Jump to content

EU Membership??


Recommended Posts

I think there is a mis-understanding here on your part -

There would be absolutely nothing to stop a sovereign country - the UK - making any kind of trading agreement with the EU itself - is there ?   

And WHY would the UK wish to have any say in how remaining countries in the EU do business;  the countries remaining in the EU CANNOT decide for themselves 'how they do business' - the EU over-rides anything doesn't it ?

As for the comment 'not like Britain is a big producer of of what the rest of Europe wants' ..... really !!!!

How much of the UK trade with the EU goes through Rotterdam ?

The UK has links with the wider world;  the UK is trading more with the wider world than it is with the EU.

But how much of what the EU produces is exported to the UK;   I believe you'll find that the EU 'needs' our markets - and our money - more than the other way round.

Official figures show that the EU costs us, in hard physical cash - and in lots of other ways.   The UK would be better off out of the declining EU.....   check facts and figures.

The EU needs the UK more than we need the EU;   and TTIP will be a disaster for the UK - AND for the EU.

There would be nothing to stop the UK, a sovereign country, sixth biggest economy in the world -

MAKING IT'S OWN DEAL WITH THE USA - and leave TIPP to destroy the EU which it will do;  but the UK would NOT be involved in this takeover by the multi-nationals of state owned, state run public services.   You honestly think the TTIP will be good for the EU or the UK ?

If for no other reason than to protect the UK's NHS service - the UK should leave the EU......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 179
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well you all seem to assume that the EU would want to trade with the UK...The world has moved on since the 70s, and with the exception of financial services I can't think of anything that we produce that would be of much interest to Europe or the US for that matter, that they would be begging us for. I'm happy to be corrected on that..someone asked me the other day what the UK produced, and most big companies I could think of are owned by Chinese corporations or multi nationals. Now why would these companies want to remain in the UK without the EU? The financial centre would also move, most likely to Frankfurt.

As far as I understood it the TTIP was initiated by the USA, who want better and more favourable access to European markets. Why would that be any different if Britain was out of the EU? The only difference as far as I can see is that we would have no say in the negotiations and have to go along with whatever was decided.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="lindal1000"]t

As far as I understood it the TTIP was initiated by the USA, who want better and more favourable access to European markets. Why would that be any different if Britain was out of the EU? The only difference as far as I can see is that we would have no say in the negotiations and have to go along with whatever was decided.[/quote]

That is also the case if the UK was part of EFTA and wished to continue to trade with the EU, it would still be bound by all the EU regulations with absolutely no say in what these were or how they were applied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Thibault"][quote user="lindal1000"]t

As far as I understood it the TTIP was initiated by the USA, who want better and more favourable access to European markets. Why would that be any different if Britain was out of the EU? The only difference as far as I can see is that we would have no say in the negotiations and have to go along with whatever was decided.[/quote]

That is also the case if the UK was part of EFTA and wished to continue to trade with the EU, it would still be bound by all the EU regulations with absolutely no say in what these were or how they were applied.[/quote]

And part of being in EFTA means that we would end up making similar sized EU contributions to those that we make now, so I have been led to believe. With no input as to how they are used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Thibault"]

As far as I understood it the TTIP was initiated by the USA, who want better and more favourable access to European markets.[/quote]

YES, most convenient for large American companies to sell services and supplies to the NHS[+o(]

There are more ways to privatise the NHS than simply starving it of funds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's at all strange for me to ask those who seem to be so pro-UKIP to explain what it is that attracted them to the party other than their proposals on immigration.

I do find it strange that those same people think me strange for wanting them to answer my question with their own views, rather than directing me to read the UKIP manifesto and perhaps make erroneous assumptions about what they think about it.

