EU referendum opinion poll.

[Thracian]

Final point:  Out of the EU the UK will surely continue to exist and will most likely supplement any lost trade (or at least some of it) by increasing ties with other countries further afield.  This is most likely true.  If that is all that matters for you and none of the other fiscal, social, or environmental implications of a better integrated Europe matter to you then you are right to vote out.

 

I'll be voting in because the best thing for the planet, let alone Europe, is for all nations to cooperate on economic, political, and environmental matters as closely as they can and the EU is currently one of the best political tools towards achieving that aim.  Leave and the out voters will soon start seeing the EU introduce policy directives aimed at helping Europe which they disagree with and react with indignation when we have no power at all to change it because we've given up our seat at the debate table (you're kidding yourself if you think we'd still be allowed any influence over EU decision making because 'Britain's special').

Britain's exit will either demand a massive rethink by the EU or it will disintegrate. We have no influence of any consequence on the debate anyway.

We will have far more influence on the outside in the end. And more than anything we'll no longer be a virtually disregarded and too often disrespected player in mainland Europe's loaded card game.

We'll need to change too. We'll need to abandon the naive philosophies that have been thrown in our faces and set standards of education, performance and personnel that offer an example others want to follow.

We need to understand the way the world is evolving, where our best friendships lie and on what terms.

Our nation needs to be fit and strong again, at every level and in every way and to stop scoring own goals.

Finally, The Human Rights legislation needs to be torn up and replaced with something that not only offers fairness and justice for those accused of crime but far greater consideration for victims of crime and for the welfare of those affected by crime.

PS: Just read Gove's statement and I'm entirely encouraged.

[Webbo]

That's a fantastic statement from Michael Gove. I agree with every word.

[Carl the Llama]

Quick note:  One of the most intelligent men in Westminster doesn't know that the European Commission is elected by MEPs and that when it generates new laws every day (one of its key raisons d'etre) they still have to be approved by the aforementioned MEPs and by the heads of state, either that or he's deliberately misrepresenting the other side of the argument.  Actually it's probably the second one reading on to his fantastically scaremongering description of how courts of law function.

 

Please just look into how the institution functions yourselves using the vast online resources available to you all instead of inhaling that particularly bad example of fact skewing.

[digitalalba]

Tony Benn

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/15/10-of-the-best-tony-benn-quotes-as-picked-by-our-readers

We can't vote out the leader of the EU, we can only leave the EU.

[digitalalba]

Statement from Michael Gove MP. Delighted to have a man widely considered as one of the most intelligent in Westminster behind the leave campaign; hopefully Boris will follow suit and put his country before his party unlike some of the other cowards in the cabinet.

For weeks now I have been wrestling with the most difficult decision of my political life. But taking difficult decisions is what politicians are paid to do. No-one is forced to stand for Parliament, no-one is compelled to become a minister. If you take on those roles, which are great privileges, you also take on big responsibilities.

I was encouraged to stand for Parliament by David Cameron and he has given me the opportunity to serve in what I believe is a great, reforming Government. I think he is an outstanding Prime Minister. There is, as far as I can see, only one significant issue on which we have differed.

And that is the future of the UK in the European Union.

It pains me to have to disagree with the Prime Minister on any issue. My instinct is to support him through good times and bad.

But I cannot duck the choice which the Prime Minister has given every one of us. In a few months time we will all have the opportunity to decide whether Britain should stay in the European Union or leave. I believe our country would be freer, fairer and better off outside the EU. And if, at this moment of decision, I didn’t say what I believe I would not be true to my convictions or my country.

I don’t want to take anything away from the Prime Minister’s dedicated efforts to get a better deal for Britain. He has negotiated with courage and tenacity. But I think Britain would be stronger outside the EU.

My starting point is simple. I believe that the decisions which govern all our lives, the laws we must all obey and the taxes we must all pay should be decided by people we choose and who we can throw out if we want change. If power is to be used wisely, if we are to avoid corruption and complacency in high office, then the public must have the right to change laws and Governments at election time.

But our membership of the European Union prevents us being able to change huge swathes of law and stops us being able to choose who makes critical decisions which affect all our lives. Laws which govern citizens in this country are decided by politicians from other nations who we never elected and can’t throw out. We can take out our anger on elected representatives in Westminster but whoever is in Government in London cannot remove or reduce VAT, cannot support a steel plant through troubled times, cannot build the houses we need where they’re needed and cannot deport all the individuals who shouldn’t be in this country. I believe that needs to change. And I believe that both the lessons of our past and the shape of the future make the case for change compelling.

