If the EU is so good why won't Red Ed allow a referendum? This completely defies logic, obviously as the EU is the greatest thing since sliced bread the easiest way to shut UKIP and the others down would be to have a referendum and end the argument once and for all.
Funniest thing is how all the main parties are going after UKIP as if they are a real threat. Farage was on the edges not too long ago, a forgotten bigot shown as a privileged, upper class twit. Now he is central competitor one
party faithful and fanatics now have more of an influence theses days. probably due to disillusion with politicians and not bothering to vote.
Because the EU is part of the paradigm favoured by our ruling, self serving, political class. That it is at the expense of the voters they don't care, and if they allow a referendum they might get the wrong result. So much for democracy.
If the Europhobes want the UK to withdraw from the EU, they don't even need a referendum. All they need is 325 MPs to vote for a Bill to that effect. So why don't they? Simple - there is no majority for withdrawal. There has never been a majority for withdrawal, and there is never likely to be a majority for withdrawal. Europe has been a topic of contention at every election for the past 40 years, and the Europhobes have lost every one. Decisively. So where does all this waffle about referenda come from? It is because the Europhobes have given up all hope of ever getting a majority for their pet project, so a referendum is Plan B - a contrivance for circumventing the way political decisions are taken in this country. It is also because the Prime Minister's party is so hopelessly split they cannot decide upon on any policy about Europe, except for not taking a decision. A referendum is a non-policy designed to suit a party which cannot make its mind up.
Just a few thoughts/questions that none of the politicans & few of the media seem to address. Politicians talk of referenda & accuse each other of making little sense on the EU (some would say they often make little sense on anything). But none of them appear to outline the details behind the pro & anti-EU positions. What happens to the farming subsidies paid to EU farmers if we withdraw? The media don't say much about the scale of payments made to farmers & land owners in the UK, but it represents a lot of money: United Kingdom | FarmSubsidy.org Would the loss of this money result in British farmers struggling to sell produce if their prices had to rise to compensate for the loss of subsidies? Are there any repayment penalties from EU grants & loans? This includes support for small businesses, farmers, public contracts etc. Is there any interest to be paid on these loans or can the UK simply walk away from them? Funding - loans and grants from the European Union — EUbusiness Would UK citizens lose the right/ability to use E111 cards to obtain payment to cover any health treatment received in another EU country? If we lose the E111 cards, then would UK citizens have to use insurance policies for health cover in the EU or would we have to pay directly for treatment? Would a non-EU Britain risk losing out on any pan-EU deals with countries such as the USA, China & India - as suggested by the US government? Would Britain lose out on business currently held with other EU countries? i.e. would they snub us? Or would Britain be able to secure more profitable deals with all countries if we were outside the EU? Our monthly exports to the EU appear to average over £10 billion: https://www.uktradeinfo.com/statistics/euoverseastrade/Pages/EuOTS.aspx So much that our politicians don't say - but then perhaps nobody knows the answers??
It may have escaped peoples attention that we are, after all, right next to a massive trade organisation. Continental Europe. But to get the benefit we have to be a member. Just like Matalans.
Having been excluded from decisions on treaties (when many other European countries had them) there is now an appetite for a referendum on our terms/membership of the EU. The politicians can only blame themselves for this. So many decisions are now made in Brussels, you could argue that a lot of our democracy has been transferred to the European Parliament and I certainly feel completely detached from it. The remaining decisions that are made at Westminster are now driven by business lobbyists rather than what is really in the interests of Joe Public. I would sacrifice growth and our materialistically driven lives for a better quality of life. Our views need to be heard. UKIP will clean up in the European elections as a demonstration of this dissatisfaction. It is our way of demonstrating a need for change and has already influenced the mainstream parties stance on Europe and immigration. They are not a serious party of any real substance but do serve a useful influence for change. I heard Ed Balls on the radio this afternoon and his "What Labour would like to do" statements drive me mad. They are just words and when in Government come to nothing. Their position on a referendum is a typical muddle enabling those pro or anti EU to use it as suits them. Completely unsatisfactory as usual.....
Well I guess if they put it to the people and the people vote for change - then its justified. As they represent us. Or do you think the people are too thick to decide
There is not enough accurate information out there about the benefits of EU membership as the entire argument has been hijacked by the anti campaign and either reduce it to pointless and erroneous issues about straight bananas or loss of sovereignty, they stir up opposition to the European Court of Human Rights by making up stories about immigrants and family pets and then conflate the two issues, they claim we could enter a free trade agreement and cite Norway as an example but ignore the fact that Norway has to enact almost all the EU legislation we do and has to pay almost as much per capita to trade with the EU as we do but without the benefits of EU grants, loans, investment and a say in the running of the EU, they make up figures about the cost of membership and spout them with conviction yet when they are challenged there is no substance to the argument. In short the people may not be too thick to decide but they do not have enough information and I do not want my future decided by rabble rousing xenophobic liars like Farage and his sycophants in the right wing press.
Well come on then prove me wrong, give us your appreciation of why we should stay or leave based on evidence not just distrusting johnny foreigner.
Well I for one think the general public is too thick to make the right choice. Actually I dont think theyre too thick, i know theyre too thick. Trouble with a vote is it might actually take us out of europe and then when people realise the shit theyve got themselves into, by then it will be too late. If the general populace had an ounce of nous, they would not be reading the sun, mirror, mail, express, etc. But they do. Coz in general we are arseholes. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to see the benefits of being in europe and even at the low levels of interlect required to fathom that, still there are people who miss the point completely. It is on these people then we rely on to make the correct judgement. Furthermore, the same party that took us into europe now say we must leave europe. Make your minds up. Its not the fucking hokey kokey. Oh how we need spitting image. We are surrounded by wet politicians in all parties. Theyre a fucking gift to spitting image. I hate Thatcher but I will give her credit for strength. Cameron is a floundering guppy, Clegg is well a cleggnut and Milliband looks like something modelled from plasticene.
Im not saying we should stay or leave mr defensive pmsl. What I am saying is that if its on the agenda - then let the voters decide. To often mistakes are made through pompous self righteous attitudes who think they know whats best for others
Unfortunately Phill, your last sentence works both ways. Whats needed is strong leadership. Weve not had that since, and I hate saying it, Blair. We need to be in Europe and I fear for us if we leave. I buy goods and tour round Europe all teh time. Its easy. It will be grief if we leave.
Strong leadership what leads through consensus. scotland, europe....so many people are shitting their pants at the possible outcome. And it does indeed work both ways but only makes a difference for those in power. The little man never gets heard. Wether thick or intelligent which is why there should be a vote.
A vote would be okay if the information was out there to properly advise people. I dont think it is. As it is people are just reacting to who shouts loudest.
And isnt that the same cry every time there is a vote. Just dont make the mistake and generalise that people are fools and incapable of deciding whats imporyany yo them however they see it
Of course there will be a vote, and it will take place at the general election next year. Everybody, thick or intelligent, gets to vote - if they're not too lazy to bother. There will be plenty of choice between Europhobe and Europhile candidates and parties. It is really easy to predict that in the result the Europhobes will be a smallish minority. It is also easy to predict that the Europhobes will then try to subvert that clear result by contriving some other means of getting their way, as usual. Over the past 40 years we have done several laps of that track already.
