Staying in the EU

[woolybanana]

Right guys, without having rows or extended discussion of a heated kind, let's come up with some succinct reasons why the UK should stay in the EU. (Another thread) for leaving.

1. We Brits have ease of movement and health cover (at least, notionally), throughout Europe.

[Pierre ZFP]

2. If Farage is for leaving, I'm against it

In fact that probably applies to all of his hare brained policies

[Pickles]

Access to one of the main developed trading blocs on advantageous terms.

Joint negotiating clout with other existing market blocs (North America, China) and other developing market blocs (Mercosur/Latin America, Asia/India, Africa).

[Quillan]

As an Island we are somewhat on our own. The days of the Empire have long gone same as sending a gun boat up river to sort the nasty people out, hell we can't even afford a rowing boat these days.

I do agree with the EU not being democratic enough but I am sure I read somewhere that in the next 8 to 10 years we will get an elected president and that the EU democratic system will be somewhat similar to the American system, not that I understand their system very well but at least it will be elected.

As Pickles and others have pointed out on our own we are nothing these days and we need to be part of something that is very big, like the EU, to be able to negotiate on equal par with the other continents on such matters as trade etc.

Leaving the EU would be disastrous for the UK but what does annoy me is the unfair bias the media has in putting up reasons why we should leave. To have a vote the pro Europeans have to do and say a lot more than "we need to be in it". They need to explain in simple terms the advantages and what we get out like perhaps that new bit of road or by-pass which the UK could not have afforded without and EU grant etc, etc. Somebody also needs to put the public right, and rather loudly, about the lies Farrage says about us still being able to trade like Norway and Greenland like we would still have to pay out the same amount of money, accept the same EU legislation yet we won't have any representation.

My gut feeling and I hope to God I am right is that although close a vote will leave us in.

[Pickles]

As Q says, plus:

We aren't Norway

We aren't Greenland

We aren't Switzerland

in terms of what makes up our economy, and the size of population.

[Thibault]

As the OP was several days ago, I would have thought there would have been a rush to set out exactly what the benefits are to the UK from being a member [:)]

If UK left the EU, do you think all our EU trading partners would suddenly stop trading with us?  Would we stop trading with them?

[Pickles]

[quote user="Thibault"]If UK left the EU, do you think all our EU trading partners would suddenly stop trading with us?  Would we stop trading with them?[/quote]

No. But let's put it this way: if you think that our trade with the EU would not be adversely affected by leaving the EU, then I think that would be naive. Similarly, if you think that none of the "inward investment" that has come and is still coming into the UK depends on us being part of the EU, then I think that that would be a "courageous" attitude to take.

Perhaps more important, though, is this: how do you see the development of the trading blocs that are now surfacing affecting us? Are we better off inside one of them, or on the outside in magnificent isolation?

"Ah, Mr Li Keqiang, about out new trade pact ..."

"Oh, I see, you'll build us a new high speed line from the middle of the Peak District to the middle of the Lake District in return for the rights to all our fracked shale gas and coal?"

[Thibault]

Interestingly there was someone on Jeff Randall Business Programme the other night who said that Britian's trading position with the EU would not be affected to any great degree.  He also thought that inward investment would still happen because of factors outside those relating to the EU.

 

Unfortunately as no one has left the EU before, no one can be sure of the consequences.

[Pickles]

[quote user="Thibault"]Interestingly there was someone on Jeff Randall Business Programme the other night who said that Britian's trading position with the EU would not be affected to any great degree.  He also thought that inward investment would still happen because of factors outside those relating to the EU.[/quote]

There are some naive people around ...

Would this be one of the masters of the universe who helped to get us into this mess or one of the experts who didn't forsee the various financial problems that we have seen?

[quote user="Thibault"]Unfortunately as no one has left the EU before, no one can be sure of the consequences.[/quote]

Exactly. And unfortunately, my opinion is just as valid, accurate and valueless as anyone else's.

[Rabbie]

[quote user="Thibault"]

Interestingly there was someone on Jeff Randall Business Programme the other night who said that Britian's trading position with the EU would not be affected to any great degree.  He also thought that inward investment would still happen because of factors outside those relating to the EU.

 

Unfortunately as no one has left the EU before, no one can be sure of the consequences.

