Norway Foreign Minister Brende: UK better off in EU

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'm going to assume we're being forced to use less oil. It would first mean we import less, then if we're forced to useless than we produce, we can simply export or produce less and have longer lasting reserves. It's not like they're going to outright ban oil.

We are being forced to implement renewables targets by the EU which are simply unachievable and make energy costs higher, rather than use our own sources such as oil, cheap imported oil or shale gas. Below you make the point about a lack of heavy industry in this country (which isn't unusual for an advanced economy) yet it is EU regulation which pushes up the costs of energy that result in heavy industry closing down. The likes of steel smelting plants require huge amounts of energy to operate, and an increase of even 10% due to EU legislation forcing us to use 10% renewables has an enormous effect on operating costs at that plant.

I say below oil isn't related to EU membership, and it isn't, but on the energy point we are linked to EU policy. And EU policy on energy is a disaster.

It's also a silly statement to say EU membership (and presumably you're referring to EU parliament etc. too) can't deal with more than one issue!! I'm not even pro-EU but that's just a weird statement to make

Trade deals are also unrelated to what I said. I was merely comparing the oil between two countries.

But oil has nothing to do with EU membership.

But fair enough, if that's your view. I just know a lot of people complain about the lack of industry in the country and assumed based off of what you posted that you were one of them.

I do, and I am one of them: but that's not to say that Great Britain is now some tiny island with no global power. We're the sixth largest economy, one of only three countries in the world to operate a blue-water navy, we're the financial capital of the world with the square mile and we're predicted to be the only economy in Europe left in the top ten global economies by 2050. On top of that, we have historical links with the rapidly growing Commonwealth and a free trade ethos that means we can do so much better and do it alone.

I wish people would have some more faith in this country and what it can be and do. We can do better than an outdated 1950s Euro-centric customs union.

[dbgtz]

We are being forced to implement renewables targets by the EU which are simply unachievable and make energy costs higher, rather than use our own sources such as oil, cheap imported oil or shale gas. Below you make the point about a lack of heavy industry in this country (which isn't unusual for an advanced economy) yet it is EU regulation which pushes up the costs of energy that result in heavy industry closing down. The likes of steel smelting plants require huge amounts of energy to operate, and an increase of even 10% due to EU legislation forcing us to use 10% renewables has an enormous effect on operating costs at that plant.

I say below oil isn't related to EU membership, and it isn't, but on the energy point we are linked to EU policy. And EU policy on energy is a disaster.



But oil has nothing to do with EU membership.

Anything is related to EU membership if the government makes it to do with it. I'm also not defending the EU by any means, but at some point some renewable energy sources will need to be adopted at some point (at least on a more local scale). Whilst making it more expensive now, it will become cheaper at some point. However, I would also personally like to see an investment in nuclear and also greater investment into R&D. Those last 2 sentences weren't really relevant now that I think about it, but oh well.

I do, and I am one of them: but that's not to say that Great Britain is now some tiny island with no global power. We're the sixth largest economy, one of only three countries in the world to operate a blue-water navy, we're the financial capital of the world with the square mile and we're predicted to be the only economy in Europe left in the top ten global economies by 2050. On top of that, we have historical links with the rapidly growing Commonwealth and a free trade ethos that means we can do so much better and do it alone.

I wish people would have some more faith in this country and what it can be and do. We can do better than an outdated 1950s Euro-centric customs union.

I never said it has no power. Literally the only point I was trying to make is the extraction and selling of oil isn't really comparable to financial services.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Anything is related to EU membership if the government makes it to do with it.

Not really, the government often tries to avoid linking issues to EU membership.

Take for example Royal Mail/Post Office privatisation. Nothing to do with the EU, right? Heard nothing about the EU mentioned. Well...

The competences of agriculture, fisheries, energy are heavily influenced/almost entirely driven by EU legislation.

I'm also not defending the EU by any means, but at some point some renewable energy sources will need to be adopted at some point (at least on a more local scale). Whilst making it more expensive now, it will become cheaper at some point. However, I would also personally like to see an investment in nuclear and also greater investment into R&D. Those last 2 sentences weren't really relevant now that I think about it, but oh well.

If you agree with renewables, that is another issue and I would say to you that you can't argue for more heavy industry whilst advocating renewables. But that's a whole other topic I guess. That said, this is what all this is really about though isn't it: who governs Britain?

Does Britain make her own energy policy to suit her own needs, accountable at the ballot box, or do Belgian pencil-pushers make it for us?

