[the truth]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Nothing is 1005 certain anywhere,however the outs must know what deals they will be wanting to get,they must know what conditions from the EU they would refuse to accept,they also need to tell the voters if they'd refuse any conditions what will be the consequences of that on ay more lucrative trading deal.

To seemingly themselves have no idea what out will come to fruition as, than that leaves a continuing massive hole in their credibility and therefore voting to leave.

TIPP is a bit of a possible red herring here in this debate,if it becomes part of the EU then we have a trading deal when out with the EU of course we would likely have to be affected with it, good or bad.
Unless the outs are now claiming we are to have nothing to do with the EU.which I am sure even they know that would be economical suicide.

TIPPs is still being discussed,it will have to be ratified by 'all' the EU nations if it even gets that far.
If there is opposition as strong as has been stated on here to it, I myself think ratification of it is more less likely then likely.
So TIPPS cannot be judged fully until all the talks ad negotiations are completed,I understand 2020 is the target date.
Then if any deal can be out to the EU nations it likely will, 'but' it will need ratifying by 'all' the EU nations anyway.
Of which we would still be a member if we vote to stay in and then actually get a say on TIPPS.
Out we will have no say and furthermore no say as to if in any way it could cross into our dealings with the EU,as we will have then no control over conditions being added or changed as to our dealings with the EU if out.

There is much wrong with the EU,I would love to go back to the drawing board on it on many issues,however you cannot go back to the drawing board with any influence if you leave something,inside the organisation you can, and if as you say other EU Nations are disgruntled, then handled rightly the UK could lead great change in the EU with many of those disgruntled Nations also joining the move to greater reform.

Out, we can do nothing but still accept what the EU expects of us for any trading deals,costs, tariffs and conditions.

Now, if the out organisations can show us in any way what deals we will get, not could get.
If they can get even an idea of costings and the conditions to be imposed.
If they can get any organisation or other Nation to say we should not be in the EU, then the out argument may be going somewhere.

We have heard form the out side the dismissal of us not being as secure out the EU by the in side,then along comes a hierarchy of NATO, which was held up as being more important than the EU as to security,yet NATO stated they would prefer the UK in the EU.
Someone is getting it badly wrong.

I ask again, is it the out side 'cannot' tell the voters what out 'will' be really like or is it they 'will not' tell the voters.
Either is bad as if they cannot,then whatever picture they paint, in the absence of even any guidelines, is then near irrelevant.
If they will not, then that has to mean the picture maybe is a much darker one.

I think. as you rightly say the out side have not got all the info, that is no excuse for not giving the voters any real info however,even just as things set up to begin deal talks with the EU and other Nations,of which the USA will be one too.

I think those in govt who have great doubts and issues as to the EU, who have info at hand,have looked very closely at what out is and the picture is not a good one,which is why, love or hate them, Cameron and Osborne are now firmly for in.

The out organisations,have the London Mayor, 3 major Cabinet Ministers and another ex Cabinet Minister,those people must have some info as to what is possible out yet have chosen only to dismiss any in argument while presenting nothing of note as to where we go, what we do, who with when and how once we voted to leave.

For me that is too big a risk so with all its faults I still say staying where we are, as a successful Nation in the EU,(despite my annoyances with the EU too), is the better option to ensure the future success and further stability of the UK.
You can disagree with all I say,as I do almost all that you have with full respect to you for your position on this.
However an argument has to be backed up with solid facts and particularly big change has to be shown to be for the better and not a risk in any way.

Having said all that,I think the result will be to leave, carried only by the far South of England which will then open up more instability and chaos across the UK.
I do however think leaving is the likely result at this point in time anyway.
People being so sick of the 'over the heads' stuff being thrown at them by both sides.
So you may well get your wish.

makes you wonder how so many of the most successful countries do so well outside the EU....starting with switzerland and norway, usually rated as the best most successful and highest quality of life nations in the world....other awesome countries who govern themselves include canada, new zealand, australia, america, japan hong kong, oh and china arent too too bad either
they all run their own affairs and theyre the top nations in the world...the only EU nation at the top is of course germany, who control the entire monetary policies of the eu to suit their own needs and agenda ,the vast majority of the other eu nations have gone to hell in a handbasket