The EU - Referendum - 23rd of June 2016 - in or out?

[kirklancaster]

The thing about EU migrants is, we are a part of them. Millions of Brits are economic migrants that may have no choice but to return to Britain if we are no longer part of the EU and so yes, we make it more and more restrictive for the Spanish to live and work here and Spain makes it more and more restrictive for us to live and work there. The numbers returning will make up for the numbers leaving but that still won't leave that room you talk about for "genuine refugees/asylum seekers.

Let's analyse that figure of 'millions of Brits' Red, shall we:

Of an estimated 2 million 'Brits' who have emigrated abroad to EU countries:

1) Just 30,000 are taking advantage of EU rules and claiming benefits and living abroad in EU countries. THESE are opportunist 'Economic Migrants' who claimed Benefits in THIS country but just want a bit of Sun, Sea, and Sand, and a change of scenery poor souls. The vast majority of these live and claim in Spain and Greece.

2) A huge majority are 'Retired People' who have sold up here after a lifetime's working and paying tax and wish to spend what life they have remaining in the sun.

3) A smaller percentage are ageing Brits with 'Second Homes' in the sun, who have made the move after spending more and more time abroad as they grew older.

4) Another smaller percentage are highly skilled workers whose work in foreign countries has made it economically impossible NOT to live abroad.

So - as Conservative MP Mark Field, so aptly couched it - “These [figures] are not like for like: Lots of Brits abroad are successful people living in second homes in Spain or France. Most Brits living abroad are not aggressive beggars or sleeping rough on the streets.”

As for what may or may not happen to all these 'migrant Brits' should we exit the EU - no one can say with anything other than a huge degree of unqualified speculation.

[Northern Monkey]

The thing about EU migrants is, we are a part of them. Millions of Brits are economic migrants that may have no choice but to return to Britain if we are no longer part of the EU and so yes, we make it more and more restrictive for the Spanish to live and work here and Spain makes it more and more restrictive for us to live and work there. The numbers returning will make up for the numbers leaving but that still won't leave that room you talk about for "genuine refugees/asylum seekers.

No.The Brits won't all come flooding home just as existing EU migrants here in Britain won't be sent back to their respective countries.At worst they may have to fill out some paperwork.People were living abroad long before the EU was a thing.

[kirklancaster]

IF YOU WANT TO KNOW JUST HOW THE CORRUPT POLICIES OF THE EU HAVE DECIMATED THE LIVES OF OVER A HUNDRED THOUSAND ORDINARY WORKING UK CITIZENS AND THEIR FAMILIES, AND HOW THEY HAVE DESTROYED ONCE HEALTHY INDUSTRIES, THEN READ THESE EXTRACTS FROM;
"How the EU Common Fisheries Policy Permanently Damaged Scotland:*A Warning for Iceland . By Dr James Wilkie, David Thomson and associates."


Fishing has been a key element of the Scottish economy for many centuries, even thousands of years.**During those centuries the Scottish fishing industry harvested the seas while maintaining healthy fish stocks in balance with the rate of exploitation.**

In 1970 this all changed with the advent of control from Brussels, a move that resulted in an economic, environmental, ecological, social and cultural disaster.**

The direct results for Scotland have included almost 100,000 job losses and an annual loss of wealth creation of the order of ₤1,500 million.**

The Start of Control from Brussels

The European Union’s Common Fisheries Policy*(CFP), dating from 1970, basically consists of an agreement between the then six members of the European Economic Community*(EEC)*that fishing vessels belonging to member states would have free and equal access to the waters of all other members*(Directive 2141/70, later replaced by 101/76).

The clear purpose was to gain unrestricted access to the rich fish stocks of the United Kingdom, Ireland and Norway, which together with Denmark had just applied to join the*EEC.

It had nothing to do with management or Conservation.**It was a ruthless political gambit, with no legal basis, to give powerful commercial interests in other member states an entry ticket to the well conserved Norwegian, UK and especially Scottish waters, which they would otherwise have been unable to exploit.**

The excellent 2009 study by The Taxpayers’ Alliance, which reveals that the total annual economic cost to the UK of the EU Common Fisheries Policy is £2,813 million, or £2.8 billion (American billion 109*– European billion 1012*is different).**Of that total, £2,100 million was from the loss of access to home waters.*

Since Scotland has over 66 % of the UK EEZ, then £1,400 million of that loss relates to Scotland.*Adding the other estimates proportionally from the TPA study now make the Scottish fisheries sector loss due to the CFP over £1,500 million every single year.

Dr Lee Rotherham, who carried out the research for The Taxpayers’ Alliance, said:

“For years everyone has known, even in Brussels, that the Common Fisheries Policy has been a disaster. It has trashed the environment, wrecked coastal communities like Hull and Grimsby, and dumped hundreds of thousands of tonnes of dead fish uselessly back into the sea. If any government minister had ordered such actions, he would have been lynched. The time is long overdue to scrap the CFP and manage our territorial seas with the self-interest and self-enlightenment of countries like Norway, Iceland and Canada.”

Costing the Common Fisheries Policy, January 2009

Commenting on the TPA study, the Aberdeen (Scotland)*Press and Journal*in its editorial of 30 January 2009, The Price of Fish, wrote:*“In case any proof were needed that the European Union’s Common Fisheries Policy is one of the most damaging political schemes ever to affect a UK industry, some facts about its impact on every single household will help. Pressure group The Taxpayer’s Alliance has calculated that the policy costs every family £111 a year in higher taxes and lost business and puts ₤186 a year on the average food bill.

As the north and northeast of Scotland has witnessed, the impact on jobs has been severe. More than 9,000 directly in fishing and up to 90,000 have been lost from onshore dependent industries. This is before the baffling phenomenon of throwing away tons of dead fish each year has been considered.**The problem with the CFP of course, is that we are pretty much stuck in a world in which the European Union will forever meddle with this vital Scottish industry. …**The CFP is a triumph of pork barrel politics over commonsense and compassion.”***

Summary of Scottish Losses

No calculable benefits to Scotland of EU membership could possibly compensate for this haemorrhage of Scotland’s economic wealth. The appalling figure of lost value creation of ₤1,500 million every single year, and the loss of almost 100,000 jobs from the Scottish employment market, represents nothing less than a national disaster – brought about for no better reason than the crazed ideology of “sharing the common resource” with other EU member countries.

What the figures cannot reveal is the amount of personal tragedy and communal disruption that lie behind them: bankruptcies, the uprooting of individuals and families, the destruction of thriving communities with centuries-old cultural traditions and communal lives. Major harbours, like Lossiemouth, that were the focus of social and economic life twelve months in the year, are now marinas for a handful of yachts. One can imagine the reaction if Brussels had reduced the Spanish or French fishing fleets by almost two thirds simply to make way for incomers. And fishing is by no means as important to those countries as it is to Scotland.

The costs to public funds of unemployment and other social benefits as well as broader economic consequences, including loss of tax income, probably brought the total loss nearer to £900 million every year. This exceeds by a huge margin any economic benefits Scotland receives from the European Union, especially when it is considered that Scotland as a member of the UK is already a substantial net contributor to the EU.

The above calculations were made in 2004, on the basis of the then available information, by Dr James Wilkie, with data and guidance from Japanese economist Kaz Nagao, Fishermen’s Association (FAL) Secretary Roddy McColl, and fishery consultant David Thomson.**

HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DECENT, HARDWORKING, HONEST, ORDINARY PEOPLE IN THE UK HAVE SEEN THEIR LIVES SHATTERED BY THE CORRUPT PRACTICES AND SELF-INTEREST POLICIES OF THE EU

VOTE OUT.OUT.OUT. OUT. OUT.

[Kizzy]

:laugh: I feel it is you who are confused Kizzy. You stated "If we were to take a seat in the WTO" So what else can you mean by the word; 'We' other than, 'we in the United Kingdom'? To which my response was perfectly correct in pointing out that 'we' have been a member of the WTO since the 1st of Januaury 1995.

You are being deliberately infantile with your comments in the rest of your post.

We may be a member, that isn't what I referred to however. I specifically said 'if we were to take a seat'
You misinterpreted my post and then chose to insult me, I don't appreciate the antagonistic tone just as we are on opposing sides of the debate.
Mocking posts about brick walls aren't conducive to a rational debate either, the insinuation anyone with a counter opinion to yours is rather insulting.

[kirklancaster]

We may be a member, that isn't what I referred to however. I specifically said 'if we were to take a seat'
You misinterpreted my post and then chose to insult me, I don't appreciate the antagonistic tone just as we are on opposing sides of the debate.
Mocking posts about brick walls aren't conducive to a rational debate either, the insinuation anyone with a counter opinion to yours is rather insulting.

How have I insulted you?

I misinterpreted nothing of the sort.

We will reclaim our seat at the World Trade Organisation, a seat we vacated because the EU speaks on our behalf. From that position we will be able to negotiate our own trade deals with emerging economies and generate jobs in the UK.

As for 'mocking posts about brick walls' - WHY THE FECK ARE YOU TELLING ME? I did not post any brick walls.

I'm done with you and your old 'drawing me into a personal argument tricks to get me banned' - from now on I will ignore you -- even though it is YOU who keep stalking and baiting me when I have not even directly communicated with you.

From now on if you do not like anything I write - sue me - preferably in that corrupt, over abused Court of Human Rights.

BYE.

[Alf]

We may be a member, that isn't what I referred to however. I specifically said 'if we were to take a seat'
You misinterpreted my post and then chose to insult me, I don't appreciate the antagonistic tone just as we are on opposing sides of the debate.
Mocking posts about brick walls aren't conducive to a rational debate either, the insinuation anyone with a counter opinion to yours is rather insulting.
I put the brick walls up because the only reply that seems to be coming back at us is, "That's got nothing to do with the referendum"

[arista]

No need to fight you 2

[arista]

Yes Shag - Cool jokes

[Kizzy]

I put the brick walls up because the only reply that seems to be coming back at us is, "That's got nothing to do with the referendum"

Try stick to the issue in discussion then, don't berate others for pointing out you're veering wildly off topic.

[kirklancaster]

I put the brick walls up because the only reply that seems to be coming back at us is, "That's got nothing to do with the referendum"

And hilariously funny it was too Shag. :hee:

[Alf]

No need to fight you 2
There's no fighting, we're a loving community here at tibb.

But debate is good and should get heated by passion, especially with a topic like this.

[Kizzy]

And hilariously funny it was too Shag. :hee:

I found it as funny as you find my virgin mary pics clearly.
It's easy to misinterpret pictures in serious debates.

[Alf]

I found it as funny as you find my virgin mary pics clearly.
It's easy to misinterpret pictures in serious debates.
I can't believe you didn't enjoy my comedy?

I'm a comic genius, me mam said.

[arista]

There's no fighting, we're a loving community here at tibb.

But debate is good and should get heated by passion, especially with a topic like this.



Yes
Tell that to the Conservatives

[kirklancaster]

Yes
Tell that to the Conservatives

:laugh: Bang On Right Arista.

[Kizzy]

Yes so nice to see IDS taking a brake from savaging the vulnerable to concentrate on firmly placing daggers in his leaders back. ...naw.

[DemolitionRed]

I sense a one sided clique forming...give it up guys because from where I'm sitting, this is starting to look awfully bitchy.

[Alf]

Try stick to the issue in discussion then, don't berate others for pointing out you're veering wildly off topic.The irony of that is that Kirk was talking about immigration (which is definitely on topic), when he was told "That has NOTHING to do with being in or out of Europe"

And earlier when we were talking about the young girl on question time (on there debating the referendum, so again on topic), you said "What has that got to do with an in out referendum?"

And now you claim that I wildly veered off topic, which is a false claim.

[joeysteele]

With the fullest respect, as to those talking to most who have made their minds up to stay in, maybe it is like talking to a brick wall, however their decision to decide that way is their right and no insults should be part of any rational debate.

However ,equally so, as I find daily,talking to most people who are totally on the out side is also probably like talking to a brick wall.
They will not give any inch either.

However I still have not heard from anyone in the 'out' camp,and Kirk your graphs and info say a great deal but still do not fill me with assurances I would need to think of changing my mind.
Much of the no info harks back to over 40 years ago and the World is a vastly different place from then.

I still then at least know where I am and the UK is in the EU at this time, where its been, where it is and what the future in it will be like too.
Some of it I like some of it I would love to change and some I wish was gone.
However the facts are there, unlike as to the UK out of the EU.

Watching and listening to Ian Duncan Smith this morning,actually turned me more to the in camp than the out camp if that was possible.
Trying to figure out what that man would love to be able to do that's even worse than he is now,out of the EU, doesn't bear thinking about for me.

[Kizzy]

The irony of that is that Kirk was talking about immigration (which is definitely on topic), when he was told "That has NOTHING to do with being in or out of Europe"

And earlier when we were talking about the young girl on question time (on there debating the referendum, so again on topic), you said "What has that got to do with an in out referendum?"

And now you claim that I wildly veered off topic, which is a false claim.

I didn't say that about Lexie Hill, I asked if her point on QT was in regard to immigration or minimum wage.

[bots]

I put the brick walls up because the only reply that seems to be coming back at us is, "That's got nothing to do with the referendum"

And hilariously funny it was too Shag. :hee:

You may find it hilariously funny, but you have missed the fundamental point, no matter how many times it is said.

On this thread, Kirk has stated that illegal immigration will go down if we leave europe. There is no basis for that assumption as leaving the EU will not change people wanting to enter into this country illegally. As long as people continue to say that, I will refute it, because it is simply not true

It has also been stated that it will stop Jihadists getting in. As europe is predominantly non muslim, and those muslims fleeing war or jihadists currently within europe cannot come to the UK legally. We are not and never have been part of the schengen agreement. Refugees to other countries within the EU cannot come to the UK legally.

Are my points clear now, or are you going to persist with your hilarious brick wall images?

[bots]

Enjoy your serious debates folks

[kirklancaster]

NET IMMIGRATION INTO THE UK INCREASES TO RECORD LEVELS FOR THE THIRD CONSECUTIVE YEAR - UK POPULATION ALARMINGLY PREDICTED TO TOP 70 MILLION IN NEXT 12 YEARS

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/14800/production/_86886938_net_migration_624.png

By Danny Shaw, home affairs correspondent, BBC News

The release of the immigration statistics, every three months, is a day the Home Office must dread.

Since the end of 2012, net migration has being going up almost continuously. Net migration, of course, is the key figure we look for because the government is aiming to bring it down to below 100,000 by 2020.
It failed to do that by the general election in May, and, to much surprise, decided to stick with the target when critics were saying it was unachievable and should be dropped. A lot can happen in four and a half years of course, but it's hard to see how it can do it.

Emigration is broadly stable and immigration is at record levels and rising from both EU and non-EU countries.

If ministers are to reach their goal, they'll have to reduce the so-called "pull factors". That's tough when one of the biggest attractions of the UK is its relatively buoyant economy and the prospect of work.
The ONS said the rise was due to a 62,000 increase in immigration to 636,000 and a 20,000 reduction in emigration to 300,000.
More than two thirds of the immigration increase was driven by EU citizens, the majority of whom came to Britain to work.
Immigration minister James Brokenshire said the government was committed to reforms "across the whole of government" to deliver "the controlled migration system".
"Our new Immigration Bill will address illegal working, the pull factors that draw migrants to Britain and the availability of public services which help them to remain here unlawfully," he said.
"The last two set of figures show record levels of EU immigration which show why the prime minister is right to negotiate with the EU to reform welfare to reduce the financial incentives that attract EU migrants to the UK."
The Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford said asylum remained "the smallest component" of UK immigration "by some distance".
Director Madeleine Sumption said migration for work and study were "the largest categories" and said changes in net migration were "mainly being driven" by economic factors like the success of the UK economy rather than by new policies.
Alp Mehmet, vice chairman of Migration Watch UK, said the figures were "very disappointing" and warned "the pressure on our infrastructure will intensify" if the numbers continued to rise.

OUR SERVICES ARE UNDER IMMENSE PRESSURE AND FAILING - THE N.H.S, POLICE, FIRE SERVICES, SCHOOLS, BENEFITS SYSTEM, HOUSING - THE LIST IS ENDLESS, YET MILLIONS MORE ARE FREE TO CONTINUE IMMIGRATING TO THIS COUNTRY TO EXACERBATE THE ALREADY CRITICAL SITUATION.

AS THE ABOVE REPORT SHOWS - OUR ECONOMIC SUCCESS IS THE NUMBER 1. REASON THAT MIGRANTS FLOCK TO THIS COUNTRY NOT 'ASYLUM', WHICH REMAINS "THE SMALLEST COMPONENT OF UK IMMIGRATION BY SOME DISTANCE".

MORE THAN TWO THIRDS OF THE MASSIVE IMMIGRATION INCREASE WAS DRIVEN BY EU CITIZENS - THE MAJORITY OF WHOM CAME HERE TO WORK NOT FOR ASYLUM OR REFUGEE REASONS.

IF WE EXIT THE CORRUPT, DAMAGING, SELF-SERVING EU, THEN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF IMMIGRANTS TO THIS COUNTRY WILL BE REDUCED BY TWO THIRDS - LEAVING MORE FUNDS AND STAFF TO COMPREHENSIVELY POLICE OUR OWN BORDERS AND IMPLEMENT THE PROPER IMMIGRATION VETTING PROCEDURES WHICH ARE NECESSARY IN THESE TERRORIST DOMINATED TIMES.

GENUINE REFUGEES - THE SMALLEST COMPONENT OF IMMIGRANTS - WILL NEVER BE TURNED AWAY AND THERE WILL BE INCREASED FUNDING AVAILABLE FROM SAVINGS MADE TO PROPERLY ATTEND TO THEIR GENUINE NEEDS.

IT IS FAR EASIER TO PROCESS SMALLER NUMBERS OF GENUINE REFUGEES THAN THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF EU ECONOMIC MIGRANTS, FAR LESS COSTLY, AND IT CAN BE DONE WITH MORE EFFICIENCY.


WHEN TURKEY JOINS THE EU ANOTHER 79 MILLION OF ITS CITIZENS ARE THEN ELIGIBLE TO IMMIGRATE TO THIS COUNTRY AS 'ECONOMIC EU MIGRANTS' - DO YOU BELIEVE WE CAN COPE WITH EVEN A FRACTION OF THESE NEW IMMIGRANTS ON TOP OF THOSE ALREADY FLOODING HERE IN THEIR HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS PER YEAR?

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG, OR XENOPHOBIC OR RACIST, WITH WANTING TO CARE FOR YOUR OWN PEOPLE NO MATTER HOW CHARITABLE YOU ARE - ESPECIALLY WHEN HUGE SECTIONS OF OUR SOCIETY, INCLUDING THE YOUNG, ARE BEING MARGINALISED AND NEGLECTED AND LEFT WITH NO HOPE, YET IMMENSE FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE FOR MAKING OTHERS LIVES MORE COMFORTABLE.

IS IT RIGHT THAT THOUSANDS OF FAMILIES WITHIN THE UK ARE STRUGGLING TO EXIST,WHILE OVER £30 MILLION POUNDS EACH YEAR IS BEING PAID OUT BY THIS COUNTRY IN CHILD BENEFIT PAYMENTS CLAIMED BY 20,660 OPPORTUNIST SCROUNGING IMMIGRANT FAMILIES IN THE UK FOR 34,199 OF THEIR CHILDREN LIVING BACK IN THEIR OWN COUNTRIES????


AND THIS IS ONLY THE VERY TINY TIP OF A VERY LARGE ICEBERG WHEN IT COMES TO THE BILLIONS OF POUNDS PER YEAR THAT HEMORRAGES FROM THIS COUNTRY TO OTHER EU COUNTRIES BECAUSE OF THE SELF-SERVING ANTI-BRITISH OPPORTUNIST EU.


THE ONLY WAY TO REMEDY THIS SITUATION IS TO VOTE OUT.

OUT.OUT.OUT.OUT.OUT.OUT.OUT.

[kirklancaster]

You may find it hilariously funny, but you have missed the fundamental point, no matter how many times it is said.

On this thread, Kirk has stated that illegal immigration will go down if we leave europe. There is no basis for that assumption as leaving the EU will not change people wanting to enter into this country illegally. As long as people continue to say that, I will refute it, because it is simply not true

It has also been stated that it will stop Jihadists getting in. As europe is predominantly non muslim, and those muslims fleeing war or jihadists currently within europe cannot come to the UK legally. We are not and never have been part of the schengen agreement. Refugees to other countries within the EU cannot come to the UK legally.

Are my points clear now, or are you going to persist with your hilarious brick wall images?

I think you have misinterpreted my post BOTS. Two thirds of immigrants to the UK are Economic Migrants from EU Countries. If we exit that corrupt wasteful organisation, the immigration figures WILL be drastically reduced, and the millions of miles of bureaucratic EU Red Tape which binds our hands when it comes to controlling our own borders will be removed.

This will leave hundreds of millions of pounds available for extra funding to both increase our Immigration Staff numbers to increase efficiency in vetting all remaining applicants, AND to fund extra Border Staff to tackle the massive problem of Illegal Immigrants.

[DemolitionRed]

Perhaps now is the time to confess I'm dyslexic and large text in an array of colours are really difficult for me to read.

[Alf]

Enjoy your serious debates folks
Will do.

[DemolitionRed]

How will border controls change for those living outside of the EU? We presently have the Dublin Regulation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Regulation plus the cooperation of the French. Surely if we take away those two things its going to be far easier for illegals to use Britain as a safe haven

[Ammi]

....just side-tracking and hijacking etc, that's very interesting to me personally because the complete opposite has been the case with every dyslexia child I've ever worked with, I don't recall an exception to that really...larger text makes more constant and smooth flow of reading for dyslexics and really helps a lot with the 'jumbling' effect that smaller text tends to quite often have, so magnifying lenses are usually recommended by dyslexia experts for use in schools, well at home as well and in every situation where the child reads...colour also is recognised and helps 'define' so coloured lenses are nearly always prescribed for dyslexic children to wear while they're reading..it's nice/interesting to learn new things of something I haven't personally come across before...

[DemolitionRed]

....just side-tracking and hijacking etc, that's very interesting to me personally because the complete opposite has been the case with every dyslexia child I've ever worked with, I don't recall an exception to that really...larger text makes more constant and smooth flow of reading for dyslexics and really helps a lot with the 'jumbling' effect that smaller text tends to quite often have, so magnifying lenses are usually recommended by dyslexia experts for use in schools, well at home as well and in every situation where the child reads...colour also is recognised and helps 'define' so coloured lenses are nearly always prescribed for dyslexic children to wear while they're reading..it's nice/interesting to learn new things of something I haven't personally come across before...


There are different types of dyslexia Ammi and so, as I'm sure you know, no two dyslexics are alike. I have visual/sensory and audio dyslexia as well as dyspraxia. I can't read royal green text at all and my head spins if I see lots of different colours of text on one page. I also have problems with large block words but its dependant on the syle of font. I use sylexiad but I know other dyslexics who have real problems with it. It definitely changes as you get older though because I used to like sasoon, which my dyslexic son now uses but now have trouble with that.

We are all different. I've never had much trouble with spelling but ask me to write down a group of numbers and its doubtful I can put them down in the order given to me.

[Ammi]

...no, there are never two 'absolute identicals' in these things as there aren't with anything..but in my own personal experience of working with many dyslexic children, the same has been prescribed and applied for all of magnified text plus colour tinted lenses/glasses as well as an individual plan for each child...wow, though..your school days must have been a very living nightmare with so many challenging difficulties and not being able to follow audio instructions either....both must obviously still cause you severe problems...I'm not familiar with sensory dyslexia but am familiar with Sensory Processing Disorder, which is usually more associated with things like Autism/OCD etc and something I have encountered but not with dyslexics, I have to say... so you're a bit of a phenomenon to me..:laugh:..and very interesting...

..one of my sons also has dyspraxia btw, so something I know about personally as well as through my job.../'the living with it', I guess you could say...he had no dominant side of left or right handed, which does still create problems for him in his life and really frustrating ones when he was at school...

[DemolitionRed]

...no, there are never two 'absolute identicals' in these things as there aren't with anything..but in my own personal experience of working with many dyslexic children, the same has been prescribed and applied for all of magnified text plus colour tinted lenses/glasses as well as an individual plan for each child...wow, though..your school days must have been a very living nightmare with so many challenging difficulties and not being able to follow audio instructions either....both must obviously still cause you severe problems...I'm not familiar with sensory dyslexia but am familiar with Sensory Processing Disorder, which is usually more associated with things like Autism/OCD etc and something I have encountered but not with dyslexics, I have to say... so you're a bit of a phenomenon to me..:laugh:..and very interesting...

..one of my sons also has dyspraxia btw, so something I know about personally as well as through my job.../'the living with it', I guess you could say...he had no dominant side of left or right handed, which does still create problems for him in his life and really frustrating ones when he was at school...

I've started a thread on dyslexia Amy because this is totally off topic but I'll just respond to what you've said.

I've tried the shields but found I couldn't get along with them and so there was no point having tinted lenses. I still have a shield somewhere, I should dig it out.
I didn't get diagnosed before my late teens and only then because my parents really pushed for a diagnosis. Things have changed a lot since I was at school. I didn't get the help my son now gets.

A lot of people with my condition get wrongly diagnosed and put on the autistic spectrum.

I could tell you so much about how you feel to be a dyspraxic child Ammi. I've often thought about working with dyspraxic children, simply because I know the sort of inner anguish they go through. I know what really helped me and what hindered me.

[Ammi]

I've started a thread on dyslexia Amy because this is totally off topic but I'll just respond to what you've said.

I've tried the shields but found I couldn't get along with them and so there was no point having tinted lenses. I still have a shield somewhere, I should dig it out.
I didn't get diagnosed before my late teens and only then because my parents really pushed for a diagnosis. Things have changed a lot since I was at school. I didn't get the help my son now gets.

A lot of people with my condition get wrongly diagnosed and put on the autistic spectrum.

I could tell you so much about how you feel to be a dyspraxic child Ammi. I've often thought about working with dyspraxic children, simply because I know the sort of inner anguish they go through. I know what really helped me and what hindered me.



...I think I just found it thank you..:laugh:..I'll follow it with interest...

[Alf]

Not really a fair debate when my post's are being deleted.

There's things I don't agree with, but I get on with it.


If you believe in democracy you vote out, If you don't, then vote in, simple as that.

Briton's, never, never, never shall be slaves



I'll leave you all to enjoy debate, I don't stay where I'm not wanted.

[kirklancaster]

Not really a fair debate when my post's are being deleted.

There's things I don't agree with, but I get on with it.


If you believe in democracy you vote out, If you don't, then vote in, simple as that.

Briton's, never, never, never shall be slaves



I'll leave you all to enjoy debate, I don't stay where I'm not wanted.

I WANT YOU MATE - PLEASE STICK AROUND.

I have had more posts disappear than the Royal Mail. You'll get used to it Shag.

[kirklancaster]

I sense a one sided clique forming...give it up guys because from where I'm sitting, this is starting to look awfully bitchy.

Then you really need to move seats because your view is grossly and conveniently distorted.

This is nothing more than an open debate, in which - by virtue of this being a forum - everyone is welcome to post contributions.

I have very often been the only one debating with several members who opposed my view, and quite often those 'several' included your good self.

It really is disingenous to keep claiming that this is anything but an open debate.

[Kizzy]

Then you really need to move seats because your view is grossly and conveniently distorted.

This is nothing more than an open debate, in which - by virtue of this being a forum - everyone is welcome to post contributions.