I never said it has no power. Literally the only point I was trying to make is the extraction and selling of oil isn't really comparable to financial services.

Well no it isn't comparable as financial services are far more sophisticated than oil trading.

Hence why we're the 6th largest economy for a relatively small population.

[dbgtz]

Not really, the government often tries to avoid linking issues to EU membership.

Take for example Royal Mail/Post Office privatisation. Nothing to do with the EU, right? Heard nothing about the EU mentioned. Well...

The competences of agriculture, fisheries, energy are heavily influenced/almost entirely driven by EU legislation.

I'm well aware of the directive which lead to the privatisation, but at some point the government would have signed away the power to make it relevant to the EU. The EU doesn't exist without government consent and they could have probably ignored the EU if they really wanted.

If you agree with renewables, that is another issue and I would say to you that you can't argue for more heavy industry whilst advocating renewables. But that's a whole other topic I guess. That said, this is what all this is really about though isn't it: who governs Britain?

Does Britain make her own energy policy to suit her own needs, accountable at the ballot box, or do Belgian pencil-pushers make it for us?



Well no it isn't comparable as financial services are far more sophisticated than oil trading.

Hence why we're the 6th largest economy for a relatively small population.

I advocate renewables more so when coal/nuclear etc. become more scarce and pricey, then the infrastructure is there and paid for but also because it will hopefully lead to developments which improve on what exists so they're less crap. Also, I never actually said I was a fan of heavy industry to begin with.

Also financial services may be more sophisticated, but they can also easily relocate which would cripple this country. Oil will stay where it is until extracted, however is finite in the grand scheme of things. Both have their positives and negatives.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'm well aware of the directive which lead to the privatisation, but at some point the government would have signed away the power to make it relevant to the EU. The EU doesn't exist without government consent and they could have probably ignored the EU if they really wanted.

Indeed, so let's leave and restore those powers back to Her Majesty's Government in Whitehall.

I have said before, given the ultimate aim of the European project is to acquire more and more powers and turn itself into a political state, it is high time those in favour came out in public with this and argued for it so we could have an honest debate on whether we wanted to remain independent or become part of a European superstate. But they will not do this as they know what answer the public would come back with so they continue to pretend it's just about trading cheese with France: which is the exact same trick they pulled in 1975.

I want elections to matter in this country again so that when we go to the ballot box and choose a government, that government can control immigration. That it can sign or not sign a Free Trade Deal (FTA) with Mexico. That it can renationalise industry should it wish. That it can remove X regulation on financial services. Etc.

I advocate renewables more so when coal/nuclear etc. become more scarce and pricey, then the infrastructure is there and paid for but also because it will hopefully lead to developments which improve on what exists so they're less crap. Also, I never actually said I was a fan of heavy industry to begin with.

Again another topic, but all those renewable subsidies are making a few landowners very wealthy indeed. Thanks to Brussels and Westminster. Meanwhile in the real world, elderly people and families are struggling to heat their homes because of the absurd costs of renewable energy.

Also financial services may be more sophisticated, but they can also easily relocate which would cripple this country. Oil will stay where it is until extracted, however is finite in the grand scheme of things. Both have their positives and negatives.

Aye they could relocate, but given we're not under a Marxist government they won't be relocating anytime soon.

[dbgtz]

Indeed, so let's leave and restore those powers back to Her Majesty's Government in Whitehall.

I have said before, given the ultimate aim of the European project is to acquire more and more powers and turn itself into a political state, it is high time those in favour came out in public with this and argued for it so we could have an honest debate on whether we wanted to remain independent or become part of a European superstate. But they will not do this as they know what answer the public would come back with so they continue to pretend it's just about trading cheese with France: which is the exact same trick they pulled in 1975.

I want elections to matter in this country again so that when we go to the ballot box and choose a government, that government can control immigration. That it can sign or not sign a Free Trade Deal (FTA) with Mexico. That it can renationalise industry should it wish. That it can remove X regulation on financial services. Etc.

You really didn't need to give me the whole speech. Again, I've not advocated being in the EU.

Again another topic, but all those renewable subsidies are making a few landowners very wealthy indeed. Thanks to Brussels and Westminster. Meanwhile in the real world, elderly people and families are struggling to heat their homes because of the absurd costs of renewable energy.

Oh yeah, I think the way it's been handled is pretty bad and definitely some money going where it shouldn't.

Aye they could relocate, but given we're not under a Marxist government they won't be relocating anytime soon.

Oh yeah the chance of any large scale movement is very unlikely, but still possible nonetheless especially as developing nations get wealthier and better infrastructure.