Europe: In or Out

Scunner · Jan 26, 2016

Hmmm...this is a really vexed question for me as I am somewhat undecided. It's one of those head and heart questions that, in reality, have no 'correct' answer. I think if the proverbial gun were held to my head I would vote out. My reasoning for this is that I think the British people are naturally creative, free thinking, liberal and yet also Eurosceptic. We are so because being part of the EU restricts freedom of choice and is fundamentally undemocratic.

Years ago I was in the offices of Gartner, who are a large American firm that specialises in statistics and information. They calculated that of the 5000 or so large US Corporates that had a European or EMEA head office, 4000 of these were in the UK. This has occurred naturally through the security they feel by being based in an English language speaking country. The choice/worry is: will we leverage that advantage or risk it by leaving Europe?

I think we can leverage it by public sector reform, education reform, structural investment in public services and corporate tax incentives that we would not otherwise be able to offer while remaining in the EU. Witness the EU vs Google/Facebook/Apple et al tax storm that is approaching...

Yes, we want those companies to pay tax, but Ireland has realised it benefits their economy more to have 1000's of people in work rather than claiming benefits, and thus paying income tax, than it would do by disincentivising large US companies from basing themselves in Ireland through high corporate tax charges.

On to globalisation: the shrinking of the world in technology terms, means that a flexible and reformed social economy like the UK's would be positioned very well to cope with the demands of a tertiary, service industry based exchange of trade and money. Less regulation, especially in the financial markets, could mean that the UK's trusted financial services houses expand rapidly with greater flexibility and entrepreneurial spirit.

In fact, while typing this, I have come to the conclusion that the one thing humans fear more than anything else is change...the fear of the unknown. And that's the only argument that the 'IN' campaign will be peddling. They will prey on uncertainty and the fear of change. We should be stronger than that and face up to the future without being afraid of the consequences but it will be essential to invest and embrace the reforms that will be necessary to compete on a global stage. Do that and we will be fine, just look at the mess surrounding the Schengen agreement announced today...do we really want to remain part of such an unwieldy nonsense?

Herr Tubthumper · Jan 29, 2016

Britain and Europe are moving towards a breakthrough in David Cameron’s quest to deny EU citizens working in Britain tax credits and other benefits for up to four years.
As the prime minister prepares to meet the European Commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, tomorrow, senior sources in Brussels suggested both sides were nearing agreement on the issue that has been the central and most contentious sticking point in his campaign to rewrite the terms of Britain’s EU membership.
Sources confirmed an agreement that would allow the government to pull an “emergency brake” if migration was deemed to be putting excessive stress on social and welfare systems was in sight.
The rules being negotiated would apply to all EU member states and not just Britain, and authority over when and whether to apply the brake would lie with EU governments and not with the EU executive in Brussels.

This local emergency break seems an interesting development. I had my doubts about the person Cameron appointed to do the negotiations, and irrespective of whether I agree with it, fair play to the minister as he seems to have pulled it off.

JC Footy Genius · Jan 29, 2016

HT in praising Tory shock - I smell a rat.

Herr Tubthumper said:
Britain and Europe are moving towards a breakthrough in David Cameron’s quest to deny EU citizens working in Britain tax credits and other benefits for up to four years.
As the prime minister prepares to meet the European Commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, tomorrow, senior sources in Brussels suggested both sides were nearing agreement on the issue that has been the central and most contentious sticking point in his campaign to rewrite the terms of Britain’s EU membership.
Sources confirmed an agreement that would allow the government to pull an “emergency brake” if migration was deemed to be putting excessive stress on social and welfare systems was in sight.
The rules being negotiated would apply to all EU member states and not just Britain, and authority over when and whether to apply the brake would lie with EU governments and not with the EU executive in Brussels.

This local emergency break seems an interesting development. I had my doubts about the person Cameron appointed to do the negotiations, and irrespective of whether I agree with it, fair play to the minister as he seems to have pulled it off.

Oh HT come on, it started off as negotiations as a supposed brake on EU immigration and it's been whittled down to a virtually meaningless possible restriction on benefits. The vast majority of EU migrants work, even restrictions on in work benefits won't make a difference as the new living wage will be a much bigger draw.

Apparently your aversion to all things Tory is only trumped by your love of the EU. What on earth can you see in a top down, centralising, undemocratic, bureaucratic, meddling ever expanding super state that will keep the (Tory) UK government in check?

