Conservatives remain divided over EU

[-:Undertaker:-]

Shadow business secretary Ken Clarke says the Tories will not reopen negotiations on the Lisbon Treaty if the Irish back it in a new referendum.

The treaty was rejected last year by Ireland, but could hold another vote.

The Tories have said they will call a referendum if they win power before all EU states ratify it, but had not said what happens if the Irish vote yes.

Tory party central office denied its position had changed but Labour said Tory policy was "in disarray".

Tory leader David Cameron has previously only said that if the treaty is ratified by all EU member states before a Conservative government comes to power he would "not let matters rest".

His party argues that the treaty was an EU Constitution in all but name.


"The Conservatives have no intention of holding a referendum on the Lisbon treaty and all their promises during the European election campaign about holding one can now be seen to be sheer, brass-necked dishonesty." - Nigel Farage (UKIP Leader)

Why can none of the main political partys (Conservative & Labour) support what the people want and what we were promised, we want a vote on this treaty which gives ever-more power to the unelected eurocrats in Brussels. The Irish are being made to vote again - so much for democracy.

The French said NO.
The Dutch said NO.
The Irish said NO.

How many more times must we say NO to the European Union, at least Hitler was elected by the people whereas the EU hasn't been elected by the people.

I think now i'm ever more doubtful about David Camerons Conservatives now. I know if it came to a General Election tommorow my vote would not go to the Conservatives and would go to UKIP. To be honest maybe the Conservatives need to lose the next General Election again so then they will have to have a bloody good look at themselves and then maybe we'd actually get a Conservative Party which is conservative, rather than a follow-on to New Labour which it seems to be going that way, sadly.

I just hope that Ken Clarkes comments are not actually Conservative policy and hopefully the Czech President Mr Klaus can hold off signing the Lisbon Treaty as long as possible. The Conservative website seems very anti-EU which is good, however I just wish they would slam Clarkes comments and set the record straight.

What do other Conservative supporters think about this?

[Fez]

at least Hitler was elected by the people whereas the EU hasn't been elected by the people.



Don't ever compare anything to what Hitler did. The EU's power isn't causing genocide now is it?

[ifuseekamy]

Any political party will be for the EU, saying they're against it is a means of getting popular. Of course when they are popular they will feed us the benefits of the EU, and the majority will believe this because they'll think "oh well they hated the EU before but now they like it so obviously it is good". It's frustrating that the enormous flaw of democracy is that everyone is affected by the idiocy of others but that's how it works.

[ashyboy999]

actually its a very good comparison i think. we dont want the EU. every main political party is doing the EXACT opposite to what the british people want. which is why im not suprised in the slightest that people like the BNP have been elected. when you cant trust labour and tory where do you turn? thats the predicament the british people faced this month will have to face again at march next year if not sooner....

genocide hmm i wouldnt put it passed them seens as they carry no responsibility for their actions! looks at our country for goodness sake the law is corrupt, human rights means absolutely nothing anymore, soveriegnity is a thing of the past and whats more, get this our traditions which we celebrated for centuries like christmas and st georges day are protested at by immigrants with different religions because THEY dont agree!!!! all from being a member of the EU

the EU can change any law in our country they are basically the rulers of this land, new labour, the queen are overpowered by the EU!! HOW DARE THEY !!!

people wonder why the russians hate the EU, just look at our country now and you will see why. knife crime and gun crime id even go as far as that being caused by the EU for one simple fact. they can change our laws whenever they please and take no responsibility for the consquences it may cause. like for instance parenting, a decade ago you could discapline and bring up your kids right. now if u did that youd have them taken away and u imprisioned and its the EU that has implemented that. for child rights mallarky and what do we have now? children as young as 12 killing each other!

[jam666]

Why can none of the main political partys (Conservative & Labour) support what the people want and what we were promised, we want a vote on this treaty which gives ever-more power to the unelected eurocrats in Brussels. The Irish are being made to vote again - so much for democracy.

The French said NO.
The Dutch said NO.
The Irish said NO.

How many more times must we say NO to the European Union, at least Hitler was elected by the people whereas the EU hasn't been elected by the people.

I think now i'm ever more doubtful about David Camerons Conservatives now. I know if it came to a General Election tommorow my vote would not go to the Conservatives and would go to UKIP. To be honest maybe the Conservatives need to lose the next General Election again so then they will have to have a bloody good look at themselves and then maybe we'd actually get a Conservative Party which is conservative, rather than a follow-on to New Labour which it seems to be going that way, sadly.

I just hope that Ken Clarkes comments are not actually Conservative policy and hopefully the Czech President Mr Klaus can hold off signing the Lisbon Treaty as long as possible. The Conservative website seems very anti-EU which is good, however I just wish they would slam Clarkes comments and set the record straight.

What do other Conservative supporters think about this?

Ok, where shall i start?

This is hardly new news. The Conservatives have always said they will hold a referendum on the treaty if they come into power before the lisbon treaty is signed so i dont know why people are shocked by clarkes comments as he is just trying to save his sinking ship (labour party) however they have always said that if they do not come into power before the treaty is signed it would be very DIFFICULT but not impossible to hold a referendum then. Therefore they have not ruled out the possibility of calling a referendum if the treaty gets signed.