The ability to choose who governs us, and the freedom to change laws we do not like, were secured for us in the past by radicals and liberals who took power from unaccountable elites and placed it in the hands of the people. As a result of their efforts we developed, and exported to nations like the US, India, Canada and Australia a system of democratic self-government which has brought prosperity and peace to millions.

Our democracy stood the test of time. We showed the world what a free people could achieve if they were allowed to govern themselves.

In Britain we established trial by jury in the modern world, we set up the first free parliament, we ensured no-one could be arbitrarily detained at the behest of the Government, we forced our rulers to recognise they ruled by consent not by right, we led the world in abolishing slavery, we established free education for all, national insurance, the National Health Service and a national broadcaster respected across the world.

By way of contrast, the European Union, despite the undoubted idealism of its founders and the good intentions of so many leaders, has proved a failure on so many fronts. The euro has created economic misery for Europe’s poorest people. European Union regulation has entrenched mass unemployment. EU immigration policies have encouraged people traffickers and brought desperate refugee camps to our borders.

Far from providing security in an uncertain world, the EU’s policies have become a source of instability and insecurity. Razor wire once more criss-crosses the continent, historic tensions between nations such as Greece and Germany have resurfaced in ugly ways and the EU is proving incapable of dealing with the current crises in Libya and Syria. The former head of Interpol says the EU’s internal borders policy is “like hanging a sign welcoming terrorists to Europe” and Scandinavian nations which once prided themselves on their openness are now turning in on themselves. All of these factors, combined with popular anger at the lack of political accountability, has encouraged extremism, to the extent that far-right parties are stronger across the continent than at any time since the 1930s.

The EU is an institution rooted in the past and is proving incapable of reforming to meet the big technological, demographic and economic challenges of our time. It was developed in the 1950s and 1960s and like other institutions which seemed modern then, from tower blocks to telexes, it is now hopelessly out of date. The EU tries to standardise and regulate rather than encourage diversity and innovation. It is an analogue union in a digital age.

The EU is built to keep power and control with the elites rather than the people. Even though we are outside the euro we are still subject to an unelected EU commission which is generating new laws every day and an unaccountable European Court in Luxembourg which is extending its reach every week, increasingly using the Charter of Fundamental Rights which in many ways gives the EU more power and reach than ever before. This growing EU bureaucracy holds us back in every area. EU rules dictate everything from the maximum size of containers in which olive oil may be sold (five litres) to the distance houses have to be from heathland to prevent cats chasing birds (five kilometres).

Individually these rules may be comical. Collectively, and there are tens of thousands of them, they are inimical to creativity, growth and progress. Rules like the EU clinical trials directive have slowed down the creation of new drugs to cure terrible diseases and ECJ judgements on data protection issues hobble the growth of internet companies. As a minister I’ve seen hundreds of new EU rules cross my desk, none of which were requested by the UK Parliament, none of which I or any other British politician could alter in any way and none of which made us freer, richer or fairer.

It is hard to overstate the degree to which the EU is a constraint on ministers' ability to do the things they were elected to do, or to use their judgment about the right course of action for the people of this country. I have long had concerns about our membership of the EU but the experience of Government has only deepened my conviction that we need change. Every single day, every single minister is told: 'Yes Minister, I understand, but I'm afraid that's against EU rules'. I know it. My colleagues in government know it. And the British people ought to know it too: your government is not, ultimately, in control in hundreds of areas that matter.

But by leaving the EU we can take control. Indeed we can show the rest of Europe the way to flourish. Instead of grumbling and complaining about the things we can’t change and growing resentful and bitter, we can shape an optimistic, forward-looking and genuinely internationalist alternative to the path the EU is going down. We can show leadership. Like the Americans who declared their independence and never looked back, we can become an exemplar of what an inclusive, open and innovative democracy can achieve.

We can take back the billions we give to the EU, the money which is squandered on grand parliamentary buildings and bureaucratic follies, and invest it in science and technology, schools and apprenticeships. We can get rid of the regulations which big business uses to crush competition and instead support new start-up businesses and creative talent. We can forge trade deals and partnerships with nations across the globe, helping developing countries to grow and benefiting from faster and better access to new markets.

