I want Scotland to be part of the UK. Historical affinity.
I don't, however, understand how the Scots can want to be independent whilst remaining a member of the European Union. A total oxymoron.
Not really. Are Germans not German ? Are the Greeks not Greek ?
Very easy to be Scottish and for Scotland to be in the EU. I wanted Scotland to stay in the UK but if the UK votes to leave the EU but a majority of Scots (or Welsh, or Northern Irish) don't then I hope they have the opportunity to have another referendum. I think the result would be very different this time.
What if Tower Hamlets votes in majority to stay, should it have a referendum too?
It's such a stupid concept. If we opt to stay in the EEA after leaving the EU then Scotland won't be affected much anyway. The SNP's desire to stay in the EU is almost entirely political and their support for a federal Europe, as opposed to the benefits Scotland gets for being in Europe (and would largely continue to get if the UK remained in the EEA).
What do you mean by that? That their views mirror opinion polls which show a consistent clear majority among Scots for staying in the EU, and indeed for a stronger State than they believe Westminster allows them?
Perish the thought that they try to represent their electorate, eh?
Political as in the EU is moving towards a centralised, socialism style model which matches the SNP's left-leaning politics.
Well, that seems to be broadly what the Scottish people want too, in varying degrees. You are aware of the Tory party's recent track record in Scottish elections, right?
I would like to see you talking like this about the issue with a group of Scots in a Scottish pub, although because I am sure you are actually a good bloke save for your bizarre politics, I'd want to get you out of there before the third pint .
"Bizarre politics"? Care to elaborate which of my views seem to warrant this tag?
Not that I talk politics in any pub because there are generally more interesting things to discuss but given my sweaty heritage and extended family I've been exposed to a fairly wide and robust set of views on both independence and the EU referendum.
Well I find them bizarre :-) but I really would like to be there see you take your arguments to a group of Scots. They've been politically estranged from England since Thatcher. Surely you accept that reality, especially if you have friends (as I do) and family from up there.
It doesn't help when the devolved Parliament has been actively pushing propaganda blaming Westminster for all of Scotland's ills for years now, even though most of Scotland's problems today are devolved matters and due to years of cack-handed governance by equally cack-handed cretins. I often see Scots who are centre or right of centre bemoaning the lack of any decent parties to vote for as the Tories are such a toxic brand, but Scotland, whilst more left-leaning, is certainly not a haven of socialists and Corbynistas - nearly 1 in 3 people voted for parties to the right of Labour and the SNP.
Again I haven't seen any real indication that those who voted No last time would demand another referendum in case of Brexit. All the same arguments would apply.
Fair enough. It seems to me though that key measures the Scots have taken for themselves in the areas of health and education (for example) are an indication of their genuine rejection of the more US style policies that Westminster has enacted since Thatcher's time. I wouldn't call them socialist, unless you call Scandinavia socialist. My Scottish gang covers the political spectrum but they all seem to agree that those measures were good for Scotland.
Small bet now that Scotland votes at least 60% to stay in? Proceeds to the Upbeats?
There will be lots of talk about trade and the pound etc etc, but the public will vote on a single issue:
IMMIGRATION
The public will see that even the mighty Germany is in a panic about the 1.5m extra population it has all of a sudden, and is making noises about sanctions against neighbour countries for not controlling the flow.
Smaller EU states have restricted the use of public transport by migrants, or put up fences !
Denmark is making radical plans to deal with immigration and France has "closed it's borders" - in a free economic area where you can't close your borders !
EU member states are making up their own local rules as we go along, meanwhile Poland says it will vote against UK plans to restrict child benefit payments to children that ACTUALLY live in the UK - I wonder why !!!!
So .............it's already one rule for the EU and another for UK. The public can see this and will vote accordingly. The UKIP vote in the last election was huge - those folk won't have changed their mind in a year.
Estimated UK population by 2030 is 70+ million.
You went to war with Iraq and you thought the only price tag would be measured in dollars and cents and pounds and pence and the lives of a few hundred (thousand) who deserved better?
Welcome to paying for your share.
If any country should be familiar with the costs of foreign wars and occupations, it should be Britain. And on that same note, if any country should be lauded for their track record of assimilating immigrants (sometimes in spite of racist rejection), it should also be Britain.