[/quote]Innterestingly there was someone in my my local pub who thought exactly the same. There were also three people who thought all our problems (economic and social) would be resolved if only we left the EU immediately. Their views were balanced by three others who thought that leaving the EU would spell doom and disaster for us. Who is right? Only time will tell.  Funnily enough the same group of people were split differently on the question of whether there would be a major economic crisis a few years ago. The fact is that leaving the EU would be a huge leap in the dark and no-one really knows what the consequences would be.

[Quillan]

[quote user="Thibault"]

Unfortunately as no one has left the EU before, no one can be sure of the consequences.

[/quote]

Not true, Greenland left after a 70% in favour vote to leave. A couple of other small countries have technically 'left' because they were dependencies of other countries that were EU members and then became independent. They also set the standard for what would happen if Scotland left the UK. I can't remember exactly who they are but I think one was formally French.

If you want to trade with the EU then you need to be a member EFTA and that will cost the UK the same.

If not a member then import duty will be charged on UK goods sold in the EU which will make them non competitive price wise. The UK could respond by charging import duty on EU goods but a lot of it is food (Belgium, Holland and Spain) and guess who ends up picking up the bill.

As to German newspapers, well try asking a German or two. The response when I asked was that the UK would be stupid to leave but if they decide to then best of luck i.e. we don't really care. They also believe in the federalisation of Europe as have other nationalities that I have asked and that includes a few Irish as well.

Apart from that there is absolutely no reason for any country or state not to leave if it wants and I quote from Article 50 "Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."

The problem as I see it at the moment is we are all expressing views that we have gained from reading newspapers or watching the TV. What I would like to see is a truly independent enquiry as to the advantages and disadvantages to the "Yes or No" question written in simple terms so that everyone can understand it so we can all make an informed decision on how we want to vote should we get a vote. To my mind there is so much rubbish written in papers some of which is clearly biased because of the political leaning of owners, like Murdoc who only put this negative stuff out because of personal gain and greed and nothing else.

[Pickles]

[quote user="Quillan"]The problem as I see it at the moment is we are all expressing views that we have gained from reading newspapers or watching the TV. What I would like to see is a truly independent enquiry as to the advantages and disadvantages to the "Yes or No" question written in simple terms so that everyone can understand it so we can all make an informed decision on how we want to vote should we get a vote. To my mind there is so much rubbish written in papers some of which is clearly biased because of the political leaning of owners, like Murdoch who only put this negative stuff out because of personal gain and greed and nothing else.[/quote]

I think you know what the chances of any truly independent enquiry are ...  it didn't happen with the PR vote and I think that that campaign sets the standard for what would happen in the run up to any referendum on the EU.

[Mr Ceour de Lion II]

[quote user="Quillan"][quote user="Thibault"]

Unfortunately as no one has left the EU before, no one can be sure of the consequences.

[/quote]

Not true, Greenland left after a 70% in favour vote to leave. A couple of other small countries have technically 'left' because they were dependencies of other countries that were EU members and then became independent. They also set the standard for what would happen if Scotland left the UK. I can't remember exactly who they are but I think one was formally French.

If you want to trade with the EU then you need to be a member EFTA and that will cost the UK the same.

If not a member then import duty will be charged on UK goods sold in the EU which will make them non competitive price wise. The UK could respond by charging import duty on EU goods but a lot of it is food (Belgium, Holland and Spain) and guess who ends up picking up the bill.

As to German newspapers, well try asking a German or two. The response when I asked was that the UK would be stupid to leave but if they decide to then best of luck i.e. we don't really care. They also believe in the federalisation of Europe as have other nationalities that I have asked and that includes a few Irish as well.

Apart from that there is absolutely no reason for any country or state not to leave if it wants and I quote from Article 50 "Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."

The problem as I see it at the moment is we are all expressing views that we have gained from reading newspapers or watching the TV. What I would like to see is a truly independent enquiry as to the advantages and disadvantages to the "Yes or No" question written in simple terms so that everyone can understand it so we can all make an informed decision on how we want to vote should we get a vote. To my mind there is so much rubbish written in papers some of which is clearly biased because of the political leaning of owners, like Murdoc who only put this negative stuff out because of personal gain and greed and nothing else.

[/quote]

I personally think the UK would be nuts to leave the EU. It may have a lot of negatives, but the positives far outweigh these. It's not like the UK can rely on former colonies as it could say 50 years ago. I think I mentioned in another thread that I believe it very dangerous to put the vote to the public to decide whether to stay in or not. The majority of people are not well informed enough to make that decision. Your suggestion to have an independent enquiry is a good one, but even then, so many people wouldn't bother reading it, and still vote based on emotion.