Your telling me you would rather have another 4 years of labour compared to 4 years of a fresh Conservative party? I certainly know which one I'd rather have.

The Conservatives are hardly follow on new-labour.... this is absolutely pathetic to even suggest this as The Conservatives do not like labour as they themselves believe that labour has wrecked this country beyond belief.

Clarkes comments are not conservative party policy. He is simply trying to stir up trouble yet again. Please refer to above as to why.

I hate to say this but why even bother voting UKIP at the next general election? Its rather obvious they have no chance of winning. Fair enough they may gain some MP's however the vote you cast for UKIP could of being the difference between another 4 years of labour or not.

[GommeInc]

Get the monarch back in power. England has very rarely had any problems with a King or Queen as leader, and at least she has respect!

[ashyboy999]

Ok, where shall i start?

This is hardly new news. The Conservatives have always said they will hold a referendum on the treaty if they come into power before the lisbon treaty is signed so i dont know why people are shocked by clarkes comments as he is just trying to save his sinking ship (labour party) however they have always said that if they do not come into power before the treaty is signed it would be very DIFFICULT but not impossible to hold a referendum then. Therefore they have not ruled out the possibility of calling a referendum if the treaty gets signed.

Your telling me you would rather have another 4 years of labour compared to 4 years of a fresh Conservative party? I certainly know which one I'd rather have.

The Conservatives are hardly follow on new-labour.... this is absolutely pathetic to even suggest this as The Conservatives do not like labour as they themselves believe that labour has wrecked this country beyond belief.

Clarkes comments are not conservative party policy. He is simply trying to stir up trouble yet again. Please refer to above as to why.

I hate to say this but why even bother voting UKIP at the next general election? Its rather obvious they have no chance of winning. Fair enough they may gain some MP's however the vote you cast for UKIP could of being the difference between another 4 years of labour or not.

so are u trying to say thatcher didnt mess up this country beyond belief? they can hardly accuse labour really with their track record. thats why this election is such a difficult one because niether party can be trusted to be fair. the exspenses scandal is more centred around labour but tory were in on it too. they wouldnt have to "clean up" if they wernt

its a good suggestion because when tory came to birmingham to try to get votes for next year all they talked about is what labour wanted to achieve. we elected them for a referendum on the EU plus a number of other reasons but never got any. tory are using a cheap tactic which is promising us everything labour wanted to achieve before we elected them that is not david cameron wanting to be a tory leader with conservative views thats david cameron copying labour exactly!

people are voting UKIP etc because they want our soverignity back they want democrocy and we cant get that from labour and tory we'll get it elsewhere!

[jam666]

so are u trying to say thatcher didnt mess up this country beyond belief? they can hardly accuse labour really with their track record. thats why this election is such a difficult one because niether party can be trusted to be fair. the exspenses scandal is more centred around labour but tory were in on it too. they wouldnt have to "clean up" if they wernt

its a good suggestion because when tory came to birmingham to try to get votes for next year all they talked about is what labour wanted to achieve. we elected them for a referendum on the EU plus a number of other reasons but never got any. tory are using a cheap tactic which is promising us everything labour wanted to achieve before we elected them that is not david cameron wanting to be a tory leader with conservative views thats david cameron copying labour exactly!

people are voting UKIP etc because they want our soverignity back they want democrocy and we cant get that from labour and tory we'll get it elsewhere!

Thatcher was one of the best leaders this country has ever seen. She let millions of people buy their council houses which in turn created todays property market (not the downturn as that cant be helped).

Im not saying UKIP are a bad party and id vote for them myself however im simply saying there is no chance they will win a general election so therefore it would be best in my OPINION to vote for a more mainstream party which has policys that YOU like and that will stand a CHANCE of winning the next general election.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Don't ever compare anything to what Hitler did. The EU's power isn't causing genocide now is it?

I am not comparing the Third Reichs genocide policy to the European Unions genocide policy, as the EU does not have one. I stated very clearly they are comparable/different in terms that one was elected and one was not.


Ok, where shall i start?

This is hardly new news. The Conservatives have always said they will hold a referendum on the treaty if they come into power before the lisbon treaty is signed so i dont know why people are shocked by clarkes comments as he is just trying to save his sinking ship (labour party) however they have always said that if they do not come into power before the treaty is signed it would be very DIFFICULT but not impossible to hold a referendum then. Therefore they have not ruled out the possibility of calling a referendum if the treaty gets signed.

Your telling me you would rather have another 4 years of labour compared to 4 years of a fresh Conservative party? I certainly know which one I'd rather have.

The Conservatives are hardly follow on new-labour.... this is absolutely pathetic to even suggest this as The Conservatives do not like labour as they themselves believe that labour has wrecked this country beyond belief.

Clarkes comments are not conservative party policy. He is simply trying to stir up trouble yet again. Please refer to above as to why.

I hate to say this but why even bother voting UKIP at the next general election? Its rather obvious they have no chance of winning. Fair enough they may gain some MP's however the vote you cast for UKIP could of being the difference between another 4 years of labour or not.

The point I am making, is why are the Conservatives not slamming Kenneth Clarkes comments if they are his opinion and not policy. They are not being strong enough on EU policy and it is worrying me as Conservative supporter.