I have very often been the only one debating with several members who opposed my view, and quite often those 'several' included your good self.

It really is disingenous to keep claiming that this is anything but an open debate.

As was yours yesterday.

'LEAVE ME FECKING ALONE and concentrate PURELY on my contributions to the debates.'

Pictures of walls are not contributions to debates either Kirk, it's a double standard.

I can't bring myself to read the shouty coloured posts either,this isn't a debate it's like a Trump caucus everything is shouted over in glorious technicolour.
If a serious debate looked less like a tabloid headline it would help.

[kirklancaster]

As was yours yesterday.

'LEAVE ME FECKING ALONE and concentrate PURELY on my contributions to the debates.'

Pictures of walls are not contributions to debates either Kirk, it's a double standard.

I can't bring myself to read the shouty coloured posts either,this isn't a debate it's like a Trump caucus everything is shouted over in glorious technicolour.
If a serious debate looked less like a tabloid headline it would help.

First of all may I correct you that I did not post any 'pictures of walls' - that was Wannashag by his own admission and as the most fleeting of glances back through these posts will attest.

Secondly, I will correct your deliberate misrepresention concerning the part of my response to Kizzy which you disingenously quote COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTEXT.

YES, I did post to her; 'LEAVE ME FECKING ALONE and concentrate PURELY on my contributions to the debates.' BUT that was because she was not debating but criticising my use of colour and text - as you full well know.

I do not want to get into any personal arguments with you - or anyone else - because that will lead to me being banned for defending myself or correcting untrue allegations (as now for instance) and I am here to put forward my argument for exiting the corrupt EU and to debate THE SUBJECT MATTER should any other member wish to do so.

This IS A DEBATE should you or anyone else choose to make it one, and I will tone down my use of colour for you if that prevents you from reading my posts but I take it that larger text in bold black type is not a problem for you if used for the purposes of Headlines and illumination of key points in my posts?

The only thing I will politely ask of you, is that you refrain from falsely accusing me of things which I have NOT done, because this does happen a lot and it does appear like deliberate deflection because there is no valid counter to my argument.

If you want to counter what I claim then please do so, but do try to corroborate your claims as I do try to do with mine.

We are, after all, intelligent adults, and there really is no need for anything than debate of the subject matter - no matter how impassioned we may become.

[Kizzy]

Oh blah blah everything is disingenuous your word de jour, if it fails to meet your exacting standards that clearly you don't follow .
I didn't suggest you had posted the wall yet you guffawed your napper off at it, while a couple of posts earlier slagged me for posting pics in SD!
Double standards, big fat disingenuous double standards.

[Vicky.]

Only posts in here I can see that have been deleted was a pic of a brick wall and then people quoting it? Not sure how thats a debate. We do tend to delete offtopic or trivial posts in this section.

[kirklancaster]

Oh blah blah everything is disingenuous your word de jour, if it fails to meet your exacting standards that clearly you don't follow .
I didn't suggest you had posted the wall yet you guffawed your napper off at it, while a couple of posts earlier slagged me for posting pics in SD!
Double standards, big fat disingenuous double standards.

I suggest you calm down. It is you who constantly use the new words which I have introduced you to. And STOP being aggressive and personal.

[Kizzy]

The lives of 2 million UK citizens living, working and travelling in the other 27 Member States would be affected if Britain was to leave the EU, according to an official government’s paper.

Britons leaving on the continent may lose a range of specific rights that are only guaranteed because of EU law. These include the rights to live and work but also access to pensions, health care and public service, the Cabinet office warned in his first official report into the impact of a future Brexit.

This would be a reality for expats, a shame for those who worked and saved to retire in the sun.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/eu-referendum-brexit-could-leave-british-expats-without-access-to-pensions-health-care-and-public-a6903211.html

[Ammi]

...ok, whether it's wanted/appreciated/resented or whatever, I really don't care..I'm going to put my 10 euros into this...it makes no difference which seat you sit in from an observer's point of view/none whatsoever because all seats see the exact same thing and equal participation ...which is nothing at all to do with passion of opinions from the red or blue corner of shall we say, 'a handful of people'...it's just the sheer inability to be able to hold a debate with each other when it comes to political stances...the buttons pressed/the buttons reacted to being pressed etc are nothing to do with passion at all, they're just ridiculous and silly and spoiling it for those who are trying to post round the nonsense/those who are passionate and who do genuinely want to debate and who are trying desperately to not allow themselves to be distracted...and those others on the forum who also have genuine interest because the Euro referendum is so important...but their discussions/questions/debate etc can be found in other areas of their lives where they don't have the distraction of this nonsense and this becomes the last place they have any inclination to talk about...a shame really and a 'be careful what you all wish for', because without the respect for each different opinion and each input of reasons for in or out, all there would be left is, yes I agree, for sure, certainly and I concur, which isn't an informed debate at all but a bland and boring experience, I would think....Kirk, wanna, and bitontheside (if you've voted out of this thread and discussion..)...stop being silly now and get yourself back here and focus on your opinions on the referendum/nothing more, nothing less...

[Kizzy]

Thanks for trying to denigrate my views as not passion but the inability to hold a debate, strangely enough I don't agree but I'm sure you feel better for saying all that.

[Cherie]

I thought the brick was funny and could apply to both sides of the argument :laugh: it didn't apply to the undecided who are sitting on it

[kirklancaster]

...ok, whether it's wanted/appreciated/resented or whatever, I really don't care..I'm going to put my 10 euros into this...it makes no difference which seat you sit in from an observer's point of view/none whatsoever because all seats see the exact same thing and equal participation ...which is nothing at all to do with passion of opinions from the red or blue corner of shall we say, 'a handful of people'...it's just the sheer inability to be able to hold a debate with each other when it comes to political stances...the buttons pressed/the buttons reacted to being pressed etc are nothing to do with passion at all, they're just ridiculous and silly and spoiling it for those who are trying to post round the nonsense/those who are passionate and who do genuinely want to debate and who are trying desperately to not allow themselves to be distracted...and those others on the forum who also have genuine interest because the Euro referendum is so important...but their discussions/questions/debate etc can be found in other areas of their lives where they don't have the distraction of this nonsense and this becomes the last place they have any inclination to talk about...a shame really and a 'be careful what you all wish for', because without the respect for each different opinion and each input of reasons for in or out, all there would be left is, yes I agree, for sure, certainly and I concur, which isn't an informed debate at all but a bland and boring experience, I would think....Kirk, wanna, and bitontheside (if you've voted out of this thread and discussion..)...stop being silly now and get yourself back here and focus on your opinions on the referendum/nothing more, nothing less...

A great post Ammi, written by someone impartial who has great peception.

I have never felt more strongly about anything in my life than I do about our membership of the EU, and I HAVE tried to focus only on the issues at hand.

I think many can see what always occurs on these threads when certain members are out-debated and are losing the argument - 'ganging up', subterfuge, devious tactics of deflection, false claims and 'Strawman' tactics are employed in an effort to 'drive off' those in opposition and therefore leave the thread to themselves for mutual backslapping and propaganda with NO counter views to give balance or inform.

My use of text size and colour is a classic example. These facilities are there to be used if any member so chooses, and I chose to use them because - by sheer necessity - posts on this very complex subject need to be lengthy if comprehensive, and either, KEY points tend to become overlooked in long pages of standard text, or long pages of standard text do deter some people from reading.

So, I used size and colour to highlight, and to try to induce people to actually read my posts.

Yet there has been NO comment on the actual content of those posts, merely a smokescreen of deflection about my legitimate use of the text size and colour.

THAT is NOT debate. That is attack for no VALID reason.

Anyway Ammi - thank you for your balanced post, I intend to keep posting AND in a manner which I see fit., and I genuinely hope Wannashag and BOTS will too.

[Cherie]

The lives of 2 million UK citizens living, working and travelling in the other 27 Member States would be affected if Britain was to leave the EU, according to an official government’s paper.

Britons leaving on the continent may lose a range of specific rights that are only guaranteed because of EU law. These include the rights to live and work but also access to pensions, health care and public service, the Cabinet office warned in his first official report into the impact of a future Brexit.

This would be a reality for expats, a shame for those who worked and saved to retire in the sun.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/eu-referendum-brexit-could-leave-british-expats-without-access-to-pensions-health-care-and-public-a6903211.html

Interesting article, I follow some of the expat forums as we have a place in Spain, hard to see how the out camp can counter these claims as each individual country would be able to set their own rules

[kirklancaster]

The lives of 2 million UK citizens living, working and travelling in the other 27 Member States would be affected if Britain was to leave the EU, according to an official government’s paper.

Britons leaving on the continent may lose a range of specific rights that are only guaranteed because of EU law. These include the rights to live and work but also access to pensions, health care and public service, the Cabinet office warned in his first official report into the impact of a future Brexit.

This would be a reality for expats, a shame for those who worked and saved to retire in the sun.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/eu-referendum-brexit-could-leave-british-expats-without-access-to-pensions-health-care-and-public-a6903211.html

So is this you now posting a report by the TORY GOVERNMENT as factual corroboration to support your 'Vote To Remain IN' stance?

The very SAME TORY GOVERNMENT whom you have spent years despising?
The very SAME TORY GOVERNMENT whose every other 'statement you have hailed as 'lies' or 'spin'?

What is happening?

I mean, I am puzzled by the very fact that you IGNORE all the evidence of how our membership of the corrupt EU is HURTING the poor of this country, but you now express great sympathy for what MAY (or MAY NOT) be the plight of the more well off who have had the means - however gained - to be able to retire to a 'life in the sun'.

What is happening?

Some of the TORY party have a huge vested interest in keeping us in the EU, hence the frenetic campaign of hysterical 'fear mongering' over what MAY occur if we vote to leave their beloved EU - the EU which generates huge covert personal income for themselves and the corporations which keep them in power and in funds, and all at the expense of the British Taxpayers, many of whom are struggling to exist on inadequate wages.

42 years of huge multi-billion pound net deficits for belonging to an organisation which has delivered very little by return which actually justifies the cost of membership, and YET the Tories are hellbent on keeping us in.

OWEN JONES - the dahling of the Left Wing strongly advocates all on the Left to vote OUT.

THE SOCIALIST PARTY OF SCOTLAND and THE SOCIALIST PARTY OF ENGLAND AND WALES strongly advocate all those on the Left to vote OUT.

Editorial statement from the Socialist Party England and Wales and Scotland

http://socialistpartyscotland.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/sp-300x161.png

"The referendum on 23 June is not just about the EU but is also an opportunity to pass verdict on Cameron and his rotten government.
An ‘out’ vote would strike a mortal blow at the government"

"It is wrong and a serious mistake for Jeremy Corbyn and Labour to be supporting an ‘in’ vote that could inadvertently lead to an escape for this Tory government on the ropes."

" Corbyn… and the GMB

"Jeremy Corbyn and others on the left were wrong to succumb under pressure from Labour’s right wing to the argument that the EU is advantageous for workers and so advocated a vote to stay in it. One of the consequences of that mistake is that his referendum campaigning will be improving the chances of a victory for Cameron and the continuation of Tory austerity."

"Also, the trade union leaders are mistaken in looking to provisions from a “social Europe” as a way to counter the anti-union and anti-worker attacks of a right-wing government like Cameron’s. A future UK government elected on the anti-austerity programme Corbyn stood on in the Labour leadership election would soon be confronted with the anti-working class character of the EU."

I do not agree with most of their reasons, but I applaud their passion and totally agree with their decision to vote OUT.

As to the fate of 'ex-pats' should we leave the EU - well, NO ONE KNOWS but I do not believe that they will be abandonded.

But here is where Cameron and pro-EU Tory Government are 'hoisting themselves on their own petards' because - and think clearly about this - Here we have a BRITISH PRIME MINISTER and his GOVERNMENT attempting to spread fear and panic among the British people to evince them to 'Vote to Remain' in the EU, and ALL that scaremongering is based squarely upon the UNCERTAINTIES of what MAY or MAY NOT happen if we leave.

SHOULD NOT THE BRITISH PRIME MINISTER AND HIS GOVERNMENT HAVE LONG BEEN BUSY ANALYSING THE EFFECTS OF A BREXIT, AND HAVE LONG BEEN CALCULATING WHICH COURSE OF ACTION THEY SHOULD TAKE ON ALL SUCH MATTERS AS EX-PATS etc. IN THE EVENT OF US LEAVING THE EU?

SHOULD A BRITISH PRIME MINISTER REALLY BE SO CLUELESS AND HYSTERICALLY ALARMED BY THE EFFECTS OF A BREXIT WHEN THAT HAS BEEN A DISTINCT POSSIBILITY FOR YEARS?

I have supported Cameron and a lot of his policies in the past and still do - but on this ALL CRUCIAL matter, he is being nefarious, deceitful, alarmist, and guilty of the most atrocious lies and scaremongering - all in the interest of self and the corporate elititists.

[Cherie]

but you now express great sympathy for what MAY (or MAY NOT) be the plight of the more well off who have had the means - however gained - to be able to retire to a 'life in the sun'.




As to the fate of 'ex-pats' should we leave the EU - well, NO ONE KNOWS but I do not believe that they will be abandonded.


Are you inferring that most expats are hugely wealthy or have made their money by nefarious means? naturally some will fall into this category but a huge number emigrated as the cost of living used to be a lot cheaper and their pensions stretched further, the weather is better and ironically enough to escape immigration into the UK, but forgetting that by doing this they were now guests in their home country and would at times be treated with the same suspicion that they had treated people here.


That is the whole problem with the OUT campaign, no one can confidently claim what will happen with anything, apart from maybe immigration? so isn't it voting for an unknown?

[MTVN]

Even with immigration there is no chance that we would be a part of the single market without accepting free movement as well. The Eurosceptics like to herald Norway and Switzerland as examples of successful countries outside of the EU yet both have to accept free movement of people as the price for access to the single market and both have to abide by the vast majority of EU regulation. People like IDS think it would be simple to arrange free trade agreements with the EU member countries, well it took Canada seven years to negotiate their free trade deal! Yes it will be in their interests to continue trading with the UK but it will also be in their interests to make sure that we don't have it easy if we do want to leave. These leaders are all accountable to their own populations and they don't want to give momentum to anti-EU movements in their own countries.

[Alf]

I may as well talk to a brick wall.

[Alf]

I'd like to apologise to anyone offended by the brick walls picture, I didn't intentionally mean to offend, I suppose I was just trying to be a clever dick.

Please accept my apology and let's move on with the thread debate.

[Alf]

Under the European Union Treaty's Article 34, the EU limits what our diplomats can say and do on international bodies like the UN. EU membership doesn't give us a voice on the top tables, it takes away our voice.

[arista]

I'd like to apologise to anyone offended by the brick walls picture, I didn't intentionally mean to offend, I suppose I was just trying to be a clever dick.

Please accept my apology and let's move on with the thread debate.


Jolly Good Shag


Europe is a mess
Illegal Migrants
need to get in line.


We are not a Dumping ground - You French feckers

[Alf]

More job losses, the futures bright in the EU

http://nr.news-republic.com/Web/ArticleWeb.aspx?regionid=4&articleid=59111117

[Alf]

A fantastic article in The Washington examiner

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/why-americans-should-back-brexit/article/2584222?custom_click=rss

[reece(:]

Not here for prices of most items skyrocketing if we leave, a sad prospect.

[Alf]

Maajid Nawaz say's "Europes social fabric is falling apart"

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/03/01/there-s-no-excuse-for-child-brides-in-europe.html

[Kizzy]

So is this you now posting a report by the TORY GOVERNMENT as factual corroboration to support your 'Vote To Remain IN' stance?

The very SAME TORY GOVERNMENT whom you have spent years despising?
The very SAME TORY GOVERNMENT whose every other 'statement you have hailed as 'lies' or 'spin'?

What is happening?

I mean, I am puzzled by the very fact that you IGNORE all the evidence of how our membership of the corrupt EU is HURTING the poor of this country, but you now express great sympathy for what MAY (or MAY NOT) be the plight of the more well off who have had the means - however gained - to be able to retire to a 'life in the sun'.

What is happening?

Some of the TORY party have a huge vested interest in keeping us in the EU, hence the frenetic campaign of hysterical 'fear mongering' over what MAY occur if we vote to leave their beloved EU - the EU which generates huge covert personal income for themselves and the corporations which keep them in power and in funds, and all at the expense of the British Taxpayers, many of whom are struggling to exist on inadequate wages.

42 years of huge multi-billion pound net deficits for belonging to an organisation which has delivered very little by return which actually justifies the cost of membership, and YET the Tories are hellbent on keeping us in.

OWEN JONES - the dahling of the Left Wing strongly advocates all on the Left to vote OUT.

THE SOCIALIST PARTY OF SCOTLAND and THE SOCIALIST PARTY OF ENGLAND AND WALES strongly advocate all those on the Left to vote OUT.

Editorial statement from the Socialist Party England and Wales and Scotland

http://socialistpartyscotland.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/sp-300x161.png

"The referendum on 23 June is not just about the EU but is also an opportunity to pass verdict on Cameron and his rotten government.
An ‘out’ vote would strike a mortal blow at the government"

"It is wrong and a serious mistake for Jeremy Corbyn and Labour to be supporting an ‘in’ vote that could inadvertently lead to an escape for this Tory government on the ropes."

" Corbyn… and the GMB

"Jeremy Corbyn and others on the left were wrong to succumb under pressure from Labour’s right wing to the argument that the EU is advantageous for workers and so advocated a vote to stay in it. One of the consequences of that mistake is that his referendum campaigning will be improving the chances of a victory for Cameron and the continuation of Tory austerity."

"Also, the trade union leaders are mistaken in looking to provisions from a “social Europe” as a way to counter the anti-union and anti-worker attacks of a right-wing government like Cameron’s. A future UK government elected on the anti-austerity programme Corbyn stood on in the Labour leadership election would soon be confronted with the anti-working class character of the EU."

I do not agree with most of their reasons, but I applaud their passion and totally agree with their decision to vote OUT.

As to the fate of 'ex-pats' should we leave the EU - well, NO ONE KNOWS but I do not believe that they will be abandonded.

But here is where Cameron and pro-EU Tory Government are 'hoisting themselves on their own petards' because - and think clearly about this - Here we have a BRITISH PRIME MINISTER and his GOVERNMENT attempting to spread fear and panic among the British people to evince them to 'Vote to Remain' in the EU, and ALL that scaremongering is based squarely upon the UNCERTAINTIES of what MAY or MAY NOT happen if we leave.

SHOULD NOT THE BRITISH PRIME MINISTER AND HIS GOVERNMENT HAVE LONG BEEN BUSY ANALYSING THE EFFECTS OF A BREXIT, AND HAVE LONG BEEN CALCULATING WHICH COURSE OF ACTION THEY SHOULD TAKE ON ALL SUCH MATTERS AS EX-PATS etc. IN THE EVENT OF US LEAVING THE EU?

SHOULD A BRITISH PRIME MINISTER REALLY BE SO CLUELESS AND HYSTERICALLY ALARMED BY THE EFFECTS OF A BREXIT WHEN THAT HAS BEEN A DISTINCT POSSIBILITY FOR YEARS?

I have supported Cameron and a lot of his policies in the past and still do - but on this ALL CRUCIAL matter, he is being nefarious, deceitful, alarmist, and guilty of the most atrocious lies and scaremongering - all in the interest of self and the corporate elititists.

I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't again...
I have taken the report on it's merits regardless of where it came from, isn't that a positive that I didn't dismiss it without consideration?
Mind you the hokey cokey conservatives aren't sure themselves which leg to put in are they so nobody can be sure where they stand atm.
My initial concern is WTD, if that is isolated and protected prior to the vote I'm happy.
I'm not willing to be bamboozled with spin relating to immigration which distracted so many during the GE.

[Alf]

A chap called John Redwood has some questions he'd like to ask the remain campaigners.

http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2016/02/26/crucial-questions-for-stay-in-the-eu-that-never-get-asked-by-the-media/

[Kizzy]

A chap called John Redwood has some questions he'd like to ask the remain campaigners.

http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2016/02/26/crucial-questions-for-stay-in-the-eu-that-never-get-asked-by-the-media/

'Why did they show such hostility to British beef?'

:laugh: Is this guy for real?

[joeysteele]

This argument doesn't have any reason to get at any govt since in fact no matter what govt we had unless it was a UKIP one, all other mainland Parliamentary Parties would be advocating remaining in the EU.
Maybe the DUP and UUP would be anti it but even as to N Ireland, the SDLP, Sinn Fein and the Alliance party would be likely for in.

So whatever this govt or any that were in place other than this Conservative govt are going to present that will help the 'in' cause.
Then even I support the PM and the bulk of this govt on this issue,so I agree with Kizzy's presentation more obviously,
Like her despite my intense dislike for this govt, on this I agree with it completely, support it too and also support anything they present to further the 'in' cause that has a basis and fact to it.

[Alf]

I think staying in will destroy the Labour party, I think UKIP will become the main opposition and I'd say there's the possibility of civil war in this Country within the next twenty years.

[joeysteele]

I think staying in will remove the need for UKIP totally,they will have lost completely the argument of the EU and their credibility will be gone.
They will then have to be in turmoil,having to completely argue their policies around the UK being in the EU.
No totally anti EU Party could really then credibly govern or have great influence in my view, after an in vote result.

Just as with those saying if the vote is to leave, the PM will have lost the argument and his credibility will be gone.

As for Labour,they have no problem with the EU as a Party as to the vast majority of MPs and members.
I cannot see a single scrap of of justification to indicate any problems for Labour on this issue,no matter whatever the result of the referendum is.

[DemolitionRed]

I think staying in will remove the need for UKIP totally,they will have lost completely the argument of the EU and their credibility will be gone.
They will then have to be in turmoil,having to completely argue their policies around the UK being in the EU.
No totally anti EU Party could really then credibly govern or have great influence in my view, after an in vote result.

Just as with those saying if the vote is to leave, the PM will have lost the argument and his credibility will be gone.

As for Labour,they have no problem with the EU as a Party as to the vast majority of MPs and members.
I cannot see a single scrap of of justification to indicate any problems for Labour on this issue,no matter whatever the result of the referendum is.

I think there's going to be utter turmoil regardless.
If we remain in, Boris is going to have to start a new party which will inevitably split the present government.
UKIP will be, like you say, finished.

If we leave, Cameron will probably have to step down and Osborne would probably get a vote of no confidence as deputy PM. I think Boris would step up to the job but whoever takes on the PM role in those unpredictable fledgling years of Brexit isn't going to be as popular as he hopes. Its predicted that within a few years of us leaving the EU Britain will be hitting hard times (be that temporary) which could create civil unrest. If that happens, the nation may look towards the Labour party as a serious alternative.

[Alf]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CckQBsGXEAAFRTA.jpg

[Alf]

Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has his two penn'orth.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/eu-referendum-joseph-stiglitz-ttip-labour-transatlantic-trade-investment-partnership-a6907806.html

[Kizzy]

Who promoted the idea of that TTIP thing, where did it come from... What govt in their right mind would give businesses that much power?

[kirklancaster]

'Why did they show such hostility to British beef?'

:laugh: Is this guy for real?

YES - This guy is for real.:


European unity? Don't make me laugh - The UK has always been the EU's 'whipping boy':

Monday, October 25, 1999 Published at 16:52 GMT 17:52 UK

How the beef row escalated

French say British beef is still unsafe

Tensions between British and French farmers and politicians have simmered to boiling point throughout this month.

The French government is flouting European Commission instructions with its refusal to import British beef.

It says it has evidence that British beef is unsafe. The commission says it has misinterpreted reports.

Back in Britain, frustration at France's continuation of the ban - and revelations that the French themselves may be employing unsafe farming practices - have led to demonstrations and calls for an all-out boycott of French goods.

Key events in the escalating row

The French are facing allegations that they feed sewage to their cattle

1 October 1999:France announces that unlike the rest of Europe, it will not lift a ban on British beef. The decision is based on a report by France's Food Safety Agency, which states that British beef is not safe for human consumption. Six days peviously, Britain had exported its first beef to Europe in more than three years.

2 October:Amid protest from British farmers and outrage in the British press, the UK asks the European Commission to take action against France for its stance. Its president, Romano Prodi, gives assurances that legal action will be taken - if scientific advisers find that there is no evidence to support France's continuation of the ban.

4 October: The European Commission finds there is no justification for the French ban.

5 October:France agrees to allow transportation of British beef across its borders, but will not allow it onto shop shelves.

6 October:French agriculture minister Jean Galvany says there is "no reason for France to change its mind" about the ban.

Joyce Quin spoke informally on behalf of British farmers

7 October: At a meeting of European scientists, British farmers threaten mass demonstrations if France does not fall into line with the rest of the community.

8 October: Germany delays importing beef as a result of France's continuation of the ban. German health minister Andrea Fischler says Germany will wait and see what European scientists make of French Food Safety Agency's report.

9 October: Deputy Agriculture Minister Joyce Quin announces that she will travel to the annual food exhibition in Cologne, to speak informally on behalf of British farmers. Her boss Nick Brown cancelled his attendance in protest, and had vowed to personally boycott all French goods.

10 October: Lindsay Hoyle, Labour MP for Chorley, calls for a boycott of all French and German produce. The press is also urging its readers to "forget the Dijon, and buy British".

11 October: Approximately 600 farmers block Plymouth's Millbay docks, preventing at least two lorries from leaving ferries from France and entering the UK.

Prince Charles voiced support for British beef farmers

12 October: The French government announces that the ban could continue for months, despite the threat of legal action from the European Union. British farmers, meanwhile, promise that demonstrations at ports will continue until the French relent.

13 October: The European Commission finds that the report of the French Food Safety Agency is based on a misinterpretation of scientific findings, regarding the age of cattle and the threat of BSE infection. Prince Charles publicly supports British beef farmers.

14 October: British beef is back on the menu in Brussels at a gala dinner. France's ban is further scrutinised by an EU committee, which calls for more information into the safety of British beef. It is announced that farming profits in the UK have halved in a year.

15 October: At the EU summit in Finland, Tony Blair takes his French counterpart Lionel Jospin aside to warn him "in the stongest possible terms" that France could face legal action over the ban.

18 October: During the day, Liberal Democrat Chief Whip Paul Tyler and shadow Agriculture Minister Colin Breed deliver a prime beef joint to French Ambassador Louis Bernard at the embassy in London. They discuss the ban for 30 minutes. In the evening, 200 farmers try to break down the gates of Poole Ferry Port in Dorset in an attempt to prevent lorries from Cherbourg entering the UK. One lorry remains on the ferry, rather than disembarking.

19 October: Farmers say further demonstrations are planned.
Farmers promised more demonstrations

20 October: The south of England local supermarket chain Budgen's announces that it will take French apples and pears off the shelves of its 116 stores, and stock British alternatives.

Armed French riot police are called in as Tory MEPs protest in the Champs Elysees, with a banner reading: "Let them eat cake - let them eat British beef."

22 October: Somerfield supermarkets follow suit, saying they will stop selling French apples "as soon as possible". Every single shop and pub in the Devon town of Hatherington stops selling French goods in a show of solidarity with the community's farmers.

23 October: An EU report says that sewage has been used by French renderers to make animal feed, sparking fears of a BSE crisis on the other side of the Channel. Tony Blair congratulates agriculture minister Nick Brown - who has been criticised in the press for not taking strong action against France - on his handling of the French ban situation.

The European Commission gives France until 28 October to come up with suggestions for supervising conditions in rendering plants.