Having said that, how do people vote for government now? Very few are properly informed anyway, and vote based on what their peers think, or their parents, and so on. And the majority never get their way anyway. Tricky times for sure, but in my opinion, the UK would be crazy to leave.

Edit: Having thought a little more, there should be a vote. But there has to be clear information as Q said, with the pros and cons of staying or leaving.

[powerdesal]

'' I think I mentioned in another thread that I believe it very dangerous to put the vote to the public to decide whether to stay in or not. The majority of people are not well informed enough to make that decision.''

Dangerous thing Democracy ! Fancy asking the people of a so-called sovereign country to vote. Much better to rely on those who know they are born to lead.

[Mr Ceour de Lion II]

[quote user="powerdesal"]'' I think I mentioned in another thread that I believe it very dangerous to put the vote to the public to decide whether to stay in or not. The majority of people are not well informed enough to make that decision.''

Dangerous thing Democracy ! Fancy asking the people of a so-called sovereign country to vote. Much better to rely on those who know they are born to lead.[/quote]

Did you read the rest of that post where I u-turned at the end?

[powerdesal]

Your edit certainly clears it up.

[Thibault]

[quote user="Pickles"][quote user="Quillan"]The problem as I see it at the moment is we are all expressing views that we have gained from reading newspapers or watching the TV. What I would like to see is a truly independent enquiry as to the advantages and disadvantages to the "Yes or No" question written in simple terms so that everyone can understand it so we can all make an informed decision on how we want to vote should we get a vote. To my mind there is so much rubbish written in papers some of which is clearly biased because of the political leaning of owners, like Murdoch who only put this negative stuff out because of personal gain and greed and nothing else.[/quote]
I think you know what the chances of any truly independent enquiry are ...  it didn't happen with the PR vote and I think that that campaign sets the standard for what would happen in the run up to any referendum on the EU.
[/quote] Everyone has a POV - both supporters and non-supporters of the EU. Non-supporters have just as much right to express their opinions and make their points as pro-EU people. I sometimes get the impression from some of the posts, both on this thread and on others, that only pro-EU people are entitled a) to have an opinion and (more importantly) b) express it. I'm afaid that now, the UK's relationship with the EU is the elephant in the room and will be for the foreseeable future. It will influence the voting in the next general election. It will not go away. There needs to be debate. It's no good saying that the public are too stupid to know what they think and feel about the EU - as someone else said asking the public to think about something and then vote is what democracy is all about. It is up to the opposing sides to get their message across clearly and honestly.

[allanb]

As Mr C de L says, it would be nice to have a vote based on clear information.  The trouble is that the really important information isn't clear: it's only a guess.

I think it's clear that if the UK leaves, its trade with the EU would decline.  But its trade with the rest of the world would presumably gain, since it wouldn't be bound by EU tariffs and other restrictions on non-EU trade.  The question is whether the gain would be greater than the loss.  This can only be guesswork, but it seems to me highly likely that the gain would be greater: the potential for growth in the EU cannot be as great as the potential for growth in China, India, Brazil, etc, and there's no reason to think that trade with the USA would suffer.

As for the "inward investment" argument: inward investment will continue as long as the UK is seen as a good place to invest and do business, and that doesn't depend solely on potential exports within Europe.

[Quillan]

Yes it would certainly make it easier for the UK to import non EU items but then we already do. I read somewhere that 90% of women's underwear is made in India and China. Most Electronic goods and some cars come from outside the EU so there is no change there. On the other hand these 'tariffs' would apply to goods made in the UK that would normally be sold in the EU possibly making them more expensive than before hence people will buy from elsewhere. The logical answer would be to join the trading association like Norway etc but then we would be paying the same as we do now to the EU, same laws etc but be worse off because we would have no representation.

Then there is the issue of unemployment. There are many companies set up in the UK manufacturing goods either directly or indirectly that are sold in the EU. I have seen various estimates ranging from between 400k to 4M people who work, again either directly or indirectly, for these companies. If they move manufacturing to another EU state, lets say Toyota moves from the UK to Spain where it already has a small factory, what happens to all those UK workers. Don't forget that it was Thatcher who got some of these companies, via certain incentives, to set up manufacturing in areas where there was mass unemployment due to shipyard and steel works closures. More importantly who is going to pay their unemployment benefits?

