The thing is, I'm yet to see any sort of plan for what our relationship would be to the EU were we to leave. It would be nice if those backing the "Leave" campaign could outline what they think would actually be the scenario in this case.

A lot of the arguments put forward by the 'Remain' side are simply scaremongering (the UK would lose its influence; 3 million jobs lost; trade will collapse) - complete falsehoods spread like a virus. The leaders in charge of this absolute facade, Britain Stronger in Europe, are already seen as complete charlatans by a good deal of people - one reason, of many, for why the UK will be voting to Leave this decaying political union on 23rd June.

Our relationship with the EU upon exiting will be one of free-trade, not political union. Vietnam managed to sign one a few months ago, I'm sure Britannia could manage as well.

by TopHat24/7 Thu 03 Mar 2016, 11:24 am

Duty281 wrote:
Mad for Chelsea wrote:the problem the "Remain" camp face with their campaign is perfectly encapsulated by this morning's arguments over the Calais camp/border. When the French Interior minister says the Le Touquet agreement would likely be torn up if the UK leaves it's dismissed as "scaremongering", and that is their easy response to any argument for the UK remaining.

Advantages the UK get out of the EU could all be kept outside the EU.
Any bad things that could ensue won't, that's just "project fear".

The thing is, I'm yet to see any sort of plan for what our relationship would be to the EU were we to leave. It would be nice if those backing the "Leave" campaign could outline what they think would actually be the scenario in this case.

A lot of the arguments put forward by the 'Remain' side are simply scaremongering (the UK would lose its influence; 3 million jobs lost; trade will collapse) - complete falsehoods spread like a virus. The leaders in charge of this absolute facade, Britain Stronger in Europe, are already seen as complete charlatans by a good deal of people - one reason, of many, for why the UK will be voting to Leave this decaying political union on 23rd June.

Our relationship with the EU upon exiting will be one of free-trade, not political union. Vietnam managed to sign one a few months ago, I'm sure Britannia could manage as well.

Complete pontification and postulation.

by Duty281 Thu 03 Mar 2016, 11:34 am

TopHat24/7 wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Mad for Chelsea wrote:the problem the "Remain" camp face with their campaign is perfectly encapsulated by this morning's arguments over the Calais camp/border. When the French Interior minister says the Le Touquet agreement would likely be torn up if the UK leaves it's dismissed as "scaremongering", and that is their easy response to any argument for the UK remaining.

Advantages the UK get out of the EU could all be kept outside the EU.
Any bad things that could ensue won't, that's just "project fear".

The thing is, I'm yet to see any sort of plan for what our relationship would be to the EU were we to leave. It would be nice if those backing the "Leave" campaign could outline what they think would actually be the scenario in this case.

A lot of the arguments put forward by the 'Remain' side are simply scaremongering (the UK would lose its influence; 3 million jobs lost; trade will collapse) - complete falsehoods spread like a virus. The leaders in charge of this absolute facade, Britain Stronger in Europe, are already seen as complete charlatans by a good deal of people - one reason, of many, for why the UK will be voting to Leave this decaying political union on 23rd June.

Our relationship with the EU upon exiting will be one of free-trade, not political union. Vietnam managed to sign one a few months ago, I'm sure Britannia could manage as well.

Complete pontification and postulation.

The Lisbon Treaty is clear that, upon a member state leaving the Union: "the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union."

It is in our interests, and the interests of the EU, to have a free-trade arrangement. Our negotiating foothold is also stronger than theirs.

by **Pr4wn** Thu 03 Mar 2016, 11:40 am

It really isn't. They're way bigger than us, we're net importers from them and they may well negotiate hard to tempt our precious financial institutions to relocate there.

by Mad for Chelsea Thu 03 Mar 2016, 11:41 am

How long did it take Vietnam to set up and sign the free-trade treaty? Is it as advantageous as the UK's current one with the (rest of the) EU?

General statements are great, but when I say "plan" I was hoping for something a bit more specific than "we'll have a trade treaty", followed by the usual bluster that "they need us more than we need them" (they really don't).

