The EU referendum - IN / OUT or Shake it all about.

[Alf Bentley]

Three quarters of a million pounds per year in EU subsidies raked-in by the Duke of Westminster (worth 7 billion), and similar amounts going to other 'landed gentry'.

I feel instinctively that I should vote to remain, but things like this make me want to vote to leave.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2016/apr/21/why-our-landed-gentry-are-so-desperate-to-stay-in-the-eu

 

 

I share your frustration. Even after reform, a large portion of the EU budget supports agriculture/land. As a nation dominated by intensive farming, we benefit less than many other nations - and some of the dosh goes to big landowners.

 

But if we leave, we'll need our own strategy to ensure that farming is viable and that land in private ownership (including by the Duke of Westminster) is well looked after. I think that I'm right to say that most farmers are dependent to some degree on EU handouts. Unless we believe that the big supermarkets are willing to pay farmers much more and/or consumers are willing to pay much more for their food, then the UK government will have to step in to replace that subsidy, presumably? 

 

Of course, the UK could then adopt its own policies to keep farming viable and ensure land is looked after. Does anyone really foresee a Tory government attacking the interests of wealthy landowners? Of course, many of those landowners are large corporations, too, not just Dukes...

 

A lot of EU agriculture policy is now directed at looking after land and environmental protection, not like the old days of subsidised over-production (remember "butter mountains" and "wine lakes"?). Farmers/landowners receive subsidies for looking after the land / protecting the environment. If we leave the EU, would the UK just take over those subsidies or make savings by allowing farmers/landowners to treat land as they pleased and to neglect it if there was no financial incentive to do otherwise? Would we allow farmers en masse to sell land so that it was no longer in agricultural production, requiring us to be much more dependent on imported food?

 

I think Giles Fraser's argument about the EU dumping subsidised farm produce on developing countries, thereby generating unfair competition and poverty, is less valid than it used to be. Interestingly, he quotes the year 2007 - quite a long time ago.

 

What would be the post-Brexit policies for British farming and land use - and how would they be financed? Have Gove, Farage, Hoey & company said anything about that?

[The Railway Man]

Three quarters of a million pounds per year in EU subsidies raked-in by the Duke of Westminster (worth 7 billion), and similar amounts going to other 'landed gentry'.

I feel instinctively that I should vote to remain, but things like this make me want to vote to leave.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2016/apr/21/why-our-landed-gentry-are-so-desperate-to-stay-in-the-eu

 

If people still haven't worked out the the EU is a vehicle for politicians, the rich, big business and corporations then they never will.

 

I've never seen a bigger case of The People v The Establishment than this upcoming referendum.

[digitalalba]

Ashdown really does have some front, he was as insistent as anyone we HAD to join the Euro yet he still display such arrogant snobbery against anyone who supports British independence.

You can tell when someone doesn't believe in themselves, when they first attack someone for talking when Ashdown wanted to, then when Kate spoke, he felt comfortable talking all over her, fascist!

 

Last nights show was amazing for two reasons,

A, the panelist was 60-40 in favour of Brexit. Usually, it's the opposite everytime.

B, the audience, by their cheering, which is usually in favour of a lefty Labour agenda, were about 60-40 in favour of Brexit.

 

Is the Brexit campaign winning, is that why QT had a majority Brexit panelist, because the audience are more in favour of it?

 

Hmm

[Guest MattP]

Ashdown is so disconnected from the opinions of the public it is laughable. The shock when he saw the exit poll at the election was a classic moment for an elite.

 

I still watch it on Youtube every now and again, it really was terrific, he refused to believe the nation woulc vote in such a way, he does come across at times as one of these people who has never met a Tory in his life.

 

I used to really like him as well, his book is a great read and he's had an incredible life, but now he's coming across as the embodiment of the snobby "educated left" despite his opinions and predictions being proved wrong time and time again.

 

What would be the post-Brexit policies for British farming and land use - and how would they be financed? Have Gove, Farage, Hoey & company said anything about that?

 

The problem is the Brexit camp can't really deliver any of this as the Brexit camp as a collective don't run the country, they can't make promises about treasury spending, I would hope that the money we get back from the EU would be used to make sure the farmers are still subsidised to the same extent that they are under the EU but Michael Gove can't stand up and promise that when he is only the SoS for Justice.