Gwylan · Jan 29, 2016

JC Footy Genius said:
Oh HT come on, it started off as negotiations as a supposed brake on EU immigration and it's been whittled down to a virtually meaningless possible restriction on benefits.

That's not true. I'm not pro-EU but I recognise that you're talking nonsense here. The UK's four demands were: more competition; protection for non-Eurozone countries, bolstering of national parliaments and removal of abuses within the right to migration. As the Telegraph (an anti-EU paper) puts it "Mr Cameron is not seeking the right to limit the number of EU nationals who enter Britain. Instead, he wants agreement to limit such nationals’ right to claim British benefits, requiring them to work for four years before being eligible for child benefit, tax credits or council housing. Ministers say benefits are a “pull factor” for EU migrants".

Cameron knows that an end to EU migration is a non-starter as it's a fundamental principle of the Treaty of Rome - it's never been part of the UK's negotiating stance

Surf's Up · Jan 29, 2016

I can't make my mind up about this - however I have no such uncertainty regarding the classic contest between the Sun Bear and THE MIGHTY HONEY BADGER!!!!!

Westdene Seagull · Jan 29, 2016

Gwylan said:
Cameron knows that an end to EU migration is a non-starter as it's a fundamental principle of the Treaty of Rome - it's never been part of the UK's negotiating stance

Which is what makes these discussions a sham - virtually nothing will change yet Cameron will claim he's come away with some amazing deal - all lies. Just hold the bloody referendum.

Megazone · Jan 29, 2016

We need a one world government!

cunning fergus · Jan 29, 2016

Herr Tubthumper said:
Britain and Europe are moving towards a breakthrough in David Cameron’s quest to deny EU citizens working in Britain tax credits and other benefits for up to four years.
As the prime minister prepares to meet the European Commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, tomorrow, senior sources in Brussels suggested both sides were nearing agreement on the issue that has been the central and most contentious sticking point in his campaign to rewrite the terms of Britain’s EU membership.
Sources confirmed an agreement that would allow the government to pull an “emergency brake” if migration was deemed to be putting excessive stress on social and welfare systems was in sight.
The rules being negotiated would apply to all EU member states and not just Britain, and authority over when and whether to apply the brake would lie with EU governments and not with the EU executive in Brussels.

This local emergency break seems an interesting development. I had my doubts about the person Cameron appointed to do the negotiations, and irrespective of whether I agree with it, fair play to the minister as he seems to have pulled it off.

Notwithstanding the absurdity of our democratically elected PM having to negotiate with an unelected technocrat like Juncker how we want to manage our welfare system, this outcome (if confirmed) is totally unsatisfactory..............it is essentially the status quo.

If Cameron really wanted to put the squeeze on the EU then he would want de facto independence on our welfare system from unelected EU control.

Given the headwinds that the EU faces the timing for nogtiation could not be better, the EU's has a moribund economy, migration crisis, rising political populism and a ongoing euro/EZ fudge that are all creating uncertainty with the project, the last thing the EU wants is a UK exit.

This outcome is a measure of how much Cameron really wants UK independence, evidently he does not and the whole negotiation is as everyone feared it would be; a carefully choregraphed peice of political theatre to enable him to announce to teh UK electorate "independence in our time".

This week when ex EU Politicians wargamed the possible pre and post referendum exit negotiations, their overwhelming view on the post referendum exit negotiation process was that in hindsight they would have offered the UK what it wanted to prevent its exit.

Cameron merely has to kick in the front door to bring the whole structure to its knees.

Gwylan · Jan 29, 2016

cunning fergus said:
Notwithstanding the absurdity of our democratically elected PM having to negotiate with an unelected technocrat like Juncker how we want to manage our welfare system, this outcome (if confirmed) is totally unsatisfactory..............it is essentially the status quo.

If Cameron really wanted to put the squeeze on the EU then he would want de facto independence on our welfare system from unelected EU control.

Given the headwinds that the EU faces the timing for nogtiation could not be better, the EU's has a moribund economy, migration crisis, rising political populism and a ongoing euro/EZ fudge that are all creating uncertainty with the project, the last thing the EU wants is a UK exit.

This outcome is a measure of how much Cameron really wants UK independence, evidently he does not and the whole negotiation is as everyone feared it would be; a carefully choregraphed peice of political theatre to enable him to announce to teh UK electorate "independence in our time".

This week when ex EU Politicians wargamed the possible pre and post referendum exit negotiations, their overwhelming view on the post referendum exit negotiation process was that in hindsight they would have offered the UK what it wanted to prevent its exit.