[ image: French riot police were called when Tory MEPs protested on the Champs Elysees]
French riot police were called when Tory MEPs protested on the Champs Elysees
24 October: J Sainsbury announces an advertising campaign which will concentrate on the supermarket chain's support for British farmers, although along with Tescos, it refuses to support a boycott. Tesco says it will clearly label produce so that customers can choose where they want their shopping to come from. The store announces a drop in sales of French dressing, fresh French produce and Dijon mustard - and it cancels a £2m order for French mistletoe. Asda takes French brie off its shelves.

Following the sewage in feed allegations against French meat producers, Nick Brown says labelling of food is to be tightened to allow consumers to make informed choices. He is criticised for not banning French beef outright.

25 October: While the British government still resists banning French beef in the wake of the sewage allegations, Liberal Democrat MEP Liz Lynne says she will travel to the European Parliament with prime cuts of Herefordshire beef in a Union Jack bag to protest against the ban.

Scientific advisory committees tell Mr Blair there is no scientific case for banning French meat.

...... Notice the non-action against the French by the EU...............................

[DemolitionRed]

So is this you now posting a report by the TORY GOVERNMENT as factual corroboration to support your 'Vote To Remain IN' stance?

The very SAME TORY GOVERNMENT whom you have spent years despising?
The very SAME TORY GOVERNMENT whose every other 'statement you have hailed as 'lies' or 'spin'?

What is happening?



Brexit or not is a cross party issue, so it is hardly a Tory thing.

[Kizzy]

'25 October: While the British government still resists banning French beef in the wake of the sewage allegations'

Yes things have to be pretty grim to get banned here even scabby horse burgers were given the green light.
Thousands of pigs were found dead on a farm in the UK there is just not enough regulation in our food standards and if the French don't want it that is their prerogative. They can eat their ****ty meat and we'll eat ours.

[kirklancaster]

THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT WHY WE ARE IN THIS MESS IN THE FIRST PLACE

THE UK WAS TAKEN INTO THE EU ILLEGALLY


1) When alleged paedophile SIR Edward Heath took us into the 'Common Market', he did so by pushing the 'European Communities Bill' through an ordinary vote in the Commons WITHOUT any consultation of the British people by way of a Referendum or General Election - an act which is invalid under British Law, which lays down that a General Election or Referendum MUST take place BEFORE any related Parliamentary Debate.

2) Just before he became Prime Minister in the 1970 General Election, Heath himself declared that it would be wrong for any Government to join the European Community without first gaining "the full hearted consent of Parliament and people" - YET, when the polls showed in 1972 that TWO THIRDS of the British Population DID NOT WANT to join , corrupt Heath merely SIGNED THE DOCUMENTS WHICH TOOK US INTO THE COMMON MARKET.

3) In doing so, Heath misused Parliament to DENY the political sovereignty of the electorate and both HE and PARLIAMENT acted immorally and illegally under the Magna Carta (1215), the Petition of Right (1628), the Bill of Rights (1689) and the Act of Settlement (1701) - ALL OF WHICH LAY DOWN THAT Parliament HAS to "consult the electorate directly where constitutional change which would affect their political sovereignty is in prospect."

4) The 1689 Bill of Rights contains the following oath:

"I do declare that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state or potentate hath or ought to have jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence or authority within this Realm."


This Bill has NEVER been repealed, which renders it irrefutable that EVERY SINGLE TREATY WHICH THE UK HAS SIGNED WITH THE EU IS ILLEGAL.

5) Heath repeatedly LIED to the British people when he swore that our 'National Sovereignty' would be unaffected by his signing of the 'Treaty of Rome' and he even ADMITTED to this gross deception in later years.

6) However, as shocking as this act of treachery and confession are, Heath's proffered REASON for lying and deceiving Britain is even more incredible. He admitted that he lied; "because he knew that the British would not approve of him signing the Treaty if they knew the truth."

And that 'TRUTH' was, that though Heath conned voters that the EEC was merely a free trade association, he KNEW that the original members of the EEC had one common agenda to political union and creation of a European superstate with a surrender of our sovereignty mandatory under such goals.

7) The totally corrupt, self-serving Heath even received covert DIRECT PERSONAL FINANCIAL REWARD from his BRUSSELS PAYMASTERS for illegally handing our country over to them 'Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels' when he was awarded 'The Charlemagne Prize' and the sum of £35,000 paid to him PERSONALLY even though he was Prime Minister. £35,000 is worth a conservative (no pun intended) £400,000 by today's standards.

Heath knew all about bribery, because one of his aides bribed a senior Labour Party official with a payment of £25,000 for details of Harold Wilson’s election tactics.

8) So Heath received DIRECT FINANCIAL REWARD for his treachery, but there were other, more INDIRECT REWARDS for Heath, and the Party and Class which he represents, which are still ongoing today, and it is these 'benefits' which explain just WHY we are STILL in, and why David Cameron ANOTHER TORY PRIME MINISTER is campaigning so vigorously with LIES, DECEIT, and SCAREMONGERING to KEEP US IN - in spite of all the IRREFUTABLE evidence of the full past 42 years which DEMANDS that we COME OUT.

[joeysteele]

Good gracious the insults fly on this thread at times,totally unnecessary.
There are misleading statements coming from all sides in this from the Politicians the in camp and the out camp.

People have the right to feel strongly for in or out without getting insulted for goodness sake.
There is no need for attacks as to political leanings or words like ****** to be used to make any points.

Honestly,it is ridiculous,the 'in' camp only need to point out how things are now,the securities, the success and the stronger we likely are in the EU, despite its many and I mean many failings.
The 'out' camp instead of attacking people as being on the left or otherwise,all they need to do is avoid all that and explain in full with 'substantiation of same', what the UK would be like out of the EU.

Instead of going on about old arguments, that are null and void that is what people undecided need to know from the out camp.
Just to make my point as to old arguments.

I agree with Kirk that the Conservative govt in the early 70s took us into Europe without asking the voters.
I agree that was wrong.

It happened however and had they not,then Harold Wilson and Labour would have likely done so after 1974.
The polling Kirk stated, had a healthy vote against going into Europe,then as now the polls are meaningless since after only 2 years in Europe and even a re-negotiation of sorts already needed to be done, the Nation voted by almost 2 to 1 to 'stay in',in Labour's referendum on the issue.

I was talking to 4 people who are totally undecided and are sick of the whole thing already.They listen to both sides and are getting no info as to what the really need to make a decision.
They have stopped listening to UKIP as they say all they go on about is immigration.

They want the picture, as near guaranteed picture as should be possible, if things are true and right from the out camp, as to the future of the UK out of the EU.
Nothing has been given as to such assurances so the likelihood for them is to stay with what they know for sure now in the EU.

If all the out camp are going to do is insult others of a different view and political leaning to them, then they will lose the argument bigtime.

I cannot say what the UK would be like out of the EU because I have seen and heard nothing to convince of any claims being right.
Statistics mean nothing, we know a good number of the EU statistics, statistics can say whatever a particular viewpoint wants then to say.
I don't know who said it but is was once said, there were 'lies,damned lies and statistics'.
Or words to that effect.

To change over from something, people have to be assured the change they are making is for the better of all and Country,if that cannot be shown and substantiated with right and true facts,then for me change is best avoided.
We have been in Europe for over 40 years now as a partner in this process.
If David Cameron is to be believed he has got in his deal, a fact of no further political union by the UK in the EU.

If the out camp can prove him wrong on that,do so if not then he should be afforded the benefit of the doubt on it since he did the re-negotiation.
Those in his party attacking and insulting him from 'the' out side, make the whole issue look ugly and they also paint a very bad picture indeed of being out of the EU too by that nonsense.
he is presenting his deal to the voters,he believes he did his very best and got the best he could.
I cannot bear the man but on this I applaud his work on this issue and believe him right.

I also do believe fully, that he has started a chain of events in the EU that will surface as more change within the EU is demanded now in light of what he has begun.
That for me is another reason why I will be voting to stay put and take no risks whatsoever.

[kirklancaster]

[QUOTE=joeysteele;8547233]Good gracious the insults fly on this thread at times,totally unnecessary.
There are misleading statements coming from all sides in this from the Politicians the in camp and the out camp.

People have the right to feel strongly for in or out without getting insulted for goodness sake.
There is no need for attacks as to political leanings or words like ****** to be used to make any points.

And people have the right to post without their posts constantly being misrepresented or parts of their posts being quoted out of context.

Your comments above Joey just totally substantiate my often stated point that if lies and falsehoods and misrepresentations concerning certain posts are allowed to remain unchallenged on here, then they do so for posterity, with the result that they then stand as fact and truth.

NOWHERE in my post which you allude to did I call any member on here a '******'.

I was quoted out of context and had the meaning of what I had really said in an earlier post misrepresented by a member so that it 'justified' her criticism of me.

I pointed this much out to that member in a response, and reproduced what I ACTUALLY said, with the comment that; "even a ****** could understand the meaning".

I then received another very personally insulting response and yet more misrepresentation from that same member which left anyone reading that response under the impression that I had called her personally a '******' - which is a damned lie and an easily verifiable lie to boot, because those posts are still here earlier in the thread.

Now, I have repeatedly and very politely appealed to this member that she please refrain from her constant misrepresentatins of my posts, which makes this issue all the more vexing - and I KNOW from some of your own posts in other threads that you too find being misquoted, misrepresented, and being 'quoted out of context' as equally as irritating.

I am perceptive enough to recognise baiting when I encounter it.

"Honestly,it is ridiculous,the 'in' camp only need to point out how things are now,the securities, the success and the stronger we likely are in the EU, despite its many and I mean many failings.
The 'out' camp instead of attacking people as being on the left or otherwise,all they need to do is avoid all that and explain in full with 'substantiation of same', what the UK would be like out of the EU."


I totally agree, and I have invested a lot of time and effort in making posts on here which fit your brief.

I defy ANYONE to prove just how I have attacked anyone on here no matter what their politics are. I have posted what I see is the TRUTH about the EU and our 'membership' and have confined myself to those issues.

I will however, ALWAYS defend myself if I am being attacked, unfairly criticised, misrepresented, or baited.

"Instead of going on about old arguments, that are null and void that is what people undecided need to know from the out camp.
Just to make my point as to old arguments.

I agree with Kirk that the Conservative govt in the early 70s took us into Europe without asking the voters.
I agree that was wrong.

It happened however and had they not,then Harold Wilson and Labour would have likely done so after 1974.
The polling Kirk stated, had a healthy vote against going into Europe,then as now the polls are meaningless since after only 2 years in Europe and even a re-negotiation of sorts already needed to be done, the Nation voted by almost 2 to 1 to 'stay in',in Labour's referendum on the issue."

I agree about the polls being 'useless' Joey, because back then in 1975, the the 'OUT' lobby had no media or newspapers behind it, no big businesses and a very spartan campaign budget.

Meanwhile, the 'IN' campaign was supported by the Government, The Tory Opposition Party, ALL the newspapers with the exception of the communist 'Morning Star', and ALL of the other media, and they enjoyed unlimited funding via immensely wealthy idustrialists and the all-powerful Confederation of British Industry, who all had vested interests in remaing in, and they used the public's very limited knowledge and understanding of the Common Market to enable them to spread fear about exiting and to lie about the benefits of remaining in.

Nothing much changes does it?

"I was talking to 4 people who are totally undecided and are sick of the whole thing already.They listen to both sides and are getting no info as to what the really need to make a decision.
They have stopped listening to UKIP as they say all they go on about is immigration.

They want the picture, as near guaranteed picture as should be possible, if things are true and right from the out camp, as to the future of the UK out of the EU.
Nothing has been given as to such assurances so the likelihood for them is to stay with what they know for sure now in the EU."

I have actually been out campaigning for the 'OUT' lobby Joey - In Sheffield, Barnsley, Rotherham and Wakefield - and I have found that the great majority of those whom I engaged with were equally as confused, but it was a confusion with a difference because most of that 'great majority' wanted out.

They may not have had a grasp on the fine details of the EU and our membership of it, and they too sought more definite reassurance from 'our politicians' and media on any disadvantages of Brexit, but those 'niggles' were not enough to eradicate even their limited understanding of the huge damage the past 42 years has cost this country.

In short - they KNEW that all the evidence of the past 42 years right up to the present of being in the EU was enough of a reason to exit, vague uncertaintities or not.

"If all the out camp are going to do is insult others of a different view and political leaning to them, then they will lose the argument bigtime."

I do not understand what you mean by this Joey? On here? Or in the world at large?

Who is insulting who on here?

"I cannot say what the UK would be like out of the EU because I have seen and heard nothing to convince of any claims being right.
Statistics mean nothing, we know a good number of the EU statistics, statistics can say whatever a particular viewpoint wants then to say.
I don't know who said it but is was once said, there were 'lies,damned lies and statistics'.
Or words to that effect."


I only know that the scaremongering is absolute tosh.

The 'Three Million Jobs At Risk' scaremongering is a proven lie.

Trading?

We import much more FROM the EU than we export to it and ALWAYS have done - it is on 'one way' street.

Less than 30% of our export trade is with the EU once the dishonest 'Rotterdam Effect' is discounted, and we rely more on trade with non-EU countries like the USA and China.

In 2014 alone we had a trade deficit of over £50bn with the EU and our current deficit is just under £100 billion.

The EU is also BOUND under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty to make a trade agreement with any country which exits the EU. So that is us.

The EU and UK are also bound by the rules of The World Trade Organization concerning International Trade and this alone safeguards jobs in the uk in industries which rely on exports.

"To change over from something, people have to be assured the change they are making is for the better of all and Country,if that cannot be shown and substantiated with right and true facts,then for me change is best avoided."

I'm afraid that I am in emphatic opposition to you here Joey.

There comes a time in ANY situation when 'enough is enough' and the historical evidence of one's own continuously and continued bad experiences is so overwhelming that it can no longer be denied, and a change is the only option.

42 years of hundreds of billions of pounds of NET LOSSES to the EU.
42 years of SURRENDING OUR SOVEREINGTY to the EU.
42 years of taking from the tax-payers of this country and meekly handing over those hundreds of billions to the EU to LINE THEIR OWN POCKETS and SUBSIDISE OTHER COUNTRIES - some undeserving and ungrateful, others un-needing - while WE NEGLECT OUR OWN STRUGGLING CITIZENS WITH CONTEMPT.

Just ONE YEAR's tribute to our Brussels overlords would give the entire UK a TWO THIRDS CUT IN COUNCIL TAX or would BUILD and EQUIP 200 HIGH TECH HOSPITALS - So think what those 42 years of wasted payments could have achieved in this country?

During the last Parliament, while Cameron's Government saved £36 billion through the entire 'AUSTERITY CUTS, it handed our Brussels Overlords over £85 billion by way of our EU 'Membership Fee' . So our EU 'membership cost us over TWICE what we took from our own poor and needy.

No, I'm afraid that claiming that the historical evidence of the past 42 years is NOT IN ITSELF reason enough to 'CHANGE' is like telling a 'battered wife' who has suffered the 42 years of the most horrendous violent abuse from her husband, NOT to leave because every little question concerning her future OUTSIDE OF THAT UNENDURABLE MARRIAGE cannot be answered in 'one fell swoop'.

"We have been in Europe for over 40 years now as a partner in this process.
If David Cameron is to be believed he has got in his deal, a fact of no further political union by the UK in the EU."


David Cameron IS NOT TO BE BELIEVED ON THIS ISSUE.

"If the out camp can prove him wrong on that,do so if not then he should be afforded the benefit of the doubt on it since he did the re-negotiation.
Those in his party attacking and insulting him from 'the' out side, make the whole issue look ugly and they also paint a very bad picture indeed of being out of the EU too by that nonsense.
he is presenting his deal to the voters,he believes he did his very best and got the best he could."


I cannot bear the man but on this I applaud his work on this issue and believe him right.

I also do believe fully, that he has started a chain of events in the EU that will surface as more change within the EU is demanded now in light of what he has begun.
That for me is another reason why I will be voting to stay put and take no risks whatsoever.

I'm afraid that I shortly have to leave for work Joey, but I will that respond to these other points in another post.

[joeysteele]

Kirk, I respect your passion but your answers give again no concrete assurances as to out success out of the EU.

We are successful after being in the EU,so we can easily expect to remain successful remaining in.
That much we know.
Yes the costs may be high but you cannot and neither does anyone from the out camp, tell us what out costs,tariffs and other charges even may be,never mind will be.

There are several million jobs that are linked to the the EU and our membership,the wording is in your own post, the in camp say 3,000,000 could be at risk.
Not that they all are but being linked to other EU nations, can you 100% assure the undecided that those jobs are safe totally if we leave the EU.
If not, then since they are already in place, they are more likely to be secure remaining in than coming out.

The real waste of space on the out side, Ian Duncan Smith even tried to really frighten people,(he is rather adept at doing that actually,)by saying we would have attacks like Paris if we remain in the EU.
What blatant scaremongering that is too, it is understood several incidents of terrorism have been thwarted by the UK over the last few years, our involvement with the USA and being involved in the Middle East is what will bring those attacks to the UK, in or out of the EU.

I think you do David Cameron an injustice, would have voted to remain in the EU even with no deal won by Cameron.
That is my position.
However I would still give him credit for his efforts and unlike you I do believe he has done the best deal he could at this time.
Had he too said,I cannot get a deal after the time he put in,then came away, although I would still be voting in, I'd still have given him credit for trying.

The out camp calling him a liar and saying he should not be believed on this,is again for me, why the out camp could and in my view should lose the referendum.
The austerity cuts was a choice of govt policy,we don'e need these austerity cuts just as we didn't need the top rate of tax down to 45%.
Govts choose the action they wish tot take as to the UK citizens, sadly the priority of this govt is to penalise and punish the poorest.

me, I would have raised all taxation for a period of 4 to 5 years, get the UK out of the problem after the global financial crisis then re-set taxes back down again.
I think any savings, even if there were any at all in the end after all negotiations after leaving the EU, could soon be squandered away by UK govts anyway in a short space of time.

Maybe used to be wasted on even more top down re-organisations of the NHS for instance.
That is domestic policy however and while I accept we pay more into the EU than we likely get out,for me for stability, economic success, security and some social issues,it is for me a price worth paying still and far into the future for those issues.

I also really do think, the EU could change,Cameron has shown many Nations he could get a deal against the odds, had he got anything it would have been commendable.
So I can see change in the EU being demanded in the future and I hope the UK is there, as a full member to support and help bring about any real change that becomes possible,always now assuring the best deals for the UK too.

Even in our own Parliament and law, it is now set in stone any more treaties from the EU cannot be signed by any PM,the treaty has to be put to the voters to agree it.
The coalition did that.
We are totally exempt from having to join the Euro,I honestly now would never risk what we already have and are doing by voting to leave.
Especially in the absence of costs of trading deals, time and what other condition will have to still be imposed on the UK to be able to have any deals with the EU at all.

We know the cheques we have to pay as to the EU,we know they could and should be less but we know we have to do it.
What the out camp are hoping for from the voters,are whole books of blank cheques with not a single costing as to what we will have to shell out after leaving.

Not from me will the out camp get that.
I like to know the full substantiated costs of all actions beforehand, not learn them and have then thrust on me afterwards.

[Northern Monkey]

What Kirk said

[arista]

Love Boris AM
on Marr telling him to Stop the BBC Claptrap

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/03/06/11/31EAB2BC00000578-3478844-image-a-39_1457265133631.jpg

[Kizzy]

What Joey said.

[DemolitionRed]

Good gracious the insults fly on this thread at times,totally unnecessary.
There are misleading statements coming from all sides in this from the Politicians the in camp and the out camp.

People have the right to feel strongly for in or out without getting insulted for goodness sake.
There is no need for attacks as to political leanings or words like ****** to be used to make any points.

Honestly,it is ridiculous,the 'in' camp only need to point out how things are now,the securities, the success and the stronger we likely are in the EU, despite its many and I mean many failings.
The 'out' camp instead of attacking people as being on the left or otherwise,all they need to do is avoid all that and explain in full with 'substantiation of same', what the UK would be like out of the EU.

Instead of going on about old arguments, that are null and void that is what people undecided need to know from the out camp.
Just to make my point as to old arguments.

I agree with Kirk that the Conservative govt in the early 70s took us into Europe without asking the voters.
I agree that was wrong.

It happened however and had they not,then Harold Wilson and Labour would have likely done so after 1974.
The polling Kirk stated, had a healthy vote against going into Europe,then as now the polls are meaningless since after only 2 years in Europe and even a re-negotiation of sorts already needed to be done, the Nation voted by almost 2 to 1 to 'stay in',in Labour's referendum on the issue.

I was talking to 4 people who are totally undecided and are sick of the whole thing already.They listen to both sides and are getting no info as to what the really need to make a decision.
They have stopped listening to UKIP as they say all they go on about is immigration.

They want the picture, as near guaranteed picture as should be possible, if things are true and right from the out camp, as to the future of the UK out of the EU.
Nothing has been given as to such assurances so the likelihood for them is to stay with what they know for sure now in the EU.

If all the out camp are going to do is insult others of a different view and political leaning to them, then they will lose the argument bigtime.

I cannot say what the UK would be like out of the EU because I have seen and heard nothing to convince of any claims being right.
Statistics mean nothing, we know a good number of the EU statistics, statistics can say whatever a particular viewpoint wants then to say.
I don't know who said it but is was once said, there were 'lies,damned lies and statistics'.
Or words to that effect.

To change over from something, people have to be assured the change they are making is for the better of all and Country,if that cannot be shown and substantiated with right and true facts,then for me change is best avoided.
We have been in Europe for over 40 years now as a partner in this process.
If David Cameron is to be believed he has got in his deal, a fact of no further political union by the UK in the EU.

If the out camp can prove him wrong on that,do so if not then he should be afforded the benefit of the doubt on it since he did the re-negotiation.
Those in his party attacking and insulting him from 'the' out side, make the whole issue look ugly and they also paint a very bad picture indeed of being out of the EU too by that nonsense.
he is presenting his deal to the voters,he believes he did his very best and got the best he could.
I cannot bear the man but on this I applaud his work on this issue and believe him right.

I also do believe fully, that he has started a chain of events in the EU that will surface as more change within the EU is demanded now in light of what he has begun.
That for me is another reason why I will be voting to stay put and take no risks whatsoever.

:clap1:

[MTVN]

Love Boris AM
on Marr telling him to Stop the BBC Claptrap

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/03/06/11/31EAB2BC00000578-3478844-image-a-39_1457265133631.jpg

Very poor performance from Boris, just waffling on without giving any clear answers or making any clear points

[Kizzy]

So what's new?...

[joeysteele]

Boris should be on more often if he performs the way he did this morning, really badly and came across very arrogant and at times ignorant too.

Looking to the floor when asked about ambitions to take over from Cameron was a very telling moment too.

Nothing much endearing at all as to his performance on Marr today at all for me and for sure no real concrete facts as to life outside the EU,in fact he seemed to be waffling most of the time.

[Alf]

The Head of British Chambers of Commerce suspended for saying we'd be better off out of EU.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/04/british-chambers-of-commerce-boss-suspended-in-brexit-row-reports-say

[arista]

So what's new?...


The British Chamber of Commerce
sacked there speaker
because he spoke from
a private matter about leaving Europe


He was not speaking about the B.C.C. view.

[joeysteele]

Perhaps the BCC would have been better to have reprimanded him rather than suspension, however they have put themselves in a position of neutrality on the EU issue therefore all connected to it should be held to that.
He spoke out breaking that condition so he asked for it really.

Keeping his views to himself and those around him would have been fine but speaking out publicly is in effect disobeying rules put in place.

[Kizzy]

The Head of British Chambers of Commerce suspended for saying we'd be better off out of EU.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/04/british-chambers-of-commerce-boss-suspended-in-brexit-row-reports-say

He compromised neutrality, he deserved to be suspended.

[Kizzy]

The CBI
sacked there speaker
because he spoke from
a private matter about leaving Europe


He was not speaking about the CBI view.

My comment was a response to the comment about BOJO.

[arista]

My comment was a response to the comment about BOJO.


Yes Marr
kept doing the question muddle

He needed a full 30mins

[Alf]

Perhaps the BCC would have been better to have reprimanded him rather than suspension, however they have put themselves in a position of neutrality on the EU issue therefore all connected to it should be held to that.
He spoke out breaking that condition so he asked for it really.

Keeping his views to himself and those around him would have been fine but speaking out publicly is in effect disobeying rules put in place.
But what of his opinion that we should vote out?

Should we take his opinion as something to think about? or something to be ignored?

[joeysteele]

But what of his opinion that we should vote out?

Should we take his opinion as something to think about? or something to be ignored?

Well for me his loyalty and word word be questionable from me personally.
Since he cannot abide by the strict ruling that the BCC demanded of all connected to them,neutrality on the issue, that he would then ignore that,knowing the ruling was made,sorry but for me, he comes out someone and his word not to be trusted.

So I will be ignoring him since again anyway, he made no clear factual substantiated points as to life out of the EU in any event.
Then again,he is among all in the out camp at present in that failing in my opinion.

[arista]

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2016/3/6/451062/default/v1/telegraph-1-992x558.jpg

This is wrong
using public money

[DemolitionRed]

Whilst Boris is sharpening his proverbial knife to stick in the backs of Cameron and Osborne, I look forward to Sadiq Khan slipping into the mayor of London's seat.

Boris thinks he's the next PM and that's the only reason he's positioned himself with the "OUT" side in the EU Referendum. If we remain 'IN' which we probably will, Boris can blame the treachery on Cameron and Osborne and make a pitch for the leadership, which will be backed by the hard right. I doubt Boris wants to be PM if we come 'OUT' as the long years of disengagement from the EU are bound to be very harsh indeed and the Tory seat, after an initial period of right wing euphoria, will become a very uncomfortable place indeed.

[joeysteele]

Whilst Boris is sharpening his proverbial knife to stick in the backs of Cameron and Osborne, I look forward to Sadiq Khan slipping into the mayor of London's seat.

Boris thinks he's the next PM and that's the only reason he's positioned himself with the "OUT" side in the EU Referendum. If we remain 'IN' which we probably will, Boris can blame the treachery on Cameron and Osborne and make a pitch for the leadership, which will be backed by the hard right. I doubt Boris wants to be PM if we come 'OUT' as the long years of disengagement from the EU are bound to be very harsh indeed and the Tory seat, after an initial period of right wing euphoria, will become a very uncomfortable place indeed.

If as I hope it will, the vote is to remain in the EU.

Then that will put David Cameron into a stronger position having negotiated with the EU and then persuaded more of the UK to support his deal and stay in.
I would very much doubt then, that even the Conservative party at the time of David Cameron resigning as leader,would then elect a leader who had been an 'out' campaigner and therefore an MP who had publicly taken on the then PM Cameron.

If the vote is to stay in,with the issue settled then, it would be of no benefit at all for the UK to have the Conservatives or any other party elect a leader who had wanted out,even more than just electing a leader but a PM too for a time.

If he was willing to throw his hat in the leadership ring when Cameron goes,I would quite like to see Matt Hancock be a surprise candidate for the top job there.

[DemolitionRed]

Sorry Joey but I don't think Cameron's going to be in a stronger position whichever way this vote falls because of the upheaval going on in the Tory right. The present government is split right down the middle and its only going to get worse from here.

[joeysteele]

Sorry Joey but I don't think Cameron's going to be in a stronger position whichever way this vote falls because of the upheaval going on in the Tory right. The present government is split right down the middle and its only going to get worse from here.

I'd have said that too if he'd had intentions of staying on as leader.
However,if he gets the 'in' result he wants I do think even the Conservative party will overall see him as the stronger and the one who won the arguments.