 

Maybe the government should be telling what the economic plan is if we were to leave so we can all make an informed decision? At the minute Cameron and Osborne can make sure the Brexit campaign can't paint any picture of the future outside the EU because they hold the purse strings to the nation's finances.

[Dodgy Bob]

An interesting article from the FT: https://next.ft.com/content/8b5907c4-0797-11e6-a70d-4e39ac32c284

It looks at the potential aftermath of a Brexit vote in more detail than most coverage does.- glancing at different economic sectors, negotiating issues etc.

Pro-Brexit people criticise the Remain camp for "fear tactics". While I agree that the Remain people are employing fear tactics, the Brexit camp need to offer a much better explanation of what they will do if they win a "Leave" vote. At the moment, their response doesn't seem to amount to much more than: "We'll be alright, the EU needs our trade at least as much as we need theirs, so they'll negotiate a favorable deal....we've no idea on what terms yet, maybe something like Norway or Switzerland or Canada, we're not really sure. We'll sort that out after the referendum. It'll all be OK, don't worry".

Brexit need to come up with responses to some of the specific risks raised in this article.

Reads like problem after problem after problem, with no significant plus points in sight. I think we'd have to say that the economic argument for leaving amounts to nil.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

The problem is the Brexit camp can't really deliver any of this as the Brexit camp as a collective don't run the country, they can't make promises about treasury spending, I would hope that the money we get back from the EU would be used to make sure the farmers are still subsidised to the same extent that they are under the EU but Michael Gove can't stand up and promise that when he is only the SoS for Justice.

 

Maybe the government should be telling what the economic plan is if we were to leave so we can all make an informed decision? At the minute Cameron and Osborne can make sure the Brexit campaign can't paint any picture of the future outside the EU because they hold the purse strings to the nation's finances.

The Brexit campaign could set out clear priorities and intentions though couldn't they? They could actually do with putting together a mini manifesto for what they'd want to achieve in a period following Brexit so it's clear what people would be voting for if they chose to leave.

IF they could do that in a coherent way - that would be a very strong argument. It's a choice of the campaign not do this.

You can't expect the government to present an economic plan in case of an exit vote, when its position is to back Remain - that's akin to admitting you're going to lose... And let's face it, if the UK does return a vote for leaving, Cameron / Osborne would be out the door pretty quickly as well.

[Webbo]

The Bremain campaign have members from all the major parties and they all have different visions of the future. Pro Europe Labour will promise a different future to pro Europe Tories. It's a bit unfair to expect the brexit camp to promise one future when they come from different philosophies and so much of what might happen is out of their control.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

The Bremain campaign have members from all the major parties and they all have different visions of the future. Pro Europe Labour will promise a different future to pro Europe Tories. It's a bit unfair to expect the brexit camp to promise one future when they come from different philosophies and so much of what might happen is out of their control.

It's not the same, because with the remain view you at least know what the current position is. My point about the Brexit campaign is to deal with the bigger degree of unknowns it has because that's its biggest problem to securing what it wants.

Obama's speech has been a hammer blow to the Brexit cause today as well... It appeals to the moderate swing voter that both sides need to court in order to win.

[Guest MattP]

Project fear turns to Project threat from Obama.

His speech basically could be translated into "We value our special relationship but do what we say or you are at the back of the queue"

Cameron really does have to go ASAP, what an embarrassment, standing there telling the British people they have to do something because America tells us to.

Vote Leave have to handle this well, if they do they can use it to advantage, big if though.

[Sharpe's Fox]

Back of the queue for trade deals eh, Obama? Well I'd want to be as far away from the TTIP entry desk as possible before mining and oil drilling corporations start to sue elected governments because of lost profits (that they don't pay tax on) when parliament passes environmental legislation.

[Webbo]

It's not the same, because with the remain view you at least know what the current position is. My point about the Brexit campaign is to deal with the bigger degree of unknowns it has because that's its biggest problem to securing what it wants.

Obama's speech has been a hammer blow to the Brexit cause today as well... It appeals to the moderate swing voter that both sides need to court in order to win.

"Do what America tells you or else?" I doubt anyone's changed their mind over that.

[The Guvnor]

Project fear turns to Project threat from Obama.

His speech basically could be translated into "We value our special relationship but do what we say or you are at the back of the queue"

Cameron really does have to go ASAP, what an embarrassment, standing there telling the British people they have to do something because America tells us to.

