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

[Rincewind]

They are already being portrayed as squabbling over other issues, they do not need the EU added to the list. In or out when it is over maybe they can focus on a little unity which is the most important thing for them to do.

[Webbo]

It is far more important for Labour (and the country to some degree) to have a party full stop, than to pick sides on this debate and put themselves in a position of being wiped out.

Corbyn's doing a good job on that already. It's no good talking about a new kind of politics while ducking the issue.

[Alf Bentley]

I see some of the EU issues differently from Webbo. However, I agree that it will be utterly irresponsible if Labour is perceived to be sitting on the fence.  

 

This is the single biggest decision to face voters in my lifetime. The outcome will play a crucial part in determining what sort of country we live in - possibly for several decades.

 

Labour has an agreed "Remain" position. The Labour majority who support that position should do so vigorously. The minority who favour "Leave" should also argue that case openly (from a Left, not a Right perspective). There is no reason why such divergences should split or destroy the party. Some Labour MPs are on different sides already, and the Tories are split down the middle on this. Argue the different cases openly, vigorously but civilly - then get on and work with the outcome.

 

One thing that I do wonder about is why the media is giving so little coverage to Labour people who definitely ARE campaigning vigorously. Alan Johnson is leading the Labour Remain lot, but I've seen very little of him on TV news. Likewise, Gisela Stuart & Kate Hoey are campaigning for "Leave", yet I've never heard a word from either on the TV news (or is it just me?). The whole debate seems to be Boris/Nigel & co versus Dave/George & co. That seriously needs to change over the next few weeks.

 

I can understand why Corbyn might not be enthused by the EU (I have major doubts myself), but he needs to stand up and be counted. I know that he made a big speech a couple of weeks ago, but he's generally said little about this massive issue. If he has come to believe in the EU or accepts the will of the party, he should argue that case vigorously. If, like many on the Left, he is still a Eurosceptic at heart and sees that as important, he should have made a stand against his Party majority on that. He made a stand over British nukes, unlikely to be of critical importance given the much bigger arsenals held by others. Yet he pipes down over this issue that will probably have a major impact on everybody, for better or worse?!? 

 

Labour might not have opted for a referendum (wrongly, in my view) but a referendum is happening and it matters big-time. I'm glad that Gordon Brown sees the importance of the issue, even if some other Labourites seem not to.

[digitalalba]

I came on this thread to check the latest poll figures?

[SMX11]

 

Brexit: The Movie if anyone is interested.

[Stadt]

I want to vote leave out of curiosity more than anything, is anybody else in the same boat? 

[Sharpe's Fox]

As a Labour voter I'm pretty glad that JC and the party aren't weighing in to the debate too heavily not only because I'm an outer but because there are arguments in the Leave campaign that the Labour Party used to argue themselves. The EU supports free market capitalism yet the party traditionally doesn't, the party want to secure workers rights yet cheap labour from Eastern Europe drives down wages, the leadership extol the virtues of state ownership yet the EU actively outlaws it. It's difficult for Labour members to campaign for a neoliberal institution that are opposed so heavily to their core values.

[Webbo]

 

Brexit: The Movie if anyone is interested.

That really is excellent. A couple of silly bits in the middle but I don't know how any one can deny what's said.

[Alf Bentley]

As a Labour voter I'm pretty glad that JC and the party aren't weighing in to the debate too heavily not only because I'm an outer but because there are arguments in the Leave campaign that the Labour Party used to argue themselves. The EU supports free market capitalism yet the party traditionally doesn't, the party want to secure workers rights yet cheap labour from Eastern Europe drives down wages, the leadership extol the virtues of state ownership yet the EU actively outlaws it. It's difficult for Labour members to campaign for a neoliberal institution that are opposed so heavily to their core values.