Assuming they themselves have read it, then I'm sure they must have formed an opinion. It's that opinion which interests me, not my own, with which, unsurprisingly, I'm quite familiar.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="mint"][quote user="Thibault"]

As far as I understood it the TTIP was initiated by the USA, who want better and more favourable access to European markets.[/quote]

YES, most convenient for large American companies to sell services and supplies to the NHS[+o(]

There are more ways to privatise the NHS than simply starving it of funds

[/quote]

Okay, so why would leaving the EU make any difference, especially as Cameroon's agenda has been to privatise the NHS for years (a policy started by Blair).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="mint"][quote user="Thibault"]

As far as I understood it the TTIP was initiated by the USA, who want better and more favourable access to European markets.[/quote]

YES, most convenient for large American companies to sell services and supplies to the NHS[+o(]

There are more ways to privatise the NHS than simply starving it of funds

[/quote]

Actually, I didn't say this - I was quoting a post from someone else.

My point was that if the UK left the EU but joined EFTA, it would still be bound by EU rules and regulations, but without any say over them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regard to the so-called privatisation of the NHS, under the Blair government, it was around 2% of the total, and now it has risen to 5%. I am not a mathematician, but to me that means that 95% of the NHS is not privatised.

It is interesting that in France, there seems to be a much greater role in the health service played by the private sector than in the NHS and yet it is lauded as being a much better health service than the NHS (at least by the comments I have been reading on the various ex-pat forums over the years).

What is it that makes the French health service great with private sector involvement, but not the NHS?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One aspect of the French system which seems to work well, at least in my experience, is that of blood testing which seems to be carried out by private companies located just about everywhere.

It would be interesting to compare the costs of doing it all in hospital with this system to see if it could not be adopted by the NHS. Surely a privatization worth considering?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lindal1000 wrote,

So what you're saying then Cheesie , in answer to YCCMB's question, is that there was nothing else interesting about UKIP other than Brexit/immigration.

There are many other good points to UKIP, other than their position on immigration and leaving the EU although, these two are real vote winners it seems. As powerdesal said, read the manifesto. I agree, you should read it if you wish to know something further, but as you are probably as interested in reading UKIP proper gander as I am in reading the Koran, I will, as I have a few minutes free, list four things for you, which I am sure you will also approve of.

Abolish inheritance tax.

Why should anyone who has worked hard to get a monetary advantage for themselves and their family's future, be expected to give even one penny away in tax, when more lazy people who have chosen an easy less well paid life be able to keep their lives rewards. Dave promised raising the limit to £1M in the manifesto, but clearly this is not enough, and it should be abolished completely.

Energy policy.

To stop anymore wind farms and solar farms being built, which produce a very poor return for everyone except the landowner and operator. Our small village has just spent sometime fighting successfully a plan to have a solar farm near us, so I do know something on this subject. We should have in this country (as France has) nuclear power, and the reason we don't have is another thing down to the Blair government, they did not mind opening the doors of the UK to all and sundry, but could not even be bothered to plan for our energy needs in the future. For more details on UKIPS plans, RTFM.

Animal welfare.

After the disgusting treatment of creatures in Halal slaughter houses filmed by animal action groups and shown on the main UK news a few months back, to install cameras in all slaughter houses, the monitoring of what happens there can then be checked to try to reduce such cruelty. It is a sad fact of life we must kill animals so we can live, but it should be done in as an humane away as possible.

Defence.

Keep our nuclear deterrent, have more, not less in the armed forces, and build a purpose built hospital to treat our soldiers when they return from duty, instead of the government turning their backs on them as many in the past have.

On top of this, is of course the appeal of the leader, Nigel, a better communicator you will not find in politics today. Love him or loath him, he is a great speaker, amusing and a pleasure to watch in action. Paxman does not beat him for sure.

Without UKIP and Nigel's excellent leadership, and before their rise, speaking of immigration was to be avoided at all costs, thank goodness that has now changed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Ebaynut for that resume of the UKIP manifesto.  However I am interested in the answer to YCCMB's question. Which of these items is the key one for you?

I agree with you on some points but not on all. Nigel Farage is an extremely good communicator even if I am opposed to him. He does seem to be  more of an ordinary person than the other political leaders but I am sure he is not. If he were then he wouldn't be as effective as he is.