The Conservative Party has been split since the 90s,odd how it used to ridicule, jeer and laugh a Labour when they were split in the early 80s on Europe.
However despite that split, I doubt they would elect as a successor to Cameron anyone who had gone against him on the EU issue and lost.
In that I think Gove and Johnson have taken a massive risk as I think both would like the job after Cameron.

If the result is an 'in' win however,then as to the important task of electing a leader,which the Conservative party takes very seriously indeed,I doubt the Conservatives would then elect an anti EU campaigner,who was at odds with the EU and indeed and the bulk of voters of the UK too, and I also hope Cameron does take some revenge on those Ministers who have set out to totally discredit him as leader and PM on this issue.

[DemolitionRed]

Cameron will be blamed for bringing this about in the first place. I believe he's damned if we do and damned if we don't. The conservative party are tearing themselves apart and are now so viscerally divided that its become an open and very public warfare. The awkwardness is not going to go away any time soon.

I know a good few conservatives who are considering the out vote atm. The only thing that's stopping them (the ones I know) is this bandwaggon of petty nationalists and xenophobics that are riding at the front of the 'OUT' chariot. I had a very interesting conversation with a conservative friend of mine regarding what he thought about the present party divide and he told me that a lot of conservative MP's don't sit comfortably with this present government and blame Cameron's leadership for moving further and further away from what conservatism stands for. He said its likely the 'blue' parliamentary Brexit supporters just want to contribute to Cameron's and Osbornes downfall and squash this present leadership, because if they wait until the next election, the conservatives won't get in. Installing a new Tory PM would at least give the conservative party a fighting chance.

I say, if politicians within Cameron's own party are prepared to take such desperate measures to repair what's left of the conservative party, then things must be bad. I suspect that what we are seeing here is a modern version of the Roman senators conspiracy with Julius Ceasor.

[arista]

Love Boris on SkyNewsHD
he said the Message telling his staff off
is not longer legal.
He then said its removed from History
as he took his bike into Parliament


What a Guy

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2016/3/8/451394/default/v1/cegrab-20160308-101228-95-1-736x414.jpg


http://news.sky.com/story/1655721/boris-eu-gag-on-staff-rescinded-kaduuk
Video Clip.

[Boris Johnson has said he has "wiped from history"
a 'back Boris on the EU or keep your views
to yourself' edict on City Hall staff.]

[smudgie]

Love Boris on SkyNewsHD
he said the Message telling his staff off
is not longer legal.
He then said its removed from History
as he took his bike into Parliament


What a Guy

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2016/3/8/451394/default/v1/cegrab-20160308-101228-95-1-736x414.jpg


http://news.sky.com/story/1655721/boris-eu-gag-on-staff-rescinded-kaduuk
Video Clip.

[Boris Johnson has said he has "wiped from history"
a 'back Boris on the EU or keep your views
to yourself' edict on City Hall staff.]

What a plonker.

[Alf]

I know a good few conservatives who are considering the out vote atm. The only thing that's stopping them (the ones I know) is this bandwaggon of petty nationalists and xenophobics that are riding at the front of the 'OUT' chariot.Why is it xenophobic to fight for the freedom of your country?

I'd say that the people that want to break up these countries and destroy the national identity of people, to form one almighty powerful union are far more xenophobic.

[joeysteele]

Wiped from history maybe only because it came out in the first place.
Against his wishes was this instruction given in the first place or is this statement now only because he was caught out on it.
I know where my suspicions lie.

[joeysteele]

Cameron will be blamed for bringing this about in the first place. I believe he's damned if we do and damned if we don't. The conservative party are tearing themselves apart and are now so viscerally divided that its become an open and very public warfare. The awkwardness is not going to go away any time soon.

I know a good few conservatives who are considering the out vote atm. The only thing that's stopping them (the ones I know) is this bandwaggon of petty nationalists and xenophobics that are riding at the front of the 'OUT' chariot. I had a very interesting conversation with a conservative friend of mine regarding what he thought about the present party divide and he told me that a lot of conservative MP's don't sit comfortably with this present government and blame Cameron's leadership for moving further and further away from what conservatism stands for. He said its likely the 'blue' parliamentary Brexit supporters just want to contribute to Cameron's and Osbornes downfall and squash this present leadership, because if they wait until the next election, the conservatives won't get in. Installing a new Tory PM would at least give the conservative party a fighting chance.

I say, if politicians within Cameron's own party are prepared to take such desperate measures to repair what's left of the conservative party, then things must be bad. I suspect that what we are seeing here is a modern version of the Roman senators conspiracy with Julius Ceasor.

That is a fascinating post and I do find some of my Conservative friends feeling exactly as you say in the post above.

However at my end most of my Conservative friends feel this has now become the real test for Cameron.
Few believe he can stay on as PM if the vote is to leave but by the same token they think he will be stronger after an 'in' result.

In all honesty however, it will be hard for the Conservatives not to be at the very least the party with the most seats after the 2020 election.
Not because they deserve to be but because of pure and simple arithmetic.

Labour will not turn around the Scottish losses within 5 years only,there will not be any mighty surge to bring about a landslide win for anyone now,I think anyway.
Also,there are boundary changes to come in likely 2018, these will reduce the number of MPs to 600 from 650 and will favour the Conservatives more,in a further 20 seats.

Not the picture I like to think of at all but while I see massive problems for the Conservatives due to this EU issue,they will not be tearing themselves to pieces once an election looms.
So even with the wrangling, the best result for anti Conservatives I can see at this moment in time for 2020,is that they get no overall majority again and then are forced to be far more accountable with totally heartless and unjust policy making thrown out.
Which is why I really believe they will be extra careful now as to who they elect as leader after Cameron with possibly all the leading favourites at present being rejected in the end.

[DemolitionRed]

That is a fascinating post and I do find some of my Conservative friends feeling exactly as you say in the post above.

However at my end most of my Conservative friends feel this has now become the real test for Cameron.
Few believe he can stay on as PM if the vote is to leave but by the same token they think he will be stronger after an 'in' result.

In all honesty however, it will be hard for the Conservatives not to be at the very least the party with the most seats after the 2020 election.
Not because they deserve to be but because of pure and simple arithmetic.

Labour will not turn around the Scottish losses within 5 years only,there will not be any mighty surge to bring about a landslide win for anyone now,I think anyway.
Also,there are boundary changes to come in likely 2018, these will reduce the number of MPs to 600 from 650 and will favour the Conservatives more,in a further 20 seats.

Not the picture I like to think of at all but while I see massive problems for the Conservatives due to this EU issue,they will not be tearing themselves to pieces once an election looms.
So even with the wrangling, the best result for anti Conservatives I can see at this moment in time for 2020,is that they get no overall majority again and then are forced to be far more accountable with totally heartless and unjust policy making thrown out.
Which is why I really believe they will be extra careful now as to who they elect as leader after Cameron with possibly all the leading favourites at present being rejected in the end.

What you say makes a lot of sense. For a real split there has to be the right mechanisms in place and like you say, who will fill that vacuum? I do think this establishment crisis will bring about some fairly major political change.... Interesting times Joey.

[DemolitionRed]

Why is it xenophobic to fight for the freedom of your country?

I'd say that the people that want to break up these countries and destroy the national identity of people, to form one almighty powerful union are far more xenophobic.

I'm talking about the BNP and all those who think along the same lines as the BNP. If we leave the EU through the triumph of right wing nationalism, then we leave the EU based on a lie.

I don't care about xenophobics, I just think they are mostly angry poor people with a mighty chip on their shoulders. I do care that they believe things are going to be so much better (immigration wise) if we leave the EU, because that's simply not true.

[Alf]

I'm talking about the BNP and all those who think along the same lines as the BNP. If we leave the EU through the triumph of right wing nationalism, then we leave the EU based on a lie.

I don't care about xenophobics, I just think they are mostly angry poor people with a mighty chip on their shoulders. I do care that they believe things are going to be so much better (immigration wise) if we leave the EU, because that's simply not true.
But you have to ask yourself, why are these far-right groups coming about?, and where did these people in them come from?

Most I'd assume come from the centre or centre-right, and have seen society's have a massive tilt to the left, and not a good left, it's a left that constantly attacks our freedoms and our identity's.

We're made to feel ashamed of who we are and where we're from. which is something you'd expect in a far-right society.

We should be proud of who we are and where we come from. What Britain has done for this World is incomparable, alright it's had it's bad bits, but what country hasn't?

You or I don't owe anybody anything.

[DemolitionRed]

But you have to ask yourself, why are these far-right groups coming about?, and where did these people in them come from?

Most I'd assume come from the centre or centre-right, and have seen society's have a massive tilt to the left, and not good left, it's a left that constantly attacks our freedoms and our identity's.

We're made to feel ashamed of who we are and where we're from. which is something you'd expect in a far-right society.

We should be proud of who we are and where we come from. What Britain has done for this World is incomparable, alright it's had it's bad bits, but what country hasn't?

You or I don't owe anybody anything.

I've just edited and scrapped most of this post because it wasn't relevant to topic and it was just me getting a bit carried away.

I couldn't tell you why there has been a rise of nationalist thinkers but I would take a guess that most of those who call themselves nationalists, or who enjoy some of the benefits of nationalism, have just been sucked into right wing propaganda, a propaganda that points its grubby finger at the left and has people believe its those bloody immigrants that are responsible for their low wages, lack of affordable housing or unemployment.

The more the neoliberals suppress the poor, the bigger the rise in this type of nationalism.

[Kizzy]

'The more the neoliberals suppress the poor, the bigger the rise in nationalism.'
Yes it's funny that, how does that work?
The demonisation of the poor resonated with some who subscribe to a national ethos but in a more sinister twist that has morphed into something even uglier, the outcasting too of those incapacitated or old.
A frightening development.

[DemolitionRed]

'The more the neoliberals suppress the poor, the bigger the rise in nationalism.'
Yes it's funny that, how does that work?
The demonisation of the poor resonated with some who subscribe to a national ethos but in a more sinister twist that has morphed into something even uglier, the outcasting too of those incapacitated or old.
A frightening development.

Omg, don't get me started again :joker:

Its very confusing and conflicting. People who make a hard stance on immigration and want Britain to be reclaimed by the British are not or shouldn't consider themselves to be nationalists if they vote conservative because conservative nationalism doesn't represent those wishes. More interestingly, because our conservative parties have gradually morphed into 'neoliberal thinkers'; nationalist voters who vote for them, are voting for a party that completely clashes in every way with what any sort of nationalism stands for.

Hard left could be 'social nationalist'... far right 'fascist nationalist' (both totalitarian). So when you and I get accused of being 'hard left' they could be accusing us of wanting an ancestral race. :conf:

Anyway, that aside, goes and bangs my head on the wall!, my point is, a person who desires to reclaim Britain from immigrants and I don't mean people who just want to properly sort out illegal immigration in a diplomatic grown up way but the ones who would love to turn round to the Indian shopkeeper and tell him to feck off home, could be right wing or left wing. They could be as much aligned to the Labour party as the Conservative party.

[arista]

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2016/3/8/451505/default/v2/sun-1-992x558.jpg

[Kizzy]

They're going to have to retract that.

[arista]

They're going to have to retract that.


Feck Me Kizzy
what about Prince William saying stay in EU
the other day.


And the Queen never comments on Press reports.


I think it Great the number 1 selling newspaper
has done this Front Page,


Fair Is Fair


Well done Piers GMBHD saying there is truth in it
after Clegg just spoke dodgy words

[DemolitionRed]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35760912

EU referendum: Queen neutral, palace says after Sun claim

[arista]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35760912

EU referendum: Queen neutral, palace says after Sun claim


Yes We know ( all with TV news or radio)

But she must say that in Public DR.



That BBC link is not Valid to me.,

[DemolitionRed]

Yes We know ( all with TV news or radio)

But she must say that in Public DR.



That BBC link is not Valid to me.,

And the Sun is? :hehe:

I was just updating the thread because not everyone will bother to go and look for themselves ....geez!!

[DemolitionRed]

Prince William didn't suggest we stay in the EU. All he said is, "Britain is a forward thinking country". That could mean anything.

[arista]

And the Sun is? :hehe:

I was just updating the thread because not everyone will bother to go and look for themselves ....geez!!


No GMBHD Live
is more Valid.

Also ITV1HD Lorraine


And of course you were correct to post the Official Response
Fair And Balanced

[arista]

Prince William didn't suggest we stay in the EU. All he said is, "Britain is a forward thinking country". That could mean anything.


It was more than that
and he is Pro EU.


But Our Queen is Get Out of the Gravy Train Mess Europe

[joeysteele]

The Sun printing utter nonsense again likely.
They should be made, if they in fact even have any, to reveal their source for this.
If they cannot reveal their source,or they are supposedly anonymous, the Sun should be made to make a massive retraction at the very least, all over its front pages and not on page 6 or 7 as they usually do.

Why anyone even looks at or buys this rag is beyond me,even sadder is that anyone takes anything they say seriously either.
It would be out of production for me and I give no thought either to its mostly misleading/lying editorial team and many of its staff too as to that.

[bots]

it seems the Sun is referring to conversations in the past where the Queen is alleged to have voiced a political opinion. The queen has been neutral on every political decision over her entire reign, including issues such as Scottish independence, which, with respect, are of much greater concern to the UK than if we choose to remain or leave the EU.

Also, if the queen did express an opinion, who cares. She is well past her relevance sell by date.

[joeysteele]

That front page printed ,even were it right without the permission and endorsement of the Monarch is a total disgrace in the UK.

It is also totally misleading,I have thought on things the EU was going the wrong way about things however I still do not support leaving it.
Even the conversation,if it ever took place, as stated does not indicate the Queen saying she supports leaving anyway.

This is a likely total fabrication from the Sun well known as to its lies and slanderous headlines as to the Hillsborough tragedy.
This should actually be a serious matter,that a publication,( wrongly described as a newspaper in my opinion), can get away with printing on a front page, something so totally unsubstantiated and rejected by all concerned.

The sooner this rotten mess of a joke as to a publication is gone the better.

[DemolitionRed]

This is a just a very sneaky banner campaign by Murdoch who's done more u-turns on the EU than a gridlock of cars in a traffic jam. He's presently sitting with Brexit, hence his poster page but he will likely change his mind sometime soon.

The thing about such a poster campaign is, regardless of its untruth, its still a massive advert for Brexit. The other papers need to counter that with posters of the Queen and headlines saying, "THE QUEEN HAS NOT SAID SHE WANTS BRITAIN TO LEAVE THE EU" because if they don't do that, then all those people who don't buy newspapers or watch the news, could remain misinformed.

[user104658]

The thing about such a poster campaign is, regardless of its untruth, its still a massive advert for Brexit. The other papers need to counter that with posters of the Queen and headlines saying, "THE QUEEN HAS NOT SAID SHE WANTS BRITAIN TO LEAVE THE EU" because if they don't do that, then all those people who don't buy newspapers or watch the news, could remain misinformed.


What will happen, though, is that they will clarify this in a tiny 2 inch square article on page 7 next week.

[DemolitionRed]

What will happen, though, is that they will clarify this in a tiny 2 inch square article on page 7 next week.

Exactly :shrug:

[arista]

"That front page printed ,even were it right without the permission and endorsement of the Monarch is a total disgrace in the UK."


Sure Joey
but they have a solid source
and Prince William is Pro EU

So its a Good Balance Joey

[Kizzy]

'Buckingham Palace has complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) about a report in the Sun newspaper which claimed that the Queen had voiced strong Eurosceptic views.

The front page story was based on an anonymous source's report of a lunch with Nick Clegg during his time as Deputy Prime Minister.

It claimed the monarch had vented her anger with Brussels at Mr Clegg, who is pro-EU, during their meeting at Windsor Castle in 2011.'

I'm guessing GCHQ

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/queen-eu-referendum-brexit-sun-front-page-ipso-complaint-buckingham-palace-nick-clegg-meeting-a6921051.html

[Kizzy]

'Imagine a country in which there is:

– No statutory right to paid holiday

– No legal limit on the number of hours employees can be required to work

– No right to a daily rest period

– No laws to prevent employers discriminating against workers who are disabled or who have particular religious beliefs

– No right for employees to take time off work to look after a sick child.

This was the UK before the New Labour government was elected in 1997. Since then a substantial number of employment rights have been introduced – most of which have their roots in EU legislation.

Thanks to the EU, employers cannot treat part-time workers less favourably than full-time workers, working parents have a right to take leave to look after their children, and temporary agency workers and workers with fixed-term contracts are entitled to the same basic conditions as comparable workers with permanent contracts.'

Still want out?...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/eu-brexit-uk-referendum-leave-employment-rights-disaster-explained-a6921126.html

[Alf]

Still want out?...
No! you've changed my mind, it sounds like a life of luxury, I'll have a bit of that.

[DemolitionRed]

Just done a catch up on PMQT...
...David Cameron stated that he would not resign should The EU Brexit occur.

Don't know if anyone else watched it today, but if you did, what did you think about Gideon Osborne's very odd behaviour ?

[MTVN]

Just done a catch up on PMQT...
...David Cameron stated that he would not resign should The EU Brexit occur.

Don't know if anyone else watched it today, but if you did, what did you think about Gideon Osborne's very odd behaviour ?

Watched the start then had to go out so listened to the rest on the radio, what was strange about Osborne's behaviour?

[joeysteele]

"That front page printed ,even were it right without the permission and endorsement of the Monarch is a total disgrace in the UK."


Sure Joey
but they have a solid source
and Prince William is Pro EU

So its a Good Balance Joey

'IF' they have any solid source then name the source/s.

This is what the press regulator should be able to make them do, not just print a pathetic apology or fine the Paper

It is a blatant lie anyway as a front page headline, nowhere does the Queen even say she would advocate the UK leaving the EU, in this probably word twisting as to her comments,if even made in the first place.

It isn't a balance at all in any sense of the word if its more fiction than fact.

[joeysteele]

Just done a catch up on PMQT...
...David Cameron stated that he would not resign should The EU Brexit occur.

Don't know if anyone else watched it today, but if you did, what did you think about Gideon Osborne's very odd behaviour ?

Osborne always looks uncomfortable at PMQs, he also knows by really supporting Cameron on the EU issue,he has likely thrown away his chance to be leader if the UK votes to leave.
He also though, would have been pre-occupied with the vote coming up on the Sunday trading law too.

I really believe now that David Cameron would not want to resign but he is well aware the party likely will force a leadership election to be held in the event of an 'out' vote.
Which would leave him as not needing to resign but since he was standing down before the next election anyway, he would gracefully bow out.

So no, he would not resign as such but would have to go in my view.

[Kizzy]

Just done a catch up on PMQT...
...David Cameron stated that he would not resign should The EU Brexit occur.

Don't know if anyone else watched it today, but if you did, what did you think about Gideon Osborne's very odd behaviour ?

I did see it on you tube, do you mean the staring about? He always looks like he's tripping his tits off doesn't he? :laugh:

[DemolitionRed]

Has a little snigger at 'tripping his tits off'! He just looked like he was sweating and frowning even more than usual. He looked like he was very uncomfortable and nervous.

[Kizzy]

Yes his little lizard brain processing how else to spread poverty across the country :(

[Vicky.]

Despite the constant bombardment of EU stuff, I am still undecided :laugh: I will probably vote in though when it comes to it..as as far as I am aware, if the tories get 'too' cruel, the EU can step in. I do not wish to throw the people of Britain to the wolves in the way an unregulated Tory majority would be...

[Kizzy]

Isn't that sad, when it comes down to it many can clearly see this govt for what it is, a heartless elitist boys club.
I believe that will be what drives many to an in vote too.

[DemolitionRed]

Despite the constant bombardment of EU stuff, I am still undecided :laugh: I will probably vote in though when it comes to it..as as far as I am aware, if the tories get 'too' cruel, the EU can step in. I do not wish to throw the people of Britain to the wolves in the way an unregulated Tory majority would be...

Well said Vicky.

[joeysteele]

Despite the constant bombardment of EU stuff, I am still undecided :laugh: I will probably vote in though when it comes to it..as as far as I am aware, if the tories get 'too' cruel, the EU can step in. I do not wish to throw the people of Britain to the wolves in the way an unregulated Tory majority would be...

For me that is another selling point for the EU, as to extremes of any govt in fact.
However,yes, at this present time, as to this truly bad and heartless Conservative party leadership.

[DemolitionRed]

On the 3rd March Ely Cathedral had a 'brexit debate' where nearly 500 people attended
http://www.elycathedralbusinessgroup.org/ All of the speakers were right wing, including Stewart Agnew on behalf of UKIP.

At the start of the evening a poll was taken via mobile phones on whether people were in, out or undecided. It was roughly 50% in and 25% between the other two camps.
After the speakers had finished they took another poll, again via mobile phone and this time it was 70% in.
It has to make you wonder how offensive Agnew was.

[Kizzy]

On the 3rd March Ely Cathedral had a 'brexit debate' where nearly 500 people attended
http://www.elycathedralbusinessgroup.org/ All of the speakers were right wing, including Stewart Agnew on behalf of UKIP.

At the start of the evening a poll was taken via mobile phones on whether people were in, out or undecided. It was roughly 50% in and 25% between the other two camps.
After the speakers had finished they took another poll, again via mobile phone and this time it was 70% in.
It has to make you wonder how offensive Agnew was.

Backfired :joker:

[DemolitionRed]

Backfired :joker:

Well he probably meant to say something like, "migrants are living in fancy houses on free money while raping the women and eating your pets" but got it the wrong way round :hehe:

[Alf]

Despite the constant bombardment of EU stuff, I am still undecided :laugh: I will probably vote in though when it comes to it..as as far as I am aware, if the tories get 'too' cruel, the EU can step in. I do not wish to throw the people of Britain to the wolves in the way an unregulated Tory majority would be...
If the Tories get too cruel, then we the people will step in by voting them out, we don't need the EU to hold our hand.

[kirklancaster]

If the Tories get too cruel, then we the people will step in by voting them out, we don't need the EU to hold our hand.

The EU are holding our throat Alf - not our hand.

[arista]

'IF' they have any solid source then name the source/s.

This is what the press regulator should be able to make them do, not just print a pathetic apology or fine the Paper

It is a blatant lie anyway as a front page headline, nowhere does the Queen even say she would advocate the UK leaving the EU, in this probably word twisting as to her comments,if even made in the first place.

It isn't a balance at all in any sense of the word if its more fiction than fact.


"Michael Gove"

http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2016/3/8/451505/default/v2/sun-1-992x558.jpg

Yesterdays Great Front Page

[joeysteele]

If Michael Gove is a source then firstly how cowardly of him to hide behind anonymity,furthermore what happened to the oath that MPS have to take as to the Monarch.

I had respect for Gove but if he is a source and has said anything as to this to the vile rag that is the Sun, then he should be dismissed as a Minister right off and even should be thrown out of Parliament for me.

I is an absolute disgrace that after being Queen for 64 years plus, that one of her Ministers may have dragged her name and herself into a serious political issue,quite frankly if he has, it shows the desperation and failure of the 'out' camp.

I am not particularly a massive Monarchist but at least I act out of respect and integrity I hope, Gove has sacrificed any chance of the Conservative leadership,he has acted very badly and wrongly 'if' he is a source at all as to this.
He needs to explain this quickly and very strongly too and if he has not been a source for it, that is what he would do too.

[bots]

If Michael Gove is a source then firstly how cowardly of him to hide behind anonymity,furthermore what happened to the oath that MPS have to take as to the Monarch.

I had respect for Gove but if he is a source and has said anything as to this to the vile rag that is the Sun, then he should be dismissed as a Minister right off and even should be thrown out of Parliament for me.

I is an absolute disgrace that after being Queen for 64 years plus, that one of her Ministers may have dragged her name and herself into a serious political issue,quite frankly if he has, it shows the desperation and failure of the 'out' camp.

I am not particularly a massive Monarchist but I at least I act out of respect and integrity I hope, 2 things Gove has sacrificed very badly and wrongly if he is a source at all as to this.
He needs to explain this quickly and very strongly too and if he has not been a source for it, that is what he would do too.

If Gove was the source, he has betrayed personal trust over confidential discussions, and should be sacked from the cabinet immediately

[Kizzy]

Well well well.... tsk, tsk.

No doubt he'll slither out of it by blaming some underling.

[smudgie]

Well well well.... tsk, tsk.

No doubt he'll slither out of it by blaming some underling.

Might not be that easy for him, he was one of those present when the alleged conversation took place, alongside Mr.Clegg.
Looks like he has taken an innocent comment and twisted it to his advantage.
Off with his head I say..take him to the tower.(or at least sack him)

[Kizzy]

Might not be that easy for him, he was one of those present when the alleged conversation took place, alongside Mr.Clegg.
Looks like he has taken an innocent comment and twisted it to his advantage.
Off with his head I say..take him to the tower.(or at least sack him)

Surely it's treason?.... Off with his head I say :)

[arista]

Well well well.... tsk, tsk.

No doubt he'll slither out of it by blaming some underling.



Yes Kizzy
could be the case

[Vicky.]

If the Tories get too cruel, then we the people will step in by voting them out, we don't need the EU to hold our hand.

Well we cant vote them out for a fair few years, and the 'I'm alright, I'm not working/middle class' people will vote tory whatever they do.

[Alf]

Well we cant vote them out for a fair few years, and the 'I'm alright, I'm not working/middle class' people will vote tory whatever they do.And we has people will never be able to vote the EU out, so a few years sounds great doesn't it?

Just think of the freedom you're taking away from future generations by voting to stay in the Soviet Union sorry European Union. When Britain is finally dead (which it will be if we don't stand up for ourselves), the future generations will look in the history books (if they've not been burnt) and see that we had the opportunity to do something to save it. They wont be very proud of us, the way we're proud of our past generations who fought for our freedom.

[Vicky.]

I don't understand why we would be taking away future generations freedom by remaining in the EU? Mind as I said, I haven't researched it properly or anything.

[Kizzy]

And we has people will never be able to vote the EU out, so a few years sounds great doesn't it?

Just think of the freedom you're taking away from future generations by voting to stay in the Soviet Union sorry European Union. When Britain is finally dead (which it will be if we don't stand up for ourselves), the future generations will look in the history books (if they've not been burnt) and see that we had the opportunity to do something to save it. They wont be very proud of us, the way we're proud of our past generations who fought for our freedom.

What freedoms don't they have now, what freedoms will they have once we're out?
Stand up for ourselves.... you're creating a situation which doesn't exist, our relationship with the rest of the world it tentative at best and you feel our greatest threat comes from our NATO allied countries? :/
They fought for rights, how will being out of the EU protect those rights?.... What safeguards will there be? Nobody knows.

[bots]

I don't understand why we would be taking away future generations freedom by remaining in the EU? Mind as I said, I haven't researched it properly or anything.

We will be taking many freedoms away by leaving the EU i think.

For me the biggest benefit of europe is that we are not isolated. We have a large community that is duty bound to help us if we ever end up in a bit of bother. Of course, we never want to be in that position, but having a safety net and partners always there is a great benefit. Isolation is never great and always leads to problems in the end

[kirklancaster]

We will be taking many freedoms away by leaving the EU i think.

For me the biggest benefit of europe is that we are not isolated. We have a large community that is duty bound to help us if we ever end up in a bit of bother. Of course, we never want to be in that position, but having a safety net and partners always there is a great benefit. Isolation is never great and always leads to problems in the end

Oh Yeah - The way they have helped Greece.

More rhetoric based on zilch facts.

[bots]

Oh Yeah - The way they have helped Greece.