Also, what about movement of people? Presumably we're not going to require EU citizens to get a visa to travel to the UK, since they would reciprocate in kind? To take a personal example, UK Universities currently employ a lot of research staff from the EU - my team has in it an Irishman, an Icelandic, a Swede, a Franco-British dual national, a Russian and a Brit. What happens to the EU staff? Do they have to go through all the annoying administrative procedures to work and live in the UK? (and they are annoying, ask the Russian bloke!) Do we think this will continue to attract top researchers?

by Mad for Chelsea Thu 03 Mar 2016, 11:41 am

Pr4wn wrote:It really isn't. They're way bigger than us, we're net importers from them and they may well negotiate hard to tempt our precious financial institutions to relocate there.

and to discourage others from leaving...

by TopHat24/7 Thu 03 Mar 2016, 11:43 am

Duty281 wrote:
TopHat24/7 wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Mad for Chelsea wrote:the problem the "Remain" camp face with their campaign is perfectly encapsulated by this morning's arguments over the Calais camp/border. When the French Interior minister says the Le Touquet agreement would likely be torn up if the UK leaves it's dismissed as "scaremongering", and that is their easy response to any argument for the UK remaining.

Advantages the UK get out of the EU could all be kept outside the EU.
Any bad things that could ensue won't, that's just "project fear".

The thing is, I'm yet to see any sort of plan for what our relationship would be to the EU were we to leave. It would be nice if those backing the "Leave" campaign could outline what they think would actually be the scenario in this case.

A lot of the arguments put forward by the 'Remain' side are simply scaremongering (the UK would lose its influence; 3 million jobs lost; trade will collapse) - complete falsehoods spread like a virus. The leaders in charge of this absolute facade, Britain Stronger in Europe, are already seen as complete charlatans by a good deal of people - one reason, of many, for why the UK will be voting to Leave this decaying political union on 23rd June.

Our relationship with the EU upon exiting will be one of free-trade, not political union. Vietnam managed to sign one a few months ago, I'm sure Britannia could manage as well.

Complete pontification and postulation.

The Lisbon Treaty is clear that, upon a member state leaving the Union: "the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union."

It is in our interests, and the interests of the EU, to have a free-trade arrangement. Our negotiating foothold is also stronger than theirs.

Give an example where this has been successful?

You can't because EU exit would be new ground. Would will still be party to the Lisbon Treaty is we left the EU? How? If not what would be our recourse if EU states played hard-ball? We've decided we don't want the EU Courts to oversee such matters anymore, if we leave.

Again, it's the same as Scots Ref, taking a punt on what you think you can get outside/on your own. THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES OR CERTAINTY. To suggest otherwise is pure bullsh!t.

by TopHat24/7 Thu 03 Mar 2016, 11:46 am

Pr4wn wrote:It really isn't. They're way bigger than us, we're net importers from them and they may well negotiate hard to tempt our precious financial institutions to relocate there.

Made me laugh when that French idiot said that recently. Why the hell would Brit based bankers up sticks and leave for a collection of states that have done nothing but attack them and want their bonuses capped, the profitability shot by a robin hood tax and want their higher earnings robbed.

London has been booming on the back of all the successful Parisians coming over here due to the ridiculous socialist policies enacted - that isn't going to be reversed.

If they leave London, presuming the importance of GMT remains, they won't be going near the EU!!

by Mad for Chelsea Thu 03 Mar 2016, 12:34 pm

I'll answer the first of my own questions re the Vietnam treaty on how long it took. Negotiations started in June 2012, and were concluded in December 2015, so two and a half years of negotiations. The treaty itself by the way has not yet been signed or ratified, only a declaration on the agreement reached in December 2015 has been signed.

It's expected with "cautious optimism" that the treaty will be signed and ratified in 2017, and become effective in 2018. That's right, about six years from the beginning of negotiations to the treaty becoming actually effective...

http://www.vietnam-briefing.com/news/update-euvietnam-free-trade-agreement-discussions.html/

by Duty281 Thu 03 Mar 2016, 12:50 pm

Mad for Chelsea wrote:How long did it take Vietnam to set up and sign the free-trade treaty? Is it as advantageous as the UK's current one with the (rest of the) EU?

General statements are great, but when I say "plan" I was hoping for something a bit more specific than "we'll have a trade treaty", followed by the usual bluster that "they need us more than we need them" (they really don't).

Also, what about movement of people? Presumably we're not going to require EU citizens to get a visa to travel to the UK, since they would reciprocate in kind? To take a personal example, UK Universities currently employ a lot of research staff from the EU - my team has in it an Irishman, an Icelandic, a Swede, a Franco-British dual national, a Russian and a Brit. What happens to the EU staff? Do they have to go through all the annoying administrative procedures to work and live in the UK? (and they are annoying, ask the Russian bloke!) Do we think this will continue to attract top researchers?

