EU referendum

[aintforever]

Market access, not EU membership

 

The UK does not need to be in the EU to have access to the EU Single Market. Switzerland, Mexico, South Korea - altogether more than 50 other countries - trade with the EU through a free trade agreement (FTA). A further 73 nations are negotiating their own FTAs with Brussels (Europa.eu - February 2013). The claim that a 'business as usual' free trade agreement would not be on offer to the UK after we leave the EU is a blatant scare story.

As a signatory to the World Trade Organisation, an independent Britain would be protected from discriminatory high tariffs because of the Most Favoured Nation principle, one of the cornerstones of the WTO system. The WTO is rendering customs unions like the EU redundant by reducing tariff barriers across the world.

 

So Mexico and South Korea can have a free trade agreement but we are supposed to believe they will impose tariffs on us if we leave.

 

I wonder how many of the other scare stories are completely made up?

[badgerx16]

I wonder how many of the other scare stories are completely made up?

 

Most of them, on both sides.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Again, those outside nations that have negotiated some form of 'free trade' like arrangement with the EU in reality do not have full access to the Single Market area as financial services are always excluded.

 

Further, although the share of world GDP Europe accounts for is indeed in long term decline (as devloping nations become industrialised of course) it is nevertheless still almost certainly true that the UK will continue to conduct a large percentage of its export trade with our nearest neighbours. Europe can be both declining in relationship to the rest of the world and still be vital to us.

 

I take it that there is no need for me to explain yet again the reality of the situation nations such as Norway and Switzerland are in vis-a-vis the EU?

[Wade Garrett]

Again, those outside nations that have negotiated some form of 'free trade' like arrangement with the EU in reality do not have full access to the Single Market area as financial services are always excluded.

 

Further, although the share of world GDP Europe accounts for is indeed in long term decline (as devloping nations become industrialised of course) it is nevertheless still almost certainly true that the UK will continue to conduct a large percentage of its export trade with our nearest neighbours. Europe can be both declining in relationship to the rest of the world and still be vital to us.

 

I take it that there is no need for me to explain yet again the reality of the situation nations such as Norway and Switzerland are in vis-a-vis the EU?

 

So we can sell our goods abroad for free, but not financial services. In return, we control our immigration and return sovereignty to parliament.

 

Sounds good to me. Is there freedom of movement between Mexico, South Korea and the EU?

[buctootim]

So we can sell our goods abroad for free, but not financial services. In return, we control our immigration and return sovereignty to parliament.

 

Sounds good to me. Is there freedom of movement between Mexico, South Korea and the EU?

 

[Lord Duckhunter]

There isn't a single market in services

[CB Fry]

We'll definitely get a really quick trade deal with South Korea. The CEO of Kia will be banging on the door of the Korean President the minute the result is called.

[Whitey Grandad]

We'd have to negotiate a trade deal with 50 countries just to get back to where we are now, and we would be doing it with a population of 60m compared to over 500m.

[Lord Duckhunter]

We'd have to negotiate a trade deal with 50 countries just to get back to where we are now, and we would be doing it with a population of 60m compared to over 500m.

 

Not with any countries that are happy to trade under the same terms they have now , you wouldn't . It was on The Daily Politics the other day and even Cleggys Mrs , a right Euro nutter , conceded the point . The UK can go to a country that the EU ( and therefore the uk ) have a deal with and ask if they're happy to continue on the same terms . If they are , nothing changes . Now Mrs Clegg , a right federalist loon, claims nobody will agree because as you rightly point out, we would have gone from 500mil citizens to 50mil . However, consider this . You're the leader of X country . You have a trade deal with the U.K. via The EU . If the uk leave the EU , you still have a trade deal with the remaining EU countries . If you then agree to trade with the U.K. under existing terms , you still have exactly the same as you had before . Why would you want to impose tariffs on the UK , and have them imposed back, when you can have the status quo . The only long winded complications will be dealing with other EU countries or Countries that the EU don't have a trade deal with . For non EU countries with a trade deal already , it's a piece of **** .

[Mr Biscuits]

I suppose I should put in my tuppence on this. Below is something I posted on Facebook to my friends. Just something I wrote down trying to get out what I was thinking at the time.

