Jump to content

Better out of the EU?


Quillan
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think that one of the saddest things about politics in Britain is the domination of the landscape by just two parties. This, of course, is the natural consequence of a first-past-the-post system. From this follows the unhappy truth that the prime minister's main job is keeping his party together. Thus Cameron is promising an in-out referendum - not for the benefit of the country - but to prevent his errant right wing defecting. He is using exactly the same strategy as Harold Wilson for the same purpose - for party management. I suspect that the end result is not likely to be so clear cut.

If the UK votes to leave the EU, then, in my opinion, the needs of the Conservative Party will have been seen as being more important than the needs of the country. Cameron has already been shown to be inadequate by his response to the constitutional crisis highlighted by the Scottish referendum. He puts the sectional interest of his party first.

 

Sorry. Rant over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I am not sure it is only Conservative and Ukip voters who dislike the EU and would support a referendum on the matter. There are plenty of people in other parties who are Eurosceptic and certainly there are a number of current Labour MPs who are.

People who see no case for reform of the EU and its institutions must be willfully blind. Any organisation whose auditors refuse to sign off its accounts for umpteen years obviously has a serious problem.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the act of moveing away from the origional aim of " trading partnership " through "Euro Zone " and "Free Movement " to creation of more "Closer Union " . And all EU money now controlled from the ECB in Hamburg . Many EU peoples see Germany taking control of the EU and telling them how to lead their lives The last time they saw that happening it was by uniformed men in their streets . It has to throw off the march towards the creation of an empire and let individual countries run themselves in a trading union as first envisiged IMO

to survive . The EU is a place where a lot of people are unhappy at the moment and want to see it changed .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is also a generation thing as well Frederick. My father would be turning in his grave with how things are with the EU at present and where some can see it going. Whilst he didn't have a problem trading he would see as going too far and probably have the same attitude about Germany as you have expressed. I remember him saying how German military personnel got a better war pension than he and they lost.

My generation I think are sceptical because we have been bought up with my father’s generation. My daughter’s generation however is quite different. She and most, if not all, of her friends believe strongly in the EU and of federalisation. For them this brings Europe together making the world a smaller place in number of countries but a bigger place in other ways. She has enjoyed, and still does, the ability to move and work in EU without hindrance of any kind. She is anti monarchy, not it the "cut their parasitical heads off" way more that she sees little use for them. She feels the same way about republics as well in that why have presidents when governments run the country. For her and her friends the world should be coming closer together and we should stop thinking of countries but start thinking of people, the world population. Why do we live rather well when those in other countries can't even feed themselves? Should we not be acting as one planet and share the wealth? Why should we have wealth, why should the planet even have money? Some would say this is a stupid idea but as a banker she can put a much better case than I and far for eloquently than I.

We now have another generation, those twenty year olds, and they have even stronger ideas about how things should be run. They have no connection with world wars or for instance the Thatcher years, miner’s strikes etc. They can only read about it and them. These are the ones that the political parties want to engage to get their vote but they don’t understand this generation see right through them and don’t think any are worth the effort. Meeting people of this age from NI is interesting. They don’t have the baggage of their ancestors nor do they have firsthand knowledge and experience of ‘the troubles’ only what they read and see on film. They can’t imagine how it was and the killing that took place and certainly can’t imagine seeing a return to those dark days and the thought that basically killing for what they see as religious reasons seems rather stupid. Long may that attitude continue.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quillan we can only make suppositions from the small number of people we know. The younger generation I know is quite limited but many of them are deeply Eurosceptic. They see the UK sticking to the rules and paying its bills and getting little in return. They visit the continent and see massive civic projects with big signs that they are being funded by the EU when there would appear to be no such projects in the UK.

It has nothing to do with party politics I think it’s getting worrying close to a lack of belief in democracy when politicians of all stripes seem only to be interested in personal advantage.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess the next generations view of their governments is not helped by the fact that they are constantly being caught out engaging in corrupt and illegal activities. (The latest one with Rifkin and Straw being one example). Is the EU corrupt..almost certainly..but is it any more or less corrupt than the governments of the member states.. probably not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Hoddy"]It has nothing to do with party politics I think it’s getting worrying close to a lack of belief in democracy when politicians of all stripes seem only to be interested in personal advantage.[/quote]

That’s what I meant but probably didn't put it well enough. All the parties either have fixed agendas or merge into one. As was said earlier their policies are somewhat the same and have remained so for decades.