The Vietnam comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, a poke at those who talk this nation down at every turn. It's irrelevant how long it took, because the UK and the EU have a two-year time-frame in which to reach a deal. And I imagine, somehow, the UK will hold greater priority.

You said 'relationship', and that is what our relationship will be.

The free movement of people would end and this country could implement a fair immigration policy across the board. I imagine that EU citizens would require the same documentation as non-EU citizens presently require (with the obvious exception of Ireland).

Will this continue to attract top researchers? Well, I don't imagine it puts them off from working in countries such as China, the USA or Japan.

by Duty281 Thu 03 Mar 2016, 12:54 pm

TopHat24/7 wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
TopHat24/7 wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Mad for Chelsea wrote:the problem the "Remain" camp face with their campaign is perfectly encapsulated by this morning's arguments over the Calais camp/border. When the French Interior minister says the Le Touquet agreement would likely be torn up if the UK leaves it's dismissed as "scaremongering", and that is their easy response to any argument for the UK remaining.

Advantages the UK get out of the EU could all be kept outside the EU.
Any bad things that could ensue won't, that's just "project fear".

The thing is, I'm yet to see any sort of plan for what our relationship would be to the EU were we to leave. It would be nice if those backing the "Leave" campaign could outline what they think would actually be the scenario in this case.

A lot of the arguments put forward by the 'Remain' side are simply scaremongering (the UK would lose its influence; 3 million jobs lost; trade will collapse) - complete falsehoods spread like a virus. The leaders in charge of this absolute facade, Britain Stronger in Europe, are already seen as complete charlatans by a good deal of people - one reason, of many, for why the UK will be voting to Leave this decaying political union on 23rd June.

Our relationship with the EU upon exiting will be one of free-trade, not political union. Vietnam managed to sign one a few months ago, I'm sure Britannia could manage as well.

Complete pontification and postulation.

The Lisbon Treaty is clear that, upon a member state leaving the Union: "the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union."

It is in our interests, and the interests of the EU, to have a free-trade arrangement. Our negotiating foothold is also stronger than theirs.

Give an example where this has been successful?

You can't because EU exit would be new ground. Would will still be party to the Lisbon Treaty is we left the EU? How? If not what would be our recourse if EU states played hard-ball? We've decided we don't want the EU Courts to oversee such matters anymore, if we leave.

Again, it's the same as Scots Ref, taking a punt on what you think you can get outside/on your own. THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES OR CERTAINTY. To suggest otherwise is pure bullsh!t.

THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES OR CERTAINTIES IN LIFE. EVER.

by **superflyweight** Thu 03 Mar 2016, 1:07 pm

Duty281 wrote:
TopHat24/7 wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
TopHat24/7 wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Mad for Chelsea wrote:the problem the "Remain" camp face with their campaign is perfectly encapsulated by this morning's arguments over the Calais camp/border. When the French Interior minister says the Le Touquet agreement would likely be torn up if the UK leaves it's dismissed as "scaremongering", and that is their easy response to any argument for the UK remaining.

Advantages the UK get out of the EU could all be kept outside the EU.
Any bad things that could ensue won't, that's just "project fear".

The thing is, I'm yet to see any sort of plan for what our relationship would be to the EU were we to leave. It would be nice if those backing the "Leave" campaign could outline what they think would actually be the scenario in this case.

A lot of the arguments put forward by the 'Remain' side are simply scaremongering (the UK would lose its influence; 3 million jobs lost; trade will collapse) - complete falsehoods spread like a virus. The leaders in charge of this absolute facade, Britain Stronger in Europe, are already seen as complete charlatans by a good deal of people - one reason, of many, for why the UK will be voting to Leave this decaying political union on 23rd June.

Our relationship with the EU upon exiting will be one of free-trade, not political union. Vietnam managed to sign one a few months ago, I'm sure Britannia could manage as well.

Complete pontification and postulation.

The Lisbon Treaty is clear that, upon a member state leaving the Union: "the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union."

It is in our interests, and the interests of the EU, to have a free-trade arrangement. Our negotiating foothold is also stronger than theirs.

Give an example where this has been successful?

You can't because EU exit would be new ground. Would will still be party to the Lisbon Treaty is we left the EU? How? If not what would be our recourse if EU states played hard-ball? We've decided we don't want the EU Courts to oversee such matters anymore, if we leave.