 

I remain completely unconvinced by either side in the debate and I suspect it's going to come down to the whole sovereignty issue for me. Which I'm not entirely happy with since the whole EU thing is about so much more than just the sovereignty debate.

 

Do you know I'm actually still undecided on which way to vote in the referendum. You might have noticed that I've always been somewhat cynical of the media (and other people in general) offering up articles and information which hint (or blatantly tell) what your opinion should be. The stuff I've shared on this particular topic has tended to be more sensible and believable than the usual run of stuff I'm seeing shared on Facebook and Twitter.

So here's what I think, I won't use figures I'll just talk about stuff.

 

1) Trade. The EU is a massive trading partner for the UK. That's stands to reason as we are 'in the club' as it were and the barriers to trading in the EU as a member are much lower than trading to a non-member (the rest of the world). This was actually one of the original concepts of the whole thing, although we didn't get on board until 1973 when we realised the benefits of being part of a trading bloc.

So if we leave, changes WILL happen. That's obvious although I don't think it will be the economic meltdown certain people would have you believe. Companies such as VW and EDF won't suddenly hold their hands up and say 'sorry, can't trade with you any more' and, given their stake in the UK economy they certainly won't allow their respective governments to suddenly put in silly tariff rates without a fight. The price of things may change, but then again this kind of thing happens all the time anyway - there isn't a Chancellor yet that has managed to break the boom/bust cycle (despite what Gordon Brown said at the dispatch box when he was Chancellor). New trade deals will be struck, businesses will change, jobs will change. The economy will survive. Huge international corporations cannot move countries overnight.

Having said that, most consumer law that affects us all right now is generated by the EU. That's stuff such as product safety, food standards, consumer rights, etc. The favourite example on this is the law on 'bendy bananas' - bit of a myth really. What the legislation actually stated was that producers must sell bananas that are 'free from malformation or abnormal curvature' - that's hardly the lunatic interference UKIP would like you to believe it to be, basically the EU was just laying down a standard and nothing else.

2) Freedom of movement. Right now I can go and live anywhere I want in the EU. For as long as I want.

If we leave, I believe I can still go and live where I want for as long as I want, it's just that there will be more paperwork involved. No different to me emigrating to New Zealand right now (no don't get your hopes up I'm not going anywhere)

This obviously brings up the question of immigration to the UK. I actually think the UK being in or out of the EU is irrelevant to the fact that people want to come and live here. Legal or illegal, that whole debate is actually irrelevant to this referendum because the result won't make a blind bit of difference to anyone sitting in the Jungle at Calais - they will still want to come here.

3) Political Union. Make no mistake, this IS going to happen in the future for all members of the EU. At present its a mix of what our MEP's do alongside our national government, in conjunction with other member states MEP's and governments. Haven't a clue what a politically unified EU would be structured as to be honest. However at present the system means that laws passed in the European

Parliament can be put into force in every member state even if that member state voted against them as being not in their national interests (for example).

What happens if we leave? Well the future of the country is placed in the hands of the current crop of politicians, none of whom I'm too happy about voting for if I'm honest. Ok so let's imagine there is someone in charge who I do trust. That politician is going to be negotiating with the whole world on their own. They won't have the power of the massive EU trading bloc behind them, although I think it's fair to say the the UK economy, unique as it is, is more than likely able to stand on its own. But without that comfort blanket of the EU, it is somewhat lessened.

I suppose the whole issue is really - is the benefit of being a part of the trading bloc worth giving up political autonomy?

 

I still don't know.

[Johnny Bognor]

I suppose I should put in my tuppence on this. Below is something I posted on Facebook to my friends. Just something I wrote down trying to get out what I was thinking at the time.

 

I remain completely unconvinced by either side in the debate and I suspect it's going to come down to the whole sovereignty issue for me. Which I'm not entirely happy with since the whole EU thing is about so much more than just the sovereignty debate.

 

 

You make some good points. As for the power of the EU trading block in terms of negotiating trade deals, whilst we have less resources to negotiate, there are less obstacles. To agree a trade deal, all 28 members have to agree it. Take the current negotiations on a deal with countries in South America, the French are blocking it to protect their farmers, so no deal will happen any time soon. So whilst we have less clout or less resource to negotiate a deal, it would be easier to negotiate without other EU nations blocking deals in their own self interest.