Cameron merely has to kick in the front door to bring the whole structure to its knees.

Agree with most of this - it's arrant cowardice on the part of Cameron

But it's not true to say that Juncker is unelected. He got 422 votes out of 729 MEPs - that's actually a bigger mandate that Cameron got.

cunning fergus · Jan 29, 2016

Gwylan said:
That's not true. I'm not pro-EU but I recognise that you're talking nonsense here. The UK's four demands were: more competition; protection for non-Eurozone countries, bolstering of national parliaments and removal of abuses within the right to migration. As the Telegraph (an anti-EU paper) puts it "Mr Cameron is not seeking the right to limit the number of EU nationals who enter Britain. Instead, he wants agreement to limit such nationals’ right to claim British benefits, requiring them to work for four years before being eligible for child benefit, tax credits or council housing. Ministers say benefits are a “pull factor” for EU migrants".

Cameron knows that an end to EU migration is a non-starter as it's a fundamental principle of the Treaty of Rome - it's never been part of the UK's negotiating stance

To a point I agree, however the polictical narrative here is and has always been about immigration and migrants, whether EU or non EU because UK politicans want to create the impression that they CAN deal influence it. As the Hungarian PM said a few weeks ago there is no such thing as a Hungarian migrant in the UK. They are just EU citizens just like their UK counterparts, ergo they have equal rights with UK nationals and should have equality all round.

This is exactly how the position should be explained to the public, but its not...................I wonder why they dont speak so plainly as the Hungarian PM.

Cameron is just window dressing.................they only UK politician who has called this position out plainly is Farage and yet people say he's exagerrating.

JC Footy Genius · Jan 29, 2016

Gwylan said:
That's not true. I'm not pro-EU but I recognise that you're talking nonsense here. The UK's four demands were: more competition; protection for non-Eurozone countries, bolstering of national parliaments and removal of abuses within the right to migration. As the Telegraph (an anti-EU paper) puts it "Mr Cameron is not seeking the right to limit the number of EU nationals who enter Britain. Instead, he wants agreement to limit such nationals’ right to claim British benefits, requiring them to work for four years before being eligible for child benefit, tax credits or council housing. Ministers say benefits are a “pull factor” for EU migrants".

Cameron knows that an end to EU migration is a non-starter as it's a fundamental principle of the Treaty of Rome - it's never been part of the UK's negotiating stance

Not nonsense at all. The four demands were not the start of the negotiation process rather the final publicly announced terms he knows he can get after being told where to go by Germany on his initial attempts to negotiate controls on EU immigration.

According to the Sunday Times, Germany has already rejected a proposal to impose quotas on low-skilled EU migrants by limiting the national insurance numbers issued to them.
Der Spiegel reported that Mr Cameron was now looking at a plan to stretch the EU rules "to their limits" in order to ban migrants who do not have a job, and to deport those who are unable to support themselves after three months.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29874392

5ways · Jan 29, 2016

Brexit is not 'fear of the unknown' it is damaging and costly disruption to the UK economy.

"Mark Carney has warned of financial instability, higher interest rates and capital flight if Britain voted to leave the EU, saying the country could not depend on “the kindness of strangers” to fund the country’s deficits."

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b1d9e160-c440-11e5-808f-8231cd71622e.html

Also "I think we can leverage it by public sector reform, education reform, structural investment in public services and corporate tax incentives that we would not otherwise be able to offer while remaining in the EU. Witness the EU vs Google/Facebook/Apple et al tax storm that is approaching..."

This is a great reason to stay in the EU.

This approaching tax storm is a result of globalisation in which effectively profits can be shifted and shifted again from jurisdiction to jurisdiction allowing a company to reduce its tax bill. This is not something that helps anybody except a very few tax havens - this puts an effective negative tax on fixed, non-multinational, companies which have to make up shortfalls in tax revenues. This is deeply unfair. In less developed parts of the world this has led to a race to the bottom. Breaking up the EU would result in this becoming standard practice across the Europe.

The US has a big advantage here - it's massive. It is difficult to run from the IRS and they'll eventually track you down if you owe taxes in America. The EU needs similar heft to protect the tax bases of its member nations. HMRC cannot gallivant across the globe and demand taxes owed because it doesn't have the heft or the reach. Osborne, a real-politik guy, has taken what he can get from Google because he appreciates that multinational profits are quicksilver. So do we take part of cannibalising our multi-national tax base by withdrawing from Europe wide safeguards and regulation or do we band together and put a floor under this free-for-all?