I agree. If we don't have to take (under EU freedom of movement) 5 million Poles/Romanians/French/Belgians etc etc etc, then we can make our own rules about how far we can go to help people who really need to come to UK.
I like to think of us, the UK as world leaders. If we vote out, I can almost guarantee that at least 3-4 other EU countries will follow within 18-24 months of us. They are watching the UK with great interest as we could provide them with the perfect get out clause.
I don't agree there are 3-4 other countries looking to exit anyway but they will be worried about contagion. Which is why the EU will be doing us no favours whatsoever if we vote out. It'll be the most drawn out, messy, painful divorce in history that will take far longer than a couple of years. That's not a reason in and of itself not to vote out but it is a unavoidable consequence.
Whilst we spend years unpicking ourselves from the EU, redrafting domestic legislation, negotiating fresh trade agreements, fighting off another push for Scottish independence and all the rest the EU will be a far more attractive proposition for foreign investment and boy would they be putting the boot in whilst we are packing up our stuff. Just as I'd want our government to do if the situations were reversed.
Sweden, Denmark and Holland have all drawn up plans to hold similar referendums. But the UK will give them a helpful insight. Not a rumour, guess or prediction but fact.
Sorry if I missed it as haven't caught up with the other referendum thread for a day or two @braydex but have you got any details on the plans by the countries quoted?
I'm aware that there are noisy nationalist movements in other EU countries of course but I wasn't aware three governments had got as far as this.
I want Scotland to be part of the UK. Historical affinity.
I don't, however, understand how the Scots can want to be independent whilst remaining a member of the European Union. A total oxymoron.
Not really. Are Germans not German ? Are the Greeks not Greek ?
Very easy to be Scottish and for Scotland to be in the EU. I wanted Scotland to stay in the UK but if the UK votes to leave the EU but a majority of Scots (or Welsh, or Northern Irish) don't then I hope they have the opportunity to have another referendum. I think the result would be very different this time.
What if Tower Hamlets votes in majority to stay, should it have a referendum too?
It's such a stupid concept. If we opt to stay in the EEA after leaving the EU then Scotland won't be affected much anyway. The SNP's desire to stay in the EU is almost entirely political and their support for a federal Europe, as opposed to the benefits Scotland gets for being in Europe (and would largely continue to get if the UK remained in the EEA).
Who says we would be given the option? Massive assumptions again ...
I see you are claiming to speak for other people again too? Your insight... remarkable...
I like to think of us, the UK as world leaders. If we vote out, I can almost guarantee that at least 3-4 other EU countries will follow within 18-24 months of us. They are watching the UK with great interest as we could provide them with the perfect get out clause.
I don't agree there are 3-4 other countries looking to exit anyway but they will be worried about contagion. Which is why the EU will be doing us no favours whatsoever if we vote out. It'll be the most drawn out, messy, painful divorce in history that will take far longer than a couple of years. That's not a reason in and of itself not to vote out but it is a unavoidable consequence.
Whilst we spend years unpicking ourselves from the EU, redrafting domestic legislation, negotiating fresh trade agreements, fighting off another push for Scottish independence and all the rest the EU will be a far more attractive proposition for foreign investment and boy would they be putting the boot in whilst we are packing up our stuff. Just as I'd want our government to do if the situations were reversed.
Sweden, Denmark and Holland have all drawn up plans to hold similar referendums. But the UK will give them a helpful insight. Not a rumour, guess or prediction but fact.
Special offer for all the people who want to stay in Europe, I have a special deal for you. Exclusive membership to my club £55.00 a day. Our specially selected unelected committee will take over the daily running of your life. For this small fee; we can control what you eat, who you employ, who you can do deals with, who stays in your house and who you can throw out of your house. We don’t even waste a penny on having our accounts audited, you can trust us. So join today.
Special offer for all the people who want to stay in Europe, I have a special deal for you. Exclusive membership to my club £55.00 a day. Our specially selected unelected committee will take over the daily running of your life. For this small fee; we can control what you eat, who you employ, who you can do deals with, who stays in your house and who you can throw out of your house. We don’t even waste a penny on having our accounts audited, you can trust us. So join today.