Again, it's the same as Scots Ref, taking a punt on what you think you can get outside/on your own. THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES OR CERTAINTY. To suggest otherwise is pure bullsh!t.

THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES OR CERTAINTIES IN LIFE. EVER.

But Toppy's point is a valid one and it's what ultimately led to Scotland voting No.

There are no guarantees or certainties but to expect people to change the status quo (when that status quo is relatively prosperous) is to misunderstand human nature. If you're going to make the argument for change then you need to show why that change would be beneficial and have specific quantifiable answers to the resulting questions. Without that, you end of up in a situation like the Yes campaign in Scotland and the Leave campaign now where you are just make sweeping statements that everything will be fine and any concerns to the contrary are just the result of scaremongering.

by Mad for Chelsea Thu 03 Mar 2016, 1:11 pm

Duty281 wrote:
The Vietnam comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, a poke at those who talk this nation down at every turn. It's irrelevant how long it took, because the UK and the EU have a two-year time-frame in which to reach a deal. And I imagine, somehow, the UK will hold greater priority.

It's not irrelevant if it takes six years to implement a deal, is it??

Duty281 wrote:
The free movement of people would end and this country could implement a fair immigration policy across the board. I imagine that EU citizens would require the same documentation as non-EU citizens presently require (with the obvious exception of Ireland).

So UK people will require a visa to travel to Europe? What about the expats already living there? Specifics Duty, not just a sweeping statement...

Duty281 wrote:
Will this continue to attract top researchers? Well, I don't imagine it puts them off from working in countries such as China, the USA or Japan.

There aren't (m)any top foreign researchers in China, certainly in Maths/Computer Science. Take a look at some of the bigger universities there, there'll be usually at most one mathematician from outside China, if that. It's a shame, because they have some top researchers, but the lack of openness to the rest of the world makes it hard for them to produce cutting-edge stuff.
The US has more (though significantly fewer than the UK or other EU countries proportion-wise), partly of course because they offer much better salaries.
Not sure about Japan, though a quick look at Tokyo University shows that there aren't very many at all (none in Maths that I can tell, though they had a couple of visiting profs from Europe back in 2014).

Like it or not, not having to jump through administrative hoops is a nice attraction for people who want to focus on their research (which they find quite interesting usually). We do quite enough hoop-jumping inside the university without wanting to do more just to get into a country...

by dyrewolfe Thu 03 Mar 2016, 4:16 pm

I'll be voting to leave...simply because I want Britain to be able to govern itself without interference from Brussels.

by aja424 Thu 03 Mar 2016, 4:50 pm

I will be voting out.

I have travelled Europe and would have probably preferred to have been born in Spain, Greece or Italy to be honest. But I guess being governed by our countries elite is bad enough without adding the 'Tim nice but dim'counterparts from the EU dropping in the odd bit of legislation in here and there.

by Corporalhumblebucket Thu 03 Mar 2016, 9:30 pm

It seems obvious to me that, were UK to leave EU, the remaining countries and the European Commission would want to strike a hard bargain with UK about the exit terms and subsequent arrangements and would be in no hurry to do deals. After all, it would be contrary to the EU's interests to make exit seem like an easy or beneficial process as that would simply serve to encourage the growth of euroscepticism across the EU and risk the progressive break up of the EU.

by guildfordbat Fri 04 Mar 2016, 9:25 am

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:It seems obvious to me that, were UK to leave EU, the remaining countries and the European Commission would want to strike a hard bargain with UK about the exit terms and subsequent arrangements and would be in no hurry to do deals. After all, it would be contrary to the EU's interests to make exit seem like an easy or beneficial process as that would simply serve to encourage the growth of euroscepticism across the EU and risk the progressive break up of the EU.

Morning, Corporal - I'm sure that's right. I'm not so sure though it's a right reason for staying.

by Corporalhumblebucket Fri 04 Mar 2016, 9:59 am

guildfordbat wrote:
Corporalhumblebucket wrote:It seems obvious to me that, were UK to leave EU, the remaining countries and the European Commission would want to strike a hard bargain with UK about the exit terms and subsequent arrangements and would be in no hurry to do deals. After all, it would be contrary to the EU's interests to make exit seem like an easy or beneficial process as that would simply serve to encourage the growth of euroscepticism across the EU and risk the progressive break up of the EU.

Morning, Corporal - I'm sure that's right. I'm not so sure though it's a right reason for staying.

