Now the “FUD” will commence as the campaigning starts in earnest.


A while ago there was a request for 5 reasons:



Sovereignty.
Within this comes -

Control of national borders.


Responsibility for the security of the nation which has always been a primary responsibility of any government – and that goes way beyond the basic concepts of security (based on “home” and “foreign” policy) to the health of the citizens and many other aspects.


Responsibility for the economic well being of the nation – there is much more to this than a simple consideration of trade (see the economic crisis thread).
So, “Security” relates to both home policy and foreign policy – for the latter we have very much permitted the EU to take over via their efforts in the past few years to develop such a single policy with non elected bureaucrats carrying out some functions e.g. the World Trade Organisation has EU representation which acts on behalf of all the nations of the EU.


As something of a subset consideration, but totally relevant, I think it is necessary to remember that none of the modern geo-political blocs in this world developed to where they are now without spilling a considerable amount of blood.
The USA got off relatively lightly via its' mid-19th century civil war in the sense that it did not last very long.
The Peoples' Republic of China is the current result (it may well change yet) of the deaths of perhaps 70m people (estimates vary); via yet another civil war (the long march) and then the cultural revolution (wave your little red book at this point).
Russia is a classic of the genre, with years of internal conflict, revolution, and control by despotic rulers.


What I am saying is that the EU cannot achieve its' own declared aims without its' own internal conflict, far beyond anything that we have seen to date, in Greece for example.
I cannot be sure in my own mind what is the best for the UK in these circumstances; we got sucked into WW1 after staying out of European problems for all of 99 years (1815 - 1914) and we have been much more closely involved ever since then. But nowadays, NATO is the main plank of our foreign defence policy.



Sense of community.
It seems to me that there may be an optimum level of identification by those of a country with their nation – the “citizen effect” that politicians tend to pontificate about.
It is hard to pin it down, but there can be little doubt that it exists.
Nor does it seem to relate to the physical scale of the country or any other particular factor; it just “is” - it exists.
The Germans have a term “Heimat”. They had their own TV series with that title quite a few years ago.
It seems likely that the Scottish have the same sense of belonging. The Catalonians also.
The optimum size of a country is what? I don't know – there are so many factors to it, but Europe has always been so diverse that the current aims of the EU are not compatible with the populations of the 28 existing countries much less any potential new entrants (97% of the land mass of Turkey, for instance, lies within Asia – to have a trade agreement with that country would be fine but to integrate? - how can that be?).
There are currently 24 official languages in use across 28 nations – that will work OK?


The legal system.
As outlined previously, continental law is derived from Roman practice later modified by Napoleonic law.
UK law is based on case law over 1000+ years including key stages such as Magna Carta.
The two are simply not compatible – nor am I saying that our system is perfect, it has problems but trying to bring in commonality with Europe when there are so many other issues at present makes little sense to me.


Trade.
Ability to act as a single entity; where does the optimum lie for the future?
An independent Britain could take it's own seat at the WTO; we are nominally there at present, but we allow the EU to represent us, as do other EU nations.
We hold a seat on the UNSC and, no doubt, various other bodies; for instance, we recently joined the AIIB.
(We can be pretty sure that the EU would like to take on the UNSC role, from both France and the UK - the latter are 2 of the 5 permanent members).
Coming up we have TTIP (check on that).
Personally, I don't buy the ridiculous argument that the UK, with its' history of trading, cannot manage without the EU.



Financial/Economic.
This has probably been covered adequately in this thread, although there is much more to follow now that the terms of the “agreement” have been negotiated, subject to ratification by the EU parliament after the date set for the UK referendum.
If not, then there is quite a bit more at the economic crisis thread in the HUBB pub.
The UK has much more chance of dealing with the econ crisis as a standalone nation then it has as one of 28 all trying to share the responsibility for the EU decisions.
As identified earlier, the theory is that the EU makes decisions without having to be held responsible for the consequences of those decisions e.g, the current state of Greece – the undoubted issues that lie within the borders of that troubled country could have been helped by the EU/ECB, but the Eurozone was the only priority when it came down to it.
In practice, the central powers of the EU – often referenced as the “Troika” in commentary, exert undue influence to put it in diplomatic language.
Judge by what they do and not so much by what they say.


As a summary point, for any and all of this we really do need a better standard of leadership than is extant at present.
This comment applies at all levels of society frankly.
The selfishness that is evident in many many case studies will continue?

__________________
Dave

Well 'if' the UK leaves the EU other states may follow.

Unfortunately, the scaremongering, lousy debates and lack of global vision is shockingly bad in the socialist element of politics.

Glad they're not in Government either as we (the electorate) wouldn't have been given the option if Labour were in office.


Sent from my MoJ mobile tagging device

I have been pondering on that aspect recently; it's an interesting possibility.


Yes, many of the politicos show their true colours and it is not pretty.
A number of them struggle to pull together a coherent set of sentences - perhaps they are used to dealing in sound bites and not being challenged with the difficult questions?
I was quite impressed with Kate Hoey just the other day when she spoke up in a TV interview; she does seem to hold firm views that have not wavered even when a certain Mr Blair tried to pressure her all those years ago.

__________________
Dave

I even risk to say that if UK voters vote in favour of Brexit the whole thing falls apart and it spells the end of the European Union. It is, as a matter of fact, the reason why I would like the Brexit camp to win the referendum.

See how Poland is getting so cosy with Britain's government's positions. It's an indicator of what you said, earlorange. I don't doubt for a second that the other three Visegrad countries will follow suit if they feel the need to spell it openly instead of just reaping the fruits sewn by Poland without the need to do anything.