I think there is a failing in the way that there seems to be some reluctance in making it known what funding the UK gets and where it goes. Not a 'smart' move for the pro side. I did a Google on the matter of EU funding in the UK. Wales in 2013 had £1.3bn in funding. The European Regional Development fund (referred to ERDF) funded 14,933 new small businesses between March 2013 and March 2014 creating 62,507 new jobs. London received, in the same year £1bn split across development and social funding. Just a couple but if you research 'EU Funded Project UK' there is loads of projects some broken down by region. I really don't understand why it is that when the anti EU brigade start bashing away why the pro brigade don't stand up and say "hang on a minute, we have had funding for this, that and the other"? It would go some way towards people understanding some of the benefits and that it is not all give, give then give some more when it comes to our contributions, we do actually get a lot back money wise.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="lindal1000"]I guess the next generations view of their governments is not helped by the fact that they are constantly being caught out engaging in corrupt and illegal activities. (The latest one with Rifkin and Straw being one example). Is the EU corrupt..almost certainly..but is it any more or less corrupt than the governments of the member states.. probably not.[/quote]

You should also remember that they were ALL stealing from us by falsifying their expenses. It wasn't them getting caught so much as th punitif prison sentences given out to the sacrificial lambs. In my mind they stole from those that elected them and from every taxpayer. I read a month or two back that they are at it again by the way. Would you trust somebody who lies for monitory gain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="woolybanana"]All MPs should have other jobs, fully declared. Idealists and altruists are a damned nuisance when more than a tiny minority

Most of these jobs should be in the private sector and noone should be allowed to stand if tey have not had a proper job for a minimum of, say, seven years.[/quote]

True.

Their salaries are not that high, well if you discount the actual hours they attend for otherwise pay per view is really good.  It's abusing their positions to sit on boards and directorships of other companies where they make up their money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two things.

1. Not ALL MP's were falsifying their expenses. The one representing my constituency wasn't, for example, I checked. How do I know he wasn't? Because he practically wasn't claiming any.

2. God knows, it sticks in my craw to even type this, but Jeffrey Archer (visualise me spitting on the floor) made a good point on the TV this morning (or yesterday, I can't recall...still reeling from agreeing with him). Apparently, about 7 (I think he said) other MP's were approached for this latest sting, of which 5 declined and two categorically told the journos to sod off. Archer suggestes that it would be beneficial if the names of those MP's were released, so that their constituents might judge them on their apparent honesty, rather than simply name and shame the two who leapt at the chance for a quick buck.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hoddy wrote,

It has nothing to do with party politics I think it’s getting worrying close to a lack of belief in democracy when politicians of all stripes seem only to be interested in personal advantage.

You are correct, many people see MP’s as ‘out for themselves’. I know many of you dislike Nigel Farage, but I would point out that he has worked for many years in the city, and when asked by a reporter was he in politics for the money, he laughed loudly, he could earn far more in other lines of work, and has. He is in politics because he believes in what he is doing, which does make a refreshing change.

How do I know this is true, well if it was not, then he would have been exposed by now for sure. His past must be squeaky clean or else ‘the establishment’ who have had him by now.

Nigel is not anti Europe, and I guess most of us on this forum are not either. How could he be, being from French stock, and having a German wife. He is anti the EU, and its control of people by unelected bodies.

When he is questioned on his beliefs, he needs no script to read from, to tell him how to answer, as its what he passionately believes in.

Rabbie say that perhaps MP’s wages should be lowered, and more people from, how should I put it, lower positions might become MP’s. But they could not do the job. Look at the leader of the Green party, see froze when questioned by a radio presenter, and did not know how to answer. Imagine if she went before Paxman.

I am afraid its down to the fact, that people from lower walks of like cannot hold these positions as they are not up to it. Most lack the balls, or they would not still be in their position in the first place.

Hence the huge appeal of UKIP at present, a leader who is not on the take, for personal gain, again if he was doing anything wrong we would know.