We do set our own tax rates, both corporate and individual, but if we can't collect that tax what's the point in having the rate in the first place? In Europe = more corporate taxes = more public services = lower individual tax.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dc1e3cd4-c592-11e5-808f-8231cd71622e.html

Proof in the pudding:

"Over the past three months alone €1.25bn has been clawed back from multinationals across the EU as a result of the state aid cases. They include the commission ordering Luxembourg and the Netherlands to recoup millions of euros in back taxes in cases involving Fiat and Starbucks. It is also investigating whether Ireland gave favourable treatment to Apple.
These decisions “show that national tax authorities cannot give any company, however large or powerful, an unfair competitive advantage compared to others. This is illegal under EU state aid rules,” a spokesman for Ms Vestager said.
“More cases may come, if we have indications that EU state aid rules are not being complied with.”"

Lincoln Imp · Jan 29, 2016

Westdene Seagull said:
Which is what makes these discussions a sham - virtually nothing will change yet Cameron will claim he's come away with some amazing deal - all lies. Just hold the bloody referendum.

I agree with you. The main purpose of the whole charade is to serve the internal convenience of the Conservative Party. Poor old Major aged before our eyes as he tried to deal with his outers but Cameron reckons he's smarter. He has a Cunning Plan. It's high risk and it's certain to fail - even if he wins the referendum the Europhobes won't stop.

Herr Tubthumper · Jan 29, 2016

JC Footy Genius said:
Oh HT come on, it started off as negotiations as a supposed brake on EU immigration and it's been whittled down to a virtually meaningless possible restriction on benefits. The vast majority of EU migrants work, even restrictions on in work benefits won't make a difference as the new living wage will be a much bigger draw.

Apparently your aversion to all things Tory is only trumped by your love of the EU. What on earth can you see in a top down, centralising, undemocratic, bureaucratic, meddling ever expanding super state that will keep the (Tory) UK government in check?

total rubbish. No it didn't.

cunning fergus · Jan 29, 2016

Gwylan said:
Agree with most of this - it's arrant cowardice on the part of Cameron

But it's not true to say that Juncker is unelected. He got 422 votes out of 729 MEPs - that's actually a bigger mandate that Cameron got.

I said democratically elected..........he was "elected" by the Council first which is a mere 28 people, the EU Parliament is a self serving institution with no mandate other than to approve the laws made by the Commission. If the EU Parliament made the laws and were in the legislative driving seat dealing with TTIP and EU enlargement then you would have more of a point but they and MEPs do not.

It is deliberately designed this way so that the most powerful man in the EU is not elected by the people, even the most ardent EU supporters accept this democratic deficit requires reform, so let not flog this horse.

heathgate · Jan 29, 2016

One thing is certain in my view, if a deal is reached, with a modicum of substance in the are of border controls, and also reduces the up front overhead for welfare, I think the public will vote with Cameron to stay in the club...........

Pretty pink fairy · Jan 29, 2016

Lets just save 55 million a day and cut our losses
regards
DR

JC Footy Genius · Jan 29, 2016

Herr Tubthumper said:
total rubbish. No it didn't.

See #251.

He would have been stupid not to try and negotiate some controls on EU migration as that is the major concern of the electorate. He did try and got short shrift from Merkel.

heathgate · Jan 29, 2016

I think Germany ( aka Merkel) is herself starting to be under big pressure to slow this migration down, and the overheads that EU migration is having on her country. Dont forget, that once naturalised, with a lot of them having no papers at all, the non-EU migrants become EU migrants, and can then work or live anywhere they choose.

Solly March Sexy Legs · Jan 29, 2016

The in camp must want sharia law and see their wifes and daughters raped like what's happening across the EU. 80% of refugees are unskilled welfare scrounging raping economic migrants.

18 yr old Afgan refugee raped an 73 yr old lady in her back garden and received 18 months in prison but cant deport him.

Last week, 20 Muslim migrants snatched an 12 year old schoolgirl from the street and gang raped her for 40 hours.

You vote to stay in and your wife and children will be raped and Anglia Merkel has said when the UK votes in then we must take in 800,000 3rd world Muslim men.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Europe: In or Out

Which way are you leaning?

Stay

Leave

Undecided

Active member

Well-known member

Bringer of TRUTH

Well-known member

Well-known member

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch

On his last warning

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Bringer of TRUTH

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Banned

Bringer of TRUTH

Well-known member

New member

Share this page