[Saint-Armstrong]

Cameron and Corbyn speaking about why they're backing a 'remain' vote today.

 

Live stream and coverage here: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2016/jun/02/eu-referendum-live-cameron-and-corbyn-make-the-case-for-remain-separately?CMP=twt_gu

[Saint-Armstrong]

Corbyn now taking questions from the press and members of the public.

 

 

ITV: "Labour voters are split on the EU and many voters don't actually know where the party stands on this, with three weeks to go can you honestly say that everyone is aware and you have campaigned as well as you can?" - (para)

 

Corbyn: "Well it's partly down to how much the media report what the Labour Party says..."

[Saint-Armstrong]

Channel 4: “You’ve spoken about how you’re opposed to TTIP, if that deal had already been signed would you still be campaigning for a remain vote?”

 

 

 

Corbyn: “That’s a hypothetical question if I may say so…”

 

 

 

Channel 4: “And you could say that’s weak support…”

 

 

 

Corbyn: “…no, it’s just telling you it’s a hypothetical question, actually.”

 

 

Now talking about TTIP, the environment, trade and workers rights at length.

[derry]

We export about 36% to the original 11 EEC members (the same as 1973) and about 10% to the remaining 16. The 500 million market is a myth, that's the trouble with generalisation. More like 450 million with the right of access to this country. I'd be really interested to know how much we export to the last 10 entrants and to the next five.

 

I think the voters are getting the message, it's about immigration now.

[ScepticalStan]

We'll definitely get a really quick trade deal with South Korea. The CEO of Kia will be banging on the door of the Korean President the minute the result is called.

 

You haven't actually been able to argue against the points I've made concerning the fact that it'd be in Germany's interest to have a free trade deal as much as it would be our own, have you?

 

You sound a little like a petulant teenager, folding her arms whilst repeating what the nearest adult has calmly said, but in a sulkier and angrier voice.

[ScepticalStan]

Can someone describe to me why the British-incorporated subsidiary of a profit-generating, British taxpayer-contributing, German and British-employee hiring, German prestige and economic power-generating German company is going to suddenly withdraw from the UK in the event of a Brexit vote? Or why the leaders of Britain or Germany would have any incentive to insist that they do?

[Whitey Grandad]

Can someone describe to me why the British-incorporated subsidiary of a profit-generating, British taxpayer-contributing, German and British-employee hiring, German prestige and economic power-generating German company is going to suddenly withdraw from the UK in the event of a Brexit vote? Or why the leaders of Britain or Germany would have any incentive to insist that they do?

 

But would any German companies choose to invest in the UK after Brexit? Or any other countries, come to that.

[buctootim]

Can someone describe to me why the British-incorporated subsidiary of a profit-generating, British taxpayer-contributing, German and British-employee hiring, German prestige and economic power-generating German company is going to suddenly withdraw from the UK in the event of a Brexit vote? Or why the leaders of Britain or Germany would have any incentive to insist that they do?

 

But would any German companies choose to invest in the UK after Brexit? Or any other countries, come to that.

 

We dont want to only have the UK offices based here - essentially small sales teams. We want the global design / R&D / European Head Office / major manufacturing plants too. Companies are much much less likely to do that if they cant guarantee Britian will have easy access to markets or have to apply for visas everytime they want to move staff between locations in, say, London, Madrid and Copenhagen.

[Mr Biscuits]

We export about 36% to the original 11 EEC members (the same as 1973) and about 10% to the remaining 16. The 500 million market is a myth, that's the trouble with generalisation. More like 450 million with the right of access to this country. I'd be really interested to know how much we export to the last 10 entrants and to the next five.

 

I think the voters are getting the message, it's about immigration now.

 

 

I still think immigration is irrelevant to this debate. They will still come even if we leave. Besides has anyone actually put forward a cogent, sensible plan to change how we deal with immigration? (Legal or otherwise) because I've yet to hear it.