"Therefore they have not ruled out the possibility of calling a referendum if the treaty gets signed." - My point exactly, they are not clear enough and I want a straight yes or no answer because we know as soon as they get in office they will most likely say no, but refuse to say no before the election as that would lose them votes.

Of course I wouldn't want another four years of Labour compared to a Conservative government, but if it ment in another four years having a Conservative Party with a Thatcherite doctrine/leader then i'd consider it. The situation at the moment is too serious for Labour to carry on with anyway, because yet again they have ruined the economy.

They are comparable to New Labour, they do not mention traditional Conservative policies enough and prefer to bang on about green issues which in my opinion and middle englands opinion (core tory base) don't even believe exists.

People wrote UKIP off in the European Election, the point is that the stronger UKIP get the more influence it will have on Conservative policy, and I want a return to Thatcherism that this country needs.

I want straight Conservative policies, because if this upcoming Conservative government is a failure then I as a tory supporter really have no backup against Labour support and quite frankly i'll be disillusioned with the whole lot of them. To be successful, Cameron needs to be radical.


Thatcher was one of the best leaders this country has ever seen. She let millions of people buy their council houses which in turn created todays property market (not the downturn as that cant be helped).

Im not saying UKIP are a bad party and id vote for them myself however im simply saying there is no chance they will win a general election so therefore it would be best in my OPINION to vote for a more mainstream party which has policys that YOU like and that will stand a CHANCE of winning the next general election.

I agree Thatcher was the best Prime Minister we have ever had, better than Churchill in my mind. The sad thing is, that the very thing that finished off Thatcher was the European Union itself.

[ifuseekamy]

Get the monarch back in power. England has very rarely had any problems with a King or Queen as leader, and at least she has respect!
It would be nice if she had more political sway considering the monarchy doesn't take crap and actually has patriotic integrity. I mean if the queen had any say in the EU giving our territory away you know Spain would've been *****slapped by the navy.

[Frodo13.]

he is just trying to save his sinking ship (labour party)

Clarke is a Tory :l

[jam666]

Clarke is a Tory :l

My fault, there was a recent labour backbencher who spoke out against Conservative policy who i must of got confused with.

[Chippiewill]

I for one am voting for UKIP asap so that we can get IE back into windows... anyway, I am going to convince as much as britain to demand Opera to be illegalised and IE back into Windows... (Stupid Opera..). Of course as soon as the Pirat Partiet gets control of the EU then I am voting back in to the EU so that we don't get moaned at for 'Piracy'

[alexxxxx]

I for one am voting for UKIP asap so that we can get IE back into windows... anyway, I am going to convince as much as britain to demand Opera to be illegalised and IE back into Windows... (Stupid Opera..). Of course as soon as the Pirat Partiet gets control of the EU then I am voting back in to the EU so that we don't get moaned at for 'Piracy'
IE not being included in windows sounds stupid, but really it isn't. PLUS with most computers IE will be installed because the manufacturer will jsut install it, along with all those other dodgy programmes. I think M$ shouldn't be able to prepackage IE or WMP because they are markets in themselves and therefore M$'s monopolistic powers means that they can now dominate other markets easily making it harder for others to enter in.

Conservatives, Labour and LibDems are all pro-EU because they think it's best for this country. Anyway the Irish will vote yes in the next referendum as there has been changes made for the Irish which they were concerned about. Did you see that the Irish voted for LESS eurosceptics this time? Probably cause they have come to realise that they do want it.

[-:Undertaker:-]

IE not being included in windows sounds stupid, but really it isn't. PLUS with most computers IE will be installed because the manufacturer will jsut install it, along with all those other dodgy programmes. I think M$ shouldn't be able to prepackage IE or WMP because they are markets in themselves and therefore M$'s monopolistic powers means that they can now dominate other markets easily making it harder for others to enter in.

Conservatives, Labour and LibDems are all pro-EU because they think it's best for this country. Anyway the Irish will vote yes in the next referendum as there has been changes made for the Irish which they were concerned about. Did you see that the Irish voted for LESS eurosceptics this time? Probably cause they have come to realise that they do want it.

They are pro-EU yet they don't reflect the will of the people, thus them all being just as bad as eachother. I tell you what would reflect the view of the people; a referendum that we were promised.

Are the Irish going to get another referendum if in a years time after they vote yes (presuming they do) if the opinion polls show they do not want the EU/Lisbon Treaty? - of course they will not. That goes to show how 'democratic' the EU is.

I tell you what, why aren't the EU giving all countrys across Europe the chance to vote on its existence, and secondly if they agree with it existing then they can then vote which powers and areas the EU can and cannot touch of national sovereign powers? - because they know the result will be numerous countrys leaving the EU.

Did you see the United Kingdom and the majority of Europe voted for more right-wing anti-EU candidates - because they don't want it, so how about giving the people of Europe the say whether or not they want to be ruled by a group of unelected eurocrats in Brussels? - because i'm pretty sure the result will come out just as it did before from three different nations; NO, NO, NO.

[LuketheDuke]

Which ratifications of the Lisbon Treaty are you against -:Undertaker:-?