On defence I agree with improving the facilities for treating our troops but I am not convinced that our so-called independent nuclear deterrent gives value for money. For starters it is inconceivable that it would ever be used without the agreement of the US government and secondly the main threat to our national security seems to come from Middle Eastern sponsored terrorism where a nuclear response does not seem to be appropriate.

I agree totally with your suggestions about abattoirs. Absolutely no need to allow ritual slaughter. Animals should be slaughtered as humanely as possible.

I agree with you about increasing Nuclear Energy subject to us managing to find a safe way of dealing with the products at the end. I am a little concerned with the fact that the nuclear power stations will be build by the company submitting the lowest bid, using components suppplied by firms also submitting the lowest bids. Cheapest is not always the best

As for Inheritance Tax I disagree with you. The Government have to raise a certain amount of Tax revenue each year and if they reduce/abolish this tax then they have to raise other taxes to compensate. Personally I would rather pay my share of taxes when I am dead than when I am alive. Besides anybody with an estate worth over  1 million should be able to afford a good tax avoidance consultant[:)].

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for stepping up to thE plate, ebaynut.

Whilst I couldn't disagree more about Farage as leadership material (let's face it, he couldn't even get himself elected), and my views on most of the policy ideas are diametrically opposed to those of UKIP, I appreciate that at least one person who supports them has the courage of their convictions and will explain why they do so...or at least enlighten me as to what other policies they have which may seem attractive to some, apart from just a "Britain for WASPS" policy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know where in the UK manifesto it refers to 'Britain for WASPS' - if that is what you honestly think, then I would respectfully suggest that you really SHOULD read UKIP's manifesto - maybe twice.

All UKIP wish to do, apart from leave the EU - is to have control over our borders.    For the people of the UK to decide who is welcome to make a contribution to the UK - and who is NOT.

UKIP wish to be open to the whole world - to have the best and the brightest and the most talented would be welcome in the UK;  but UKIP wishes for the British people to decide WHO is welcome in a country that belongs to the British.    I don't think pictures of the Romanian beggars in Kensington, or the sight of Eastern Europeans sleeping rough in Marble Arch are actually the sort that would really be welcome by the British if they had a choice - and what sort of contribution to society are these homesless people actually making.   And while we're on the subject of borders - look at how Italy and France, and now Hungary - have decided that THEY wish to control their borders.    And yet for the UK to wish to do the same we get this childish 'rascist' comment - when it is not rascist but common-sense to control who does, and does not, enter a country.

UKIP is OPEN to the world - as Churchill said;  let the Europeans live in peace - but faced with the choice then Britain will look to the wider world.

For you to think a sane policy about controlling immigration is 'Waspish'; then I would suggest that your views are rather bigotted and rascist against the British people    The country belongs to the British - and they should decide.....

Uncontrolled immigration has led to over-crowded schools - and that has caused problems for immigrants themselves.   There are no6 enough houses in the UK, nor schools, nor hospitals, nor transport - energy supplies are on a knife-edge, food supplies are more and more reliant on imported foodstuffs, and demands for water and sewage treatments are increasing.    On environmental grounds alone, it is sheer, unalderated stupidity to allow open borders with the rest of the EU, let alone the rest of the world.   We are destroying valuable farmland to build houses, or to 'grow' solar farms... - it is definitely NOT good for the British countryside and environment. 

And when the Groniad lot start shouting about 'Tories haven't planned' - of course they b---y well haven't - neither did Labour for that matter - the problem is that it was all UNCONTROLLED - no-one could plan ahead not knowing how many were likely to turn up - 1000 Polish pumbers wasn't it ?

I could write a great deal more, and defend very, very strongly the common-sense policies of UKIP.

But it would take up far too much space - and I think if people wanted to understand - really wanted to know - they would take the time and trouble to find out - rather than make childish comments about 'Waspish' UKIP policies - they are VERY VERY FAR FROM THAT -

in fact common-sense policies would be a far more accurate description.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find UKIP's constant refrain of Britain for the British and let's keep out Johnny Foreigner unless we want a particular skill they have, to be rather odd, given that the British population today is made up of the descendants of wave after wave of immigrants, the first of whom arrived after the last ice age. The entire population of the UK are descendants of immigrants.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Jay"][quote user="chessie"]

............The country belongs to the British - and they should decide.....