Vote Leave have to handle this well, if they do they can use it to advantage, big if though.

So the US president has put his 10 penneth in, bit rich coming from a Country who would never relinquish their own sovereignty and form a political alliance with Canada and Mexico, and advice coming from a countries representative who are seriously considering a nutjob as their president, safe journey home mr Obama

[DJ Barry Hammond]

"Do what America tells you or else?" I doubt anyone's changed their mind over that.

That's my point - those who have already decided will keep their view... But those in the middle and unsure, this will weigh heavy on their mind.

[Webbo]

That's my point - those who have already decided will keep their view... But those in the middle and unsure, this will weigh heavy on their mind.

Or people will think  gfy.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Or people will think  gfy.

Any other US president maybe... But Obama - I dare say he's got a bigger approval rating here than any home based politician.

He was the lead headline all day today, his words were a big dent to some of the claims on trade deals the Brexit side have made and these will run more and more over the weekend and go into the minds of swing voters who want more information and a positive argument. True, it is still early in the contest, but given the way the Brexit side have attacked this 'intervention' with such gusto, they know how significant this might be.

Trying to gag a President where 'Freedom of Speech' is cherished was never going to work and so far, the Brexit camp haven't really landed much of a punch to counter Obama's claims - all they've done is appeal to the nature of people that would already be voting for them - so they will face a challenge to turn the tide on what has been a bad week all round for their campaign (Dominic Cummings suffered quite a bit in the Treasury Select Committee this week)

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/treasury-committee/news-parliament-2015/uks-eu-referendum-evidence-15-16/

http://www.ft.com/fastft/2016/04/20/vote-leave-campaign-grilled-by-select-committee/?ft_site=falcon&desktop=true

[Thracian]

"We like you, respect you and value your help when needed so long as you're guided by us even if there's no chance on earth that we would stand beholden to the whims of a partner who's changed so much they are totally beyond recognition....." was how it sounded to me. 

 

Well let me tell Obama this. We're perfectly capable (for now) of running our own country with our own laws and policies. That independence wouldn't preclude us working with and/or alongside Europe and America nor would it negate those people continuing to be the fairly natural allies they've become.

 

But this Brexit campaign has gathered pace for good reasons. People won't suddenly shy away from trading with us, we won't suddenly refuse to share security secrets with our allies and I don't suppose we'll stop sending our thoroughly combat-experienced military out to do its share of risk-taking whenever the Western world is threatened.

 

But there's a whole lot more trading out there to  encouraged quite apart from Europe and the US.   

 

Obama talked about our influence but it was empty words. We don't have nearly enough influence in the EU for a country that contributes so much and in so many ways.

 

If countries like Norway and Switzerland can remain healthy and wealthy outside the EU, I'm quite sure we can.

 

Look at the Audis, Mercedes and VW's you see on our roads. Does anyone seriously imagine those companies - and so many others - will refuse to trade with 70-million potential customers if we're out of the EU? No chance but even, if they did, I'm quite sure we'll be able to build our own vehicles - and using state-of-the-art technology - and all sorts of things made out of our own steel while we're at it. 

 

I feel more committed to "out" the more I read.  Back to the land of education, education, education I hope - including the training of far more doctors and nurses I hope - just as I hope Obama quickly disappears into the sunset with his shameless hypocrisy. Anyone can be a friend when they're able to manipulate you, but if his EU speech reflects his attitudes, it shows what a fickle "friend" he is underneath.    

[Guest MattP]

Oh dear, just a basic glance on Twitter (notoriously left wing) and this could backfire.

Seems to have finally fired up the Corbynistas...well if the USA wants it!

As for you David Cameron, pack your bags, you are going whether we stay or go.

[Great Boos Up]

What started as a great select few of common european countries has turned into a bit of monster.

We are still commonwealth too.

[Guest MattP]

Back of the queue?

Well that line wasn't prepared by Cameron was it? How many Americans do you know who use the word queue?

[Alf Bentley]

Back of the queue?

Well that line wasn't prepared by Cameron was it? How many Americans do you know who use the word queue?