So this time around Dave has lost my vote. I am all for the top people being rewarded, and the shirkers being penalised but when you make people who are disabled move because they have an extra bedroom in the house they have lived in for years, as they did when the bedroom tax was brought in, then that is a step too far.

There was no alternative five years ago, as I hated Blair/ Brown, but this time there is. And so it is for many many people I know.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well he may be no worse than the others but I wouldn't say squeaky clean!

"Nigel Farage is facing fresh questions over his European expenses after he admitted that an office for which he claimed more than £205,000 from the taxpayer was provided to him free of charge by a Ukip supporter.

The Electoral Commission is considering what action to take, because donations such as rent-free office space should have been declared to the body within 30 days of a regulated person accepting the benefits.

Farage failed to do this, meaning that it appeared the office – near Bognor Regis – was leased on a commercial basis. However, Ukip said he declared the donation in a register in the European parliament and this was the logical place to make the declaration.

The Electoral Commission sought clarification in April over Farage's failure to declare these donations-in-kind, leading Farage to register 14 separate donations dating back to 2001, with a total value of over £205,000, on 14 May. The non-cash donations came from party supporter John Longhurst.

The Electoral Commission can levy a fine if it deems the breach of rules sufficiently serious.

The Times suggested earlier this year that Farage received £15,000 a year from the EU to pay for his constituency office. But since the office, an old grain-store near Lyminster, was rent-free, the true cost of administering the office was close to £3,000 a year – suggesting £12,000 a year was unaccounted for.

In his correspondence with the Electoral Commission, Farage has confirmed he did not have to pay rent on the office for 14 years. This leaves him needing to explain where more than £160,000 of taxpayers' money from the European parliament has gone."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good post if you don't mind me saying so.

I think we need MP's from across the social spectrum because we don't live in a classless society, much as I would like to see one. I would also like to see ministers who have actually worked in the sector for which they are responsible for. I think I might be correct in saying that the last time this really happened was under Labour with education. I can't remember her name but for a short period of her mnisterialship I think the lady was a teacher and the headteacher. I think her 'problem' was she saw what schools and children wanted rather than what the politicians wanted to win votes.

As far as Farrage goes I have listened to some of his speeches and there is no doubt he is very elegant speaker and a lot of what he has said is true. Once we get past the issue of the EU and read the rest of the changes he would like to make they revolve around the money we would save which net is a lot but a lot less than we pay in. Like Salmond and his oil this money is going to pay for better health care (more hospitals, doctors and nurses with better pay), social care, better pensions, better (and new) schools, more investment in our defence, more money for the disabled, more money for war veterans etc, etc. The cost of all this is way above the net savings he believes we will get from leaving the EU.

It also depends where you live as well about how you view things. Farrage has said he will scrape HS2 because people don't want it (his curent elected MP's say different by the way). Thats true if you live in the south east and the home counties, it won't bring any benefits at all other than disruption and destruction (of the countryside) and creating housing price blight in some areas. For it is however good for business as many can reloacte to 'cheaper' parts of the UK and still have fast links to London. For those already there there are the same advantages.

Then there is UKIPs 'green energy' program. Removal of the 'green tax' and stopping the wind farm projects. Roger Helmer (their energy spokesman) has said he wants to replace them with 'clean' coal burning power stations and nuclear power stations. Now in some ways I don't object to this because I am bit of a sceptic when it comes to global warming or rather its cause. I think it is more of a natural effect made worse by our pollution but not primarily down to man made pollution but thats by the by. My point is however that as we can see with the contract to build the new nuclear power stations that they don't come cheap and neither do these 'ultra clean' coal fired power stations.

When you add all these things together and work out their costs then financially leaving the EU and the money saved will still mean a massive deficit. As I said it is like Salmond and his oil money, it is not a bottomless pit of income/savings even when you add in the amount of foreign aid Farrage says he will cut, the money is simply not there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somehow I can't believe when it comes to the vote, whenever that might be, that most people would vote to leave the EU. I think that with the gathering support from various member countries, changes must come about.