Seriously, tell me when ANY of what you have said has REALLY affected you directly in person?
The UK government tells you how many fags or bottles of booze you are allowed to buy from France, on the other hand...
I've been swotting up on what the EU actually does in relation to trade agreements and what an agreement is for. I must admit that my views are out of date, the World has moved to embrace free trade at a much faster rate than I had realised. 75% of EU imports are now tariff free. Before 2006 it was less than 25%.
So we've moved from the EU being a powerful trade block designed to create tariff barriers to reduce competition, to a powerful trade block designed to create tariff barriers needing to break down barriers to trade. It is essentially an inward looking organisation with a priority to protect its internal single market. It is not an organisation structured to negotiate flexible free trade agreements with emerging nations who still impose tariffs and barriers to protect their immature markets. The EU will attempt to impose rules on those nations they will struggle to accept, let alone implement, so deadlock. The EU cannot be flexible, it must protect its single market, that's why it exists.
The following is a verbatim copy extract from the official EU booklet on trade negotiations:-
Many months of careful preparation take place before a trade negotiation begins.
This includes public consultation, assessment of an agreement’s potential impact on Europe’s companies and consumers and informal and formal talks between the Commission and the country or region concerned to determine the issues to be covered.
After these comprehensive preparations, the Commission requests authorisation from the Council of Ministers (made up of representatives of EU governments) to open negotiations.
They agree the objectives that the Commission should try to secure.
During the negotiating process that usually lasts several years, the Commission regularly informs the Council and the European Parliament on the progress being made.
Once an agreement is reached, its signature is formally authorised by the Council.
The European Parliament, using its new Lisbon Treaty powers, may accept or reject, but not amend, the text. Individual EU countries may also need to ratify an agreement according to their own national procedures as well as the green light they give at international level.
The agreement enters into force on a particular day, but may be provisionally applied beforehand.
If anyone suggests the UK will struggle to negotiate trade agreements I will refer them to this page. An agreement which suits the UK's single market will be a doddle compared to an agreement that has to accommodate the EU's "single"market of 28 different markets.
I want Scotland to be part of the UK. Historical affinity.
I don't, however, understand how the Scots can want to be independent whilst remaining a member of the European Union. A total oxymoron.
Not really. Are Germans not German ? Are the Greeks not Greek ?
Very easy to be Scottish and for Scotland to be in the EU. I wanted Scotland to stay in the UK but if the UK votes to leave the EU but a majority of Scots (or Welsh, or Northern Irish) don't then I hope they have the opportunity to have another referendum. I think the result would be very different this time.
What if Tower Hamlets votes in majority to stay, should it have a referendum too?
It's such a stupid concept. If we opt to stay in the EEA after leaving the EU then Scotland won't be affected much anyway. The SNP's desire to stay in the EU is almost entirely political and their support for a federal Europe, as opposed to the benefits Scotland gets for being in Europe (and would largely continue to get if the UK remained in the EEA).
Who says we would be given the option? Massive assumptions again Nick....
I see you are claiming to speak for other people again too? Your insight... remarkable...
How am I speaking for anyone? I'm basing their position on their words and actions.
Legally, we remain in the EEA until we voluntarily leave or are kicked out by unanimous consent of the other signatories. It is almost entirely certain that we would remain in the EEA after exit.
I like to think of us, the UK as world leaders. If we vote out, I can almost guarantee that at least 3-4 other EU countries will follow within 18-24 months of us. They are watching the UK with great interest as we could provide them with the perfect get out clause.
I don't agree there are 3-4 other countries looking to exit anyway but they will be worried about contagion. Which is why the EU will be doing us no favours whatsoever if we vote out. It'll be the most drawn out, messy, painful divorce in history that will take far longer than a couple of years. That's not a reason in and of itself not to vote out but it is a unavoidable consequence.
Whilst we spend years unpicking ourselves from the EU, redrafting domestic legislation, negotiating fresh trade agreements, fighting off another push for Scottish independence and all the rest the EU will be a far more attractive proposition for foreign investment and boy would they be putting the boot in whilst we are packing up our stuff. Just as I'd want our government to do if the situations were reversed.