Also referendums are not a cornerstone of democracy because a) if you vote a government in they have the ruling mandate from you to do whatever they like and b) they can ignore referenda if they wish too as they are not binding.

As well its been seen that not an awful lot of people care about such an issue, as the turnout in Ireland was particularly low.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Which ratifications of the Lisbon Treaty are you against -:Undertaker:-?

Also referendums are not a cornerstone of democracy because a) if you vote a government in they have the ruling mandate from you to do whatever they like and b) they can ignore referenda if they wish too as they are not binding.

As well its been seen that not an awful lot of people care about such an issue, as the turnout in Ireland was particularly low.

The whole of the treaty, the creation of the EU as a political body itself, the futher handover of powers from London to Brussels - the whole EU I am against, why do our MP's fight to get elected in our parliament only to hand over more powers to the European Union?

This government was voted in partly because of its promise to hold a referendum on the reform of the European Union, so if we are going to argue on thta ground then Labour should legally have to hold a referendum as they promised to us in 2005.

You hit the nail on the head there "ignore" - and thats exactly what is happening to the British people and the people of Europe. If the EU was so incredibly good and popular, why aren't they holding a referendum to let us show our 'support' for the EU? - because there is no support.

Turnouts in General Elections are also low, does that mean seeing as people seem to not care, we should scrap elections and declare a dictatorship? - no it doesn't.

The issue that always strikes me about the European Union topic is how arrogant the EU and its supporters itself appear to be, coming out with statements such as "the people don't know enough to make a decision" - so arrogant and spiteful, its no wonder people are so fed up with the political system of this country and do not bother to vote.

[LuketheDuke]

I think its dismissive to call EU supporters arrogent just because they believe in such an organisation. The EU accounts of 30% of the Worlds GDP, it has one of the best sustainability programs towards the environment which places accountability on all members and has given the continent a seperate judicial system that allows people an extra opportunity to seek redress in griviance.

If we to withdraw it would be a step back from such things, if we are to stay we can create a decent European community that will only continue to prosper over time. When the economy picks up again watch parties like UKIP fade back into obscurity as they complain about our spending into such commitments which seems their only strong argument.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I think its dismissive to call EU supporters arrogent just because they believe in such an organisation. The EU accounts of 30% of the Worlds GDP, it has one of the best sustainability programs towards the environment which places accountability on all members and has given the continent a seperate judicial system that allows people an extra opportunity to seek redress in griviance.

If we to withdraw it would be a step back from such things, if we are to stay we can create a decent European community that will only continue to prosper over time. When the economy picks up again watch parties like UKIP fade back into obscurity as they complain about our spending into such commitments which seems their only strong argument.

If you disagree with the proposal of a referendum then you are arrogant, simple as that. You know it will lose yet would prefer to see it dragged through despite the public not wanting it.

Why do we need to pay the EU £40 million a day along with signing away sovereign powers to unelected officals in Brussels so we can have an enviromental project? - In Liverpool one of our largest public parks is about to be built on by Liverpool Football Club, where are the EU now with their enviroment programs?

Our parliament is one of the oldest in the world and is democratically elected, why after all these years do we need an unelected body to make over 75% of our laws and we don't even want them to! - we would be perfectly capable of having our own enviroment scheme (and probably do already have many of them) at a small percentage of the price of what the EU costs.

The spending is only half of it, believe it or not many people place national soverignty over finance especially as we fought two world wars not to be governed by Europe, if you feel that way, then do you agree with the United Kingdom and Europe having a referendum on whether or not we even want to be in the European Union?

[ifuseekamy]

I think its dismissive to call EU supporters arrogent just because they believe in such an organisation. The EU accounts of 30% of the Worlds GDP, it has one of the best sustainability programs towards the environment which places accountability on all members and has given the continent a seperate judicial system that allows people an extra opportunity to seek redress in griviance.

If we to withdraw it would be a step back from such things, if we are to stay we can create a decent European community that will only continue to prosper over time. When the economy picks up again watch parties like UKIP fade back into obscurity as they complain about our spending into such commitments which seems their only strong argument.
Not being a part of a superstate that rules through totalitarian democracy is hardly a step back.

[LuketheDuke]

If they build on Stanley Park (is that what its called?) thats because Liverpools local council has allowed it go foward alongside various building regulations, if you have a problem with it raise the case to your local MEP and get a ruling on it as applied to whatever the EU's charter on that sort of thing is. Or do it via normal MP's.

Also slow down on the insults mate, no need to call me arrogant for fowarding my opinion, after all this government have been voted in democratically so they dont need any assent for any issue from any person. It may suck but unfortunately it aint constitutional.

The fact that so few people seem to care about it and it takes a recession to spark a small amount of protest against it just shows that people dont mind it/ think its a good idea. I suggest you read what the Lisbon Treaty entails and perhaps post back marking which policies you object too as it leans towards the centre right with a lot of proposals. eg Opening up the market to more free trading without secular taxing in certain countries making stuff cheaper for all.

Cheap San Miguel!!!!

[-:Undertaker:-]

If they build on Stanley Park (is that what its called?) thats because Liverpools local council has allowed it go foward alongside various building regulations, if you have a problem with it raise the case to your local MEP and get a ruling on it as applied to whatever the EU's charter on that sort of thing is. Or do it via normal MP's.