Quillan, was the minister you were thinking about Estelle Morris? She was well thought of in the teaching profession, unlike Gillian Shepherd, as I recall.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently one of the best ministers, whatever department he was in, was Peter Mandelson. Apparently he always took his role seriously and would turn up well briefed and fully conversant with all the issues on day one. It was his personal integrity that lead to his downfall. I remember a couple of good health secretaries. They weren't always ex -doctors and in fact just because you have worked somewhere doesn't make you any good. Frank Dobson was one of the better ones, and Alan Milburn one of the worst!

I don't think people will vote strategically in the general election although in a way it would help the Labour party if they did. UKIP will not get a majority and if they do win a few seats it will be the conservatives that will lose out. If the conservatives do win then they have promised a referendum, which could be interesting and I guess would depend on the mood at the time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC Mandelson's downfalls (there were two) were because he played fast and loose with the truth.

Recent newspaper reports indicate that UKIP is taking blue collar votes in traditional Labour areas, so it may be that not just the Conservatives will lose seats to them.

Can anyone name any feasible policies that UKIP have (apart from leaving the EU, bringing back smoking in pubs and stopping wind farms)?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that both Tories and Labour will lose out to UKIP. Many on the left are fed up of being labelled racist when they oppose immigration. I don’t think it’s widely understood how much immigrant labour depresses wages and I think this will lose Labour votes. I recall Q that you challenged me about people not wanting work when over a thousand local people applied for jobs in a new branch of a coffee chain was opening near me. This is only true to the extent that locals don’t want to live in cardboard boxes or under bridges while they get that early work experience. The Tories appear to enjoy labelling all the unemployed as workshy.

They also give the distinct impression that if you didn’t go to the right school you won’t get a government job. My local MP should in theory be a perfect Tory. He went to a local comprehensive school where he did very well, went to university and then served for several years as an officer in the army. When he came out of the army he and his brother set up a successful fruit packing firm. Now he’s my very hardworking MP but he’ll never be in the cabinet because from time to time he opposes the Tory leadership.

I confess that at the last election I voted Lib Dem. I won’t do it again because of their complete about face over tuition fees.

I can’t bring myself to UKIP so where does that leave me ? As I’ve already said I think many of us are beginning to lose our belief in democracy.

Hoddy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I know. I just wondered if the people on here who seem to be Ukip supporters knew what their policies were without having to look them up.

Some of the people I know who intend to vote for them, have no idea what their policies are apart from the ones I listed. In other words, it is the anti-EU stance which is attracting some voters, coupled with the fact that since the Lib Dems have been tainted by actually being in government, they are no longer the Protest Vote Party and to some extent Ukip has picked up that particular baton.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Hoddy"]I recall Q that you challenged me about people not wanting work when over a thousand local people applied for jobs in a new branch of a coffee chain was opening near me.I won’t do it again because of their complete about face over tuition fees.[/quote]

You can't tar every unemployed person with the same brush, I accept that and did no imply that. However there are those that don't want to work and have no intention of ever working. It's a bit like those getting disability benefits, there are some out there who cheat the system and hopefully at some point get caught. That does not mean everyone who claims disability allowance is a cheat, far from it. Those that cheat are stealing from the tax payer and the genuine unemployed and disabled. It costs a lot of money to find and bring these people to justice, money that could be given to those that need it.

[quote user="Hoddy"].... I won’t do it again because of their complete about face over tuition fees.[/quote]

I am against tuition fees, like the rest of education it should be free. Tuition fees in my mind made universities in to private establishments. Look at all the old 'colleges' around the country, they have all been made into 'universities' now so they can charge. It is yet another reason why I don't like Blair, I have quite a long list now. Problem is I see Wallace having a go at the Tories about them but all I see is a possible intention to reduce them but not to scrape them in his manifesto. Bit like re-nationalisation of water, gas, electricity and the railways really. Labour have had plenty of oppertunity to do this but haven't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So our only point of disagreement is the scale of those fiddling on benefits. I don't think it's anything like as great as those fiddling their taxes.

I am deeply worried about the members of my family in their teens and twenties. Those in their twenties with good degrees haven't been able to find jobs that might have been available to them a few years back and consequently aren't paying back their loans and won't be able to get mortgages. Those in their teens are thinking that they won't bother going to university.

And I still don't know who to vote for .........

Hoddy
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...