Morning, Guildford. I agree that it's not a positive reason for staying. The point was meant more as a warning note for those in the "out" camp mounting the argument that it would be in the interests of the EU to reach a prompt deal with UK about future arrangements.

by guildfordbat Fri 04 Mar 2016, 10:40 am

Yes, Corporal. I buy that.

Meanwhile, a major weakness for me is that neither camp has made clear - or even commented upon as far as I'm aware - the impact of leaving the EC upon Kolpak players in the County Championship. A major concern in Lancashire, I would have thought. Smile

by Corporalhumblebucket Fri 04 Mar 2016, 11:04 am

guildfordbat wrote:Yes, Corporal. I buy that.

Meanwhile, a major weakness for me is that neither camp has made clear - or even commented upon as far as I'm aware - the impact of leaving the EC upon Kolpak players in the County Championship. A major concern in Lancashire, I would have thought.

Perhaps there would be "grandparenting" rights for existing Kolpaks. Whistle

by guildfordbat Fri 04 Mar 2016, 11:20 am

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:
guildfordbat wrote:Yes, Corporal. I buy that.

Meanwhile, a major weakness for me is that neither camp has made clear - or even commented upon as far as I'm aware - the impact of leaving the EC upon Kolpak players in the County Championship. A major concern in Lancashire, I would have thought.

Perhaps there would be "grandparenting" rights for existing Kolpaks.

by dyrewolfe Fri 04 Mar 2016, 12:14 pm

What exactly is a "Kolpak"? I've heard the term used before but have always been too lazy to look it up... Headscratch

Anyway, back on topic, I have to say I watched Question Time last night and feel I'm none the wiser as to the benefits or drawbacks of a Brex...EU exit. That said, we decided not to adopt the Euro and that turned out to be a good thing.

Feels like most general elections I've ever followed. You're never sure how much of what is said is fact and how much is scaremongering.

My gut says not much will change for practical purposes, as I think Europe needs us...and we need Europe to a certain extent. The only real changes will be that our political influence on our continental cousins will diminish...and more importantly we will be able to ignore any directives or laws from the European Parliament we don't agree with.

I think our trade ties are too strong to be as badly affected as the doomsayers are making out. I'm also pretty sure we will have to retain close political ties. We aren't suddenly going to stop talking to each other.

I'm sure we will have to make some concessions, but I don't see them hammering us too badly as, even outside the EU, Britain can still be a useful ally.

In a nutshell, I can't see there being any apocalyptic consequences of us leaving, due to our long history and mutual interests.

by dummy_half Fri 04 Mar 2016, 2:01 pm

Dyre

Kolpak players are those who can represent a British team without counting as overseas players on the strength of having parents / grandparents born within the EU. Applies for quite a few South African cricketers in particular, through having Dutch ancestry (and Shane Warne could also have played under the Kolpak rules)

The rest of your comment I think is probably right - voting to leave will probably have fewer impacts on our trade with the EU than the 'stay' campaign have suggested, but also bring fewer changes to our legislative position than the 'leave' campaign make out. Even if we leave the EU, I can't see that we will leave the CEN area (the CEN is the pan-European organisation that publishes product standards and test methods, so much of what is now published under British Standards - it is not part of the EU, contrary to what stories about straight bananas suggest).

Of course most of the issues with Britain in the EU come down to two main facts:
1 - A lot of exaggerated stories in the media
2 - That Britain is a stickler for the rules, and so interprets the EU Directives in a more onerous manner than many of the other member states.

by Guest Fri 04 Mar 2016, 2:06 pm

I'll look very carefully at both sides of the argument, weighing up both positives and negatives before voting the same way as Richard Littlejohn.

by Corporalhumblebucket Fri 04 Mar 2016, 2:17 pm

DAVE667 wrote:I'll look very carefully at both sides of the argument, weighing up both positives and negatives before voting the same way as Richard Littlejohn.

Hmm "Vote fruitcake" doesn't seem a very appealing slogan! Erm

by Guest Fri 04 Mar 2016, 2:32 pm

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:
DAVE667 wrote:I'll look very carefully at both sides of the argument, weighing up both positives and negatives before voting the same way as Richard Littlejohn.

Hmm "Vote fruitcake" doesn't seem a very appealing slogan!

But he cuts to the heart of the matter by having very clever cartoons in his articles which mean I don't even have to read all the words to get the gist of what he's probably going on about.