Also slow down on the insults mate, no need to call me arrogant for fowarding my opinion, after all this government have been voted in democratically so they dont need any assent for any issue from any person. It may suck but unfortunately it aint constitutional.

The fact that so few people seem to care about it and it takes a recession to spark a small amount of protest against it just shows that people dont mind it/ think its a good idea. I suggest you read what the Lisbon Treaty entails and perhaps post back marking which policies you object too as it leans towards the centre right with a lot of proposals. eg Opening up the market to more free trading without secular taxing in certain countries making stuff cheaper for all.

Cheap San Miguel!!!!

In essence then, they have no enviromental power as they cannot save Stanley Park, so as I was saying all along, they are a waste of money. If the EU are so dedicated to saving the enviroment, why are they not lobbying against Liverpool City Council to stop the destruction of a historic park?

I didn't call you arrogant, I stated anyone who doesn't believe in the British people or people of Europe having a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty are arrogant, if you fit that description I have given, then yes, you are arrogant.

People do care about it, if people dont care about it/agree with the EU then surely you would support having a referendum across Europe on whether or not each invididual country wants to be in the European Union?

The Lisbon Treaty both by critics and supporters has been compared to the former Consitution which incidently was turned down by three out of three countrys, to put that in more simple terms, 100% of the countrys asked said no.

I do not want to have over 75% of our laws made in Brussels by unelected officals, I do not want a European President, I do not want the United Kingdom to be told what to do by the European Union, I do not want the United Kingdom to have its agriculture/fishing/courts/regulations/laws & more dominated and made in Europe, I do not want the United Kingdom to keep paying over £40 million a day into the European Union when our country itself has run up massive debts and finally I do not want to be ruled by people we did not even elect to rule us.

Perhaps one day I should read the treaty fully, or maybe the former Europe Minister Caroline Flint (Labour) should of, seeing as she thought the British people were not informed enough to make an educated decision - despite not reading it herself.

[LuketheDuke]

Many football stadia are built in places where an opportunity for commerce is apparant. Not sure where the environment comes into that as by that logic should we be building on anywhere? The EU arent a pressure group so why would they "lobby" against it?

The government lied to us about the referendum yes but you miss the point that either way theres no democratic entitlement to one. And may I ask which countries rejected it? I looked it up and Ive only seen the Irish have turned it down.

At the end of the day I think you like your British Identity and I have no problem with that, just you have to realise the financial and diplomatic benefits the EU gives us is the reason why we're part of it. If it was just a money hole no-one would be a part of it. Also you do elect this countries representatives to EU, perhaps you should blame British people for not caring about it with such a low turnout. Imagine how few would bother with a referendum if not even 40% turn out for the body who determine it.

I think more pressing matters exist in the World at the moment than the EU, I'm distressed about the well being of people in Both Iran and Somalia. Its puts such minor squabbles into perspective when we see bare human rights being neglected.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Then if they are not defending that green space what is the point in them and their enviromental programs, you have just dismantled your own arguement. We do not need the EU to tell us what to do/how to do things, not needed and not wanted.

The French, Dutch and Irish rejected the reforms the EU attempted/is still attempting to push through.

You haven't answered my questions on whether or not you should think we should have a referendum, so do you think we should have a referendum or not?

Diplomatic benefits? - we have had embassies over the world for decades, being the first modern world power. Why do we need a foreign body to work diplomacy for us when the rest of the world is capable of doing it itself?

Economic benefits? - paying £40 million into the EU a day and getting around one third of that back is a benefit?, I have no idea how you work that one out and neither would anybody else who could count to three.

That is avoiding the issue, I am talking about the issue of the European Union and not Iran/Somalia. There are more pressing issues in the world today rather than the EU, however I am a British citzen and live in the United Kingdom and not Iran or Somalia. Therefore if I am quite honest, I would rather we sort out country out before we start pledging millions/billions to those countrys who the majority of people do not give a toss about - to be frank.

This European superstate dream needs to be put to rest once and for all, lets give the people of Europe a say and I could gurantee the European Union would cease to exist overnight if the political elite let us have our say.

[LuketheDuke]

If we went out of the EU most of our trading roots would be severed and no one in Europe would want to trade with Britain due as it would be easier to trade with countries who allow broad based free markets which help generate domestic wealth (ie countries in the EU) Take that away and youd have Britain bumping taxes on everything as we'd have to encourage our own markets and price lesser quantity goods at higher prices as the demand of a small nation to what we use is way out of proportion. Think that works out ok...

Diplomacy means a greater understanding and relationship with our european neighbours, something which can only be beneficial. I dont want to be a British zenophobe, Id rather be a British European.

And I said I was more concerned with other world affairs, you dont have to be. If there I got the question of Europe Id vote for it as its worked fine for almost 40 years now tyvm. ATM when you compare Britain to Iran I think Id rather know where Id be, arguing over Britain in the EU instead of arguing why a man who has suggestably rigged an election getting into power.