 

 

The points in your second and third sentences are valid arguments from a Leftist "Leave" perspective, even if I mainly disagree with them. It's a shame these arguments aren't being debated (apart from the migrant labour issue, on populist right-wing terms). I don't understand why you're glad that Labour people on both sides seem to be having so little input, meaning that the debate is dominated by Tories & UKIP (even the New Labour "Remain" lot seem pretty quiet). There's no reason why there can't be Labour people on both sides (there already are, anyway - and the Tories are split down the middle).

 

I won't be posting much for the next couple of days, but briefly, on your arguments:

- The EU is more of a machine for big business than I'd like (& its crushing of a democratically-elected Leftist govt in Greece was a disgrace), but is it more "free market capitalist" than the UK Govt? The Rightists leading the Leave campaign complain of too MUCH EU regulation of free-market capitalism (labour/social/environmental regulation) & the EU does redistribute funds/invest in development in poorer areas (mainly in other countries, but includes Scotland, Wales, N. Ireland, Merseyside & Cornwall).

- On cheap migrant labour, a genuine issue, there are tools we can use to address this whether or not we leave the EU (minimum wage, labour inspectors, union campaigns, legislation on advertising/competition for jobs).

- While EU competition law has some impact, the EU certainly DOES NOT prohibit state ownership; indeed almost all EU countries have MORE state ownership than us, including most railways, many utilities, even car-making and shipbuilding firms:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterpriseThe EU didn't prevent us nationalising Railtrack/Network Rail or the East Coast train line (now privatised again), did they? 

- I'd argue that for decades the British government has been more of a "neo-liberal institution" than the EU (particularly under the Tories, but even under New Labour). There's a valid democratic argument that Labour could win electoral support for more left-wing policies than might be possible within the EU (taking Greece as an example), but you'd have to be a massive optimist to believe that is going to happen any time soon. Leave or Remain, we're all second-guessing the future long-term, but neo-liberal values look set to dominate in the short/medium-term. Maybe I'm wrong and Corbyn will triumph in 2020 or a Leave vote will shatter the Tories & have the electorate clamouring for left-wing policies. Much more likely that Eurosceptic Tories will get on with ripping the social fabric of the country to shreds. What's more, if there is a downturn/turbulence (even the Leave people expect this short-term), the atmosphere could get toxic - particularly if our former EU partners are perceived to be taking a tough line on the negotiation of new trade deals etc. I can imagine a serious upsurge in social problems, public discontent - and extreme racism, in response to that scenario (even accepting the argument that the UK can thrive economically in the medium-term).

 

Got to go now, but I'm glad to see you putting the Left-Leave perspective up for debate - a shame neither Left-Leave nor Left-Remain seems to be having much input nationally yet (G. Brown apart), though there's still time....

[Guest MattP]

The points in your second and third sentences are valid arguments from a Leftist "Leave" perspective, even if I mainly disagree with them. It's a shame these arguments aren't being debated (apart from the migrant labour issue, on populist right-wing terms). I don't understand why you're glad that Labour people on both sides seem to be having so little input, meaning that the debate is dominated by Tories & UKIP (even the New Labour "Remain" lot seem pretty quiet). There's no reason why there can't be Labour people on both sides (there already are, anyway - and the Tories are split down the middle).

 

I won't be posting much for the next couple of days, but briefly, on your arguments:

- The EU is more of a machine for big business than I'd like (& its crushing of a democratically-elected Leftist govt in Greece was a disgrace), but is it more "free market capitalist" than the UK Govt? The Rightists leading the Leave campaign complain of too MUCH EU regulation of free-market capitalism (labour/social/environmental regulation) & the EU does redistribute funds/invest in development in poorer areas (mainly in other countries, but includes Scotland, Wales, N. Ireland, Merseyside & Cornwall).

- On cheap migrant labour, a genuine issue, there are tools we can use to address this whether or not we leave the EU (minimum wage, labour inspectors, union campaigns, legislation on advertising/competition for jobs).