These questions (and more) need to be looked at properly and answered properly before we have a vote. Who knows there may be compelling evidence that the UK may benefit from leaving and I might find the argument so strong as to change sides, who knows although I wouldn't hold my breath.

[Chris]

What I find staggering about this whole issue is the absence of hard data.

About 18 months ago, I emailed all my MEPs and asked if there was a business or economic analysis for the cost/benefits of EU membership. All replied 'no'.

Having managed business and organisations for most of my career, I've got used to the idea that you can't buy a piece of IT; a boiler - whatever - without a cost/benefit analysis. The fact that no-one seems to have undertaken a cost/benefit analysis of the economics of EU membership is breathtaking.

The result is that the debate is reduced to the filters of the observer and one's inbuilt biases. We all have biases, and more often than not, we seek evidence to support our existing position.

I'm not pro or anti membership - I would just like to see some hard facts, rather than the spin put out by politicos and 'leaders'. Then I could make an informed decision.

[Pickles]

[quote user="Thibault"]Everyone has a POV - both supporters and non-supporters of the EU. Non-supporters have just as much right to express their opinions and make their points as pro-EU people.[/quote]

Of course - and I for one would not wish to suppress reasoned "leave the EU" viewpoints such as those that you have voiced.

[quote user="Thibault"]I sometimes get the impression from some of the posts, both on this thread and on others, that only pro-EU people are entitled a) to have an opinion and (more importantly) b) express it.[/quote]

I don't think that is true here: certainly I suspect that the Europhiles are likely to be more prominent here due to the nature of the Forum: however, in the UK at large, Europhiles could be forgiven for thinking that they are in a minority, such has been the extent of "Daily Mail"-style ranting that I have come across in the media in general and on the Internet.

[quote user="Thibault"]I'm afaid that now, the UK's relationship with the EU is the elephant in the room and will be for the foreseeable future. It will influence the voting in the next general election. It will not go away. There needs to be debate. It's no good saying that the public are too stupid to know what they think and feel about the EU - as someone else said asking the public to think about something and then vote is what democracy is all about. It is up to the opposing sides to get their message across clearly and honestly.[/quote]

Unfortunately, there is not much clarity, and far less honesty, being spouted in the media in general.

I read the Economist: it's not a publication that people who know me would associate my views with, and I don't always agree with it, but I have to say, whether I agree with particular articles or not, its articles are very well balanced, well-researched and well-argued.

These two were printed a few months ago but are still very relevant now: they discuss both points of view and, perhaps much to the surprise of the Economist's staff itself, comes down - perhaps marginally - on the side of staying in.

http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21567914-how-britain-could-fall-out-european-union-and-what-it-would-mean-making-break?zid=307&ah=5e80419d1bc9821ebe173f4f0f060a07

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21567940-british-exit-european-union-looks-increasingly-possible-it-would-be-reckless?zid=307&ah=5e80419d1bc9821ebe173f4f0f060a07

They are well worth looking at.

I suspect, as with the Torygraph paywall, that you will be limited to a certain number of viewings before they demand payment - if you clear cookies at that point it should reset the counter.

[Thibault]

Thanks for the links, Pickles. I have just got hold of a book 'Au Revoir, Europe - What if Britain Left the EU?' by David Charter. I've only just started it, but it is very interesting so far.......

By the way, I am not anti-EU per se, but I do think it needs reforming. A lot of pro-EU people say that UK should '...reform from within...' but that looks increasingly impossible, especially with QMV - just look at what's happening with the financial transaction tax.......

[NormanH]

This chap was right about Thatcher.

Perhaps he might be right now too..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/18/david-cameron-control-geoffrey-howe

[NormanH]

And now these chaps too...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-business-we-need-to-stay-in-the-european-union--or-risk-losing-up-to-92bn-a-year-8622925.html

They conclude: “The benefits of membership overwhelmingly outweigh the

costs, and to suggest otherwise is putting politics before economics.”

[NickP]

[quote user="NormanH"]And now these chaps too...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-business-we-need-to-stay-in-the-european-union--or-risk-losing-up-to-92bn-a-year-8622925.html

They conclude: “The benefits of membership overwhelmingly outweigh the costs, and to suggest otherwise is putting politics before economics.”
[/quote]

Like all things from people with an agenda, it's full of ifs buts and could be's. They are only looking at the situation from their companies angles and for them it may be correct but doesn't mean it is for everybody else, not that that has ever worried the Boss's union.