[/quote]

I thought they already did, 7th May wasn't it?

[/quote]

That's a bit over my head Jay, any chance of a simple explanation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taking into account the overall election turnout, it would seem that approximately 8.5 percent of the voting population regard UKIP's policies as "common sense" , so defend away, but there are still obviously a large majority of the populace who will disagree with you.

I wonder how many of the 200,000 Poles who settled in the UK after WW2 voted UKIP..or how many of the descendants of the Windrush migrants, to name but a couple of groups who have been in the UK since long before I, for one, was born? The first purpose-built mosque in the UK was built in 1889. Immigration, from wherever, has been part of our cultural landscape for generations.Immigrants are as much part of our society and culture as the indigenous population. So, who, exactly, after all this, are "the British"? The "bad apples" and freeloaders are a tiny percentage, and to be quite honest, there are at least as many, but I suspect more more feckless, workshy freeloaders among the indigenous population than there are among the migrants.

The Britain that I've grown up with, and am quite proud of, is not the Britain that Nigel Farage and UKIP want. And it would appear that it's not the Britain that the majority of the voting public wanted either. So, assuming that (unlike me) they read the UKIP manifesto and made an informed choice, there was presumably little to persuade them that UKIP could make a fist of running the country.

So, the British people have, indeed, decided. Of course, that decision may not be to everyone's taste (mine included, as it happens) but hey ho. At least we don't have a nightly dose of Farage any more. Although &£*#% Salmond is on QT AGAIN ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've just returned from a long weekend in London, staying in two quite different areas. In central London many of the staff in the stores were French. I even got to practice my French a bit. As YCCMB pointed out, the UK has always depended on immigration to keep it vibrant.

The second area I stayed has a very long standing Asian population, many of whom are now second and third generation. The area itself is reasonably affluent so you don't see many of the problems normally associated with poverty. From what I saw, the cultural mix only enhances what would be a rather dull area. The markets were fantastic, I got my eyebrows threaded for £2.00 in an Asian beauty salon, lots of new business in the area... The area that I grew up in is now the most racially diverse borough in the UK. I always remember it as a bit of a dump before, and now it is quite lively.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know an almost immeasurable number of UKIP policy supporters who choose to vote Conservative in May, as fear of Labour and the SNP running the country was too great a risk to take. Come the referendum, they will all be voting out of the EU.

I think Dave is making a real clown of himself in Europe ATM, we wont get any consecutions, but will come back crowing about how he has ‘re-negotiated’ a better deal for the UK and we must ‘stay with our European partners’

The more he wriggles out there, the better the change of the BREXIT happening.

Please also remember UKIP is a very new party, the other main three, Conservative, Labour & lib/dem ( do you remember them?) have all been around one hell of a lot longer, so have built up followers and infrastructure to help them on their way at election time.

UKIP coming third overall with almost 4 million votes, second in many seats, and Nigel just missing Thanet by 16000 votes to the Conservatives 18000, shows how close he came. All this in the first election for UK parliament which they fought in any real way.

I am most amused that Labour say they now want an EU referendum, what will this party do to get in power?, clearly getting into government for them is more important than their ‘policy's’ which they change to what they perceive is the popular vote winning view of the minute.

For me getting the UK out of Europe is why I now vote UKIP, their stand on Immigration just cements my views that they are the party for me.

For the UK elections in a very short time, they had to come up with a manifesto, and boy what a great one it is.

It shows me that they really are in tune with my thoughts, their policy's encompass most of the things I would want for the UK, and my family for the future.

Funny how some opponents of Nigel, even though they don't agree with him, are man enough to be able to admit that he is a good orator, which he is. A very popular leader in his own party, and which other party can say that in politics today?

Nicks and Eds resignations were happily snapped up by their party members after they failed to get in.