- While EU competition law has some impact, the EU certainly DOES NOT prohibit state ownership; indeed almost all EU countries have MORE state ownership than us, including most railways, many utilities, even car-making and shipbuilding firms:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterpriseThe EU didn't prevent us nationalising Railtrack/Network Rail or the East Coast train line (now privatised again), did they? 

- I'd argue that for decades the British government has been more of a "neo-liberal institution" than the EU (particularly under the Tories, but even under New Labour). There's a valid democratic argument that Labour could win electoral support for more left-wing policies than might be possible within the EU (taking Greece as an example), but you'd have to be a massive optimist to believe that is going to happen any time soon. Leave or Remain, we're all second-guessing the future long-term, but neo-liberal values look set to dominate in the short/medium-term. Maybe I'm wrong and Corbyn will triumph in 2020 or a Leave vote will shatter the Tories & have the electorate clamouring for left-wing policies. Much more likely that Eurosceptic Tories will get on with ripping the social fabric of the country to shreds. What's more, if there is a downturn/turbulence (even the Leave people expect this short-term), the atmosphere could get toxic - particularly if our former EU partners are perceived to be taking a tough line on the negotiation of new trade deals etc. I can imagine a serious upsurge in social problems, public discontent - and extreme racism, in response to that scenario (even accepting the argument that the UK can thrive economically in the medium-term).

 

Got to go now, but I'm glad to see you putting the Left-Leave perspective up for debate - a shame neither Left-Leave nor Left-Remain seems to be having much input nationally yet (G. Brown apart), though there's still time....

 

That for me is where the whole argument begins and ends.

 

As soon as we talk about an organisation that is willing to crush the democratic will of the people for it's own benefit no one should want anything to do with it.

[Sharpe's Fox]

I won't be posting much for the next couple of days, but briefly, on your arguments:

- The EU is more of a machine for big business than I'd like (& its crushing of a democratically-elected Leftist govt in Greece was a disgrace), but is it more "free market capitalist" than the UK Govt? The Rightists leading the Leave campaign complain of too MUCH EU regulation of free-market capitalism (labour/social/environmental regulation) & the EU does redistribute funds/invest in development in poorer areas (mainly in other countries, but includes Scotland, Wales, N. Ireland, Merseyside & Cornwall). We can change the government and its economic policy but can't change the  institution of EU free markets as it's a cornerstone of the entire project.

 

- On cheap migrant labour, a genuine issue, there are tools we can use to address this whether or not we leave the EU (minimum wage, labour inspectors, union campaigns, legislation on advertising/competition for jobs). I don't want to sound like a 'Kipper but none of that will solve the underlying issue of the free movement of people who can survive with a much lower wage than any UK counterpart.

 

- While EU competition law has some impact, the EU certainly DOES NOT prohibit state ownership; indeed almost all EU countries have MORE state ownership than us, including most railways, many utilities, even car-making and shipbuilding firms:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterpriseThe EU didn't prevent us nationalising Railtrack/Network Rail or the East Coast train line (now privatised again), did they? The foreign institutions you cite as examples are retained national enterprises from the postwar era and the EU is actively lobbying the individual states to put them on sale. The issue, for me, is over renationalisation of assets where the market has let down the consumer.

 

- I'd argue that for decades the British government has been more of a "neo-liberal institution" than the EU (particularly under the Tories, but even under New Labour). There's a valid democratic argument that Labour could win electoral support for more left-wing policies than might be possible within the EU (taking Greece as an example), but you'd have to be a massive optimist to believe that is going to happen any time soon. Leave or Remain, we're all second-guessing the future long-term, but neo-liberal values look set to dominate in the short/medium-term. Maybe I'm wrong and Corbyn will triumph in 2020 or a Leave vote will shatter the Tories & have the electorate clamouring for left-wing policies. Much more likely that Eurosceptic Tories will get on with ripping the social fabric of the country to shreds. What's more, if there is a downturn/turbulence (even the Leave people expect this short-term), the atmosphere could get toxic - particularly if our former EU partners are perceived to be taking a tough line on the negotiation of new trade deals etc. I can imagine a serious upsurge in social problems, public discontent - and extreme racism, in response to that scenario (even accepting the argument that the UK can thrive economically in the medium-term). Your point of a Corbyn led party being unlikely to win a GE is a valid one and one I was conflicted myself about, but I came to the conclusion that I won't be cowed by the prospect of a long Tory term in government and have decided to not compromise on what I think on the issue in discussion. I certainly won't feel guilty about any social discontent in the event of a Leave vote, it may be a trigger but any causes would be deep rooted and most probably unrelated.