Then again Ive studied the EU to death so other stuff obviously looks more interesting :eusa_danc

[-:Undertaker:-]

If we went out of the EU most of our trading roots would be severed and no one in Europe would want to trade with Britain due as it would be easier to trade with countries who allow broad based free markets which help generate domestic wealth (ie countries in the EU) Take that away and youd have Britain bumping taxes on everything as we'd have to encourage our own markets and price lesser quantity goods at higher prices as the demand of a small nation to what we use is way out of proportion. Think that works out ok...

Diplomacy means a greater understanding and relationship with our european neighbours, something which can only be beneficial. I dont want to be a British zenophobe, Id rather be a British European.

And I said I was more concerned with other world affairs, you dont have to be. If there I got the question of Europe Id vote for it as its worked fine for almost 40 years now tyvm. ATM when you compare Britain to Iran I think Id rather know where Id be, arguing over Britain in the EU instead of arguing why a man who has suggestably rigged an election getting into power.

Then again Ive studied the EU to death so other stuff obviously looks more interesting :eusa_danc

Hang on, what about the rest of the world and Norway who aren't members of the European Union? - their economies don't seem to have collapsed due to not being a part of the European Union. If most of our trade is with Europe, then Europe seems to need us - therefore they would not dare refuse to trade with us as they would need us just as much as we need them.

Excuse me, we do not need the European Union to have a relationship with our European neighbours, just as we didn't have the EU for hundreds of years. Basically what you mean when you say that, is that there won't be any need for diplomacy in the future because we will not be seperate sovereign states, we will be a superstate - which is the EUs' main aim.

How has it worked out fine when its finances haven't been checked for years and billions have gone missing from its books, how has it worked when we are in debt as a country yet are still losing by being in the EU, how has it worked when over 75% of our laws are made in the EU, how has it worked when our farming and agriculture have been harmed by the EU regulations it has placed, how has it worked when business has suffered as a result of its over-regulation in almost every area? -it has not worked, that is why.

You still haven't answered my most basic question; do you or do you not think we, the British people and people of Europe should have a referendum on whether or not we want the Lisbon Treaty or the European Union itself?

[LuketheDuke]

I wouldnt mind if we did as Id vote for the EU, if we didnt I wouldnt mind unless the system starts to become unviable. Dont forget Britain voted to be in the EU during the 70's so technically we already voted for it.

And in the midst of a financial crisis withdrawing from the EU would mean paying import tax for goods from European nations and the tax of exporting goods from this country to other, European ones. Put that alongside 3 million British jobs that are involved with our EU membership. (The Swiss are lumbered with all these taxes!)

Stepping out of the EU would decrease a market for our companies to sell too and this could risk further British jobs. Simple economics make the EU a seem a good proposition in my mind.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I wouldnt mind if we did as Id vote for the EU, if we didnt I wouldnt mind unless the system starts to become unviable. Dont forget Britain voted to be in the EU during the 70's so technically we already voted for it.

And in the midst of a financial crisis withdrawing from the EU would mean paying import tax for goods from European nations and the tax of exporting goods from this country to other, European ones. Put that alongside 3 million British jobs that are involved with our EU membership. (The Swiss are lumbered with all these taxes!)

Stepping out of the EU would decrease a market for our companies to sell too and this could risk further British jobs. Simple economics make the EU a seem a good proposition in my mind.

We voted in the 1970's for something that is totally different to the European Union today, back then the EU was something totally different and had nowhere near as many powers/regulations as it does today.

The question still stands, do you think we should have a referendum or not?

The money saved from not being in the European Union would outweigh the 'benefits', those taxes from Europe could be lowered with co-operation with those countrys/the union itself. We already have some of the highest taxes in Europe, so much for the EU helping us, the normal people. The jobs that depend on the EU? - mainly whitehall jobs, the jobs which contribute nothing. We would not suddenly have three million unemployed if we left the Union, if those jobs are sustainable then they would survive, hence why Margaret Thatcher replaced Labours' state solution with a private solution.

The European Union costs agriculture, fishing and business a lot of money as they are the ones who have to implement everything the EU demands, thus outweighing any potential benefit there may of been in the first place.

It would not decrease the market, we could and still can trade with over one hundred other nations which are on this planet, and as you said before, if we need the European Union so much in economic terms then that would mean the European Union needs us just as much and I can tell you now, they would have no choice but to continue trading with us.

Simple economics show that giving billions to the EU and recieving around one third of that back isn't good economies, its called daylight theft.

[LuketheDuke]

Yes lets have a referendum.

Yes 3 million jobs would be lost, people who work in the European sector rely on exactly that.

Yes taxes in this country would spiral even higher if we left the EU as we'd be paying bumper taxes, you'd pay more for us to be a seperate state.

Yes British business would suffer as it wouldnt be able to maximise profits. That effects currency strength, jobs etc.

Yes lets stop arguing as this is going nowhere, I got a sneaky exam tomorrow!

[-:Undertaker:-]

You just ignored everything that has been said, that is why it is going nowhere. :)

[GommeInc]

I don't get this idea that we need the EU to better understand our european neighbours... The dutch, germans, infact every european country understands us and we understand them. Heck, our relationships must be good with them if they've freely allowed royalty to run around pre-EU for hundreds of years - Queen Elizabeth I, that King/Prince of the House of Orange in Holland who got married to one of our members of royalty decades ago. Heck, we've got germans and greeks sitting in the royal family who have been there since pre-EU. How can you improve said relationships?