What I also intend to do is find an opinion I like (not overly concerned which side it favours) then mistake that opinion for fact then continue to spout this opinion/fact hybrid ad nauseum as if I know what I'm talking about. When I get a differing opinion, I shall walk off, wagging my finger saying "Ah well, you clearly don't understand the subject as well as I do therefore I shall tarry no more with you. Good day..."

by CaledonianCraig Fri 04 Mar 2016, 6:12 pm

TopHat24/7 wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
TopHat24/7 wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Mad for Chelsea wrote:the problem the "Remain" camp face with their campaign is perfectly encapsulated by this morning's arguments over the Calais camp/border. When the French Interior minister says the Le Touquet agreement would likely be torn up if the UK leaves it's dismissed as "scaremongering", and that is their easy response to any argument for the UK remaining.

Advantages the UK get out of the EU could all be kept outside the EU.
Any bad things that could ensue won't, that's just "project fear".

The thing is, I'm yet to see any sort of plan for what our relationship would be to the EU were we to leave. It would be nice if those backing the "Leave" campaign could outline what they think would actually be the scenario in this case.

A lot of the arguments put forward by the 'Remain' side are simply scaremongering (the UK would lose its influence; 3 million jobs lost; trade will collapse) - complete falsehoods spread like a virus. The leaders in charge of this absolute facade, Britain Stronger in Europe, are already seen as complete charlatans by a good deal of people - one reason, of many, for why the UK will be voting to Leave this decaying political union on 23rd June.

Our relationship with the EU upon exiting will be one of free-trade, not political union. Vietnam managed to sign one a few months ago, I'm sure Britannia could manage as well.

Complete pontification and postulation.

The Lisbon Treaty is clear that, upon a member state leaving the Union: "the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union."

It is in our interests, and the interests of the EU, to have a free-trade arrangement. Our negotiating foothold is also stronger than theirs.

Give an example where this has been successful?

You can't because EU exit would be new ground. Would will still be party to the Lisbon Treaty is we left the EU? How? If not what would be our recourse if EU states played hard-ball? We've decided we don't want the EU Courts to oversee such matters anymore, if we leave.

Again, it's the same as Scots Ref, taking a punt on what you think you can get outside/on your own. THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES OR CERTAINTY. To suggest otherwise is pure bullsh!t.

That depends though. Just because a situation stands where Britain is in the EU and Scotland is part of the UK does not mean that is nirvana. For example Britain were arguably more of a worldwide powerhouse industrially prior to joining the Common Market. It had homegrown car industry, electronics industry, ship building and coal mining - all gone now.

by Volcanicash Fri 04 Mar 2016, 7:35 pm

I recommend anyone on here to read Europe: IN OR OUT? By David Charter, europe correspondent of the times. In my view one of the most informative, impartial and balanced books on the eu there is. Easy to obtain for free at your public library.

I watched question time too and it does irritate a little when you hear audience members say they don’t have enough information etc, its like they need to be spoon fed every bit of information by the mainstream media, when there are plenty of ways to research information on the eu if you are really interested. (internet/google, etc)

I’m a definite leave voter but I am going to give the EU a tiny bit of credit. In general for me it has been more about democracy, and liberty more than economics.

But the thing is the EU has made steps at becoming more democratic. In the 2014 european elections every political group running nominated a candidate to represent them for the eu commission job.

They also had proposals for a europe wide election for eu president, a plan for 2 or 3 candidates to visit every single country and give the opportunity for voters to hear there views and have the opportunity to vote for them. Now the paradox with this is most national parliaments are against this as it would be seen to give them a more powerful mandate than they already have. Especially here in Britain where the argument again is mainly economics.

There is also the European citizen’s initiative, where you can petition the eu to consider proposals which could possibly be implemented. (you would need a million votes from 7 member states if you fancy giving it a try)

Now obviously these proposals have massive flaws and I don’t care for any of them but do have to give the eu a smidge of credit, as they are aware how undemocratic they are and at least considering ways of legitimising themselves democratically. And will any remainers publicise this in there campaigns? It remains to be seen.

And it has been our democratic governments from Heath to Cameron who have been instrumental in creating what the eu is, so either way we will be stuck with our inept democratic politicians no matter what the outcome.

It would also be interesting if we hear from Jonathan Hall (who?) from either side over the coming months. He's Britain's commision representative, a Lord, and former special advisor who noone has ever heard of yet has been hugely influential over the past 2 decades, so wouldn't it be nice for some form of media give an indepth analysis on who he is. Again unlikely.