[GloverFox]

... working for a big 'foreign' owned company they have gone out of their way to promote the importance of 'us' staying in ... and it's obvious it benefits big business for no working gains. But what has really started to gall me is the number of foreign mouth pieces proclaiming we 'must' vote to stay in or face the consequences ... Well! Very well done to these folks as you've made my decision to vote out so much easier ... after all when would America vote to hand over sovereignty or allow Canada for example to set their laws? Enough of the bullying and scare mongering ... stop paying for EU beurocrasy and start putting the money into our own country where we have enough problems already (whilst we are IN the bloody EU!!!!) enough ... Out it is!

[DJ Barry Hammond]

That really is excellent. A couple of silly bits in the middle but I don't know how any one can deny what's said.

I watched all of it... there are a couple of interesting areas...

When it goes on about regulation and how less regulation is more beneficial - well that just happens to ignore the recent financial crash which was allowed to happen because there were no regulation to reign in bad practices.

It also ignores the cheating bastardness of companies these days - like food manufactures chucking loads of salt / sugar into food to get people hooked. Or German car manufactures that fit in a cheat device to make it look like their vehicles pass emission tests. The truth is there is a balance of legislation is needed - otherwise you may end up with higher output, but less quality output.

There was also the bit it went on about the number of laws - but didn't care to tell us what any of them are. Now yes, the sheer numbers may seem amazing in isolation, but when you look close at the regulations in force (labelling requirements for example), it starts to make more sense.

It was also interesting that it tried to tackle the debate on largely an economic argument, one which is not going to hold very well against the weight of alternative opinion on the matter - and that it put up the 'Swiss model' as its base, but refused to mention the fact that Switzerland model adopts quite a bit of EU rules included something a lot of Brexiters don't like and that is open border immigration.

But my biggest annoyance with two of the main characters in this - Farage and Hannan are MEP's, so why have neither either resigned from their position in protest OR made more of an effort to try and effect positive change from within? IF there ideas held traction with a sufficient majority, the EU would have had to move in that direction.

[Webbo]

I watched all of it... there are a couple of interesting areas...

When it goes on about regulation and how less regulation is more beneficial - well that just happens to ignore the recent financial crash which was allowed to happen because there were no regulation to reign in bad practices.

It also ignores the cheating bastardness of companies these days - like food manufactures chucking loads of salt / sugar into food to get people hooked. Or German car manufactures that fit in a cheat device to make it look like their vehicles pass emission tests. The truth is there is a balance of legislation is needed - otherwise you may end up with higher output, but less quality output.

There was also the bit it went on about the number of laws - but didn't care to tell us what any of them are. Now yes, the sheer numbers may seem amazing in isolation, but when you look close at the regulations in force (labelling requirements for example), it starts to make more sense.

It was also interesting that it tried to tackle the debate on largely an economic argument, one which is not going to hold very well against the weight of alternative opinion on the matter - and that it put up the 'Swiss model' as its base, but refused to mention the fact that Switzerland model adopts quite a bit of EU rules included something a lot of Brexiters don't like and that is open border immigration.

But my biggest annoyance with two of the main characters in this - Farage and Hannan are MEP's, so why have neither either resigned from their position in protest OR made more of an effort to try and effect positive change from within? IF there ideas held traction with a sufficient majority, the EU would have had to move in that direction.