The benefits of the EU are only the trade and jobs, that's all anyone ever wanted - not a superstate that seems to not be wanted and knocks down what were strong foundations that gave each and every EU country some form of individuality. It's probably safe to say it ruined most of the countries in the recession. At least the UK kept a strong grip, considering we're just one small nation compared to the many countries within the Euro - imagine the UK as a fat man who lost a bit of weight during the recession, and the EU made up of loads of small, skinny men who make up the same with as the UK man. We held through why the EU really didn't make much difference (best example I could think of :P). If we joined the Euro, we would of flopped down anyway and it wouldn't of made us any better off.

That as far as I've understood at least. The EU has its benefits, but I really don't see why they need a governing body as such, when all that is needed to make up the EU table are transport and trade folk, to make sure it's all going to plan. Not President Blogs of the United State of Europa.

[LuketheDuke]

I have replied to you mate, Ive explained simple economics to you and what the EU actually does just you buy into the UKIP message and I dont.

Youve replied to my statements like...

"40 Million... Referendum" "40 Million... Referendum"

Well OK I accept those things but Ive tried to argue that as a single unitary state things would be more difficult. I hate the fact that money makes the world go around but at the moment its important to have stability, and moving out the EU is an unkown entity that isnt worth the risk

I may be bias as well just dont label me, thanks.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I have replied to you mate, Ive explained simple economics to you and what the EU actually does just you buy into what UKIP want you to hear.

Youve replied to my statements like a telephone recording message

"40 Million... Referendum" "40 Million... Referendum"

I may be bias as well just dont label me, thanks.

You ignored my points on business, regulations, agriculture, relations and farming, instead choosing to repeat what I had just replied to. I have barely mentioned the £40 million a day, as the issue we have been speaking about is not solely the membership fee, it is the affect on business and industry.

GommeInc has just hit the nail on the head.

[GommeInc]

That's a point, aren't the EU effecting small fishing and farming communities in some areas, who struggle to make a living or to make deadlines? The UK have very good, sustainable waters which can't be fished into because of EU rules and regulations - what maybe necessary for France and water located areas isn't for us, because we've got lots of water and should be able to fish as much as we like, especially when there hasn't ever been over-fishing. Fish is one of the basic food stuff that we're good and famous for. I'd be amazed if the EU effect Tiptree Jam though, but very unlikely :P

[LuketheDuke]

Er but I explained to you that British business would be minimized if we withdrew from the EU, which could only be bad for economy. And lol what points did you make on agriculture or industry!?!?, Ive re-read our debate and youve said nothing on the EU's policy towards agriculture, or industry. I raised those points and you replied saying "unelected beaurocrats" and "we need a referendum" :S

Also GommeInc EU regulations on fishing is a good thing, it means sustainability is promoted for fish populations which means their numbers don't dwindle. The only downside is that people go elsewhere like the South Pacific which woz on ze tele Sunday night, although thats only Spain.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Hang on, they are our fishing stocks so why can we not decide when our stocks need replenishing/do not need replenishing? - why do the fishermen/farmers in both France and the Unted Kingdom hold protests against EU regulations if they are so great? - because they are the ones who are out there every day doing the work, not the burocrats in Brussels who think they know better than the people whose families have been fishing/farming for decades.

It is not up to the EU to tell us when to fish our own fish and if our vegtables are not straight enough, we can do that ourselves fine thank you and we have done since this country was formed.

[LuketheDuke]

Maybe so as a continent we can protect certain species that are under threat?

The only reason people have been protesting is because they can't catch as much as they want. Harsh maybe but neccessary if staple pescetarian foods are to survive.

Just call me a left wing looney!!

[GommeInc]

Also GommeInc EU regulations on fishing is a good thing, it means sustainability is promoted for fish populations which means their numbers don't dwindle. The only downside is that people go elsewhere like the South Pacific which woz on ze tele Sunday night, although thats only Spain.
No it won't, we grossly underfish in this country and have never over fished. The number we want to fish to (but can't thanks to the EU) will continue a sustainable amount, and more. Before the fishing regulations in the EU came about we regulated how much to fish and what not to make sure fish populations don't dwindle, aswell as kept off shore fish farms which were given good food for cheap price - on TV the other night the EU regulators want fishermen to use crappy food stuff which costs alot and doesn't have many benefits. With the clearly pointless EU regulations, the fishing market has unnecessarily dropped, and fishing is one thing Britain is famous for - fish and chips (cod, plaice, salmon etc). :/

Also, the European Union don't monitor fish, they never have, they just made up the rules willy nilly for the sake of being annoying - as with technology and business.

The North Sea is where the French fish (and are also annoyed by the EU because there are plenty of fish, but the EU feel the need to make people suffer) and some of the British fishermen fish in there too, yet they can't because they're limited for no reason - protecting fish species/numbers is ludicrous, the numbers have never dropped, they're fearing they will with no evidence. Between Ireland, Cornwall and Scotland are British waters where British fishermen fish, we should be controlling them, not some union which has no clue.