Ultimately though if you vote to remain or leave, both sides carry uncertainty(apart from eu migration, remain its open border galore), security and prosperity, and neither side will be voting for the “status quo”(and that has nothing to do with Cameron's so called "reforms").

I’ll be voting to leave, whether we do in fact leave though, is another question.

by Duty281 Sat 05 Mar 2016, 7:18 am

Mad for Chelsea wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
The Vietnam comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, a poke at those who talk this nation down at every turn. It's irrelevant how long it took, because the UK and the EU have a two-year time-frame in which to reach a deal. And I imagine, somehow, the UK will hold greater priority.

It's not irrelevant if it takes six years to implement a deal, is it??

Duty281 wrote:
The free movement of people would end and this country could implement a fair immigration policy across the board. I imagine that EU citizens would require the same documentation as non-EU citizens presently require (with the obvious exception of Ireland).
So UK people will require a visa to travel to Europe? What about the expats already living there? Specifics Duty, not just a sweeping statement...

Duty281 wrote:
Will this continue to attract top researchers? Well, I don't imagine it puts them off from working in countries such as China, the USA or Japan.

There aren't (m)any top foreign researchers in China, certainly in Maths/Computer Science. Take a look at some of the bigger universities there, there'll be usually at most one mathematician from outside China, if that. It's a shame, because they have some top researchers, but the lack of openness to the rest of the world makes it hard for them to produce cutting-edge stuff.
The US has more (though significantly fewer than the UK or other EU countries proportion-wise), partly of course because they offer much better salaries.
Not sure about Japan, though a quick look at Tokyo University shows that there aren't very many at all (none in Maths that I can tell, though they had a couple of visiting profs from Europe back in 2014).

Like it or not, not having to jump through administrative hoops is a nice attraction for people who want to focus on their research (which they find quite interesting usually). We do quite enough hoop-jumping inside the university without wanting to do more just to get into a country...

1) But there will be a two-year limit on which the EU and the UK must reach an agreement, which makes it different to whatever Vietnam hammer out.

2) Yes; and the expats they will probably be required to apply for citizenship.

3) Twas a general point, referring to how researchers seem to be in plentiful supply outside the EU.

by Duty281 Sat 05 Mar 2016, 7:22 am

Volcanicash wrote:I recommend anyone on here to read Europe: IN OR OUT? By David Charter, europe correspondent of the times. In my view one of the most informative, impartial and balanced books on the eu there is. Easy to obtain for free at your public library.

I watched question time too and it does irritate a little when you hear audience members say they don’t have enough information etc, its like they need to be spoon fed every bit of information by the mainstream media, when there are plenty of ways to research information on the eu if you are really interested. (internet/google, etc)

Excellent recommendation.

And that is my greatest irritation of the referendum (so far) as well. thumbsup

by **Hero** Sat 05 Mar 2016, 8:49 am

The information is there most certainly, but in the same respect the main stream media headlines (to which a large sway of the population will only pay attention to) are purely driven by fear and negativity.

by Rowley Sat 05 Mar 2016, 9:05 am

guildfordbat wrote:Yes, Corporal. I buy that.

Meanwhile, a major weakness for me is that neither camp has made clear - or even commented upon as far as I'm aware - the impact of leaving the EC upon Kolpak players in the County Championship. A major concern in Lancashire, I would have thought.

I'm a Villa fan, if an exit means the glut of French players we have currently will be forced to return to their home country reserve me a place on the stage next to Farage and Galloway.

by **ShahenshahG** Sat 05 Mar 2016, 9:32 am

Still determined to get close and lamp Galloway one, Jazzy Jeff?

by Rowley Sat 05 Mar 2016, 9:37 am

We all have to have ambitions in life shah.

by CaledonianCraig Sat 05 Mar 2016, 3:40 pm

Yes I can see what you are saying superflyweight however that thinking has sizeable flaws and is decisions made by those petrified by change - the sort that think if they get three square meals at the end of the day and a bed to sleep in then everything is hunky dory. What must be remembered is that (in Scotland's case) there has been equally hard times as part of the union what with the shipbuilding industry now virtually no more and many mines closed down with many thousands of people losing jobs in those industries alone. There were the Thatcher years that wounded many Scots so turbulent times are not ruled out by staying in the union or is as now staying in Europe. On the Europe side of things though - at present I am undecided.

by Sponsored content

Will you vote Leave or Remain?