More rhetoric based on zilch facts.

Thanks for that constructive and informative response. Greece was helped, without the EU, it would have been completely ****ed

[Alf]

What freedoms don't they have now, what freedoms will they have once we're out?
Stand up for ourselves.... you're creating a situation which doesn't exist, our relationship with the rest of the world it tentative at best and you feel our greatest threat comes from our NATO allied countries? :/
They fought for rights, how will being out of the EU protect those rights?.... What safeguards will there be? Nobody knows.
Wait until Turkey gets the freedom of Europe and then we'll see.

[Kizzy]

Wait until Turkey gets the freedom of Europe and then we'll see.

Yeah, that's not happening.

[arista]

Boris is Live on SkyNewsHD
he is at Dartford

Talking about French Corruption
set up long before the EU started


Boris says take back our money
back - we do not need this EU

[Livia]

The "In" campaign just gets more desperate every day. Who, in their right mind, wants a foreign body, unelected by the British people, making laws for our country? I'm particularly amused by the suggestion that we will have no rights if we vote to leave... because obviously, before Tony Blair and his entourage, this place was like a dictatorship, right? And the fragrant Mrs Blair foisted the Human Rights Bill on us... which has been used almost continuously to aid some of the most odious criminals.

I'm totally with Boris on this one. Out. It's the right way.

[joeysteele]

Yet still no one is able to give the assurances needed to,in my view, even think of change.

The more David Cameron says on this makes the staying in argument spot on.
Whereas for many of those who are undecided,nothing is coming from Boris, Gove,Farage or any of the others in the 'no'camp, with real substance and guarantees being stated as to how successful or better, or even more to the point, if we would likely even stay the same were the UK to leave the EU.

All we are getting from the out camp, is we would save some funding we pay to the EU,they present a figure and ignore all the funding we hold onto ,get back or what comes as investment from other Nations because we are in the EU in the first place.

Cameron and those leading the in argument,have decades of both opportunity and success the UK has achieved while being in the EU despite those payments to the EU and the conditions of membership too.
To be a bit like a broken record, we will have not so good times,really difficult times and also good times being in the EU as we have for decades now.
Working through those difficult times together with the EU at times too because we are full members.

What is still not being guaranteed by any in the out camp, is how successful we 'will' be out the EU, how we 'will' cope with really difficult times when they arise and also what 'really will' be our trading deals and the full costs of same once out of the EU.
We already know for sure being 'in' how we will cope with hose scenarios because we have done it with the EU for decades now.

Without those assurances and clear plans from the 'out' camp, then really for me, the choice is an easy one and for me it is not to jeopardise the status, success and confidence we already have as a Nation in the EU by taking a road full of possibilities, maybes,don't know yet and absolutely no secure future guarantees.

All we get from the out camp is the endless presentation of all things seemingly bad as they see it to them, not to all, as to the EU as if there is not good at all with the EU.

We are there, we are a full member of the EU, we have shared success and overcome many difficulties while being there too.
Govts of both main Parties have signed treaties they maybe should not have,however that was done, we signed up to all that has come from the EU.
We do not have to do that any more however even as a member, all future treaties from the EU have to be put to the voters in a referendum for approval before any PM could sign it.
We are out the Euro, it is absurb to keep going on about the Euro, we have refused to join it many times now,our position is clear,we will not join it at all.

So we have now in place many assurances as to the future from the EU and by our own legislation when the coalition put in place that no further treaty can be signed in future by any PM,it has to be put to the UK voters.
So the picture within the EU is far clearer,not perfect by any means, but a lot clearer than all the fog that engulfs all the pitfalls were we to come out.
Pitfalls we maybe even yet don't know will even be there on top of the ifs and maybes of trade deals and costs of same and other security and status issues.

Walking into that minefield of ifs, possibilities ad maybes for me is a definite 'no no' and I have heard not a single thing from the out camp at all as to the clearing of any doubts as to same with any real guaranteed assurances for the UKs future.

Again today Boris has said nothing and been able to guarantee nothing either to relieve any fears doubters as to leaving will surely have in my opinion,in fact the more he waffles on the more convinced I am this is his own personal ambition for himself and little to do with the UK.

[DemolitionRed]

The "In" campaign just gets more desperate every day. Who, in their right mind, wants a foreign body, unelected by the British people, making laws for our country? I'm particularly amused by the suggestion that we will have no rights if we vote to leave... because obviously, before Tony Blair and his entourage, this place was like a dictatorship, right? And the fragrant Mrs Blair foisted the Human Rights Bill on us... which has been used almost continuously to aid some of the most odious criminals.

I'm totally with Boris on this one. Out. It's the right way.

The out campaigners are getting more and more desperate and the in campaigners are getting more and more desperate but if you sit in one camp, you will only witness desperation from the opposing camp.
I sit on neither side and so I don't speak with forked tongue.

When Tony Blair was our PM, neo-liberalism was just in its infancy. Since Blair the neo-liberal experiment has grown into something that makes classical conservatism no longer recognisable in this country. Since Blair, this country is transitioning more and more into a mini America and America is one of the most unequal societies on earth. We now live on a spit of sand where radical exclusion is the order of the day and whilst I'm alright chuck, for the sake of my children and the sake of my future grandchildren, I don't want to risk this steam train of neo-liberalism getting its dirty mitts on their futures.

[DemolitionRed]

Again today Boris has said nothing and been able to guarantee nothing either to relieve any fears doubters as to leaving will surely have in my opinion,in fact the more he waffles on the more convinced I am this is his own personal ambition for himself and little to do with the UK.

Absofeckinglutely

[joeysteele]

The "In" campaign just gets more desperate every day. Who, in their right mind, wants a foreign body, unelected by the British people, making laws for our country? I'm particularly amused by the suggestion that we will have no rights if we vote to leave... because obviously, before Tony Blair and his entourage, this place was like a dictatorship, right? And the fragrant Mrs Blair foisted the Human Rights Bill on us... which has been used almost continuously to aid some of the most odious criminals.

I'm totally with Boris on this one. Out. It's the right way.

The human rights act has flaws but if you think we should trust this particular govt to bring in anything better, than that is for sure not for me at all.

The Maastricht treaty signed by John Major was one of the worst treaties as to the EU.
Not just Labour and Tony Blair are to blame for all that is wrong with the EU.

Blair was wrong to want to join the Euro however he was thwarted by Gordon Brown on that one and had the conditions been right, the Conservatives would have likely had us in the Euro too before the 1997 election.
However things got really difficult.

No way however do I want this govt to be now in charge of planning a human rights or British bill of rights,it scares me rotten thinking what this govt and particularly the likes of Ian Duncan Smith would love to do outside the human rights act as it is.

I'd rather change be made to some elements of the human rights act as it is but not to leave it,no way for me, not after watching and seeing the heartlessness of this govt.

I also don't agree at all the in camp is desperate,both are making unnecessary claims at times but the in camp can point to decades of success within the EU.
What can the out camp promise us for sure, you are an out person,help the undecided with certainties for the future, as the in camp can now with where we are in the EU for decades now.

This is not 1973 now, the Commonwealth and the World has changed,all have moved on.
It for me would be almost like going back to a place we may have loved as a child,you go looking for what was there before but when you get there, nothing or little is in fact like it was before.

So again, if the out camp give guarantees they may have a more valid argument other than just indicating, lets pick our ball up and stop playing with these anymore, lets look elsewhere to see if we can find others to play with,with absolutely no certainty as to finding any better or even as good whatsoever.

Boris too, even when he stops waffling and mumbling a bit, has not for me said a single thing of note on this issue really.

[arista]

The "In" campaign just gets more desperate every day. Who, in their right mind, wants a foreign body, unelected by the British people, making laws for our country? I'm particularly amused by the suggestion that we will have no rights if we vote to leave... because obviously, before Tony Blair and his entourage, this place was like a dictatorship, right? And the fragrant Mrs Blair foisted the Human Rights Bill on us... which has been used almost continuously to aid some of the most odious criminals.

I'm totally with Boris on this one. Out. It's the right way.


Yes he made a great deal of sense

[DemolitionRed]

Here's a question.
Would Brexit make it better or worse for the UK when the fourth industrial revolution hits?

This working paper gives an overview of the new possibilities opened up by the 4th industrial revolution and tackles some specific questions in relation to its effects on the labour market, including on the status of employees, on working conditions and on training. It examines the role that trade unions can play in the digital economy and the main initiatives already proposed at European trade union level in this context.
http://www.etui.org/en/Publications2/Working-Papers/Digitalisation-of-the-economy-and-its-impact-on-labour-markets

This paper has been written and predicted on current experiences but how would Brexit handle such a change. Could we handle such changes on our own?

[bots]

What I have noted so far is an acceptance by all that the EU is not perfect, it has faults. We have all been made well aware of them in minutest detail. The out camp have yet to remove the rose coloured glasses on being on our own. Not a single admission that things may be less than ideal if we vote out. We live in the real world, we know there will be issues. Why have they not come clean

[DemolitionRed]

What I have noted so far is an acceptance by all that the EU is not perfect, it has faults. We have all been made well aware of them in minutest detail. The out camp have yet to remove the rose coloured glasses on being on our own. Not a single admission that things may be less than ideal if we vote out. We live in the real world, we know there will be issues. Why have they not come clean

This^ Critical analysis is a necessary part of change.

[Alf]

What does the future hold in or out? No one knows What the future holds, because it hasn't been written.

The future will be what we make it, but paying a net sum of £8.5 billion a year for non-Brits to make our rules and regulations for us, can't be good for Britain.

The EU is basically a way of bringing back a sort of slavery, it's slavery hidden behind bureaucracy.

Working class Britain's fight for a better wage, people don't want to pay workers any more than they can get away with, so how do they get away with paying as little as possible? They know minimum wage is a lot of money to Eastern Europeans and they'll happily do back breaking work for minimum wage, so working class Britain's hit the dole queues, and Eastern European country's are stripped of their workers.

If you was true Labour, you'd want out.

[joeysteele]

What I have noted so far is an acceptance by all that the EU is not perfect, it has faults. We have all been made well aware of them in minutest detail. The out camp have yet to remove the rose coloured glasses on being on our own. Not a single admission that things may be less than ideal if we vote out. We live in the real world, we know there will be issues. Why have they not come clean

Exactly, and as you say looking at being out only with rose coloured glasses,whereas the EU with us in can be seen very clearly no matter what glasses may be used or indeed even none.

[Alf]

[/B]
Exactly, and as you say looking at being out only with rose coloured glasses,whereas the EU with us in can be seen very clearly no matter what glasses may be used or indeed even none.
You're right about that, it sure can be seen very clearly.

We're not having a referendum for the fun of it, half of the people of the Country have had enough, The common market is what the people voted into, not a European super-state.

[Alf]

[/B]
Exactly, and as you say looking at being out only with rose coloured glasses,whereas the EU with us in can be seen very clearly no matter what glasses may be used or indeed even none.Do you think we should scrap the pound, and have the Euro? I mean, if we're gonna be in, let's be totally committed.

[Northern Monkey]

The "In" campaign just gets more desperate every day. Who, in their right mind, wants a foreign body, unelected by the British people, making laws for our country? I'm particularly amused by the suggestion that we will have no rights if we vote to leave... because obviously, before Tony Blair and his entourage, this place was like a dictatorship, right? And the fragrant Mrs Blair foisted the Human Rights Bill on us... which has been used almost continuously to aid some of the most odious criminals.

I'm totally with Boris on this one. Out. It's the right way.

Yep.I'm with Boris,The Queen and you.Out!

[Northern Monkey]

What does the future hold in or out? No one knows What the future holds, because it hasn't been written.

The future will be what we make it, but paying a net sum of £8.5 billion a year for non-Brits to make our rules and regulations for us, can't be good for Britain.

The EU is basically a way of bringing back a sort of slavery, it's slavery hidden behind bureaucracy.

Working class Britain's fight for a better wage, people don't want to pay workers any more than they can get away with, so how do they get away with paying as little as possible? They know minimum wage is a lot of money to Eastern Europeans and they'll happily do back breaking work for minimum wage, so working class Britain's hit the dole queues, and Eastern European country's are stripped of their workers.

If you was true Labour, you'd want out.^Good points

[joeysteele]

Do you think we should scrap the pound, and have the Euro? I mean, if we're gonna be in, let's be totally committed.

No I don't and its not an issue anyway as we have declined to join the Euro more than once, also it is even moreso not for us after David Cameron's deal too.

We are now full members and not having to have the Euro, that satisfies me.

[joeysteele]

You're right about that, it sure can be seen very clearly.

We're not having a referendum for the fun of it, half of the people of the Country have had enough, The common market is what the people voted into, not a European super-state.

Actually that is not substantiated with respect,we do not know at all if half the people have had enough, we will need to wait and see how everyone votes to gain that knowledge.

Furthermore, I know many people who 100% wanted a referendum to settle the issue once and for all but who will be also still voting to stay in.

[kirklancaster]

THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE MULDER


SYED KAMALL - THE MOST SENIOR TORY IN THE EUROPEAN PARTLIAMENT - AND THE MAN WHO HELPED CAMERON WITH THE EU RENEGOTIATION -

JOINS THE LEAVE CAMPAIGN

:dance::dance::dance::dance::cheer2::cheer2:cheer2 ::cheer2:

The leader of the Conservative MEPs in the European Parliament - who helped broker David Cameron’s renegotiation package - has said he wants to leave the EU.

In a symbolic blow to the 'in In Campaign' and Mr Cameron, Syed Kamall said he believed that “on balance we could forge a better future outside” the bloc. The top Tory in Brussels said that he thought the Prime Minister’s EU renegotiation had given the UK a “better deal” but that it was not good enough for him to stay in.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/syed-kamall-mep-leave-eu-david-cameron-renegotiation-a6925241.html

[Alf]

[QUOTE=joeysteele;8558192]Actually that is not substantiated with respect,we do not know at all if half the people have had enough, we will need to wait and see how everyone votes to gain that knowledge.QUOTE]
That's a fair point, what I should have said, from what I'm hearing, is, The majority of people.

[kirklancaster]

CHRIS GRAYLING SAYS CAMERONS 'EU DEAL' MAY MAKE THINGS WORSE

COMMONS LEADER CHRIS GRAYLING HAS CRITICISED CAMERON'S 'EU REFORM DEAL', SAYING IT COULD LEAVE BRITAIN IN A 'WORSE SITUATION' THAN BEFORE.

Mr Grayling, who wants Britain to leave the EU, warned the country could be shut out of decisions as the eurozone nations integrate further.
He also hit back at the PM's claim that Leave campaigners thought losing jobs was a "price worth paying" for exit.

He said leaving the EU "would create the opportunity for more jobs".
Follow the latest updates with the BBC's EU referendum live
All you need to know about the EU referendum
UK and the EU - better off out or in?
Cameron to set out 'benefits of EU'

In his speech Mr Grayling warned that Mr Cameron's concession in his EU renegotiation that the UK would not stand in the way of eurozone integration could undermine its position.

"One of the inadvertent consequences of the renegotiation discussions is that we have agreed that Britain 'shall not impede the implementation of legal acts directly linked to the functioning of the euro area'. This is a significant - and underappreciated - loss of leverage," he said.

"We now lack a key tool in preventing further EU integration - which we might be dragged along into. In fact we may be in a worse situation than we were before."

READ THE TRUTH FROM THE LEADER OF THE COMMONS

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35771805

[joeysteele]

[QUOTE=joeysteele;8558192]Actually that is not substantiated with respect,we do not know at all if half the people have had enough, we will need to wait and see how everyone votes to gain that knowledge.QUOTE]
That's a fair point, what I should have said, from what I'm hearing, is, The majority of people.

Which again with respect is not the likely case, and indeed will not be known as a fact until the votes have been actually cast.
Even all polling at present, not that I take any notice of those now, indicate in no way the majority want out at this time.

So we really haven't a clue what the result will be,I feel that I haven't a clue where the majority view lies, as someone who wants to stay in.
So I cannot see how you with respect. or the other 'out' people, have any more info than I and others have,even the political pundits.

[joeysteele]

Where is Graylings proof that leaving the EU will create jobs and not lose them.
There is nothing in what he says that can or does guarantee that.

However in the EU we know for a fact there are masses of jobs linked to the EU as a fact.

Grayling is just spouting the same line we are getting all the time from the out camp,with nothing to substantiate in any way his and their claims.
It's all again, ifs maybes, possibilities,no certainties.

Until he can demonstrate with substantiated facts that more jobs will be created if we leave, then what he says is meaningless.
Whereas we know now that jobs have been created via our membership of the EU.

Of course hard times will come staying in, difficult things to get over, as we have had to do over the last few decades,being in the EU we have got over those difficult times and harder times too.
So we know from past events we can do so if we find ourselves in difficulty again in the future while in the EU.

What we have no idea of at all is how we would or in fact could even deal with such harder times or difficult times if out.
So Grayling like the others in the out camp are telling us nothing of any assured certainty as to that.
Until they do all they say is possibles,ifs and maybes with likely more don't knows than anything else.

You don't and cannot build a Nations future around those ifs and uncertainties, not in this modern World now.

[kirklancaster]

[QUOTE=joeysteele;8558309]Where is Graylings proof that leaving the EU will create jobs and not lose them.
There is nothing in what he says that can or does guarantee that.

With respect Joey - You keep IGNORING the many facts which I have posted and keep insisting on the 'OUT' Campaigners providing ABSOLUTE PROOF of what will occur outside the EU but such is IMPOSSIBLE to furnish because NO ONE KNOWS the future.

The 'OUT' campaigners 'BEST GUESTIMATES' about what MAY happen if we leave the corrupt EU is as equally as valid as those of the 'In' campaigners, but there is one VERY IMPORTANT difference between the two camps when it comes to JUSTIFYING their stance:

The 'OUT' Campaigners have irrefutable PROOF of 42 YEARS OF THE EU BEING DAMAGING TO THE UK IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE: FINANCIALLY TO THE TUNE OF 100's OF BILLIONS, ECONOMICALLY, WITH THE DECIMATION OF OUR FARMING AND FISHING INDUSTRIES etc. etc. etc.

THE 'IN' Campaigners WANT to stay in IN SPITE OF THE EVIDENCE OF THE PAST 42 YEARS.

However in the EU we know for a fact there are masses of jobs linked to the EU as a fact.

Will you please post corroboration of this "fact" concerning "masses of jobs linked to the EU" Joey?

"Grayling is just spouting the same line we are getting all the time from the out camp,with nothing to substantiate in any way his and their claims.
It's all again, ifs maybes, possibilities,no certainties.

"Until he can demonstrate with substantiated facts that more jobs will be created if we leave, then what he says is meaningless."

This is just repetitition of your first paragraph Joey.

"Whereas we know now that jobs have been created via our membership of the EU."

This is just repetitition of your second paragraph Joey.

"Of course hard times will come staying in, difficult things to get over, as we have had to do over the last few decades,being in the EU we have got over those difficult times and harder times too."B]

The above IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE - well attributing our success to us being members of the EU is not true.

WE HAVE ELEVATED OURSELVES IN SPITE OF BEING IN THE EU.

The UK currently ranks as the world's fifth largest economy, overtaking France in Gross Domestic Product in 2014, and is set to become the best performing economy in the western world over the next 15 years according to a report by the Centre for Economics Business and Research.

UK economic growth is set to hit 2.9pc this year - the second fastest in the advanced world after the United States - which means the economy is now 6.1pc larger than its pre-financial crisis peak.

Our deficit has been reduced by almost two thirds as a share of GDP since its peak in 2009-10 and an average of 1,000 extra people per day are in work.

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BEING A MEMBER OF THE IDIOTIC MUDDLED AND FAILING EU - AND ALL TO DO WITH THE CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENTS OWN LONG TERM ECONOMIC POLICIES.

IF THIS IS NOT THE REAL TRUTH - THEN WHY WAS THE EURO ZONE GDP IN THE FINAL QUARTER OF 2015 STILL BELOW IT'S PRE-CRISIS PEAK OF EARLY 2008 WHILE THE UK AND NON-EU COUNTRIES SUCH AS the USA, BRAZIL AND INDIA ARE BOOMING?

THE EU IS FAILING AND STAGNANT, AND THIS IS DESPITE A LUCKY BOOST AND A COUPLE OF 'NEAT' TRICKS WHICH HAS BENEFITED THE EURO;

1)Collapsing oil prices have caused energy prices to plummet boosting consumer spending—the main engine of the recovery.

2) The European Central Bank has carried out 'Quantitative Easing' - that nifty trick of 'creating' money to buy financial assets - which, together with the earlier introduction of NEGATIVE interest rates, has kept the euro low and kept it 'weak' thus helping exporters.

ALL THIS - AND STILL THE SHAMBLES OF A EU IS FAILING.

Debt levels across the eurozone continue to rocket, with the monetary bloc’s debt reaching nearly 92% in 2014 - the highest level since the single currency was introduced in 1999.

It is NOT JUST GREECE who are in the SHET - Romania, Croatia, Finland, Spain, Cyprus, Slovenia,, Bulgaria and Estonia have seen their debts rocket.

Even the Italian and French economies are set to be overtaken in the world's new economic order by growth giants of the emerging NON EU world - India and Brazil, and in contrast to the UK, France and Italy are facing "exclusion" from the grouping of the world's advanced economies, said the CEBR.

[B]"You don't and cannot build a Nations future around those ifs and uncertainties, not in this modern World now."

I'm sorry Joey, but ALL THE FACTS are SCREAMING to GET US OUT OF THE MONEY DRAINING, SOVEREINGTY STEALING,, SHAMBLES OF A SINKING SHIP WHICH IS THE EU.

OUT - ANY OTHER DECISION IS MADNESS AND SUICIDE.

[joeysteele]

[QUOTE=joeysteele;8558309]Where is Graylings proof that leaving the EU will create jobs and not lose them.
There is nothing in what he says that can or does guarantee that.

With respect Joey - You keep IGNORING the many facts which I have posted and keep insisting on the 'OUT' Campaigners providing ABSOLUTE PROOF of what will occur outside the EU but such is IMPOSSIBLE to furnish because NO ONE KNOWS the future.

The 'OUT' campaigners 'BEST GUESTIMATES' about what MAY happen if we leave the corrupt EU is as equally as valid as those of the 'In' campaigners, but there is one VERY IMPORTANT difference between the two camps when it comes to JUSTIFYING their stance:

The 'OUT' Campaigners have irrefutable PROOF of 42 YEARS OF THE EU BEING DAMAGING TO THE UK IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE: FINANCIALLY TO THE TUNE OF 100's OF BILLIONS, ECONOMICALLY, WITH THE DECIMATION OF OUR FARMING AND FISHING INDUSTRIES etc. etc. etc.

THE 'IN' Campaigners WANT to stay in IN SPITE OF THE EVIDENCE OF THE PAST 42 YEARS.

However in the EU we know for a fact there are masses of jobs linked to the EU as a fact.

Will you please post corroboration of this "fact" concerning "masses of jobs linked to the EU" Joey?

"Grayling is just spouting the same line we are getting all the time from the out camp,with nothing to substantiate in any way his and their claims.
It's all again, ifs maybes, possibilities,no certainties.

"Until he can demonstrate with substantiated facts that more jobs will be created if we leave, then what he says is meaningless."

This is just repetitition of your first paragraph Joey.

"Whereas we know now that jobs have been created via our membership of the EU."

This is just repetitition of your second paragraph Joey.

"Of course hard times will come staying in, difficult things to get over, as we have had to do over the last few decades,being in the EU we have got over those difficult times and harder times too."B]

The above IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE - well attributing our success to us being members of the EU is not true.

WE HAVE ELEVATED OURSELVES IN SPITE OF BEING IN THE EU.

The UK currently ranks as the world's fifth largest economy, overtaking France in Gross Domestic Product in 2014, and is set to become the best performing economy in the western world over the next 15 years according to a report by the Centre for Economics Business and Research.

UK economic growth is set to hit 2.9pc this year - the second fastest in the advanced world after the United States - which means the economy is now 6.1pc larger than its pre-financial crisis peak.

Our deficit has been reduced by almost two thirds as a share of GDP since its peak in 2009-10 and an average of 1,000 extra people per day are in work.

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BEING A MEMBER OF THE IDIOTIC MUDDLED AND FAILING EU - AND ALL TO DO WITH THE CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENTS OWN LONG TERM ECONOMIC POLICIES.

IF THIS IS NOT THE REAL TRUTH - THEN WHY WAS THE EURO ZONE GDP IN THE FINAL QUARTER OF 2015 STILL BELOW IT'S PRE-CRISIS PEAK OF EARLY 2008 WHILE THE UK AND NON-EU COUNTRIES SUCH AS the USA, BRAZIL AND INDIA ARE BOOMING?

THE EU IS FAILING AND STAGNANT, AND THIS IS DESPITE A LUCKY BOOST AND A COUPLE OF 'NEAT' TRICKS WHICH HAS BENEFITED THE EURO;

1)Collapsing oil prices have caused energy prices to plummet boosting consumer spending—the main engine of the recovery.

2) The European Central Bank has carried out 'Quantitative Easing' - that nifty trick of 'creating' money to buy financial assets - which, together with the earlier introduction of NEGATIVE interest rates, has kept the euro low and kept it 'weak' thus helping exporters.

ALL THIS - AND STILL THE SHAMBLES OF A EU IS FAILING.

Debt levels across the eurozone continue to rocket, with the monetary bloc’s debt reaching nearly 92% in 2014 - the highest level since the single currency was introduced in 1999.

It is NOT JUST GREECE who are in the SHET - Romania, Croatia, Finland, Spain, Cyprus, Slovenia,, Bulgaria and Estonia have seen their debts rocket.

Even the Italian and French economies are set to be overtaken in the world's new economic order by growth giants of the emerging NON EU world - India and Brazil, and in contrast to the UK, France and Italy are facing "exclusion" from the grouping of the world's advanced economies, said the CEBR.

[B]"You don't and cannot build a Nations future around those ifs and uncertainties, not in this modern World now."

I'm sorry Joey, but ALL THE FACTS are SCREAMING to GET US OUT OF THE MONEY DRAINING, SOVEREINGTY STEALING,, SHAMBLES OF A SINKING SHIP WHICH IS THE EU.

OUT - ANY OTHER DECISION IS MADNESS AND SUICIDE.



That I have put in bold is the whole point though for me.

We do know that in the future how we will likely deal with problems that occur with our EU partners alongside us, because we have done so for the last 2 decades at least now.

It is not a money draining organisation, we maybe pay too much to be fair but we get a lot back too.
Something the out camp totally ignore.

What we do not know at all is exactly the trade deals we 'will''get if we leave, as opposed to the deals we have in place now, assured for the future.

What we do not know at all,is what tariffs may or will be put on us to trade with the EU in the future if we leave, as opposed to knowing we do not pay many now which is assured.

What we do not know at all is what other conditions we will also have to accept as to trading deals and other EU regulations,as opposed to knowing exactly where we are and what conditions apply now.

What we do not know at all, is what trading deals we can get too as to other Nations outside the EU,whether they will want to deal a bit with us, a fair lot with us or a great deal with us.


Now with respect it is for you and the out camp to spell out what we will get rather than what we have already now which has served the UK rather well for decades, despite the problems and indeed more better terms needed,no one denies that.

However, we know what problems can do to economies and we have seen how while a member of the EU how we have overcome big problems at times.
What we don't know at allis how we will overcome difficulties and problems as and when they arise if out of the EU and again I stress the out camp, tells us nothing at all as to assurances as to how we could and will anyway deal with any such problems and difficulties.