[LuketheDuke]

No it won't, we grossly underfish in this country and have never over fished. The number we want to fish to (but can't thanks to the EU) will continue a sustainable amount, and more. Before the fishing regulations in the EU came about we regulated how much to fish and what not to make sure fish populations don't dwindle, aswell as kept off shore fish farms which were given good food for cheap price - on TV the other night the EU regulators want fishermen to use crappy food stuff which costs alot and doesn't have many benefits. With the clearly pointless EU regulations, the fishing market has unnecessarily dropped, and fishing is one thing Britain is famous for - fish and chips (cod, plaice, salmon etc). :/

Also, the European Union don't monitor fish, they never have, they just made up the rules willy nilly for the sake of being annoying - as with technology and business.



Urm Im not actually part of that industry just what Ive read and seen on the news says that its been dwindling over many years due to the depletion of stocks due to over use of the seas around our country and others. The EU does have fishing quotas I think and if what I said is true I cant see it being a bad thing. Like I said thats what Ive picked up on so if theres any links to suggest otherwise Id read them.

I think theres a stigma on the EU that they're a bunch of bad guys, before we lament them we should try and sort out our own sleazy government and parliament first.

[-:Undertaker:-]

GommeInc has hit the nail on the head yet again, regulation after regulation from the European Union yet it has no purpose/is only to overrule sovereign national parliaments.

Your right our own parliament was corrupt, the only difference being that we elected our parliament whereas we didn't elect the EU commision/council who create over 75% of our laws. We can throw out our corrupt politicians at the ballot box, we cannot throw out the corrupt senior EU eurocrats as we didn't even elect them in the first place.

We have shown in example after example how useless the European Union is, and its only aim is and always was to create a superstate - the same aim that the Third Reich and Soviet Union had/achieved.

[ifuseekamy]

I think theres a stigma on the EU that they're a bunch of bad guys, before we lament them we should try and sort out our own sleazy government and parliament first.
At least we have some control with our government. The EU is ruled by unelected ministers. If you've ever read Orwell's '1984' you'd notice the ridiculous resemblance between the "Big Brother" party in that and the EU. It gains popularity on the notion that a lack of liberal rights and democracy is for some sort of greater good. Not being part of the EU does not mean cutting our ties with Europe. If that's what they're threatening us with then it just proves how power greedy they are. The euro is flawed as shown by its dragging down of the once productive economies of Greece and Spain.

[LuketheDuke]

I'd ask you to read the EU charter on regulation and tell me where its neccessarily weak as from what Ive read (revision for exam on friday) its been fundamentally the same since we joined in the 70's with various pork barrell spending on it that gives independent benefit to certain nations, ie the agricultural settlement negotiated by Thatcher.

We also elect a proportion of who sits in Brussells so if this 75% thing is correct Id argue this country is flawed if only 38% can be bothered to vote. Sounds like we don't/won't care about issues and this is a major flaw of all 3 main parties.

We need more small party/independent MP's and MEP's to represent the growing number of people who notice that mainstream politics are broken to kick the big boys into shape. I can hope that this year whenever a GE is called parties such as the Greens deliver this kick up the backside for greedy Labour/Tory/Lib Dem tyrants.

[-:Undertaker:-]

The EU charter will not mention all the regulation that has been put on as it is a charter and not a list. Over 75% of our laws are forced through by the European Union, therefore the EU has grown in size and is far more powerful than it was in the 1970s. Do not try and hide it by asking us to read EU charts and so forth, we know and everybody knows the EU has become more powerful over time, even supporters of the European Union acknowledge this.

The parliament does not make the laws, we are talking about the people above the parliament who are not elected and can direct the European Union in which ever way they see fit. I can't even believe your arguing over that, surely the fact we are being ruled by foreigners in a different country should be shocking to anyone?

What we need is for Labour to be finished off in a General Election so that it can't bankrupt this country once again, a Conservative Party which has real Conservative values and for us to leave the European Union. People are sick of political correctness, soft on crime, soft on immigration.. the list just goes on and on.

[LuketheDuke]

Im gonna play devils advocate here

38% turnout for our MEP's to represent us in the EU. If so many people cared that strongly about it where are they? MEP's from other countries do not litigate on British Laws, they draw up universal legislation thats broad based to everybody so you dont have a man from Italy outside your house wanting to demolish it for the benefit of his country right?

We've been part of the EU for coming up for 40 years, through different ideologically concerned governments so if it didnt work we'd have been taken out right?

And for the conservative party your joking right? A man who charged us for removing a wysteria from his house to be Prime Minister? A man from the socially biased elitist background that this country has gone to lengths to get rid of? A party who incidently would not withdraw out of Europe anyway? A party who in the midst of a terrible government can make the gain of ONE seat in the european elections.

I think we need to open our eyes and see parliament is corrupt, time to vote in new parties with real ideas and not faceless large parties who charge their taxpayers for horse manure.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I am not talking about the Parliament I am talking about the ones who hold the real power in the European Union, the commission and council.

If we are talking about David Cameron I have my doubts about him aswell, however gaining one seat in the European Elections was better than nearly losing all of your seats and coming behind the United Kingdom Independance Party.

I agree we do, and I think any MP who has been shown to have been abusing the system should be thrown out of parliament and an investigation (criminal) taken place which would look into the case/s.