Did you see the bit about letting bad businesses fail and make way for new businesses? It can apply to the banks just the same as steel makers. The banks took risks because they knew they wouldn't be allowed to fail.

 

As for sugar and salt, we all know about these things but how many of us really care? Nobody can possibly pretend not to know smoking's bad for you but people still take up smoking. It's just an elitist conceit that we're all too stupid to know what's good for us and we need them to organise our lives.

 

The most interesting bit for me was the fact that the European Parliament can't propose or repeal any legislation, all that's decided by unelected bureaucrats. Hannan and Farage won't resign their seats because what would be the point? Ignoring it won't make it go away . They are campaigning to do away with their jobs though.

[Cheese]

Personally I will be voting to stay for the simple reason that when the Chinese world expansion happens in the next 50 years, good European relations will be vital in order to fend them off.

[Webbo]

Personally I will be voting to stay for the simple reason that when the Chinese world expansion happens in the next 50 years, good European relations will be vital in order to fend them off.

You think the rest of the world is going to let China invade just because we aren't in the EU? We're still in NATO you know?

[Dodgy Bob]

The old China bogeyman argument, bit of a dinasour that, don't you think cheese?

[Cheese]

You think the rest of the world is going to let China invade just because we aren't in the EU? We're still in NATO you know?

I feel that remaining in the EU will grant us more world security and co-operation which I feel will become more valuable as the world population increases and resources begin to dwindle.

[bovril]

Godzilla?

[Finnaldo]

Really moving over to Leave at this point, from a left-leaning view it's seeming the best for the people and workers.

[Rincewind]

Still unsure but it seems there will be no difference for a lot of people. Workers rights etc were won by our own people and in some areas better than the continent. The ones who benefit most by being in are the multi corporations. My sister owns a small business and has said she would benefit more by leaving. I had always thought of it the other way round but I may be wrong.

[Dodgy Bob]

Really moving over to Leave at this point, from a left-leaning view it's seeming the best for the people and workers.

What benefits do you think leaving will bring for workers? The job market is almost certain to tank for at least two to three years, maybe longer.

There are already signs the market is slowing down to a crawl just in preparation for the vote.

It will take two messy years just to get out of the EU and then more to get back to where we are now with European trade.

Businesses will certainly hold back on investment during that time. The public sector can't pick up the slack because the tories are commited to austerity

It's a big disastrous recession waiting to happen and it will be the workers who pay the price, just like it always is.

[Webbo]

Employment is slowing down due to the big increase in wages from the living wage, recessions  happen whether we're in the EU or not.

[Dodgy Bob]

Employment is slowing down due to the big increase in wages from the living wage, recessions happen whether we're in the EU or not.

I don't think there's any evidence that the living wage is increasing unemployment, at least not yet. Wage growth actually slowed in the last quarter, while unemployment went up.

Recessions, like car accidents, do happen from time to time. Like car accidents, you wouldn't usually want to have a recession on purpose.

A negative financial impact is going to be very tangible for most people. They'll really feel it in their pockets. Whereas, five years after we leave, most people won't be able to name more than two laws that have changed in their favour, just like most people can't name two EU laws they don't like now.

[Webbo]

I don't think there's any evidence that the living wage is increasing unemployment, at least not yet. Wage growth actually slowed in the last quarter, while unemployment went up.

Recessions, like car accidents, do happen from time to time. Like car accidents, you wouldn't usually want to have a recession on purpose.

A negative financial impact is going to be very tangible for most people. They'll really feel it in their pockets. Whereas, five years after we leave, most people won't be able to name more than two laws that have changed in their favour, just like most people can't name two EU laws they don't like now.

The living wage didn't start until April so it wouldn't affect wage growth in the last quarter, I'd guess that firms would change their recruitment policies in anticipation of it.