Sweden, Denmark and Holland have all drawn up plans to hold similar referendums. But the UK will give them a helpful insight. Not a rumour, guess or prediction but fact.
Sorry if I missed it as haven't caught up with the other referendum thread for a day or two @braydex but have you got any details on the plans by the countries quoted?
I'm aware that there are noisy nationalist movements on other EU countries of course but I wasn't aware three governments had got as far as this.
There have been a few 'facts' posted on these threads which may have been fairly accurate about 10 years ago but are no longer the case. I'd include this one in that group.
I doubt any of the named countries have any such plans, and doubt any other European country has defined plans like that. If any country does, I'd say the most likely is Finland, which, as a Eurozone member, would be a very messy breakup.
I want Scotland to be part of the UK. Historical affinity.
I don't, however, understand how the Scots can want to be independent whilst remaining a member of the European Union. A total oxymoron.
Not really. Are Germans not German ? Are the Greeks not Greek ?
Very easy to be Scottish and for Scotland to be in the EU. I wanted Scotland to stay in the UK but if the UK votes to leave the EU but a majority of Scots (or Welsh, or Northern Irish) don't then I hope they have the opportunity to have another referendum. I think the result would be very different this time.
What if Tower Hamlets votes in majority to stay, should it have a referendum too?
It's such a stupid concept. If we opt to stay in the EEA after leaving the EU then Scotland won't be affected much anyway. The SNP's desire to stay in the EU is almost entirely political and their support for a federal Europe, as opposed to the benefits Scotland gets for being in Europe (and would largely continue to get if the UK remained in the EEA).
Who says we would be given the option? Massive assumptions again Nick....
I see you are claiming to speak for other people again too? Your insight... remarkable...
How am I speaking for anyone? I'm basing their position on their words and actions.
Legally, we remain in the EEA until we voluntarily leave or are kicked out by unanimous consent of the other signatories. It is almost entirely certain that we would remain in the EEA after exit.
Apologies, I didn't realise that. However it is perfectly possible we could be kicked out if they want to do that. Equally if they don't then we would find ourselves in a similar position to Norway, where we still pay a lot into the system, but have no influence at all on the rules and regulations.
I want Scotland to be part of the UK. Historical affinity.
I don't, however, understand how the Scots can want to be independent whilst remaining a member of the European Union. A total oxymoron.
Not really. Are Germans not German ? Are the Greeks not Greek ?
Very easy to be Scottish and for Scotland to be in the EU. I wanted Scotland to stay in the UK but if the UK votes to leave the EU but a majority of Scots (or Welsh, or Northern Irish) don't then I hope they have the opportunity to have another referendum. I think the result would be very different this time.
What if Tower Hamlets votes in majority to stay, should it have a referendum too?
It's such a stupid concept. If we opt to stay in the EEA after leaving the EU then Scotland won't be affected much anyway. The SNP's desire to stay in the EU is almost entirely political and their support for a federal Europe, as opposed to the benefits Scotland gets for being in Europe (and would largely continue to get if the UK remained in the EEA).
Who says we would be given the option? Massive assumptions again Nick....
I see you are claiming to speak for other people again too? Your insight... remarkable...
How am I speaking for anyone? I'm basing their position on their words and actions.
Legally, we remain in the EEA until we voluntarily leave or are kicked out by unanimous consent of the other signatories. It is almost entirely certain that we would remain in the EEA after exit.
Sorry to be a pain, but I have to state that, legally, if the UK has left the EU, it cannot remain within the EEA, unless it has joined EFTA and successfully applies to join the EEA - the EEA Agreement applies to "the territories to which the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community is applied" and the three EFTA countries, individually, that have signed up to the Treaty.
To be a member of the EEA requires membership of either the EU or EFTA but, only a member of the EU has to be a member of the EEA. An EFTA member state may choose to negotiate to join the EEA, but may, as with Switzerland, negotiate separate bilateral arrangements.
However, should the vote be to leave the EU, the UK has a two year disengagement period under Article 50 of the Treaty of the European Union, during which it may negotiate membership of the EFTA and EEA.
The terms of any membership that may be negotiated are unknown (though I fully expect that membership will be negotiated).