On another note, see how the new Portuguese PM blackmailed (news about this in a Spanish newspaper citing the director of the Centre for European Reform) the European Commission to accept the State Budget or else Portugal would veto the agreement between the EU and the UK. Does this show a strong, coese, union? Or, as predictable, does it show a disfunctional thing in which each constituent part is defending its objectives and goals?

Poland have 1 million of its citizens in the UK, they know compromise rather than being difficult will only be negative for them strategically.

There's not a chance in hell Cameron will get the approval of the other 27 leaders, it's a wish list & nothing else.

The fact that the EU is unelected & Merkel & Shultz appear to calling the shots shows how bad the EU has grown, the immigration crisis was imploded by St mother Merkel & even her own infrastructure & authorities are struggling & backlash is clear.

EU is only happy when it dictates to other countries, it shows its true colours when they know it needs serious reform & being told publicly.


Sent from my MoJ mobile tagging device

In a purely selfish way I love travelling across most of Europe without having to stop at borders.
In a mostly unselfish way I don't think we should have the complete freedom of all of the E.u. citizens to come here. We're pretty full.

I agree in the selfish element, and Travelling & exploring through Europe is apart from certain current restrictions unlikely to change.

The U.K. Maybe an island but that tunnel is still being exploited by many, the underlying other issue is 'overstayers' who've no intention of returning.


Sent from my MoJ mobile tagging device

From what I've been reading in the press it goes beyond merely defending their citizens who live in the UK. Poland is activelly supporting several of the items which the British Government is trying to get being only one step short of saying that they want the same for themselves.


The reality of the German Chancellor being calling the shots (and I'm not a germanophobe, a germanophile if anything) is the reason why I question if the EU still exists other than as a rubber stamping organization. Many times I wonder if the EU is still real or if it already died but someone forgot to issue the death certificate.

That might be true on some things but I had read somewhere that Poland doesn't want the UK to do the 4 years in country and earning money before you get any benefits, maybe because they are one of the biggest takers in the EU? They did however say they would back it if the UK put troops in to Poland to show a strength on its borders as part of NATO

Why anyone should be getting UK child benefit payments for kids not even in the UK is beyond me, it just makes a laughing stock of the system no wonder Cameron wants to get it changed

Wayne

Edit
Just found the article
http://www.euractiv.com/sections/glo...ng-nato-320648

Wayne

__________________
The Balkans
https://new.horizonsunlimited.com/poi_entity/8417

I'm hearing from other forums Kate Hoey is proving rather controversial, which isn't a bad thing.

The EU has changed far beyond its fundamental origin, and other EU countries are monitoring how the UK negotiations & referendum goes. I'd rather the UK be the EU bad boy than remain in the current status quo.

It maybe classed as a blueprint for others, or not..


Sent from my MoJ mobile tagging device

"The Germans"

"We're full!"

"Brick up the tunnel!"

I say, this thread has rather devolved into a Daily Mail headline generator.

I must admit I have found some of the replies rather disturbing. Considering this is a traveller forum and generally populated full of open minded, well travelled friendly folk.

__________________
Did some trips.
Rode some bikes.
Fix them for a living.
Can't say anymore.

Political debates irrespective of forum type are not for everyone, not all attract intelligent, factual and non-provocative contributions.

I hope this thread continues to be non-bias, balance debate with a varied opinion.


Sent from my MoJ mobile tagging device

Very true...

The general feeling from this thread has been very anti Europe. That could be for many reasons but my guess is that most of the forum members probably don't want to get involved in a Daily Mail type thread. When I originally asked the question I thought the replies would be more balanced.

However..

I've read all the replies and they have been very interesting and thought provoking. I've learnt a lot.


I'm still undecided though.

__________________
Did some trips.
Rode some bikes.
Fix them for a living.
Can't say anymore.

But your poll currently has the 'NO to leave' camps in the lead.

I wonder if you are insulated to a degree by being based in the Wirral and comfortably away from the migration hotspots. London always has been a melting pot of different nationalities and cultures but it's got to the stage where white UK-born people represent less than 50% of the total population.

Some people have longer memories of what happened and there's some awkward criticisms that benefit from being aired. It is said Labour Party politicians welcomed high levels of immigration on the basis that (1) the incoming migrants were typically more likely to be natural Labour Party voters, and (2) would likely vote Labour in thanks for the opening of borders. If true, this would be gerrymandering on a grand scale. At best it was an ill-considered social engineering project to make Britain multicultural.

When the EU expanded to the east in 2004 with the accession of the 'A10 countries' Tony Blair didn't have to open the UK to the Poles, Latvians, Lithuanians and other eastern Europeans. But he did and hundreds of thousands came.

They came to the UK because the Germans and others had restrictions in place for seven years—this is the origin of the proposed seven-year emergency brake for the UK. But this is all too late, I doubt we will get the seven-year brake and in any case it's locking the stable door after the horse has bolted.

I hasten to state I have no dislike of the Poles who I think are generally hard working and are not a burden to welfare, but it has placed increasing strain on our infrastructure—schools, hospitals, etc. But what I do find difficult to swallow is the reaction of the Polish government to suggestions from the EU that they shoulder some of the migration load. Seeing the country has been emptied by migration westwards, you would think they have space to spare, but apparently, Poles don't understand immigrants, don't want them. They fear immigrants take work away from Poles which is a bit rich when you consider what happened in the UK.

Everything I've written above has to do with migration, but I think it's too late to do much about that. As I've said before, my issue and the same for many other people is the increasing loss of sovereignty that the EU threatens.

__________________
"For sheer delight there is nothing like altitude; it gives one the thrill of adventure
and enlarges the world in which you live," Irving Mather (1892-1966)