 

Immigration is a very emotional subject and politicians tend to stay away from it rather than nail their colours to the mast (unless it's central to your policy, Mr Farage). I actually feel like the current crop of politicians would be happier to ignore the whole subject rather than say something and set off social media. And I don't see that attitude changing post vote(whichever way it goes)

I just don't get the whole 'vote leave and it will solve the immigration problem' - it won't until British Law is changed.

[Whitey Grandad]

I still think immigration is irrelevant to this debate. They will still come even if we leave. Besides has anyone actually put forward a cogent, sensible plan to change how we deal with immigration? (Legal or otherwise) because I've yet to hear it.

 

Immigration is a very emotional subject and politicians tend to stay away from it rather than nail their colours to the mast (unless it's central to your policy, Mr Farage). I actually feel like the current crop of politicians would be happier to ignore the whole subject rather than say something and set off social media. And I don't see that attitude changing post vote(whichever way it goes)

I just don't get the whole 'vote leave and it will solve the immigration problem' - it won't until British Law is changed.

 

I have been sayng this for some time. Voting for 'Leave' may be a protest against current immigration levels but it wouldn't change anything.

[Lord Duckhunter]

I see remain are trying to frighten pensioners by claiming their pensions will go down . Drill down into the treasury report on this and the claim is based on the pound going down and therefore inflation will go up. If you're on a fixed income you'll obviously have less money in your pocket if inflation goes up . Only problem with this , is that the Government have set a triple lock on pensions . This triple lock protects pensions against inflation. Shameful from the treasury , no wonder a modern chancellor set up the OBR because he claimed that the treasury were too political and their forecasts " can't be trusted " . Who was that chancellor?

[Whitey Grandad]

I see remain are trying to frighten pensioners by claiming their pensions will go down . Drill down into the treasury report on this and the claim is based on the pound going down and therefore inflation will go up. If you're on a fixed income you'll obviously have less money in your pocket if inflation goes up . Only problem with this , is that the Government have set a triple lock on pensions . This triple lock protects pensions against inflation. Shameful from the treasury , no wonder a modern chancellor set up the OBR because he claimed that the treasury were too political and their forecasts " can't be trusted " . Who was that chancellor?

 

There are other pensions apart from the state version.

[aintforever]

I have been sayng this for some time. Voting for 'Leave' may be a protest against current immigration levels but it wouldn't change anything.

 

Except of course, we could control it.

[Whitey Grandad]

Except of course, we could control it.

 

Could is not the same as would. Immigration has been a matter of concern amongst the British Public for years and years and yet there have been no discernible attempts to restrict it from either the EU or rest of the world. I don't believe either of the main parties has any political will to do anything about it.

 

Yes, we have had a lot of immigration from the EU. But it does not follow that if we left the EU it would all stop. Anyway it would take a couple of years to untangle ourselves and rewrite all our laws in which time there might well be a mad rush to get in here before we pull up the drawbridge.

[Batman]

Could is not the same as would. Immigration has been a matter of concern amongst the British Public for years and years and yet there have been no discernible attempts to restrict it from either the EU or rest of the world. I don't believe either of the main parties has any political will to do anything about it.

 

Yes, we have had a lot of immigration from the EU. But it does not follow that if we left the EU it would all stop. Anyway it would take a couple of years to untangle ourselves and rewrite all our laws in which time there might well be a mad rush to get in here before we pull up the drawbridge.

 

who is going to pull up a drawbridge?

[Lord Duckhunter]

Immigration has been a matter of concern amongst the British Public for years and years and yet there have been no discernible attempts to restrict it from either the EU or rest of the world.

 

You can't restrict it from the EU

[Mr Biscuits]

Yes that's right, you can't restrict immigration from citizens of the EU member states.

 

But the problem isn't citizens of EU member states is it. Anyone remember the hordes of journalists at Heathrow when Romania (or was it Bulgaria?) joined? And about 3 people turned up? What was it the Mail trumpeted?

 

The immigration numbers aren't that large in the great scheme of things, they are just made to look worse by the media. And the media conveniently forget that most immigrants who come here do so legally and pay their taxes just like you and me, so they are entitled to the same benefits as you and me. The welfare state was set up to treat everyone who contributed to the system, not only those who were British. In fact if you look up Nye Bevans speech it is very clear about this.