However, I would be inclined to believe that it is unlikely that the UK membership of the EEA would be on better terms than being provided at present; because being a member of the EEA is not designed to be simply a free trade area.
The EEA goes beyond traditional free trade agreements (FTAs) by extending the full rights and obligations of the EU’s internal market to the EFTA countries (with the exception of Switzerland). The EEA incorporates the four freedoms of the internal market (free movement of goods, persons, services and capital) and related policies (competition, transport, energy and economic and monetary cooperation). The agreement includes horizontal policies strictly related to the four freedoms: social policies (including health and safety at work, labour law and the equal treatment of men and women); policies on consumer protection, the environment, statistics and company law; and a number of flanking policies, such as those relating to research and technological development, which are not based on the EU acquis or legally binding acts, but are implemented through cooperation activities.
Special offer for all the people who want to stay in Europe, I have a special deal for you. Exclusive membership to my club £55.00 a day. Our specially selected unelected committee will take over the daily running of your life. For this small fee; we can control what you eat, who you employ, who you can do deals with, who stays in your house and who you can throw out of your house. We don’t even waste a penny on having our accounts audited, you can trust us. So join today.
Seriously, tell me when ANY of what you have said has REALLY affected you directly in person?
The UK government tells you how many fags or bottles of booze you are allowed to buy from France, on the other hand...
Are you not signing up to my membership club then?
From a leftie rag but this appears to be interesting
Not convinced, we are the joint largest European importer from the US and 2nd largest exporter and they will not wish to harm that.
U.S. goods exports to the EU in 2013 were $262.3 billion down 1.3% ($3.4 billion) from 2012, but up 68% from 2003. U.S. exports to the EU accounted for 16.6% of overall U.S. exports in 2013. The five largest country markets were: Germany ($47.4 billion), United Kingdom ($47.4 billion), Netherlands ($42.7 billion), France ($32.0 billion), and Belgium ($31.7 billion).
U.S. goods imports from the EU totaled $387.3 billion in 2013, up 1.5% ($5.7 billion) from 2012, and up 52% from 2003. U.S. imports from the EU accounted for 17.1% of overall U.S. imports in 2013. The five largest country suppliers of imports are: Germany ($114.6 billion), United Kingdom ($52.6 billion), France ($45.3 billion), Italy ($38.7 billion), and Ireland ($31.6 billion).
I want Scotland to be part of the UK. Historical affinity.
I don't, however, understand how the Scots can want to be independent whilst remaining a member of the European Union. A total oxymoron.
Not really. Are Germans not German ? Are the Greeks not Greek ?
Very easy to be Scottish and for Scotland to be in the EU. I wanted Scotland to stay in the UK but if the UK votes to leave the EU but a majority of Scots (or Welsh, or Northern Irish) don't then I hope they have the opportunity to have another referendum. I think the result would be very different this time.
What if Tower Hamlets votes in majority to stay, should it have a referendum too?
It's such a stupid concept. If we opt to stay in the EEA after leaving the EU then Scotland won't be affected much anyway. The SNP's desire to stay in the EU is almost entirely political and their support for a federal Europe, as opposed to the benefits Scotland gets for being in Europe (and would largely continue to get if the UK remained in the EEA).
Who says we would be given the option? Massive assumptions again Nick....
I see you are claiming to speak for other people again too? Your insight... remarkable...
How am I speaking for anyone? I'm basing their position on their words and actions.
Legally, we remain in the EEA until we voluntarily leave or are kicked out by unanimous consent of the other signatories. It is almost entirely certain that we would remain in the EEA after exit.
Apologies, I didn't realise that. However it is perfectly possible we could be kicked out if they want to do that. Equally if they don't then we would find ourselves in a similar position to Norway, where we still pay a lot into the system, but have no influence at all on the rules and regulations.
Special offer for all the people who want to stay in Europe, I have a special deal for you. Exclusive membership to my club £55.00 a day. Our specially selected unelected committee will take over the daily running of your life. For this small fee; we can control what you eat, who you employ, who you can do deals with, who stays in your house and who you can throw out of your house. We don’t even waste a penny on having our accounts audited, you can trust us. So join today.