We are the world’s fifth largest economy, with the best armed forces of any nation, more Nobel Prizes than any European country and more world-leading universities than any European country. Our economy is more dynamic than the Eurozone, we have the most attractive capital city on the globe, the greatest “soft power” and global influence of any state and a leadership role in NATO and the UN. Are we really too small, too weak and too powerless to make a success of self-rule? On the contrary, the reason the EU’s bureaucrats oppose us leaving is they fear that our success outside will only underline the scale of their failure.

This chance may never come again in our lifetimes, which is why I will be true to my principles and take the opportunity this referendum provides to leave an EU mired in the past and embrace a better future.

He had a nightmare decision to make, I've known ever since I knew how shit the EU is, for years. It isn't rocket science, Gove was hoping for a deal with Cameron, May got it, so Gove is 'Out'. Gove could also have be given the short straw to wreck the Out campaign so that we vote to stay in. He loves Cameroon so much he disagrees with him on something this big??

 

Lets hope NO predomanent Conservative or Labour MP is the Out campaigns 'leader'.

[Rincewind]

Matts turned into Thracian.

[Guest MattP]

Boris set to back Brexit, absolutely huge. He's the big figure needed.

If we vote to stay in it makes him a shoo in for leader next election, if we vote out Cameron can **** off and let Boris call an immediate GE v Corbyn.

[ousefox]

Cameron is putting out such a confused message on Marr. It's like he doesn't understand what sovereignty means. Either that or he just can't admit that the EU massively limits our sovereignty.

[Guest MattP]

It's been ten minutes of pure obfuscation, he's trying to argue being overruled by European courts isn't having your sovereignty taken away.

Imagine an American president trying to pull that off, they'd be laughed out of office.

[Guest MattP]

Sunday Mail giving Cameron hell today, can see the Mail and the Sun both backing Brexit.

[ousefox]

It's been ten minutes of pure obfuscation, he's trying to argue being overruled by European courts isn't having your sovereignty taken away.

Imagine an American president trying to pull that off, they'd be laughed out of office.

I don't know if he's been told to keep using 'sovereignty' as a buzzword for people who don't understand the EU. Sovereignty is only maintained ostensibly through the ability to repeal the EC Act. You simply can't defend the fact that it's a huge limitation on our sovereignty.

I've not had time to make my own mind up yet but that was a pretty weak defence of the EU our PM put out today. Maybe I should give him the benefit of the doubt and put it down to tiredness!

[Strokes]

It's a fault in the structure of the UK government that someone can vote for the Lib Dems and end up with them in coalition with the party that most starkly contrasts with that person's political views, it's not the fault of the EU that our system sucks.  See, I can do it too.

I'm pretty sure you were for an alternative vote system which would have made every government a coalition, so I'm not sure you really believe what you write.

[The Year Of The Fox]

I like Cameron but I'm annoyed with what little he set out to achieve. I think full control of our own borders and being able to abolish some of the ridiculous Human Rights Acts that have tied our hands for many a year would've been some of the changes I'd have wanted him pressing for.

Instead, he's come back having been offered virtually nothing. Reading yesterday about the Child Benefits for migrant workers really opened my eyes as to how much we're currently governed by the EU.

It's an 'out' vote for me

[Guest MattP]

If anyone doubted just how important getting Gove on board was it was him that apparantly convinced Boris Johnson to come with him over a four hour dinner.

[leicsmac]

I honestly think that this vote is going to come down to a straight battle of beliefs: those who believe in the idea of nation-state primacy and those who do not.

 

Personally, I think the EU at a micromanagement level is doomed to fail precisely because of so many people with that strong belief in the idea of nationalism, all wanting different things and so compromise either being difficult or impossible to reach - a bureaucratic black hole, as it were. I'd like to see us all actually getting along as human beings rather than being divided over petty shit like what lines were drawn on a map hundreds of years ago and the tradition of killing each other over such matters, but pragmatically I don't see that happening.

 

But...I would like to see the EU co-operate at least on long term big projects, like the ESA (which is working reasonably) and more projects to go with energy supply, conservation and the like.

 

PS. If a Brexit means we don't get another Tim Peake and we have to instead spend the next fifty years figuring how to get someone into space using our own tech then the 'Out' voters can go play in the traffic.   Hopefully that's not the case though, can anyone confirm?

[Thracian]

Some reports - and a local pretend vote in Corby - suggest as high as 81% want to leave the EU.

Haha Sturgeon's already saying the Scots will likely want another referendum on their own independence if the "out" vote wins.

Why am I not surprised - perhaps we should give her one a week til she gets her own way!

With so many Scots in Corby, I wouldn't say the vote there offers her much encouragement.