 

Like Grandad said, there isn't actually much political will amongst the mainstream parties to tackle immigration head on so what you end up with is a mishmash policy and no clear, managed solution to the problem. Leaving the EU isn't going to change this much, if at all.

 

And like I said earlier - who, in a position of power, is currently putting out a cogent, sensible answer to the problem? No one. This referendum will not change that.

[Sour Mash]

Yes that's right, you can't restrict immigration from citizens of the EU member states.

 

It clearly is a problem. Look at our net immigration figures before and after 2004. Completely unsustainable and we're unable to control it. We're currently at a scale of a city bigger than Southampton a year, mainly squeezed into the south and east of England, that is obviously a problem.

[aintforever]

Could is not the same as would. Immigration has been a matter of concern amongst the British Public for years and years and yet there have been no discernible attempts to restrict it from either the EU or rest of the world. I don't believe either of the main parties has any political will to do anything about it.

 

Yes, we have had a lot of immigration from the EU. But it does not follow that if we left the EU it would all stop. Anyway it would take a couple of years to untangle ourselves and rewrite all our laws in which time there might well be a mad rush to get in here before we pull up the drawbridge.

 

If there is no political will why did our Prime Minister pledge to get net immigration down to 10s of thousands, instead of the hundreds of thousands we currently have?

[badgerx16]

If there is no political will why did our Prime Minister pledge to get net immigration down to 10s of thousands, instead of the hundreds of thousands we currently have?

 

 

Standard bullsh!t election blather.

[Sour Mash]

If there is no political will why did our Prime Minister pledge to get net immigration down to 10s of thousands, instead of the hundreds of thousands we currently have?

And why don't we have complete open borders for the whole world?

[Whitey Grandad]

If there is no political will why did our Prime Minister pledge to get net immigration down to 10s of thousands, instead of the hundreds of thousands we currently have?

 

An election promise is a long way removed from political will.

[Whitey Grandad]

And why don't we have complete open borders for the whole world?

 

Don't we?

[OldNick]

Immigration is the one big driver to this referendum it seems to me.

One thing we need to think about is that as we as a nation with an ageing population need young blood coming in to help bring in the taxes to help us all in old age. It seems to me that as the young marry and have children later we are not going to have the young come through to keep the economy driving on.Therefore Gwent should embrace the new young coming in to keep us when we are old and retired.

[Sour Mash]

Don't we?

We don't, as I'm sure you actually know, so I'm not sure what your point is.

[whelk]

Immigration is the one big driver to this referendum it seems to me.

One thing we need to think about is that as we as a nation with an ageing population need young blood coming in to help bring in the taxes to help us all in old age. It seems to me that as the young marry and have children later we are not going to have the young come through to keep the economy driving on.Therefore Gwent should embrace the new young coming in to keep us when we are old and retired.

 

If only that simple. Although staggeringly healthy life expectancy is 53 if you are a male in Tower Hamlets.

 

https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/key-issues-parliament-2015/social-change/ageing-population/

Edited 3 June, 2016 by whelk

[aintforever]

An election promise is a long way removed from political will.

 

Yes, but immigration is obviously a big issue for many people otherwise he wouldn't have said it.

[Mr Biscuits]

Because politicians always deliver on election promises don't they.......

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/14/how-much-of-the-conservatives-2010-election-manifesto-was-implemented

[Whitey Grandad]

We don't, as I'm sure you actually know, so I'm not sure what your point is.

 

If we don't have open borders to the rest of the world then why do so many keep coming here?

[Sour Mash]

If we don't have open borders to the rest of the world then why do so many keep coming here?

I assume you're now just on a wind up. We clearly don't have open borders with the rest of the world, take 5 minutes of your day to look it up.

[ScepticalStan]

I would agree that immigration is a bit of a red herring as we'll get it from somewhere whatever the case. Plus EU migrants are a massive boost to the economy.

 

So why don't we want control over it? The ideal EU migrant (Polish plumber who costs nothing to send to school, pays tonnes in taxes between the age of 25-45 or so and then heads back home long before he's a drain on the NHS or pension pot) would still be welcome. We could, however, turn away the undesirables that countries like Germany will hand passports out to like confetti.

 

I think EU migration has been a massive benefit and it should and would still remain high in terms of pure numbers - that doesn't mean I don't want us to have control over it.