Seriously, tell me when ANY of what you have said has REALLY affected you directly in person?
The UK government tells you how many fags or bottles of booze you are allowed to buy from France, on the other hand...
Are you not signing up to my membership club then?
The US trade deal is being concluded only because it gives a massive benefit to US manufacturers who will be able to sue any government in the EU if an importer does not abide by the terms. US company doesn't have to rely on suing an individual or a business based on national laws, it will be enforceable against the national government by the EU on its members on behalf of a US corporation. That's probably why Obama isn't interested in doing individual deals with individual nations, it's more difficult to enforce onerous rules.
The current tariff is 2.5% and will increase by 0.5% IF the UK loses its "preferred status", which is probably unlikely. So its very unlikely to change from the current 2.5%.
After a Free Trade Agreement, the 2.5% tariff is removed, but it does not guarantee that the difference is not pocketed by the manufacturers.
What is to stop a US manufacturer increasing its prices so they benefit and the EU consumer continues to pay the original price?
So there is potential for EU consumers to pay less, but just as much potential for US exporters to make bigger profits. Which way do you think it will go?
The clue is in the name a "trade" agreement, not a "consumer prices" agreement.
The 80% tariffs referred to are anti-dumping tariffs on surplus goods, not regular tariffs for normal goods traded at global market rates. The UK is hardly going dump Rolls Royces and Jaguars at below cost price in the US.
Yes there are risks, but when analysed they are not quite what they might seem at face value. Every thing we will be fed in the press will have spin and few will have the stamina to dig out an opposing rational analysis for an alternative scenario.
Special offer for all the people who want to stay in Europe, I have a special deal for you. Exclusive membership to my club £55.00 a day. Our specially selected unelected committee will take over the daily running of your life. For this small fee; we can control what you eat, who you employ, who you can do deals with, who stays in your house and who you can throw out of your house. We don’t even waste a penny on having our accounts audited, you can trust us. So join today.
Out of interest, where did you get the £55 per day figure from? This seems to make your club distinctly expensive and somewhat uncompetitive. I think it is doomed to failure!
By contrast those nice people in the EU, by my back of the envelope calculation, based upon a (admittedly moving target of the EU contribution) figure of £6.7bn NET for the 26.47mn households in the UK gives a figure of £0.67 per day.
To put that into context, Northern Ireland, an area with the approx. population of Essex, costs the rest of us around £11bn a year. That means the residents of Great Britain pay about £1.17 per household per day to subsidise the residents of Northern Ireland to the tune of £6,075 per person, per year. Or about £15,700 per household to put it another way.
So, NI costs us about twice the amount the EU does. I know which gives better value and which one I'd want to keep given the option.
I see David lost to Jeremy today in PMQ's, and diminished himself in the process.
I was thinking 'whaaaat? Cameron you, you see you next Tuesday'.
Corbyn was banging on about the health service, and Cameron yells to Corbyn that his (Cameron's) mother would be telling Jeremy off about his dress sense.
'proper suit'.
Proper?
It was nothing to do with what Corbyn was talking about, but scratched the surface of the mindset of these privileged rulers.
File under:
'Is he one of us?' 'Plebs' 'Proper suit'
Cameron you might think you're wearing a proper suit, but clothes don't buy you class, you have to earn it.
One other thing, if you read why trade agreements are important you will see many references to the importance of reducing the cost of raw materials and components, (not finished consumer products). Cheaper raw materials means cheaper production costs and bigger margins for manufacturers to sell within their single market to captive consumers. Does this lead to bigger profits for companies or lower prices for EU consumers?
Freedom of movement within the single market means that companies not only are subsidised by higher margins with no increase in productivity, but with cheaper labour costs. Even if it leads to more jobs it does not lead to higher productivity or higher standards of living.
Not saying anything changes for the UK market if detached from the EU single market, except greater control can be exerted from within to prevent business getting a free ride at the expense of consumers and workers.
I am very surprised that left wing leaning supporters of the EU promote its capitalist values with such fervour.
NornIrishAddick, with all due respect I have seen all that but I am still unconvinced that, due to the lack of a unified framework for a state leaving the EU, and legally speaking the UK is a member of the EEA in its own right. It has to join because it was in the EU but the EEA is a separate entity. It is likely that the UK would need to seek entry into EFTA or negotiate a deal like Switzerland but there does not seem to be any legal mechanism that explicitly forces the UK to leave the EEA.