Nationally, from the clips I've listened to so far, the "leavers" seem much more willing to answer questions frankly than the "stayers".

And, if the UK has as much influence as the "stayers" pretend then, how the hell have we surrendered so much and allowed ourselves to be manipulated so shamelessly?

[Guest MattP]

I don't get what the EU has to do with Tim Peake?

Don't the Americans and Russians pretty much control the ISS?

[Webbo]

I honestly think that this vote is going to come down to a straight battle of beliefs: those who believe in the idea of nation-state primacy and those who do not.

 

Personally, I think the EU at a micromanagement level is doomed to fail precisely because of so many people with that strong belief in the idea of nationalism, all wanting different things and so compromise either being difficult or impossible to reach - a bureaucratic black hole, as it were. I'd like to see us all actually getting along as human beings rather than being divided over petty shit like what lines were drawn on a map hundreds of years ago and the tradition of killing each other over such matters, but pragmatically I don't see that happening.

 

But...I would like to see the EU co-operate at least on long term big projects, like the ESA (which is working reasonably) and more projects to go with energy supply, conservation and the like.

 

PS. If a Brexit means we don't get another Tim Peake and we have to instead spend the next fifty years figuring how to get someone into space using our own tech then the 'Out' voters can go play in the traffic.   Hopefully that's not the case though, can anyone confirm?

 . The EU is on track to become a federal state, you're just swapping one nation for another. It won't make any difference to all this hippy, let's hold hands, stuff you say you want.

[ousefox]

I like Cameron but I'm annoyed with what little he set out to achieve. I think full control of our own borders and being able to abolish some of the ridiculous Human Rights Acts that have tied our hands for many a year would've been some of the changes I'd have wanted him pressing for.

Instead, he's come back having been offered virtually nothing. Reading yesterday about the Child Benefits for migrant workers really opened my eyes as to how much we're currently governed by the EU.

It's an 'out' vote for me

The ECHR is separate from the EU

[Webbo]

The ECHR is separate from the EU

But we have to sign up to it as part of the EU.

[leicsmac]

I don't get what the EU has to do with Tim Peake?

Don't the Americans and Russians pretty much control the ISS?

 

Isn't the ESA funded through the EU, and Tim Peake a ESA astronaut?

 

The Americans, Russians and ESA all have a part-share of the contributions towards the upkeep of the ISS, as far as I know.

 

 . The EU is on track to become a federal state, you're just swapping one nation for another. It won't make any difference to all this hippy, let's hold hands, stuff you say you want.

 

Yeah, a much bigger nation, with fewer borders. That being said, like I said I think nationalist pressure will keep it from working. Too much division over too much time, which is why I think the long term big projects is the only way co-operation will work well. Too much else is at stake.

 

And if thinking humans are more than the arbitrary lines on a map or beliefs written in a thousand year old book they enjoy killing each other over makes me a hippy then pass me the bad-smelling poncho and the bong because I'll back that from now until the end of the world (which will probably be heralded by someone saying "I'm doing this for my country), and in spite of all the patronising BS you choose to fling in this direction.

[The Guvnor]

£50 million pounds a day into the  EU doesn't particularly sound like good value for money to me, and I can never see anything which has such a disparity of wealth within its member states working.

Cameron stating the new tiered reforms for immigrants child benefit will be workable, that is quite frankly laughable, the Dept for Work and Pensions did a great job for tax credits over the six year period, millions and millions of pounds lost, never recovered, to imagine them trying to sort that one out is a joke.

 Camerons Rhetoric changing since he know's he has basically failed to match his manifesto promises, continually trying to persuade the electorate that national security will be compromised if we leave the EU, scare everyone into a yes vote, very predictable Mr C.

[ousefox]

But we have to sign up to it as part of the EU.

Nope I'm pretty sure we could leave the ECHR if we wanted to without leaving the EU. The idea has been bandied about with regards to replacing it with a British bill of rights.

Parliament has the power to reject any declarations of incompatability with the ECHR anyway.

[Carl the Llama]

I'm pretty sure you were for an alternative vote system which would have made every government a coalition, so I'm not sure you really believe what you write.

That would be a good point had I called to get rid of/leave government entirely.

[Strokes]

That would be a good point had I called to get rid of/leave government entirely.

I didn't realise these examples had to be exactly like the other, perhaps you can explain again how voting for lib dem and your vote counting towards a coalition. Is the same as not being able to vote for the ruling and biggest alliance, that actually has power over you?