 

 

I think you're over-estimating Cameron's influence and under-estimating Obama's intelligence. I imagine that Obama deliberately used the word "queue" because he was addressing his comments to the British public. British PMs like Heath & Blair have even spoken French on foreign trips, I think. I can't imagine that Obama feels that he owes Cameron some favour, still less that Cameron wrote his speech. I assume he sees it as in American interests for the UK to remain in the EU and was seeking to influence the result of the referendum. You might criticise him for intervening in a domestic debate, but if the Brexit people are going around saying that we should leave the EU and sign separate trade deals all around the world, surely he's justified in making clear that the US would prefer us to stay in the EU and sees it as detrimental to US interests for us to leave? Ultimately, it's our decision and US-UK trade wouldn't cease, but the US is clearly focused on the US-EU free trade treaty (TTIP).

 

Ironically, it's partly because the UK has historically shared the American "deregulated, free market" approach to global capitalism that Obama wants us to stay in the EU, to influence a large trading bloc in that direction and away from the more regulated approach preferred by other major EU nations. Indeed, some other EU nations tend to see us as a Trojan horse for the US - doing its bidding in Europe. The French habitually refer to "les Anglo-Saxons", meaning the US, UK and other English-speaking nations who favour deregulated free trade.

 

Ironically, the TTIP US-EU free trade deal is one of the reasons why I'm still not sure which way I'll vote (though tending "Remain"): lots more deregulation, loss of rights, outsourcing of public services and promotion of the rights of global corporations over those of citizens....the sort of thing that Thatcherites would favour and lefties would not: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_Trade_and_Investment_Partnership. Politicians involved are now saying that they'd never give US corporations the legal right to compete to run NHS services and that the treaty will have to be passed by every national parliament in the EU (& US Congress), but can they be trusted? Mind you, given US power, I don't suppose we'd get a much better deal if we were outside the EU - particularly not with a government, like the current one (and New Labour), that is highly favourable to privatisation and global corporate interests.....

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Back of the queue?

Well that line wasn't prepared by Cameron was it? How many Americans do you know who use the word queue?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2581034/British-invasion-Americans-start-saying-Queue-thanks-Netflix-33-million-U-S-subscribers.html

[Alf Bentley]

Nobody commenting on Boris' "part-Kenyan" comments, then? 

 

For a man with a history of referring to Africans as "piccaninnies" with "water-melon smiles", Boris De Pfeffel Johnson is treading a thin line there! 

 

Admittedly, Boris' De Pfeffel ancestors in the German aristocracy were a few generations back. Likewise Nigel Huguenot-Le Farage's French connections. But what about Priti Patel? She didn't just have 1 (absentee) foreign parent like Obama, both her parents were Ugandan Indians. Is she supporting Brexit due to a historic family loyalty to Uganda or India?   As for Jocko McGove and Liam "Caber Tosser" Fox, whisper it gently, but I'm pretty sure they're Scottish so will they have England's, I mean Britain's best interests at heart? If Brexit happens and the Scots leave the UK, will we able to revoke their passports and tell them to pack their kilts and take the high road? I bet they won't be celebrating St. George's Day! 

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Ironically, the TTIP US-EU free trade deal is one of the reasons why I'm still not sure which way I'll vote (though tending "Remain"): lots more deregulation, loss of rights, outsourcing of public services and promotion of the rights of global corporations over those of citizens....the sort of thing that Thatcherites would favour and lefties would not: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_Trade_and_Investment_Partnership.

Politicians involved are now saying that they'd never give US corporations the legal right to compete to run NHS services and that the treaty will have to be passed by every national parliament in the EU (& US Congress), but can they be trusted? Mind you, given US power, I don't suppose we'd get a much better deal if we were outside the EU - particularly not with a government, like the current one (and New Labour), that is highly favourable to privatisation and global corporate interests.....

I think so - the EU isn't completely oblivious to the bad image it's developed, not just here but across the continent and Junker's recent comments about the EU being less involved in people's lives is in my mind a good sign that there is an intention to change tact. It knows it needs to get more people onside because if too many anti EU MEP's get elected and refuse to vote on the merits of anything it turns into gridlock.

Additionally, immigration is a growing concern in enough European countries for me to think the "Free Movement of People" principal aspect will be up for discussion and could be revised from a universal right to a qualified right in certain circumstances.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Alf - I felt Boris comments, which were then raised by Farage later in the day, were best ignored really.

[Webbo]

Nobody commenting on Boris' "part-Kenyan" comments, then? 

 

I haven't heard it in context but on the face of it it's quite a shocking thing to say. I can't imagine how he thought it would help his argument.