Comments
Small bet now that Scotland votes at least 60% to stay in? Proceeds to the Upbeats?
Not much of a choice, is it.
If we don't have to take (under EU freedom of movement) 5 million Poles/Romanians/French/Belgians etc etc etc, then we can make our own rules about how far we can go to help people who really need to come to UK.
I'm aware that there are noisy nationalist movements in other EU countries of course but I wasn't aware three governments had got as far as this.
I see you are claiming to speak for other people again too? Your insight... remarkable...
Seriously, tell me when ANY of what you have said has REALLY affected you directly in person?
The UK government tells you how many fags or bottles of booze you are allowed to buy from France, on the other hand...
So we've moved from the EU being a powerful trade block designed to create tariff barriers to reduce competition, to a powerful trade block designed to create tariff barriers needing to break down barriers to trade. It is essentially an inward looking organisation with a priority to protect its internal single market. It is not an organisation structured to negotiate flexible free trade agreements with emerging nations who still impose tariffs and barriers to protect their immature markets. The EU will attempt to impose rules on those nations they will struggle to accept, let alone implement, so deadlock. The EU cannot be flexible, it must protect its single market, that's why it exists.
The following is a verbatim copy extract from the official EU booklet on trade negotiations:-
Many months of careful preparation take place before a trade negotiation begins.
This includes public consultation, assessment of an agreement’s potential impact on Europe’s companies and consumers and informal and formal talks between the Commission and the country or region concerned to determine the issues to be covered.
After these comprehensive preparations, the Commission requests authorisation from the Council of Ministers (made up of representatives of EU governments) to open negotiations.
They agree the objectives that the Commission should try to secure.
During the negotiating process that usually lasts several years, the Commission regularly informs the Council and the European Parliament on the progress being made.
Once an agreement is reached, its signature is formally authorised by the Council.
The European Parliament, using its new Lisbon Treaty powers, may accept or reject, but not amend, the text.
Individual EU countries may also need to ratify an agreement according to their own national procedures as well as the green light they give at international level.
The agreement enters into force on a particular day, but may be provisionally applied beforehand.
If anyone suggests the UK will struggle to negotiate trade agreements I will refer them to this page. An agreement which suits the UK's single market will be a doddle compared to an agreement that has to accommodate the EU's "single"market of 28 different markets.
Legally, we remain in the EEA until we voluntarily leave or are kicked out by unanimous consent of the other signatories. It is almost entirely certain that we would remain in the EEA after exit.
I doubt any of the named countries have any such plans, and doubt any other European country has defined plans like that. If any country does, I'd say the most likely is Finland, which, as a Eurozone member, would be a very messy breakup.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/27/norway-eu-reality-uk-voters-seduced-by-norwegian-model
To be a member of the EEA requires membership of either the EU or EFTA but, only a member of the EU has to be a member of the EEA. An EFTA member state may choose to negotiate to join the EEA, but may, as with Switzerland, negotiate separate bilateral arrangements.
Article 128 of the EEA Agreement makes clear that: "Any European state becoming a member of the Community shall, or becoming a member of EFTA may, apply to become party to this agreement. It shall address its application to the EEA Council". The EEA Agreement can be found at: http://efta.int/media/documents/legal-texts/eea/the-eea-agreement/Main%20Text%20of%20the%20Agreement/EEAagreement.pdf
However, should the vote be to leave the EU, the UK has a two year disengagement period under Article 50 of the Treaty of the European Union, during which it may negotiate membership of the EFTA and EEA.
The terms of any membership that may be negotiated are unknown (though I fully expect that membership will be negotiated).
However, I would be inclined to believe that it is unlikely that the UK membership of the EEA would be on better terms than being provided at present; because being a member of the EEA is not designed to be simply a free trade area.