[hypochondriac]

I would agree that immigration is a bit of a red herring as we'll get it from somewhere whatever the case. Plus EU migrants are a massive boost to the economy.

 

So why don't we want control over it? The ideal EU migrant (Polish plumber who costs nothing to send to school, pays tonnes in taxes between the age of 25-45 or so and then heads back home long before he's a drain on the NHS or pension pot) would still be welcome. We could, however, turn away the undesirables that countries like Germany will hand passports out to like confetti.

 

I think EU migration has been a massive benefit and it should and would still remain high in terms of pure numbers - that doesn't mean I don't want us to have control over it.

Totally this. I wish the leave campaign would emphasise the benefits of controlled immigration more.

[buctootim]

I assume you're now just on a wind up. We clearly don't have open borders with the rest of the world, take 5 minutes of your day to look it up.

 

Ya think?

 

There were 5,462,780 visa applications between July 2012 and June 2014. Of these, 607,880 were refused. Of those 368,000 were then checked again. Of those, 292,445 applications were issued following the review and 75,560 refusals were maintained.

 

So the success rate for people who apply and then appeal if rejected is 98.5%. So tough.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2014/11/20/revealed-80-of-overseas-immigration-visa-refusals-are-overtu

[Whitey Grandad]

I assume you're now just on a wind up. We clearly don't have open borders with the rest of the world, take 5 minutes of your day to look it up.

 

Not particularly on a wind up. I know that legally we can control our non-EU borders but in practice there seems to be an awful lot of net incomers, a couple of hundred thousand a year at least. That is without all the illegal and back door entrants and those that do get picked up just claim asylum and stay anyway. I'm just an old cynic.

[Lord Duckhunter]

The ideal EU migrant (Polish plumber who costs nothing to send to school, pays tonnes in taxes between the age of 25-45 or so and then heads back home long before he's a drain on the NHS or pension pot) would still be welcome

 

Ideal for who ? The English plumbers who have to cut wages to compete with him , the English parents who can't get their kid in their first choice school, the English family who could be living in the house he's in, or the Polish nation that educated him at great expense before he ****ed off and started paying taxes that funded our health service rather than theres .

[Batman]

Ideal for who ? The English plumbers who have to cut wages to compete with him , the English parents who can't get their kid in their first choice school, the English family who could be living in the house he's in, or the Polish nation that educated him at great expense before he ****ed off and started paying taxes that funded our health service rather than theres .

 

it's good for us all as it helps stop the next great depression which would lead to world war 3.

 

 

on a more positive note, my postal vote arrived today....I wonder which box the X is going!!!

 

https://www.facebook.com/100003662834496/videos/824220994376654/?pnref=story

Edited 3 June, 2016 by Batman

[aintforever]

Ya think?

 

There were 5,462,780 visa applications between July 2012 and June 2014. Of these, 607,880 were refused. Of those 368,000 were then checked again. Of those, 292,445 applications were issued following the review and 75,560 refusals were maintained.

 

So the success rate for people who apply and then appeal if rejected is 98.5%. So tough.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2014/11/20/revealed-80-of-overseas-immigration-visa-refusals-are-overtu

 

Probably because the people applying know the criteria and wouldn't bother applying if they didn't think they qualified.

[Sour Mash]

Not particularly on a wind up. I know that legally we can control our non-EU borders but in practice there seems to be an awful lot of net incomers, a couple of hundred thousand a year at least. That is without all the illegal and back door entrants and those that do get picked up just claim asylum and stay anyway. I'm just an old cynic.

Yes, there's still a fair bit of immigration, more than I would personally like. But that's not the point. You keep restating untruths on here for some reason, it can only be as a wind up I guess.

[Sour Mash]

Ya think?

 

There were 5,462,780 visa applications between July 2012 and June 2014. Of these, 607,880 were refused. Of those 368,000 were then checked again. Of those, 292,445 applications were issued following the review and 75,560 refusals were maintained.

 

So the success rate for people who apply and then appeal if rejected is 98.5%. So tough.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2014/11/20/revealed-80-of-overseas-immigration-visa-refusals-are-overtu

Thanks for proving my point for me.