I hate Tony Blair, ( I may have mentioned this before), but boy is he good, he is a great speaker and to be feared for sure. I am quite happy to state this even though I would like him hung draw and quartered on Tower hill for what he has done for the UK.

BTW, ‘Britain for wasps’ seems good to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Farage obviously has a following. However, it would appear that he can't quite seem to persuade these immeasurable numbers of UKIP supporters to vote for him, regardless of the constituency or the underlying political climate. In fact, whatever the excuse this time, he's been banging away at trying to become an MP for the last 21 years, and he is clearly so highly respected and well thought of by the Great British Public that he has an unbroken track record of abject failure...

1994 by-election Eastleigh - Not elected

1997 general election Salisbury - Not elected

2001 general election Bexhill and Battle - Not elected

2005 general election South Thanet - Not elected

2006 by-election Bromley and Chislehurst - Not elected

2010 general election Buckingham - Not elected

2015 general election South Thanet - Not elected

I would venture to suggest that it speaks to the monumental arrogance of the man that he wants to cling to whatever tiny crumbs of power are afforded to him as UKIP leader, because it's all he has. Twenty one years, six constituencies. Not one result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at Betty's list of constituencies, I have thought the only one he might have had a sniff of a chance in; was 2015 Thanet. OK he blew it; but I'm sure the other ones were for nuisance value really, bit like The Monster Raving Looney Party. On her other point that he is arrogant, well I'd have thought that it would be the prime ingredient of every person who has aspirations to become an MP, without it you wouldn't bother. Whether you agree with his policies or not, at least he has shaken the normal suspects up a lot and that has been of interest and could be to our advantage, as they do appear to be listening slightly more to what the public are thinking. Also I do find that your analysis a bit harsh as there are plenty of other people who have constanly tried to be elected and failed, everybody  keeps telling us to vote Green, but nobody does, in fact even less votes than UKIP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Betty - it is obvious that Farage is arrogant and while pretending to be 'one of us' he is very much from the public school educated, man from the City, mold, just like those he purports to despise. He also seems to be something of a control freak - look what has happened to his Deputy Chair in the last few days. At least with Carswell, he was unable to shift him from his position over the Short money.

It is significant that many of the people most committed to the UK leaving the EU, do not want Farage to lead the No Campaign.

As for UKIP gathering support, once the Lib Dems (the 'official' Protest Party for the last several years) were tainted by actually being in government, the protest vote needed another home and UKIP was convenient,

I think it is significant that in Thanet, UKIP won the local elections but when it came to the parliamentary seat, Farage lost. Given that the elections were held on the same day, that actually tells us something.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now you know I love you ‘Betty’ but sometimes you can go on, almost as long as a DFS sale it seems. Nigel has been in Politics a while, and you are correct, he has not YET been elected to the UK parliament, but as the saying goes, ‘ god loves a trier’

I would say, it proves he believes in what he's doing, no cheese eating surrender monkey he, unlike Mr Miliband who throw the towel in after one shot for prime minister, or as Eds New Zoids puppet would say ‘At least I tried’. Guess he thinks he can earn more elsewhere in another form of employment.

16000+ people did vote for Nigel in Thanet, so it was hardly a thrashing for him, and as for Thibault’s comment about him being privately educated, are you jealous because perhaps you were not?, as from the tone of the way you imply that, that it is something wrong? Would you not want people with the best education to lead our country, and where else would you get a better education than private? I am afraid very few people from the local comprehensive get far in public life, especially these days. ( and please don't spend hours compiling a list of the few that have)

Nigel did not loose Thanet, he merely failed to get first place, he was a very healthy second, considering how the campaign to keep him out was run by all the other parties, including even the pub landlord himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no objections to any politician who is privately educated - after all that was the choice of the politicians' parents so you can't blame the politician. What I do object to, though, is Nigel trying to pretend he is a man of the people and not part of the establishment, when in fact, he is.

So, Ebaynut, how do you account for the fact that the people of Thanet voted UKIP in the local elections, but not for Nigel in the parliamentary elections held on the same day and where people were given the two ballot papers and cast their vote at the same time for both elections?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...