You are only presenting the negatives of the EU, totally ignoring all the good that is also there as to the EU while providing not a scrap, with respect, of evidence or fact of substantiation as to the questions coming out will raise.

In that full absence of such assurances,especially with what we already have with being a member of the EU,then you are asking for a journey to be taken that no one knows the road to really and no one can fully show the full substantiated blueprint for what will for sure happen if we do go on it.

That is what the out camp has to do or why should anyone listen.
The in camp only needs to defend being a member of the EU with all its many faults,because we 'know'what has come before, what things are like now and that we can be able to deal with whatever is thrown at us in the future with our EU partners.

We are hearing nothing at all as to any of that from the out camp,nothing at all.
Just plain EU bashing with no drawing even of the UKs future out of the EU that has any strong facts and assurances to it,that things could even just be held the same as they are now, let alone be any better.
So for me,with all that not knowing,no way would I take a walk with the out camp, not for my Country's future or for the very young of the UK either.
Not a chance, no blank cheques from me at all.

By the way Kirk, I may be repeating myself but look at your own posts please, they are full of the same thing over and over,even what Grayling has said today is just what others have said before too from the out camp.
Now I don't pull you up on your posting and repeating yourself over and over, so kindly refrain from pulling me up as to that.

If on different pages in this thread, you can repeat yourself with your 'out out out' messages,well for sure 100% so can I.

[rubymoo]

My gut instinct says 'out' and my gut instinct is never wrong ;)

[Kizzy]

That I have put in bold is the whole point though for me.

We do know that in the future how we will likely deal with problems that occur with our EU partners alongside us, because we have done so for the last 2 decades at least now.

It is not a money draining organisation, we maybe pay too much to be fair but we get a lot back too.
Something the out camp totally ignore.

What we do not know at all is exactly the trade deals we 'will''get if we leave, as opposed to the deals we have in place now, assured for the future.

What we do not know at all,is what tariffs may or will be put on us to trade with the EU in the future if we leave, as opposed to knowing we do not pay many now which is assured.

What we do not know at all is what other conditions we will also have to accept as to trading deals and other EU regulations,as opposed to knowing exactly where we are and what conditions apply now.

What we do not know at all, is what trading deals we can get too as to other Nations outside the EU,whether they will want to deal a bit with us, a fair lot with us or a great deal with us.


Now with respect it is for you and the out camp to spell out what we will get rather than what we have already now which has served the UK rather well for decades, despite the problems and indeed more better terms needed,no one denies that.

However, we know what problems can do to economies and we have seen how while a member of the EU how we have overcome big problems at times.
What we don't know at allis how we will overcome difficulties and problems as and when they arise if out of the EU and again I stress the out camp, tells us nothing at all as to assurances as to how we could and will anyway deal with any such problems and difficulties.

You are only presenting the negatives of the EU, totally ignoring all the good that is also there as to the EU while providing not a scrap, with respect, of evidence or fact of substantiation as to the questions coming out will raise.

In that full absence of such assurances,especially with what we already have with being a member of the EU,then you are asking for a journey to be taken that no one knows the road to really and no one can fully show the full substantiated blueprint for what will for sure happen if we do go on it.

That is what the out camp has to do or why should anyone listen.
The in camp only needs to defend being a member of the EU with all its many faults,because we 'know'what has come before, what things are like now and that we can be able to deal with whatever is thrown at us in the future with our EU partners.

We are hearing nothing at all as to any of that from the out camp,nothing at all.
Just plain EU bashing with no drawing even of the UKs future out of the EU that has any strong facts and assurances to it,that things could even just be held the same as they are now, let alone be any better.
So for me,with all that not knowing,no way would I take a walk with the out camp, not for my Country's future or for the very young of the UK either.
Not a chance, no blank cheques from me at all.

By the way Kirk, I may be repeating myself but look at your own posts please, they are full of the same thing over and over,even what Grayling has said today is just what others have said before too from the out camp.
Now I don't pull you up on your posting and repeating yourself over and over, so kindly refrain from pulling me up as to that.

If on different pages in this thread, you can repeat yourself with your 'out out out' messages,well for sure 100% so can I.

:clap1: :clap1: :clap1:

[kirklancaster]

[QUOTE=kirklancaster;8558398]



That I have put in bold is the whole point though for me.

We do know that in the future how we will likely deal with problems that occur with our EU partners alongside us, because we have done so for the last 2 decades at least now.

It is not a money draining organisation, we maybe pay too much to be fair but we get a lot back too.
Something the out camp totally ignore.

What we do not know at all is exactly the trade deals we 'will''get if we leave, as opposed to the deals we have in place now, assured for the future.

What we do not know at all,is what tariffs may or will be put on us to trade with the EU in the future if we leave, as opposed to knowing we do not pay many now which is assured.

What we do not know at all is what other conditions we will also have to accept as to trading deals and other EU regulations,as opposed to knowing exactly where we are and what conditions apply now.

What we do not know at all, is what trading deals we can get too as to other Nations outside the EU,whether they will want to deal a bit with us, a fair lot with us or a great deal with us.


Now with respect it is for you and the out camp to spell out what we will get rather than what we have already now which has served the UK rather well for decades, despite the problems and indeed more better terms needed,no one denies that.

However, we know what problems can do to economies and we have seen how while a member of the EU how we have overcome big problems at times.
What we don't know at allis how we will overcome difficulties and problems as and when they arise if out of the EU and again I stress the out camp, tells us nothing at all as to assurances as to how we could and will anyway deal with any such problems and difficulties.

You are only presenting the negatives of the EU, totally ignoring all the good that is also there as to the EU while providing not a scrap, with respect, of evidence or fact of substantiation as to the questions coming out will raise.

In that full absence of such assurances,especially with what we already have with being a member of the EU,then you are asking for a journey to be taken that no one knows the road to really and no one can fully show the full substantiated blueprint for what will for sure happen if we do go on it.

That is what the out camp has to do or why should anyone listen.
The in camp only needs to defend being a member of the EU with all its many faults,because we 'know'what has come before, what things are like now and that we can be able to deal with whatever is thrown at us in the future with our EU partners.

We are hearing nothing at all as to any of that from the out camp,nothing at all.
Just plain EU bashing with no drawing even of the UKs future out of the EU that has any strong facts and assurances to it,that things could even just be held the same as they are now, let alone be any better.
So for me,with all that not knowing,no way would I take a walk with the out camp, not for my Country's future or for the very young of the UK either.
Not a chance, no blank cheques from me at all.

Once again Joey, you are ignoring the facts in my post and merely repeating yourself.

I do not post Joey without corroborating evidence and facts, but with respect, you- and others of the 'In' camp - continue to make statements without any corroborating evidence or facts.

Saying does not make it so.

I would greatly appreciate seeing some genuine data to corroborate all these wonderful benefits - economic or otherwise - which we have enjoyed during our 42 year membership of the wonderful EU.

The EU is the ultimate money laundering scam.

The bloated bastards in Brussels collect collossal sums from the taxpayers of this country, from which they take their huge cut, then what's left is dispersed to other countries - most of who pay less in than us - so we are the feck-pigs of Europe;

We directly subsidise a lot of those EU Migrants and their families who come here to live, and we directly subsidise some of the (predominantly POLISH ) EU migrants children who they leave behind in their own countries, but we ALSO INDIRECTLY SUBSIDE EVERYONE IN THOSE COUNTRIES ANYWAY via our greater payments being diverted to them by the Money Launderers of Brussels.

As for "but we get a lot back too." - are you referring to the 'Rebate' which Thatcher fought for in 1984 after 11 years of NET LOSSES with NO REBATE?

Because if you are, the facts are that:

NOT ONCE IN ALL OUR YEARS OF 'MEMBERSHIP' HAS THE UK GOT OUT MORE THAN WE PUT IN AND BEING IN THE EU HAS BEEN A 'ONE WAY STREET FOR BRITAIN'.

Contributions from Britain to the EU budget have outstripped the benefits received in every single year of membership.

In total since 1979, Britain has paid in about €260 billion (£228 billion). It has received back in benefits just €163 billion (£143 billion).

In 2015 the UK government paid £13 billion to the EU budget, and EU spending on the UK was £4.5 billion. So the UK’s ‘net contribution’ was £8.5 billion.

BUT THIS BEING THE DECEITFUL EU AND THEIR EVEN MORE DECEITFUL UK GOVERNMENT SUPPORTERS, THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT THAT 'REBATE' IS, THAT A LOT OF IT IS SPENT HERE IN THE UK BY PRO EU GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER EU COMPANIES ON PROMOTING THE EU.

MOST OF THAT REBATE DOES NOT EVER FILTER BACK TO THE THE TAXPAYERS OF THIS COUNTRY WHO PAID THE FECKING MULTI BILLION POUND CONTRIBUTIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

AS I SAID - THE EU IS THE ULTIMATE MONEY LAUNDERING SCAM AND THE ULTIMATE EXPONENT OF THE 'SHERIFF OF NOTTINGHAM TAX - ROBBING THE POOR TO PAY THE RICH AND THE MEGA RICH CORPORATIONS.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/10/23/article-0-0E7D3F1D00000578-723_468x240.jpg

[Alf]

And the cherry on the top is, we can have an annual jolly up every 23rd of June, for Independence day.

Surely that's a deal breaker?

[DemolitionRed]

That I have put in bold is the whole point though for me.

We do know that in the future how we will likely deal with problems that occur with our EU partners alongside us, because we have done so for the last 2 decades at least now.

It is not a money draining organisation, we maybe pay too much to be fair but we get a lot back too.
Something the out camp totally ignore.

What we do not know at all is exactly the trade deals we 'will''get if we leave, as opposed to the deals we have in place now, assured for the future.

What we do not know at all,is what tariffs may or will be put on us to trade with the EU in the future if we leave, as opposed to knowing we do not pay many now which is assured.

What we do not know at all is what other conditions we will also have to accept as to trading deals and other EU regulations,as opposed to knowing exactly where we are and what conditions apply now.

What we do not know at all, is what trading deals we can get too as to other Nations outside the EU,whether they will want to deal a bit with us, a fair lot with us or a great deal with us.


Now with respect it is for you and the out camp to spell out what we will get rather than what we have already now which has served the UK rather well for decades, despite the problems and indeed more better terms needed,no one denies that.

However, we know what problems can do to economies and we have seen how while a member of the EU how we have overcome big problems at times.
What we don't know at allis how we will overcome difficulties and problems as and when they arise if out of the EU and again I stress the out camp, tells us nothing at all as to assurances as to how we could and will anyway deal with any such problems and difficulties.

You are only presenting the negatives of the EU, totally ignoring all the good that is also there as to the EU while providing not a scrap, with respect, of evidence or fact of substantiation as to the questions coming out will raise.

In that full absence of such assurances,especially with what we already have with being a member of the EU,then you are asking for a journey to be taken that no one knows the road to really and no one can fully show the full substantiated blueprint for what will for sure happen if we do go on it.

That is what the out camp has to do or why should anyone listen.
The in camp only needs to defend being a member of the EU with all its many faults,because we 'know'what has come before, what things are like now and that we can be able to deal with whatever is thrown at us in the future with our EU partners.

We are hearing nothing at all as to any of that from the out camp,nothing at all.
Just plain EU bashing with no drawing even of the UKs future out of the EU that has any strong facts and assurances to it,that things could even just be held the same as they are now, let alone be any better.
So for me,with all that not knowing,no way would I take a walk with the out camp, not for my Country's future or for the very young of the UK either.
Not a chance, no blank cheques from me at all.

By the way Kirk, I may be repeating myself but look at your own posts please, they are full of the same thing over and over,even what Grayling has said today is just what others have said before too from the out camp.
Now I don't pull you up on your posting and repeating yourself over and over, so kindly refrain from pulling me up as to that.

If on different pages in this thread, you can repeat yourself with your 'out out out' messages,well for sure 100% so can I.

:clap1:

[joeysteele]

[QUOTE=joeysteele;8558461]

Once again Joey, you are ignoring the facts in my post and merely repeating yourself.

I do not post Joey without corroborating evidence and facts, but with respect, you- and others of the 'In' camp - continue to make statements without any corroborating evidence or facts.

Saying does not make it so.

I would greatly appreciate seeing some genuine data to corroborate all these wonderful benefits - economic or otherwise - which we have enjoyed during our 42 year membership of the wonderful EU.

The EU is the ultimate money laundering scam.

The bloated bastards in Brussels collect collossal sums from the taxpayers of this country, from which they take their huge cut, then what's left is dispersed to other countries - most of who pay less in than us - so we are the feck-pigs of Europe;

We directly subsidise a lot of those EU Migrants and their families who come here to live, and we directly subsidise some of the (predominantly POLISH ) EU migrants children who they leave behind in their own countries, but we ALSO INDIRECTLY SUBSIDE EVERYONE IN THOSE COUNTRIES ANYWAY via our greater payments being diverted to them by the Money Launderers of Brussels.

As for "but we get a lot back too." - are you referring to the 'Rebate' which Thatcher fought for in 1984 after 11 years of NET LOSSES with NO REBATE?

Because if you are, the facts are that:

NOT ONCE IN ALL OUR YEARS OF 'MEMBERSHIP' HAS THE UK GOT OUT MORE THAN WE PUT IN AND BEING IN THE EU HAS BEEN A 'ONE WAY STREET FOR BRITAIN'.

Contributions from Britain to the EU budget have outstripped the benefits received in every single year of membership.

In total since 1979, Britain has paid in about €260 billion (£228 billion). It has received back in benefits just €163 billion (£143 billion).

In 2015 the UK government paid £13 billion to the EU budget, and EU spending on the UK was £4.5 billion. So the UK’s ‘net contribution’ was £8.5 billion.

BUT THIS BEING THE DECEITFUL EU AND THEIR EVEN MORE DECEITFUL UK GOVERNMENT SUPPORTERS, THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT THAT 'REBATE' IS, THAT A LOT OF IT IS SPENT HERE IN THE UK BY PRO EU GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER EU COMPANIES ON PROMOTING THE EU.

MOST OF THAT REBATE DOES NOT EVER FILTER BACK TO THE THE TAXPAYERS OF THIS COUNTRY WHO PAID THE FECKING MULTI BILLION POUND CONTRIBUTIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

AS I SAID - THE EU IS THE ULTIMATE MONEY LAUNDERING SCAM AND THE ULTIMATE EXPONENT OF THE 'SHERRIF OF NOTTINGHAM TAX - ROBBING THE POOR TO PAY THE RICH AND THE MEGA RICH CORPORATIONS.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/10/23/article-0-0E7D3F1D00000578-723_468x240.jpg

Kirk with the greatest of respect,I could talk to you until I lost my voice for good and still would not be in any way any nearer to you agreeing with me or indeed vice versa as to you to me as to the EU.

As an IN person I have outlined my reasons and with the facts of all I know from us being an EU member, why I am 100% for in.

All I would like to hear from you and all who want out,are the guarantees that the UK would not lose out by leaving, that the UK would be the same economically successful or even better if out,than we have been while in for decades.

We are a success story of the EU, it is for you and the out camp to demonstrate clearly and with substantiation what our trading deals will be and what conditions there will be too.
How our security will be better out than in too.

Yes,I am repeating myself, and will do so until, instead of just getting EU bashing as to only negatives of the EU while ignoring any good,from the out camp who still then cannot give the assurances that are needed to be even in the slightest bit positive to think of voting out.

To you a solid'out', from me a solid 'in',I suggest since you do not like people repeating themselves, even though you are doing little else yourself with respect,that you just don't read my posts because you are never likely to be going to in any way agree with what I say on this issue.
Just as I freely admit, I am unlikely to ever agree with you on the issue either.

I will however keep repeating myself,(here I am doing it again), as to the out camp, to inform us of the guarantees they will give as to the UKs future out of the EU and its success guaranteed thereafter.
None of the out camp have done so,I doubt they will or even can,so again I repeat, that is step way too dangerous in my view for the UK to go.
Full of uncertainty and no guarantees on anything at all whatsoever.

Of course we pay more in than we get out,no one disputes that but your figures are likely incorrect as to the nett contribution since we deduct the rebate before we pay the funds and then get funds back other ways which means from the gross figure,which was quoted on the Daily Politics at one year of 19 billion, we got at least 9 billion + back as to the rebate and other EU funding to the UK.
So if you are going to put a figure up that says what we pay in, you also have to balance that with what we get back too.
Otherwise such figures become meaningless.

I have just seen that you have amended at the bottom the nett contribution,may I suggest it would be easier for those looking for such facts to see that 8.5 billion figure as the actual contribution rather then the gross figure emphasised far more strongly.

See I would say our actual contribution was 8.5 billion to the EU and not confuse things by using the gross figure as the main emphasised content.
8.5 billion is considerably less than the 13billion+ figures branded about.

Nobody disputes though,we pay in more than we get back, anything you pay into to join, you rarely get more back than you put in.

Now please us what will be the full costs added to the UK as to trade deals and tarriffs imposed if we left and had to negotiate again with the EU.
What will those costs run to,what will they be?
I expect that is another we don't know at all but expecting people to vote for it anyway stance.

[Alf]

The net sum is £8.5billion.

So you asked for guarantee's that we would not be losing out, there's a guarantee for you right there, we wont be losing out on £8.5 billion a year.

[joeysteele]

The net sum is £8.5billion.

So you asked for guarantee's that we would not be losing out, there's a guarantee for you right there, we wont be losing out on £8.5 billion a year.

I have already acknowledged that actually.

Will we be saving that much, will we be saving much at all, can you now enlighten us to the fully guaranteed costs of the new trade deal we will have to negotiate with the EU,as to the costs of any tarriffs that may be put on our exports to the EU, also can you enlighten us too as to the costs of other deals negotiated independently with other Nations too.

How much of that actual 8.5 billion will we actually end up saving, I admit I haven't a clue,I haven't a clue as to if any of it would overall be saved of note.
I would love to hear someone from the out camp fully detail it all for us however, so please can and will you?

[Alf]

I have already acknowledged that actually.

Will we be saving that much, will we be saving much at all, can you now enlighten us to the fully guaranteed costs of the new trade deal we will have to negotiate with the EU,as to the costs of any tarriffs that may be put on our exports to the EU, also can you enlighten us too as to the costs of other deals negotiated independently with other Nations too.

How much of that actual 8.5 billion will we actually end up saving, I admit I haven't a clue,I haven't a clue as to if any of it would overall be saved of note.
I would love to hear someone from the out camp fully detail it all for us however, so please can and will you?
Hopefully we'll be able to clear all that up for you by June 23rd, it's only March, we don't want to peak to soon.

If we do get that information to you, do you think you can change your mind?

[arista]

[Boris Johnson slammed
the Remain camp as “gloomadon poppers” for
using scare tactics to get Brits to
vote to stay in the EU.
The Mayor of London said
there is "nothing to fear but fear itself"
and attacked the In campaign for
being pessimistic about
the country’s future.
He used a speech today to
wax lyrical about the wonders
of UK trade, which he claimed
would be made better not worse
if we were to ditch Brussels
in the June 23 referendum.]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/6993617/We-have-nothing-to-fear-but-fear-itself-as-Boris-says-UK-will-thrive-outisde-the-EU.html

Boris , You Tell The Feckers

[DemolitionRed]

For all those people who are undecided about their vote, you need to read this.

http://www.robert-schuman.eu/en/doc/questions-d-europe/qe-355-en.pdf

This paper gives the seven possible legal options after Brexit.

[DemolitionRed]

After a thorough read of that, both last night and this morning, I've made my decision and I will be voting to remain in.

[joeysteele]

Hopefully we'll be able to clear all that up for you by June 23rd, it's only March, we don't want to peak to soon.

If we do get that information to you, do you think you can change your mind?

Good try.

However come on,in truth June 23rd is not that far away and people who are undecided are asking questions now as to the guaranteed future and success if the UK left the EU.

The fact is we are getting nothing because there is nothing to get as to that if we vote to leave.
Also, I believe, no way can it be known until after we'd voted to leave as we have no idea of really what we will need to look for.
That is why right until the vote, it will be case of still paying the cheques we do now,or give the out camp books of blank cheques.

No, I won;t change my mind in any event,I would still be voting to stay in even had David Cameron not got any deal at all.
I actually never even wanted a referendum on it anyway,I believe the UKs best future is in the EU and I remain committed to that.

Which is why, while I respect those firmly for out and their passions,I am preferring to use my energy trying to persuade those undecided to think long and hard on this and hopefully support staying in too.

I can point now to the successes we have had with the EU, to the overcoming of problems when they arise with support from EU partners and also to the fact, I see success overall continuing with ongoing change being in the EU.
With us there helping bring about change and making decisions rather than even if out, having further conditions imposed on us to keep trading deals.

I can point to all that now,for any in the out camp, to admit they don't know what we could achieve with guarantees,or even to say, they will not tell the undecided until nearer June 23rd, is unbelievable.
They can't and won't say with guarantees if we come out what is likely to happen because like those who want to stay in, and the undecided too,the out camp simply do not know themselves, so then cannot give any assurances.

Without such assurances,for me their message is flawed and not to be followed.
The in camp don't really need to say anything at all, just point out that for the decades we have been in the EU as full members we are still going pretty strong, we are successful, we get through difficulties when they arise, sometimes on our own, at times with the support of our EU partners.

Again I repeat myself,(I will many times before June 23rd), to risk that status and success for a list of 'possibles', 'don't know yets','ifs' and 'maybes',in my opinion would be a massive error to make for the UKs and the children of the UK's future too.

Which is why my mind cannot be changed just as likely yours and others firmly in the out camp cannot be too.
That is to be respected.

With the choice of going on a journey to find success with someone I knew but disagreed with a fair bit but who at least could point to past and current success,or going on a journey with someone I don't know who had no real firm guarantee of where they were even taking me or even if success would be found at the end, then I will take the first journey everytime.
Even more especially if I needed to find or hold success for my Country and the future generation/s of that Country too.

[MTVN]

[Boris Johnson slammed
the Remain camp as “gloomadon poppers” for
using scare tactics to get Brits to
vote to stay in the EU.
The Mayor of London said
there is "nothing to fear but fear itself"
and attacked the In campaign for
being pessimistic about
the country’s future.
He used a speech today to
wax lyrical about the wonders
of UK trade, which he claimed
would be made better not worse
if we were to ditch Brussels
in the June 23 referendum.]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/6993617/We-have-nothing-to-fear-but-fear-itself-as-Boris-says-UK-will-thrive-outisde-the-EU.html

Boris , You Tell The Feckers

Boris has been very unimpressive in his arguments so far, his case seems to totally rely on dismissing the Remain points as 'Project Fear' and of assuring people that 'we would be fine because we're Britain and we're great' blah blah blah

[arista]

[‘I don’t think the governor or the
former governor of the Bank of England
should help advise people on how
they should vote in the referendum,’ says King.
He can’t, however, hide his contempt
for the eurozone and the misery
it has brought the countries
of Southern Europe.
Like his predecessor, the late
Eddie George (who criticised the idea of
a ‘one-size-fits-all’ currency at the
time of the euro’s launch in 1999),
he views the effect of the
single currency as calamitous.]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/03/12/00/031B926C00000514-3488483-King_still_has_some_very_worrying_things_to_say_ab out_the_state_-a-3_1457743491098.jpg

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3488483/A-disaster-zone-s-dominated-Germans-Ex-Bank-chief-King-s-verdict-euro-project.html#ixzz42gtjRU74


King Perfect for a 2 hour live panel on the EU
for Ch4HD , SkyNewsHD or BBC2HD

[Kizzy]

'Lord King, who steered the Bank through the 2008 financial crisis.'

Who what?!

:joker:

[arista]

'Lord King, who steered the Bank through the 2008 financial crisis.'

Who what?!

:joker:


Yes he has learnt
his errors.
And has not yet picked a view.

So ideal on a TV Debate

[bots]

What those campaigning for out have failed to explain is what out actually means. The problem is that you can't have your cake and eat it. If the UK wants to continue doing business with the EU after exiting the EU, then it will need to comply with the EU's terms of doing such business, and guess what, it involves complying with same terms that we do now. The major difference is that as we would no longer be a part of the EU, we would have zero influence in shaping those terms.

Whether we are in or out of Europe, our frameworks have been aligned for the last 40 years, and simply saying we are not a part of it anymore while a great sound bite, isn't even close to the real reality.

You can't take control of your own destiny when you rely on others for mutual trade. The two are by definition, mutually exclusive

[Alf]

What those campaigning for out have failed to explain is what out actually means. The problem is that you can't have your cake and eat it. If the UK wants to continue doing business with the EU after exiting the EU, then it will need to comply with the EU's terms of doing such business, and guess what, it involves complying with same terms that we do now. The major difference is that as we would no longer be a part of the EU, we would have zero influence in shaping those terms.

Whether we are in or out of Europe, our frameworks have been aligned for the last 40 years, and simply saying we are not a part of it anymore while a great sound bite, isn't even close to the real reality.

You can't take control of your own destiny when you rely on others for mutual trade. The two are by definition, mutually exclusive
Once we leave, the EU will collapse.

Every other country who wants independence are just waiting for us to take the lead.

Did you ever play domino rally?

[joeysteele]

What those campaigning for out have failed to explain is what out actually means. The problem is that you can't have your cake and eat it. If the UK wants to continue doing business with the EU after exiting the EU, then it will need to comply with the EU's terms of doing such business, and guess what, it involves complying with same terms that we do now. The major difference is that as we would no longer be a part of the EU, we would have zero influence in shaping those terms.

Whether we are in or out of Europe, our frameworks have been aligned for the last 40 years, and simply saying we are not a part of it anymore while a great sound bite, isn't even close to the real reality.

You can't take control of your own destiny when you rely on others for mutual trade. The two are by definition, mutually exclusive

Excellently put,amazingly concise too, wish I had that ability.

[Johnnyuk123]

[QUOTE=Alf;8559401]Once we leave, the EU will collapse.

Every other country who wants independence are just waiting for us to take the lead.


I agree 100%
The sooner we are out of the failed EU the better! :thumbs:

[joeysteele]

There are actually Countries queuing up to join the EU not leave it.

[bots]

Once we leave, the EU will collapse.

Every other country who wants independence are just waiting for us to take the lead.

Did you ever play domino rally?

Nothing could be further from reality. The EU will get on fine without its trouble making partner. It did before we joined

[bots]

Excellently put,amazingly concise too, wish I had that ability.

i come from an environment where if you can't put your point across in a couple of paragraphs, no-one will read it. So you soon learn ..... Those outside the environment often accuse me of being too terse, so can't win :joker:

[DemolitionRed]

free speech is being undermined by this govt in its own interest – “Staff at the Swansea-based DVLA have been told not to express anti-EU views on Facebook or Twitter in the run up to the referendum.”

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/dvla-staff-told-not-criticise-10974381

[Kizzy]

free speech is being undermined by this govt in its own interest – “Staff at the Swansea-based DVLA have been told not to express anti-EU views on Facebook or Twitter in the run up to the referendum.”

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/dvla-staff-told-not-criticise-10974381

Wow, that's a bit crackers, wonder what the repercussions would be and the grounds for any action taken?

[bots]

free speech is being undermined by this govt in its own interest – “Staff at the Swansea-based DVLA have been told not to express anti-EU views on Facebook or Twitter in the run up to the referendum.”

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/dvla-staff-told-not-criticise-10974381

Civil servants are in a privileged position and have access to information that is considered secret. All civil servants are bound by the official secrets act and hence publicly commenting on something like the EU could be seen as breaching that.

