Quote:
Originally Posted by
-:Undertaker:-
The reason why supporters of the EU such as yourself don't want a national debate and referendum on the issue is because you know you will be very likely to loose - the only thing you have are trendy words and fear such as 'jobs will be lost if we leave the EU', some of which you have mentioned below. Words such as 'development', 'positive co-operation' and so forth are used as a tactic when anyone with any kind of detatched intelligence knows its simply jargon.
If the EU is so beneficial, then lets have a referendum on it.
If push came to shove, i think that the british population would vote to stay in.. just.
Quote:
Not a disaster, are you aware of whats going on? a currency can only work with a fiscal union my friend.
The Euro has a long, long way to go before breaking up.
Quote:
The likes of you would have had us join it (as you did causing Black Wednesday) just as you would have had us surrender our currency and join the Euro, and judging by the naive response on the current situation concerning the Euro above you still would have us join it. The same can be said for the CAP and the CFP, failure after failure.
I have never actually said I think Britain should be in the Euro, as I don't think our economies are all in line enough for it to work. There are issues with the Euro, but they will be sorted out.
Quote:
The fact that we are now committed to 15%/20% of our energy coming from renewables by 2020, something which cannot be done as the Dutch have shown us (who have not closed down a single coal or gas powerplant and now sell their subsidised wind energy to their neighbours).
http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/ass...indsightPR.pdf
A fault also on our part as our politicians continue to follow its agenda.
Renewable energy is in fact a good thing (in my opinion) as economically, it seems wasteful (especially as most have to subsidised), but as fossil fuels become more and more expensive, alternative, more efficient and more secure methods of energy generation will become economically viable. This will lead to a smoother price fluctuations than are more likely with non-renewables. In the future, as technology improves and oil/coal rises, there will be profits and more private investment. In fact there is nothing to disagree with in this report, yes the UK might not need to spend this money to reach its carbon target, however, the benefits of renewable resources which do not concern the environment are good enough to take without considering carbon targets. From what i've learned at University, there is very little chance that we can change the direction of climate change (if, in fact it is happening at all - based on the model we've been taught), but that doesn't mean that renewables are bad.
Quote:
The economy of the EU has been terrible for years; unemployment in countries such as Spain has been terrible for decades even and the EU didn't improve this at all - infact for all the 'good' it did, it made it worse due to the fact that it heaped mounds of regulations upon these countries and poorer areas who already suffer from low investment.
True, Spain and parts of France have been terrible, but they had infact been improving (apart from Portugal). What the EU has done has funneled funds into areas where money for investment was required (Liverpool included).
Quote:
Why is this 'good'? most of our business is internal, either way - being a member of the EU or not we would still be able to conduct this trade just without the membership fee and the prospect we face often which is being overruled on issues which are detrimental to the United Kingdom.
Most business everywhere in the world is internal. Businesses trade with those closest, yes. But not all business does. If you don't see the benefits in a common market then i'm surprised.
Quote:
Yes, more red tape has been fantastic hasn't it? the standardisation of tractor seats, the banning of harmless herbal medicines, the measurement of fruit to the mm and taking stall owners to prison if they do not use the metric system.
The standardization of cement, steel production, building codes, concrete, plastics, glass and timbers make trading far more easy. It allows an engineering firm in London to build in Greece with materials from Sweden and Germany done by someone who was trained in Ireland a lot more simple! Stall owners should be made to sell in the metric system. I have never learned imperial, nor have my parents, i have never been taught to convert between the two either. Companies and stall owners should not be allowed to exploit me as a customer and sell me drinks/fruit etc without me understanding what i'm buying.
Quote:
Its all been just wonderful, the list of insane pieces of legislation from that place grows by the day.
And the list of insane legislation from the UK grows everyday, a long with the much larger list of important and sensible.
Quote:
The Conservatives poured money into Liverpool in the 1980s whereas now the EU does it (albeit with our own money) - its just another part thats been taken over by EU competence, the only difference now is that we have to display their propaganda or face being fined millions and that the elected national government no longer has that decision within its power - that decison of how to spend the money of taxpayers is now with unelected politicians in Brussels.
It's not propaganda is it really? Anyone with a brain cell realises that EU money comes from the UK. Best to see where money is being spent by different agencies. Besides EU investment requires the other 50% to be funded by other sources.
Quote:
Excuse the jargon please, why not call it what it is "British taxpayers paying for motorways in Ireland, sewers in Budapest etc" - at least be honest about it if you agree with it, the redistribution of wealth.
No that's not actually what I meant at all.
Quote:
That is an issue a national parliament (which can be removed) should hold sway over, again, not unelected commissioners in Brussels.
Why should british waste money on science projects that are being undertaken in the Netherlands?
Quote:
Distributing EU propaganda in schools by the commission? (of which I binned in my own school)
Nope, Erasmus schemes and laws allowing UK students to study abroad without paying international fees and british universities being able to accept bright students from around the EU. And you sound like a tough guy, i wouldn't want to mess with you.
Quote:
Resulting in hundreds of thousands of immigrants from eastern Europe arriving in the UK who as of the 1st of May now have a greater extent of access to our benefits system.
Pay in the system, you take out the system.
Quote:
They haven't yet, they soon will do - just as with the ERM it led to the Euro.
A bit of a presumption. Much like the presumption that the lisbon treaty would make a dictator out of van rompuy.
Quote:
QMV means the UK can be outvoted on issues which are bad for the United Kingdom, anyone with a sensible grasp of common sense would see this as unacceptable when other, smaller countries do not have to do the same thing.
That is the case, but as the EU is larger now, it is harder and harder to pass laws that benefit the majority of member states. You take the bad with the good, it's the same with anything.
Quote:
Now as for the Commission, who elected them to draft these laws? nobody did. They do not have a mandate, regulations I know can simply be implemented (of which the vast majority now are) whereas directives, the lesser important issues are usually sent to the EU 'parliament' - another place where the UK can be outvoted against its national interests.
You see this is the one of the only (in my opinion) valid reason that I think you can be against the commission, as they have the monopoly over drafting regulation. That is supposedly due to tendancy for the parliament to want to take positions on things that do not fall under the EU mandate. Regulations in the UK can be implemented by the dictators in the government departments. MPs don't vote on building codes. This is no different to government departments. Don't forget the council of ministers too.
Quote:
..and broken about every other promise, sorry but that doesn't wash with this 'oh but its the coalition agreement' - it was simply a policy which was designed to capture eurosceptic votes, nothing more and nothing less. Both of them are fully committed to it and would certainly never consider giving the people a say in a national referendum.
Alright Dan, you've convinced me - i'm voting UKIP. In all seriousness, I don't support any political party as none of them are centrist enough for me. I did support the Lib-Dems but unfortunately their performance in the coalition is too disappointing for me to vote for them until there is a large change of leadership.
Quote:
I knew there was no chance in hell of a referendum and I was proved right.
Lets just scrap elections then? you've argued in the past on many fronts concerning this, first it was 'we dont govern by referendum' - which we often do, then it was 'the people are too stupid to vote on the treaty' - why not just advocate no elections?
I know loads of people who have voted in the AV election without even understanding what is put in front of them, let alone people who quote to me the £250million figure of how much it costs. I'd support an EU referendum if there was a serious push for one by MPs and the but I think it's a terrible idea in practice.