The European Parliament's website http://europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_6.5.3.html states:
The EEA goes beyond traditional free trade agreements (FTAs) by extending the full rights and obligations of the EU’s internal market to the EFTA countries (with the exception of Switzerland). The EEA incorporates the four freedoms of the internal market (free movement of goods, persons, services and capital) and related policies (competition, transport, energy and economic and monetary cooperation). The agreement includes horizontal policies strictly related to the four freedoms: social policies (including health and safety at work, labour law and the equal treatment of men and women); policies on consumer protection, the environment, statistics and company law; and a number of flanking policies, such as those relating to research and technological development, which are not based on the EU acquis or legally binding acts, but are implemented through cooperation activities.
If you don't trust the EU Parliament, I recommend having a look at the EFTA site, even just for the basic descritption of the EEA: http://efta.int/eea/eea-agreement/eea-basic-features.
From a leftie rag but this appears to be interesting
U.S. goods exports to the EU in 2013 were $262.3 billion down 1.3% ($3.4 billion) from 2012, but up 68% from 2003. U.S. exports to the EU accounted for 16.6% of overall U.S. exports in 2013. The five largest country markets were: Germany ($47.4 billion), United Kingdom ($47.4 billion), Netherlands ($42.7 billion), France ($32.0 billion), and Belgium ($31.7 billion).
U.S. goods imports from the EU totaled $387.3 billion in 2013, up 1.5% ($5.7 billion) from 2012, and up 52% from 2003. U.S. imports from the EU accounted for 17.1% of overall U.S. imports in 2013. The five largest country suppliers of imports are: Germany ($114.6 billion), United Kingdom ($52.6 billion), France ($45.3 billion), Italy ($38.7 billion), and Ireland ($31.6 billion).
Can't ANY of the anti's tell me any real facts (not imagined or assumed) that back up their argument?
The current tariff is 2.5% and will increase by 0.5% IF the UK loses its "preferred status", which is probably unlikely. So its very unlikely to change from the current 2.5%.
After a Free Trade Agreement, the 2.5% tariff is removed, but it does not guarantee that the difference is not pocketed by the manufacturers.
What is to stop a US manufacturer increasing its prices so they benefit and the EU consumer continues to pay the original price?
So there is potential for EU consumers to pay less, but just as much potential for US exporters to make bigger profits. Which way do you think it will go?
The clue is in the name a "trade" agreement, not a "consumer prices" agreement.
The 80% tariffs referred to are anti-dumping tariffs on surplus goods, not regular tariffs for normal goods traded at global market rates. The UK is hardly going dump Rolls Royces and Jaguars at below cost price in the US.
Yes there are risks, but when analysed they are not quite what they might seem at face value. Every thing we will be fed in the press will have spin and few will have the stamina to dig out an opposing rational analysis for an alternative scenario.
By contrast those nice people in the EU, by my back of the envelope calculation, based upon a (admittedly moving target of the EU contribution) figure of £6.7bn NET for the 26.47mn households in the UK gives a figure of £0.67 per day.
To put that into context, Northern Ireland, an area with the approx. population of Essex, costs the rest of us around £11bn a year. That means the residents of Great Britain pay about £1.17 per household per day to subsidise the residents of Northern Ireland to the tune of £6,075 per person, per year. Or about £15,700 per household to put it another way.
So, NI costs us about twice the amount the EU does. I know which gives better value and which one I'd want to keep given the option.
I was thinking 'whaaaat? Cameron you, you see you next Tuesday'.
Corbyn was banging on about the health service, and Cameron yells to Corbyn that his (Cameron's) mother would be telling Jeremy off about his dress sense.
'proper suit'.
Proper?
It was nothing to do with what Corbyn was talking about, but scratched the surface of the mindset of these privileged rulers.
File under:
'Is he one of us?'
'Plebs'
'Proper suit'
Cameron you might think you're wearing a proper suit, but clothes don't buy you class, you have to earn it.
He spoke like a dickhead today.
Freedom of movement within the single market means that companies not only are subsidised by higher margins with no increase in productivity, but with cheaper labour costs. Even if it leads to more jobs it does not lead to higher productivity or higher standards of living.
Not saying anything changes for the UK market if detached from the EU single market, except greater control can be exerted from within to prevent business getting a free ride at the expense of consumers and workers.
I am very surprised that left wing leaning supporters of the EU promote its capitalist values with such fervour.