[Kizzy]

Ah......... * makes all social media private *

[kirklancaster]

[QUOTE=bitontheslide;8559294]What those campaigning for out have failed to explain is what out actually means. The problem is that you can't have your cake and eat it. If the UK wants to continue doing business with the EU after exiting the EU, then it will need to comply with the EU's terms of doing such business, and guess what, it involves complying with same terms that we do now. The major difference is that as we would no longer be a part of the EU, we would have zero influence in shaping those terms.

:nono:THE ABOVE IS SIMPLY AND CATEGORICALLY, NOT TRUE
You are either being misled yourself or are deliberately trying to mislead those members on here who are undecided.

I WILL ASK AGAIN THE SAME QUESTION OF YOU WHICH I HAVE ASKED IN VAIN OF OTHER 'IN' SUPPORTERS; WILL YOU PLEASE POST CORROBORATING EVIDENCE FOR YOUR PREPOSTEROUSLY FALSE CLAIMS?

You ALL keep making statements but will NOT supply any corroboration when asked.

THIS REFERENDUM IS THE SINGULARLY MOST IMPORTANT DECISION WHICH THE POPULATION OF THIS COUNTRY HAS HAD TO FACE MAKING IN ALL OUR LIFETIMES, AND A SERIOUS DEBATE THREAD ON THIS SUBJECT DEMANDS AND DESERVES MORE THAN A FEW 'SOUNDBITES' AND REPEATED, UNCORROBORATED AND FALSE STATEMENTS FROM YOU 'IN' SUPPORTERS.

HERE IS THE TRUTH ABOUT YOUR ABSURD CLAIMS - SHOULD YOU CARE TO READ IT. AND I'LL START WITH THAT BALONEY ALL YOU 'IN' SUPPORTERS KEEP SPOUTING ABOUT "THE UK NEEDING TO REMAIN IN THE EU IF WE WANT TO HAVE A SAY IN FORMULATING ITS POLICIES" - OR AS YOU PUT IT:

"The major difference is that as we would no longer be a part of the EU, we would have zero influence in shaping those terms."


THE IRREFUTABLE TRUTH IS; THAT WE HAVE VIRTUALLY NO POWER IN THE EU TO CHANGE ANYTHING:

FACT: In the European Parliament between 2009-14, BRITISH MEP's voted against 576 proposals by the EU which were AGAINST BRITISH INTERESTS and DAMAGING to the UK and were DEFEATED 485 TIMES.

FACT: THAT IS A FAILURE RATE of 84%.

FACT: In that same period, out of a total number of 1,936 motions put before the European Parliament by OTHER MEMBER STATES, only 7 per cent were rejected.

FACT: That means THE EU PARLIAMENT APPROVED 93% of ALL OTHER MOTIONS BUT APPROVED ONLY 16% OF MOTIONS FROM OUR MEP'S WHO WERE TRYING TO ACT IN OUR FAVOUR AND PROTECT OUR INTERESTS.

THAT'S 16% FOR US and 93% FOR THE OTHER MEMBER STATES

THAT'S SOME EUROPEAN 'UNION'. THAT'S SOME 'POWER TO CHANGE THE EU FROM WITHIN' THAT WE BRITISH HAVE. DON'T MAKE ME LAUGH.

HERE'S SOME FACTS AND FIGURES (Those things you 'In' Campaigners do not like and always diregard or ignore)

TOTAL MOTIONS OPPOSED BY UK MEP's BECAUSE THEY WERE UNFAIR OR DAMAGING TO BRITAIN THAT STILL WERE PASSED BY THE EU - FAILURE PERCENTAGE IN BRACKETS:

Regional development - (100%)
Petitions - (100%)
Budget - (98%)
Budgetary control - (98%)
Constitutional and inter-institutional affairs - (92%)
Agriculture - (91%)
Employment & social affairs - (91%)
Legal affairs - (91%)
Economic & monetary affairs - (89%)
Gender equality - (88%)
Environment & public health - (86%)
Culture & education - (82%)
Development - (80%)
Fisheries - (80%)
Industry, research & energy - (80%)
Transport & tourism - (75%)
Internal market & consumer protection - (75%)
Civil liberties, justice & home affairs - (73%)
Foreign & security policy - (50%)
Internal regulations of the EP - (50%)
International trade - (29%)

And here is WHY we HAVE NO POWER in the EU and just HOW the EU is so easily ABLE to feck us over and DENY our MEP's THE RIGHT TO INFLUENCE DECISIONS MADE IN BRUSSELS WHICH ARE DAMAGING TO BRITISH INTERESTS:

FACT: From the start, The European Parliament has been dominated by the Leftie Socialist and Democrat Party, and the centreright
European People’s Party - both of whom are fiercely committed to further European integration, and both of whom are staunchly federalist in their interpretation of the Lisbon Treaty,and both of whom totally support virtually every motion proposed by the European Commission.

COMPARE THESE TWO PARTIES 458 SEATS - WHICH IS 60% OF THE TOTAL AVAILABLE SEATS IN THE EUP - WITH THE UK'S PATHETIC 10%, AND IT'S NOT HARD TO SEE WHY WE HAVE NO POWER TO INFLUENCE ANYTHING WITHIN THE EU, AND WHY IT IS VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO PROTECT OUR INTERESTS AT ALL, AND WHY UK MEP'S ARE TOO OFTEN OUTVOTED AND POWERLESS TO STOP BRUSSELS LEGISLATION WHICH IS HARMFUL TO THE UK, FROM BEING PASSED INTO BRITISH LAW.

FACT: As bad as it has always been, the UK's influence in the EUP is rapidly declining as the EU expands. Now, we have just 73 MEPs out of 751.

FACT: In 1979, Britain had 20 per cent of seats in the European Parliament; today it has only 10 per cent.

FACT: A House of Commons report stated that British administrators made up only 6 per cent of the administrative grade within the EUP in 2013.

FACT: Eurozone members have almost 8 TIMES the number of seats within the EUP that the UK has.

THIS IS WHY YOUR CLAIMS - APPLAUDED OR NOT BY YOUR 'IN' CROWD MATES - ARE NOTHING BUT UNTRUE AND MISLEADING RHETORIC, AND ALSO WHY OUR FISHING AND FARMING INDUSTRIES HAVE BEEN DECIMATED AND HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF BRITISH PEOPLE THROWN OUT OF WORK, AND WHY WE HAVE BEEN PAYING MORE FOR OUR FOOD FOR THE PAST DECADES THAN WE SHOULD HAVE, AND WHY FOREIGN CRIMINALS ARE SET FREE TO ROAM BRITISH STREETS AND REOFFEND ETC. ETC. ETC. - BECAUSE THE EU IS IMPOSING ITS LAWS UPON US AND OUR MEP'S ARE SO OUTNUMBERED AND SO IMPOTENT, THAT THEY ARE CONSTANTLY OUTVOTED WHEN THEY OPPOSE SUCH MOTIONS AND THERE IS FECK ALL WE CAN DO ABOUT IT - WHILE EVER WE REMAIN IN THE CORRUPT EU.



[B]I WILL address the rest of your misleading rhetoric in another post.

[kirklancaster]

There are actually Countries queuing up to join the EU not leave it.

Countries with 'Third World Banana Republic' economies are only too keen to join the corrupt EU because they know from the past 42 years that this country's tax payers will continue paying all those annual multi billion pounds net contributions - some of which subsidises their countries, and because they also know from recent history, that as members of the EU they get to 'Pass Go' and 'Collect £200' - or in this case, get a pass straight into the UK and collect much more than £200 - to the detriment of the UK's OWN POOR.

Of course SOME "countries are queing up to join the EU."

There are also others DYING to GET OUT of that mess.

[kirklancaster]

free speech is being undermined by this govt in its own interest – “Staff at the Swansea-based DVLA have been told not to express anti-EU views on Facebook or Twitter in the run up to the referendum.”

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/dvla-staff-told-not-criticise-10974381

:clap1::clap1::clap1: Credit to you for highlighting this.

One might care to ask the question of just WHY these Tories are so DESPERATE to remain in the EU that they are resorting to lying in the media and stifling free speech?

It cannnot be because of any belief that the EU GENUINELY benefits the PEOPLE of this country, given the AUSTERITY CUTS and other PEOPLE-HARMING measures it is so fond of.

Is it that HUGE CHUNKS of those huge deficits of public money by way of the multi billion pound annual NET payments finds it way back into the pockets of themselves and the huge corporations by by stealth, in true 'Sheriff of Nottingham Tax' 'rob the poor to give to the rich' style?

[kirklancaster]

Nothing could be further from reality. The EU will get on fine without its trouble making partner. It did before we joined

This is just more uncorroborated misleading and UNTRUE baloney.

The EU is disintigrating at a rate of knots and it is DESTINED to totally implode - a BREXIT, and the loss of our 100's of Billions of pounds total NET contribution to the EU, and our continuation of a 40 year history of the UK buying billions of pounds worth of goods FROM the EU than they buy from us, could be the catalyst which sees it totally implode sooner.

HERE ARE SOME CORROBORATING ARTICLES FOR YOU TO READ - THIS IS NOT SPAMMING, BUT CORROBORATION FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES WHICH EVEN THE 'IN' CAMP ON HERE CANNOT DENY, IGNORE, OR BRUSH ASIDE:

DE SPEIGAL

"European Union in Trouble Says Parliament President Schulz"
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/european-union-in-trouble-says-parliament-president-schulz-a-1065306.html

EU Parliament President Schulz: 'The Situation in Europe Is Extremely Concerning'

In an interview, European Parliament President Martin Schulz says he is more concerned about the state of the European Union than he has ever been.
...........................................
THE TELEGRAPH

How the EU could collapse in 2016

Rather than protect Europeans, the EU is in desperate trouble.

The edifice of federalism is crumbling, broken by its own ruinous contradictions and spectacular failures. The creators of the European Union promised to bring peace and prosperity. But through their grandiose folly, they have fuelled only debt, despair and disintegration. The EU itself has become the greatest threat to our continent.
.................................................. ..

BBC News

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18094883

Eurozone crisis.

.................................................. ...
PRESS TV

http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2016/01/21/446718/French-prime-minister-Davos-warn-EU-collapse/

French PM warns EU may collapse in coming months

France warns of imminent EU collapse
.................................................. ........
EUROWEEKLY NEWS
http://www.euroweeklynews.com/3.0.15/news/on-euro-weekly-news/world-news/136487-billionaire-george-soros-warns-of-imminent-eu-collapse

Billionaire George Soros warns of imminent EU collapse
.................................................. .........

THE EU IS IN FREEFALL AND WE DO NOT NEED TO PAY £55 MILLION POUNDS PER DAY NET TO BE A MEMBER OF A CLUB FROM WHICH WE DERIVE NO BENEFITS - ONLY DISADVANTAGES.

[bots]

This is just more uncorroborated misleading and UNTRUE baloney.

The EU is disintigrating at a rate of knots and it is DESTINED to totally implode - a BREXIT, and the loss of our 100's of Billions of pounds total NET contribution to the EU, and our continuation of a 40 year history of the UK buying billions of pounds worth of goods FROM the EU than they buy from us, could be the catalyst which sees it totally implode sooner.

HERE ARE SOME CORROBORATING ARTICLES FOR YOU TO READ - THIS IS NOT SPAMMING, BUT CORROBORATION FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES WHICH EVEN THE 'IN' CAMP ON HERE CANNOT DENY, IGNORE, OR BRUSH ASIDE:

DE SPEIGAL

"European Union in Trouble Says Parliament President Schulz"
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/european-union-in-trouble-says-parliament-president-schulz-a-1065306.html

EU Parliament President Schulz: 'The Situation in Europe Is Extremely Concerning'

In an interview, European Parliament President Martin Schulz says he is more concerned about the state of the European Union than he has ever been.
...........................................
THE TELEGRAPH

How the EU could collapse in 2016

Rather than protect Europeans, the EU is in desperate trouble.

The edifice of federalism is crumbling, broken by its own ruinous contradictions and spectacular failures. The creators of the European Union promised to bring peace and prosperity. But through their grandiose folly, they have fuelled only debt, despair and disintegration. The EU itself has become the greatest threat to our continent.
.................................................. ..

BBC News

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18094883

Eurozone crisis.

.................................................. ...
PRESS TV

http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2016/01/21/446718/French-prime-minister-Davos-warn-EU-collapse/

French PM warns EU may collapse in coming months

France warns of imminent EU collapse
.................................................. ........
EUROWEEKLY NEWS
http://www.euroweeklynews.com/3.0.15/news/on-euro-weekly-news/world-news/136487-billionaire-george-soros-warns-of-imminent-eu-collapse

Billionaire George Soros warns of imminent EU collapse
.................................................. .........

THE EU IS IN FREEFALL AND WE DO NOT NEED TO PAY £55 MILLION POUNDS PER DAY NET TO BE A MEMBER OF A CLUB FROM WHICH WE DERIVE NO BENEFITS - ONLY DISADVANTAGES.

Kindly refrain from calling me a liar, I am NOT

[kirklancaster]

Kindly refrain from calling me a liar, I am NOT

This really is the epitome of hypocrisy:

ALF POSTED :

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alf View Post

"Once we leave, the EU will collapse. Every other country who wants independence are just waiting for us to take the lead. Did you ever play domino rally?"

TO WHICH YOU COMMENTED:

"Nothing could be further from reality. The EU will get on fine without its trouble making partner. It did before we joined".

ARE YOU CALLING ALF A LIAR BY CONTRADICTING AND DISPUTING WHAT HE STATED?

YOU ARE, AFTER ALL STATING THAT HIS STATEMENT IS NOT TRUE, ARE YOU NOT?

AND WHERE IS IT ANY DIFFERENT FROM YOU POSTING:

"Nothing could be further from reality. The EU will get on fine without its trouble making partner. It did before we joined".

AND ME COMMENTING TO IT:

"This just more uncorroborated misleading and UNTRUE baloney."

I AM, AFTER ALL MERELY STATING THAT YOUR STATEMENT IS NOT TRUE, AM I NOT?

This all smacks of unfair tactics in trying to silence me because I DO rebutt the misleading baloney you post so authoratively as FACT, and YOU HAVE NO ANSWERS.

This is supposedly SERIOUS DEBATES - not "SAYING IT MAKES IT SO" and we are all adults.

Enough with the false claims that I am insulting you and calling you a liar when I am not, and answer my posts.

[bots]

This really is the epitome of hypocrisy:

ALF POSTED :

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alf View Post

"Once we leave, the EU will collapse. Every other country who wants independence are just waiting for us to take the lead. Did you ever play domino rally?"

TO WHICH YOU COMMENTED:

"Nothing could be further from reality. The EU will get on fine without its trouble making partner. It did before we joined".

ARE YOU CALLING ALF A LIAR BY CONTRADICTING AND DISPUTING WHAT HE STATED?

YOU ARE, AFTER ALL STATING THAT HIS STATEMENT IS NOT TRUE, ARE YOU NOT?

AND WHERE IS IT ANY DIFFERENT FROM YOU POSTING:

"Nothing could be further from reality. The EU will get on fine without its trouble making partner. It did before we joined".

AND ME COMMENTING TO IT:

"This just more uncorroborated misleading and UNTRUE baloney."

I AM, AFTER ALL MERELY STATING THAT YOUR STATEMENT IS NOT TRUE, AM I NOT?

This all smacks of unfair tactics in trying to silence me because I DO rebutt the misleading baloney you post so authoratively as FACT, and YOU HAVE NO ANSWERS.

This is supposedly SERIOUS DEBATES - not "SAYING IT MAKES IT SO" and we are all adults.

Enough with the false claims that I am insulting you and calling you a liar when I am not, and answer my posts.

You know damn well what I am referring too. My point remains irrefutably correct. The EU flourished prior to the UK joining, that's WHY we joined. So my facts are not baloney, a lie or untrue. Now, I will not be reading or responding further to any of your future posts

[kirklancaster]

You know damn well what I am referring too. My point remains irrefutably correct. The EU flourished prior to the UK joining, that's WHY we joined. So my facts are not baloney, a lie or untrue. Now, I will not be reading or responding further to any of your future posts

Your prerogative, but you did not just state that the EU "was flourishing" when we joined - you contradicted Alf's statement that the EU would collapse when we exited by stating "Nothing could be further from reality" and my post completely rebutts your rebuttal of Alf's post.

Yet you still maintain your post to be correct, which is unsurprising given the history of the 'In' campaigners posts on this thread.

Anyway, to be honest, this all smacks of a convenient cop out because you have no valid answer to my points.

[arista]

100 Days to go
until some will vote In or Out.

We need Full 2 Hours debates with the public.
on SkyNewsHD Ch4HD and BBC2HD

[joeysteele]

People stop responding because eventually it becomes a pointless exercise.

I keep posting on this thread because I believe in staying in the EU for the reasons I list in all my posts over the thread for any to read.

However it becomes wearisome to respond to those who are of the opposite side to me on this issue because all they can see is the negatives of the EU and never once list any of the good.

So when someone gives up responding,it is not because the argument is lost at all likely, it is because they have made their points and ended up getting over analytical scrutiny of their points ad likely eventual abuse as to their views too.

So little wonder some just decide to leave it.

There is no point at all in me talking on this thread to those determined to be out no matter what the cost to the UK,I will make my points still but I make them in the hope that those undecided may latch onto to something I say and that hopefully it might in even a very small way,be of assistance to them in making their minds up.

This thread is full of figures and statistics that quite frankly in my view just go over the heads of people.
You can make statistics and figures, sound as good or as bad as you want them to,from whatever perspective you are coming from.
I feel really sorry at times for the totally undecided,who are getting little to help them see the EU as to all its make up.
I feel even sorrier for them that the out camp, and yes this is a direct comment as to the camp,that they get not a scrap of real assured guarantees of as I have said before and am saying again,as to if we could be the same, better or a lot better out of the EU, with the guaranteed blueprint of the plan with full costings too.

For me because of that, the out camp has lost the argument and sorry if I upset anyone with that statement.

However anyone expecting someone to really vote for an alternative to what is already in place and in the main secure and successful and has been for decades, well they need to really spell out the facts, costs and how successful we 'will' be out rather than 'in'.
Failure to do that leaves little to consider then in my view on the 'out' side.

Which is why I was on the 'in' side years ago,and why even moreso after the lack of guarantees from the out camp both on here here as well as nationally my mind just becomes more solid as to staying.
As does my determination to certainly vote to hold onto what we have, the success we have, the security we have and what can be seen for sure in the future too.
All things uncertain with nothing really guaranteed laid out from the opposite side.

However, no way has an argument been lost because someone decides to stop responding to another,on the contrary it is more like because it has become a total waste of time and energy.
With no one in such responses/debate, learning anything constructive either.

[Kizzy]

People stop responding because eventually it becomes a pointless exercise.

I keep posting on this thread because I believe in staying in the EU for the reasons I list in all my posts over the thread for any to read.

However it becomes wearisome to respond to those who are of the opposite side to me on this issue because all they can see is the negatives of the EU and never once list any of the good.

So when someone gives up responding,it is not because the argument is lost at all likely, it is because they have made their points and ended up getting over analytical scrutiny of their points ad likely eventual abuse as to their views too.

So little wonder some just decide to leave it.

There is no point at all in me talking on this thread to those determined to be out no matter what the cost to the UK,I will make my points still but I make them in the hope that those undecided may latch onto to something I say and that hopefully it might in even a very small way,be of assistance to them in making their minds up.

This thread is full of figures and statistics that quite frankly in my view just go over the heads of people.
You can make statistics and figures, sound as good or as bad as you want them to,from whatever perspective you are coming from.
I feel really sorry at times for the totally undecided,who are getting little to help them see the EU as to all its make up.
I feel even sorrier for them that the out camp, and yes this is a direct comment as to the camp,that they get not a scrap of real assured guarantees of as I have said before and am saying again,as to if we could be the same, better or a lot better out of the EU, with the guaranteed blueprint of the plan with full costings too.

For me because of that, the out camp has lost the argument and sorry if I upset anyone with that statement.

However anyone expecting someone to really vote for an alternative to what is already in place and in the main secure and successful and has been for decades, well they need to really spell out the facts, costs and how successful we 'will' be out rather than 'in'.
Failure to do that leaves little to consider then in my view on the 'out' side.

Which is why I was on the 'in' side years ago,and why even moreso after the lack of guarantees from the out camp both on here here as well as nationally my mind just becomes more solid as to staying.
As does my determination to certainly vote to hold onto what we have, the success we have, the security we have and what can be seen for sure in the future too.
All things uncertain with nothing really guaranteed laid out from the opposite side.

However, no way has an argument been lost because someone decides to stop responding to another,on the contrary it is more like because it has become a total waste of time and energy.
With no one in such responses/debate, learning anything constructive either.

:clap1: :clap1: :clap1:

[JoshBB]

Remaining within the EU is the most sensible option for trade and the economy right now. People are trying to play the patriotic card by saying we should retain our own sovereignty, which we already do. I think a 'Federal States of Europe' is an inherently bad idea which would lead to member states having less power to act in the will of their own people, although unity is never a bad thing this is not the way to go about it.

Another thing with 'sovereignty' is that if we left the EU, our imports/exports would suffer and small/growing businesses may close down. This would hurt the economy, and if we were to go into another recession then I doubt we will have the financial capability to retain the sovereignty that we desire - funding the NHS and other public services already seems too much a challenge for our government, with a worse economy they would have no hesitation to slashing the budgets even further.

The EU is not perfect by any means, but the best route is always reform - and I mean proper reform, not the small piece of paper given to us by Dave. I would like to see direct elections of the President of the European Commission as well as europe-wide referendums on big issues such as Climate Change initiatives and TTIP, which is one of my biggest concerns if we were to stay in the EU. Even if it were implemented though, I still don't see it as a reason to leave. The benefits far outweigh the cons.

[Alf]

It'll all end in war. It always does.

[RichardG]

Keep us in so I can move to somewhere around Scandinavia when I'm older :flutter:

[Jamie89]

I've been really on the fence with it because there's obvious pro's and con's. But I'm leaning more towards an 'out' vote for a couple of reasons. First of all I think that if we vote to leave the EU, there's a good chance we will be offered a better 'deal' in order for us to remain, which we really need as I don't think it's working for us in it's current state. And secondly, if we were to leave, I actually think it could prove to be beneficial for trade and small businesses. I know someone who runs a small business and the restrictions he faces on buying from outside of Europe are really damaging to him because of the higher taxation levels. I can't remember the exact figures but if he were to buy from China for example he would have to pay so much in tax to the EU that it makes it a no go. So whilst we may currently get better trade deals with countries within Europe, this is rendered pointless by the fact that many business owners effectively can't buy from outside Europe (when they may need to, if the goods they need are being sold there at a much better price). So yeah, leaving the EU would mean losing the current trade benefits we get, but it would also open up so many more opportunities for people like my friend who won't face extortionate taxation for buying from the rest of the world.
Anyway, I don't really know a lot about the 'ins and outs' (;)) of it all to be honest hence me being slightly undecided, but I do think it would help smaller businesses (from what my mate told me anyway) and this is really important, so if we can't get a better deal for trading outside of Europe then maybe leaving is best :shrug:

[kirklancaster]

I've been really on the fence with it because there's obvious pro's and con's. But I'm leaning more towards an 'out' vote for a couple of reasons. First of all I think that if we vote to leave the EU, there's a good chance we will be offered a better 'deal' in order for us to remain, which we really need as I don't think it's working for us in it's current state. And secondly, if we were to leave, I actually think it could prove to be beneficial for trade and small businesses. I know someone who runs a small business and the restrictions he faces on buying from outside of Europe are really damaging to him because of the higher taxation levels. I can't remember the exact figures but if he were to buy from China for example he would have to pay so much in tax to the EU that it makes it a no go. So whilst we may currently get better trade deals with countries within Europe, this is rendered pointless by the fact that many business owners effectively can't buy from outside Europe (when they may need to, if the goods they need are being sold there at a much better price). So yeah, leaving the EU would mean losing the current trade benefits we get, but it would also open up so many more opportunities for people like my friend who won't face extortionate taxation for buying from the rest of the world.
Anyway, I don't really know a lot about the 'ins and outs' (;)) of it all to be honest hence me being slightly undecided, but I do think it would help smaller businesses (from what my mate told me anyway) and this is really important, so if we can't get a better deal for trading outside of Europe then maybe leaving is best :shrug:

Jamie - please read back through the thread and the long posts which I have posted on here.

They are factual and truthful and should convince anyone who is undecided that a 'Brexit' is the only possible result.

This isn't about Kirk Lancaster, or Joey Steele - it's about the most important decision this country will ever have to face in modern times, and I have invested the time and trouble to plead the case for a Brexit because ALL the genuine evidence of the past 42 years right up to the present proves that economically, politically, and security-wise, leaving the EU is the only sensible decision.

The 'In' camp do not present any type of case - apart from scare-mongering and making uncorroborated statements which are not corroborated because there are no genuine facts with which to corroborate such statements.

This country's hundreds of billions of pounds net payment deficit with the EU is what is propping the ailing EU up and it will collapse under the weight of its own failings once we exit, but if the upcoming decision is to remain - something Cameron and his elite friends both corporate and private, so desperately desire for their own financial ends - then the EU will drag this country down with it.

Please read my posts, follow any links, and do your own research, because you are a very intelligent man and the results of this vital referendum should not be decided by anyone other than those who have tried to inform themselves of the facts - no matter which way they eventually vote.

[arista]

Kirk
This is why we need Live TV debates with proper panels

[kirklancaster]

Kirk
This is why we need Live TV debates with proper panels

I totally agree Arista. The sooner the better, but it must be presided over by a tough. impartial adjudicator who will nail the empty rhetoric, spin, and scare-mongering lies, and insist on facts only.

[Kizzy]

Jamie - please read back through the thread and the long posts which I have posted on here.

They are factual and truthful and should convince anyone who is undecided that a 'Brexit' is the only possible result.

This isn't about Kirk Lancaster, or Joey Steele - it's about the most important decision this country will ever have to face in modern times, and I have invested the time and trouble to plead the case for a Brexit because ALL the genuine evidence of the past 42 years right up to the present proves that economically, politically, and security-wise, leaving the EU is the only sensible decision.

The 'In' camp do not present any type of case - apart from scare-mongering and making uncorroborated statements which are not corroborated because there are no genuine facts with which to corroborate such statements.

This country's hundreds of billions of pounds net payment deficit with the EU is what is propping the ailing EU up and it will collapse under the weight of its own failings once we exit, but if the upcoming decision is to remain - something Cameron and his elite friends both corporate and private, so desperately desire for their own financial ends - then the EU will drag this country down with it.

Please read my posts, follow any links, and do your own research, because you are a very intelligent man and the results of this vital referendum should not be decided by anyone other than those who have tried to inform themselves of the facts - no matter which way they eventually vote.

That is not true.
There are many links to relevant reputable articles and sources as well as intelligent personal perspective from those who would remain.

[joeysteele]

Jamie - please read back through the thread and the long posts which I have posted on here.

They are factual and truthful and should convince anyone who is undecided that a 'Brexit' is the only possible result.

This isn't about Kirk Lancaster, or Joey Steele - it's about the most important decision this country will ever have to face in modern times, and I have invested the time and trouble to plead the case for a Brexit because ALL the genuine evidence of the past 42 years right up to the present proves that economically, politically, and security-wise, leaving the EU is the only sensible decision.

The 'In' camp do not present any type of case - apart from scare-mongering and making uncorroborated statements which are not corroborated because there are no genuine facts with which to corroborate such statements.

This country's hundreds of billions of pounds net payment deficit with the EU is what is propping the ailing EU up and it will collapse under the weight of its own failings once we exit, but if the upcoming decision is to remain - something Cameron and his elite friends both corporate and private, so desperately desire for their own financial ends - then the EU will drag this country down with it.

Please read my posts, follow any links, and do your own research, because you are a very intelligent man and the results of this vital referendum should not be decided by anyone other than those who have tried to inform themselves of the facts - no matter which way they eventually vote.

Excuse me, where do I come into this, I don't expect anything on this thread to be about me, you asked a question at the start of the thread and I like others have answered it.

I have never said a word to Jamie on the issue, I merely post my opinion, not using negatives as to out and admitting there are also issues within the EU.

Why should what you say be more relevant than those with a differing view to yours,I respect all peoples views even if I think them wrong, right, agreeing with me or not.

However what I will say in response since for no reason whatsoever you chose to include my name in your response to the poster.Instead of posting or at least as well as,the endless stastistics, only negative to the EU from you, perhaps you would actually get round to detailing in full with full costings what I and others have been asking the out camp,on and off here, the trading deals we would get, can get, who with, how much the likely tarriffs will be, what conditions will, not might, be placed on the UK as to those deals.
How our actual security would be better separating from Nations rather than staying together.

List the implications and how we would overcome them, we know problems will arise at times economically,how guaranteed and easier would be solve those out of the EU rather than in.

I am not saying we couldn't,I am saying I am not sure we could and I so I certainly don't have the confidence that the UK would do better out of the EU in the long run.
Those are the questions that need to be fully detailed, assured and answered with full costings too from the out camp.

I have not said to anyone on here, I think, who is undecided,that my way is right totally and that there would not be problems to overcome in the EU as well as out.
However I can point to the fact we 'have' already many times while in the EU come through difficult periods while not on our own

Now I read Jamie's post and accepted he has to make his own mind up,so if you want to hammer your statistics at him do so but do not use my name please.
As I would never want to pressure anyone,all I am doing is presenting my view as I see the EU, its bad points and good ones.

If anyone even finds anything I say remotely interesting that is a compliment but unless I was asked a direct question I would not presume to pressure or present myself as the all knowing book on the EU.

I find it annoying actually that you say this is not about you or JoeySteele, it is certainly not about me, I keep asking questions just as the undecided do.
So please, with respect for all, do not include me in your posts especially in the context you did above in your reply to the almost undecided poster.

I never mention you in my posts unless I respond to you directly.
I 100% do not agree with your analysis or presentation of the EU as you do so in your posts,only negative, no positives.
I see the attraction of trying again on our own after over 40 years but for me to ever vote for that, I would need to see the full 'new' costs and conditions that would be applied to us,across the board guaranteed, to vote for such a massive change.
Repeating myself again,
I have seen and heard nothing as to those guarantees from the out camp whatsoever.

Just repeating anti EU rhetoric gets nowhere at alland gives a false impression that all is bad as to the EU and not scrap of good about it.
Which ends up being totally misleading in my opinion.

You were right to say,this is not about JoeySteele however because I would never want it to be anything about me.
I post my views full stop.
My posts are there for anyone to read if they wish to,I am not going to direct them to any part of them.

With respect, you only made this thread Kirk, it is not your possession and on any issue like this both sides should be fairly presented, costed and the conditions of both ways known and detailed very clearly.
Just leave my name out of your responses to others however please, that is a little disrespectful to say the least to include mine the way you chose to in the post above.
So speak for yourself, not for me and don't try to infer this issue has anything to do with me, any more than it does as to anyone else who chooses to post in this thread.

I find the undecided and their views more interesting,it is a really big issue and a massive change to vote for if they vote out and sever over 40 years of closer ties to mainland Europe.
The decision is massive but whatever decisions any undecided come to I would respect and other than stating my own views and feelings, would never try to push anyone one way or the other either.
So you should not have put my name in your post above.
This is not a battle between you and I, there is in fact little point in me discussing this with you since all I say to you is wrong anyway,just as I will never accept your one sided totally negative presentation of the EU on a public forum.
So there will never be any agreement really between you and I on the issue as we are poles apart on it.

I have only responded this time again to you, because you used my name and wrongly in my view, in your response to another.
I do not like that at all.

My footnote to you is I as an IN person have pointed out the problems that can come from staying in too,I point to the fact, yes fact,that we have overcome many problems while in the EU,the UK has been successful and still is now in the EU.
So I can point clearly to a future not without difficulties and changes needed but to the fact, we would overcome problems when they arise and at times needing EU assistance too to do so.

You always choose to dismiss that but the last 40+ years speak for themselves in my view.
What no one is getting told, something you choose to ignore too, is the fact that no one in the out camp will not and probably cannot anyway, detail all the new costs, charges, tariffs,conditions and also difficulties we would have having to not only re-negotiate some trading deal with the EU again, accepting most of the conditions there are on us now already even in the new deals.

Also however just what deals will we certainly get with the other Nations and would they be that willing to really accommodate s cheaply when a good number of them want to have deals with the EU themselves anyway.
India for instance, the biggest Commonwealth Nation,would prefer the UK to say in the EU.
Canada has been battling to get its own deal with EU for years now.

How long would we take to get the 'right' deal and clearly what would that deal really be, what conditions imposed, what tariffs imposed.
Or are you trying to tell us there would be no charges, tariffs and conditions guaranteed.
When those questions are answered with solid assurances, as opposed to the solid assurances already in place for us now in the EU,then that would be a fairer portrayal of the issue..
In my opinion, nothing at all about it being about me, just my opinion like everyone elses views on here.

As to scaremongering that goes on as to all sides. The fact remains however we are in the EU, we have done pretty well out of it and there are benefits on both sides,not all is right with the EU,it likely never will be.
Then again all was not right before we joined anything as to Europe and we were desperate to do so too.

I would never throw away over 40 years of hard work unless I knew for certain that guarantees, cost and conditions were knows as to any alternative beforehand.
I would also be looking at what the UK govt could do now as to helping certain sections of business and groups of people while in the EU and yet they decide not to.
There would be no guarantees that would change or get better if we left.

There are good and bad scenarios as to in or out.
The difference is we know the bad and how to overcome it while being in the EU and working together so for me the benefits do still outweigh any drawbacks that there are still are admittedly.
However walking into a scenario of ifs, maybes, possibles and don't know yets,does nothing whatsoever to fill me with any confidence.
Yes there are possible good things in leaving, yes too equally there are possible bad things too,non really known or prepared for even..

Whereas for me as to in, there are certain bad things to come and certain good things to come from being a member,the bad things will be worked through as they have been for over 20 years or more now.

That, speaking for myself,no one else,gives me confidence for the better future for the UK being in because I know all that will happen.
Rather than taking on board biased negativity against the EU that lists not a thing that is positive as to it and takes us down a path virtually blindfold as to costs,tariffs and future conditions..
No scaremongering just balanced facts.

[Jamie89]

Jamie - please read back through the thread and the long posts which I have posted on here.

They are factual and truthful and should convince anyone who is undecided that a 'Brexit' is the only possible result.

This isn't about Kirk Lancaster, or Joey Steele - it's about the most important decision this country will ever have to face in modern times, and I have invested the time and trouble to plead the case for a Brexit because ALL the genuine evidence of the past 42 years right up to the present proves that economically, politically, and security-wise, leaving the EU is the only sensible decision.

The 'In' camp do not present any type of case - apart from scare-mongering and making uncorroborated statements which are not corroborated because there are no genuine facts with which to corroborate such statements.

This country's hundreds of billions of pounds net payment deficit with the EU is what is propping the ailing EU up and it will collapse under the weight of its own failings once we exit, but if the upcoming decision is to remain - something Cameron and his elite friends both corporate and private, so desperately desire for their own financial ends - then the EU will drag this country down with it.

Please read my posts, follow any links, and do your own research, because you are a very intelligent man and the results of this vital referendum should not be decided by anyone other than those who have tried to inform themselves of the facts - no matter which way they eventually vote.

Thanks Kirk, I'm planning to have a read through it at some point (30 pages though D: lol). I'll admit a certain amount of ignorance when it comes to the EU (hence me staying away from this thread!) I've always felt that we should remain a part of it but it's more of an instinctive thing rather than it being because I know all of the information, and I worry a bit about us being seen as segregating ourselves, or trying to shut 'foreigners' out etc. Obviously I realise that's not the point, it's more that that's how I think a lot of people view it (that's how I've sometimes interpreted it anyway) like whenever the issue is discussed there tends to be some rhetoric about how an 'out' vote is aligning yourself with Farage, and each to their own in terms of political views and everything, but I'm really not a fan of Farage :laugh: so my gut feeling has been that an 'in' vote is right for me. Like I say though, my friend was pretty convincing as to how leaving the EU would benefit him and his business (and other businesses), and I do think that's something that's really important, hence me now considering an 'out' vote, but yeah, I need to know more about it before making a decision.

Kirk
This is why we need Live TV debates with proper panels

I don't understand why there hasn't been, I would have found it really helpful and I'm sure I'm not the only one!

[kirklancaster]

Excuse me, where do I come into this, I don't expect anything on this thread to be about me, you asked a question at the start of the thread and I like others have answered it.

I have never said a word to Jamie on the issue, I merely post my opinion, not using negatives as to out and admitting there are also issues within the EU.

Why should what you say be more relevant than those with a differing view to yours,I respect all peoples views even if I think them wrong, right, agreeing with me or not.

However what I will say in response since for no reason whatsoever you chose to include my name in your response to the poster.Instead of posting or at least as well as,the endless stastistics, only negative to the EU from you, perhaps you would actually get round to detailing in full with full costings what I and others have been asking the out camp,on and off here, the trading deals we would get, can get, who with, how much the likely tarriffs will be, what conditions will, not might, be placed on the UK as to those deals.
How our actual security would be better separating from Nations rather than staying together.

List the implications and how we would overcome them, we know problems will arise at times economically,how guaranteed and easier would be solve those out of the EU rather than in.

I am not saying we couldn't,I am saying I am not sure we could and I so I certainly don't have the confidence that the UK would do better out of the EU in the long run.
Those are the questions that need to be fully detailed, assured and answered with full costings too from the out camp.

I have not said to anyone on here, I think, who is undecided,that my way is right totally and that there would not be problems to overcome in the EU as well as out.
However I can point to the fact we 'have' already many times while in the EU come through difficult periods while not on our own

Now I read Jamie's post and accepted he has to make his own mind up,so if you want to hammer your statistics at him do so but do not use my name please.
As I would never want to pressure anyone,all I am doing is presenting my view as I see the EU, its bad points and good ones.

If anyone even finds anything I say remotely interesting that is a compliment but unless I was asked a direct question I would not presume to pressure or present myself as the all knowing book on the EU.

I find it annoying actually that you say this is not about you or JoeySteele, it is certainly not about me, I keep asking questions just as the undecided do.
So please, with respect for all, do not include me in your posts especially in the context you did above in your reply to the almost undecided poster.

I never mention you in my posts unless I respond to you directly.
I 100% do not agree with your analysis or presentation of the EU as you do so in your posts,only negative, no positives.
I see the attraction of trying again on our own after over 40 years but for me to ever vote for that, I would need to see the full 'new' costs and conditions that would be applied to us,across the board guaranteed, to vote for such a massive change.
Repeating myself again,
I have seen and heard nothing as to those guarantees from the out camp whatsoever.

Just repeating anti EU rhetoric gets nowhere at alland gives a false impression that all is bad as to the EU and not scrap of good about it.
Which ends up being totally misleading in my opinion.

You were right to say,this is not about JoeySteele however because I would never want it to be anything about me.
I post my views full stop.
My posts are there for anyone to read if they wish to,I am not going to direct them to any part of them.

With respect, you only made this thread Kirk, it is not your possession and on any issue like this both sides should be fairly presented, costed and the conditions of both ways known and detailed very clearly.
Just leave my name out of your responses to others however please, that is a little disrespectful to say the least to include mine the way you chose to in the post above.
So speak for yourself, not for me and don't try to infer this issue has anything to do with me, any more than it does as to anyone else who chooses to post in this thread.

I find the undecided and their views more interesting,it is a really big issue and a massive change to vote for if they vote out and sever over 40 years of closer ties to mainland Europe.
The decision is massive but whatever decisions any undecided come to I would respect and other than stating my own views and feelings, would never try to push anyone one way or the other either.
So you should not have put my name in your post above.
This is not a battle between you and I, there is in fact little point in me discussing this with you since all I say to you is wrong anyway,just as I will never accept your one sided totally negative presentation of the EU on a public forum.
So there will never be any agreement really between you and I on the issue as we are poles apart on it.

I have only responded this time again to you, because you used my name and wrongly in my view, in your response to another.
I do not like that at all.

My footnote to you is I as an IN person have pointed out the problems that can come from staying in too,I point to the fact, yes fact,that we have overcome many problems while in the EU,the UK has been successful and still is now in the EU.
So I can point clearly to a future not without difficulties and changes needed but to the fact, we would overcome problems when they arise and at times needing EU assistance too to do so.

You always choose to dismiss that but the last 40+ years speak for themselves in my view.
What no one is getting told, something you choose to ignore too, is the fact that no one in the out camp will not and probably cannot anyway, detail all the new costs, charges, tariffs,conditions and also difficulties we would have having to not only re-negotiate some trading deal with the EU again, accepting most of the conditions there are on us now already even in the new deals.

Also however just what deals will we certainly get with the other Nations and would they be that willing to really accommodate s cheaply when a good number of them want to have deals with the EU themselves anyway.
India for instance, the biggest Commonwealth Nation,would prefer the UK to say in the EU.
Canada has been battling to get its own deal with EU for years now.

How long would we take to get the 'right' deal and clearly what would that deal really be, what conditions imposed, what tariffs imposed.
Or are you trying to tell us there would be no charges, tariffs and conditions guaranteed.
When those questions are answered with solid assurances, as opposed to the solid assurances already in place for us now in the EU,then that would be a fairer portrayal of the issue..
In my opinion, nothing at all about it being about me, just my opinion like everyone elses views on here.

As to scaremongering that goes on as to all sides. The fact remains however we are in the EU, we have done pretty well out of it and there are benefits on both sides,not all is right with the EU,it likely never will be.
Then again all was not right before we joined anything as to Europe and we were desperate to do so too.

I would never throw away over 40 years of hard work unless I knew for certain that guarantees, cost and conditions were knows as to any alternative beforehand.
I would also be looking at what the UK govt could do now as to helping certain sections of business and groups of people while in the EU and yet they decide not to.
There would be no guarantees that would change or get better if we left.

There are good and bad scenarios as to in or out.
The difference is we know the bad and how to overcome it while being in the EU and working together so for me the benefits do still outweigh any drawbacks that there are still are admittedly.
However walking into a scenario of ifs, maybes, possibles and don't know yets,does nothing whatsoever to fill me with any confidence.
Yes there are possible good things in leaving, yes too equally there are possible bad things too,non really known or prepared for even..

Whereas for me as to in, there are certain bad things to come and certain good things to come from being a member,the bad things will be worked through as they have been for over 20 years or more now.

That, speaking for myself,no one else,gives me confidence for the better future for the UK being in because I know all that will happen.
Rather than taking on board biased negativity against the EU that lists not a thing that is positive as to it and takes us down a path virtually blindfold as to costs,tariffs and future conditions..
No scaremongering just balanced facts.

WOW - I meant nothing more than this issue - even on here - is much larger than any personality on here, ME for the OUT camp and YOU for the in camp by way of example, we two being , as I thought, the most regular posters of more comprehensive posts. There was nothing disrespectful about it at all.

I will respond to you later in full as I have only just come in from work.

[joeysteele]

WOW - I meant nothing more than this issue - even on here - is much larger than any personality on here, ME for the OUT camp and YOU for the in camp by way of example, we two being , as I thought, the most regular posters of more comprehensive posts. There was nothing disrespectful about it at all.

I will respond to you later in full as I have only just come in from work.

With the fullest respect, there is no need to respond again.

Over the majority of the post I was repeating myself as you called it the other day, so you have dismissed all that before there is no need to do so again.

I said what I had to say as to my dismay and annoyance at you saying this is not about you or me JoeySteele.
Absolutely no need for a further response,just leave my name out of your posting please in future .
Thank you very much in anticipation.

[kirklancaster]

With the fullest respect, there is no need to respond again.

Over the majority of the post I was repeating myself as you called it the other day, so you have dismissed all that before there is no need to do so again.

I said what I had to say as to my dismay and annoyance at you saying this is not about you or me JoeySteele.
Absolutely no need for a further response,just leave my name out of your posting please in future .
Thank you very much in anticipation.

As you wish, but I feel you are more than a little overreacting.

No problem, I will not debate or discuss with you again - nor quote you.

[Kizzy]

Yeah! get lost pob!
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/michael-gove-should-be-sacked-if-he-leaked-the-queens-views-about-the-eu-referendum-labour-says-a6930561.html

[bots]

Yeah! get lost pob!
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/michael-gove-should-be-sacked-if-he-leaked-the-queens-views-about-the-eu-referendum-labour-says-a6930561.html

Gove should be sacked if he leaked that information about the queen, there is no doubt about it. He would have shown he is untrustworthy and not fit to have a place in the cabinet

[Kizzy]

I bet the queen said nothing of the sort either, someones been telling some very tall tales.... orf with his head!

[joeysteele]

Gove should be sacked if he leaked that information about the queen, there is no doubt about it. He would have shown he is untrustworthy and not fit to have a place in the cabinet

I read yesterday that Gove had declined to deny he was the/a source as to this.
What on earth does that mean.
Declined to deny so in fact refused to deny.

I agree 100% with all you say in your post above.

[Kizzy]

This lot really do think they're untouchable don't they? :/

[arista]

I was Amazed on a report on
Ch4HD News Neil "Wind Bag " Kinnock went to Wales with
a Reporter to find They want out
More wanted out,

I wish Spitting Image was back.

Everyone has a story to tell
More and More want Out Kirk.


Great to see Ch4HD News giving
Balanced News better than the Bloated BBC

[arista]

Gove should be sacked if he leaked that information about the queen, there is no doubt about it. He would have shown he is untrustworthy and not fit to have a place in the cabinet


Sure he could be
but that means the Queen must tell All
which can not happen.

Hell of a Puzzle


Feel The Force

[arista]

"I don't understand why there hasn't been, I would have found it really helpful and I'm sure I'm not the only one! "

Jamie89
they will be Long TV Debates with a wide ranging panel
and as Kirk said it must have "impartial adjudicator"
On BBC1 Question Time - its not good enough
thats everything not the, EU alone.


So as one example
Jon Snow - Ch4HDNews would be ideal.

[kirklancaster]

That is not true.
There are many links to relevant reputable articles and sources as well as intelligent personal perspective from those who would remain.

Well how about posting some of those links and actually putting something on here other than empty rhetoric? I look forward to discussing how reputable and relevant they actually are.

[kirklancaster]

I was Amazed on a report on
Ch4HD News Neil "Wind Bag " Kinnock went to Wales with
a Reporter to find They want out
More wanted out,

I wish Spitting Image was back.

Everyone has a story to tell
More and More want Out Kirk.


Great to see Ch4HD News giving
Balanced News better than the Bloated BBC

True Arista, I am finding daily that more and more want out. Thank God that this Tibb thread where a few can influence a poll, is not reflective of the real world. :laugh:

I agree about the BBC as well - it badly needs an overhaul.

[Kizzy]

Well how about posting some of those links and actually putting something on here other than empty rhetoric? I look forward to discussing how reputable and relevant they actually are.

I've had an opinion, if you want to denigrate that as rhetoric on a debate thread then that's fine.
As well as post links to areas which concern me such as workers rights, if you don't accept them as relevant then that's your issue.

[kirklancaster]

I've had an opinion, if you want to denigrate that as rhetoric on a debate thread then that's fine.
As well as post links to areas which concern me such as workers rights, if you don't accept them as relevant then that's your issue.

I made a post which was not directed to you at all, to which you freely elected to respond contending that a particular statement in my post was not true:

Quote: Originally Posted by Kizzy View Post

"That is not true. There are many links to relevant reputable articles and sources as well as intelligent personal perspective from those who would remain."


To which, I then responded:

"Well how about posting some of those links and actually putting something on here other than empty rhetoric? I look forward to discussing how reputable and relevant they actually are."

Considering this is - supposedly - a debate forum, what is so wrong with that?

Of course, if there are no "links to relevant reputable articles and sources as well as intelligent personal perspective from those who would remain." that you deem able to withstand analysis and intelligent rebuttal, then just say so, because there is no need for such a thinly veiled aggressive and confrontational response.

To me, sweeping statements without substantiation ARE but empty rhetoric, but then, that is what 99% of the 'In' campaign consists of out there in the real world.

No problem love that yet another 'In' campaigner on here does not want to discuss or debate this all important issue.

[Kizzy]

I made a post which was not directed to you at all, to which you freely elected to respond contending that a particular statement in my post was not true:

Quote: Originally Posted by Kizzy View Post

"That is not true. There are many links to relevant reputable articles and sources as well as intelligent personal perspective from those who would remain."


To which, I then responded:

"Well how about posting some of those links and actually putting something on here other than empty rhetoric? I look forward to discussing how reputable and relevant they actually are."

Considering this is - supposedly - a debate forum, what is so wrong with that?

Of course, if there are no "links to relevant reputable articles and sources as well as intelligent personal perspective from those who would remain." that you deem able to withstand analysis and intelligent rebuttal, then just say so, because there is no need for such a thinly veiled aggressive and confrontational response.

To me, sweeping statements without substantiation ARE but empty rhetoric, but then, that is what 99% of the 'In' campaign consists of out there in the real world.

No problem love that yet another 'In' campaigner on here does not want to discuss or debate this all important issue.

If I were to post them I would be repeating myself, something you have criticised others for doing. If you wish to see my views then you'll have to look back across the thread.
'that is what 99% of the 'In' campaign consists of'
This in itself is a sweeping statement. There is no point attempting to debate anything with you to be frank. I'll just continue to post my views of how I see things in the lead up to the referendum.
I'm not attempting to influence or inspire anyone to think as I do, I'm simply posting my own personal take on the issue, therefore I won't be attempting to convince anyone of anything in any way.
If you wish to analyse my opinion you go ahead.

[joeysteele]

I will debate any issue but not to have my opinions and posts abused.

Few are actually debating on here in reality because it is near impossible to do so, you cannot debate with someone who only presents the bad side of the EU,or someone who only presents the good side of the EU,that applies on here as well as talking to those we meet everyday too.

I will happily debate with any 'out' representative, when and if they in fact ever do, actually ever get down to listing the terms, costs, tariffs,time and also all conditions that will be the new norm as to the UK setting up trade deals not only with the EU but also other Countries too just for starters.

That would be before debating security and the UK presently in the EU helping decide the best course of action as to events around the rest of the World with our EU partners and then after leaving, probably still having to support Europe's overall actions to same while having no say whatsoever in the projection of such.

How if we were totally sidelined could we hold on to the status we have as a Nation now, and for exactly what.
What do we gain,are the out people guaranteeing us that the European Nations left in the EU will be there to, or even want to really do the UK any favours.
If they can guarantee that say so with substantiation.

Quite frankly not a single out person has given me any confidence as to all those things.
All I get is how much it costs and the only way to control immigration is to leave too.
Then you get all the 'only' negative statistics thrown around only trying to show the bad side of the EU, while totally ignoring the fact, we have been a major asset to the EU and that it has been an asset to us too over the last decades.
Despite al the reforms and changes still needed to make it work far better, something better done from inside it, as for sure I can say, we will have EU conditions imposed on us which we could do little about to be able to still deal with them and also those conditions can be altered any time too.
However out, we cannot influence any such conditions if we still have to and want to trade with the EU nations.

When if ever, the out camp ever come up with guarantees on those issues, then a serious debate may get going in a balanced way.
Rather than nit picking at each others posting and attempting to ridicule people with a differing view too.

The 'in' argument is made and clear to see, the EU has not stopped, and in fact I believe it has helped the UK, remain a success despite many problems, recessions and global crisis over the decades.
That will continue, even though the UK will at times be at odds with the EU and things be got wrong.
Overall however, it has given stability over most issues and if we were to stay in, that would always likely be the 'assured' case in my view.

For the in people, we know that and can point to decades of success overall and a good strong UK while being a member of the EU despite the current costs.

Now all the out camp will do is dismiss what I have said as nonsense and we would be better out but they never, never ever, detail the costs, tariffs and conditions we would then have imposed once out.
So never show that we would be at the very least the same as to success and status or better.

When all someone does is dismiss what is clear as to 'in', then will not in anyway give assured costings etc. as to being out too,then that makes real serious and meaningful debate impossible with such people.

Give me the costs and conditions and tariffs as to out, then I may look at out again.
Nowhere can I find anything assured as to those things,leaving then the massive difference that I know now, the costs and no tariffs, and also the conditions we have in place now as a member of the EU.
I see with what we have in place already, up and running, how successful the UK has been and is still in fact.

I will talk to any from the 'out' camp when they can present and substantiate the costs of 'out', as we already know the cost of 'in' as I detailed above.
It is for the 'out' camp to make the case for out fully substantiated and costed.
Those facts are already there as to being in for all to see.

I have said many times,I would look at out if I saw that the UK would be assuredly better with substantiated true information as to that.
I only think it could be better out, as well as also thinking it may not be too.
Again all could be's, ifs and maybes,nothing in any way assured or certain.
With the lack of substantiated and costed plans that at present is a no go for me at all.

As to in, because I know we have been, and still are as full members,I know the UK will hold its status, its success and I also know the substantiated costs as members of the EU too,if it stays in.
I know it can also be better in the long run because as members of the EU it is in the overall interests of the EU to have its members doing well when they can.

Once out,no going back, why would the EU have to, need to or want to be concerned at problems the UK may have in the future once we left.
Why lift a finger then to assist us,when they have 27 other EU Nations in place and more wanting to join too,so those other EU nations could well benefit from any problems the UK may end up in as we slip further down.

It is not debating at all to fire anti EU rhetoric and statistics all the time and never even acknowledging any of the many benefits of being a member too.

[joeysteele]

If I were to post them I would be repeating myself, something you have criticised others for doing. If you wish to see my views then you'll have to look back across the thread.
'that is what 99% of the 'In' campaign consists of'
This in itself is a sweeping statement. There is no point attempting to debate anything with you to be frank. I'll just continue to post my views of how I see things in the lead up to the referendum.
I'm not attempting to influence or inspire anyone to think as I do, I'm simply posting my own personal take on the issue, therefore I won't be attempting to convince anyone of anything in any way.
If you wish to analyse my opinion you go ahead.

As I am,as I am doing off here too, however I as soon as I come across off here, anyone solidly out, there are 3 in my whole family,I refuse to get involved .
If I find anyone who wants to talk to me about the benefits as I see them and bad things as to the EU too and also as to being out in the same way.
Then I will discuss at length all night with them, even moreso if they are undecided.

Still stating I know the EU is far from perfect and that things are wrong and will go wrong while in it.

I feel really sad for the real undecided, they are getting nothing of a really balanced nature as to any form of debating from either side.

So like you, I put my own views on here and the only other thing I ask for and never get,is the costings tariffs and conditions we will have imposed on us to trade with the EU once we leave, that is before we start to try to open up trade with all other different Countries too,even if we can.

[bots]

No-one has yet mentioned the climate aspects of opening up trade with further afield countries than the nasty, evil europe which is rather conveniently on our doorstep