[Merged] The Europe Thread

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by Graham

Now this is something that gives me problems. If the member states can't agree on something *why* should the EU Commission be able to force something through? Surely the default or fallback position should be "no" rather than "yes"?

You raise a very good point, there.

That's the *USA* complaining about breaches of Free Trade and WTO rules?? The people who were going to ban *cashmere*?!

LOL, yep. The same country which has itself breached WTO rules, the same country which imposed steel tarrifs, and so on.

Originally Posted by towny

In our recent 'voting intentions' thread there was a little discussion about the lack of honest discussion on the genuine pros and cons of EU membership. I thought I'd resurrect that train of thought here because this morning's Independent is making my blood boil ... under the headline 'The £23bn question', the entire front page is given over to what is, frankly, scaremongering. Or rather it would be scaremongering if it wasn't such a blatant tissue of lies, half-truths and spin. I have seen better written defences of Europe from 'A' level geography students. Here's just one of the priceless nuggets of nonsense:


What the &*£$ # ?

The Convention was drawn up by the Council of Europe, a completely different organisation that pre-dates the EU. The Convention is adhered to by the EU, it does not belong to the EU. Withdrawing from the EU would in no way involve withdrawing from the Convention. And in any case, the Convention is now enshrined within our own Law. Repealing it would be a matter entirely separate from any concerns about which international organisations we belong to.

Honestly, the anti-Europe camp have been accused of scaremongering and lies but this takes some beating. I'm not proposing to re-type the entire article here (I am supposed to be at work ) but I would urge anyone with an interest in the whole Europe debate to get a look at it.

This is a sad day for rational debate.

That article sounds ridiculous

Especially the part you mention about the European Convention on Human Rights

The scaremongering sounds as bad as some of the anti-EU scaremongering bandied about by people.

Why is it that neither side seems capable of a rational debate on the pros & cons? Stupid.

Originally Posted by towny

Ironic perhaps that the Independent went tabloid-only a couple of weeks ago ... Must be a state of mind or something.

LOL. Although I think they prefer the term "compact"

You say they lie but do you have any proof?

Originally Posted by Graham

I'd be laughing too if it wasn't so bloody ridiculous! This is the sort of ludicrous nonsense you'd expect from the Tabloids.



Regrettably very true

Addendum: In fact that article irritated me so much I've just sent the following e-mail...

To the Letters Editor: Letter for Publication.

Sir,

Your paper's article "The £23bn Question" is the most ludicrous scaremongering I have read in a non-red top newspaper for a long time.

It suggests that, by "leaving Europe" we would be forced to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

It begins with rank economic speculation claiming "More volatile interest rates would add to the risks of boom and bust in the housing markets." but why? Our interest rates are under control now, why should they suddenly become "more volatile" if we leave Europe? What exactly will change?

It lists rights we would apparently lose "Workers would be unable to bring sex, race or disability claims against their employers" and "The Government would have to repeal hundreds of EU directives in UK law." But why? If a law is good, what does it matter whether we're in the EU or not?

This whole article is a tissue of nonsense and is not the sort of reporting I expect from a newspaper such as yours.

You should be ashamed of it.

Yours Faithfully,

Graham Marsden

Surely the law would have to be re-passed as it is a europen law and no longer applys if we are not in the eu as the law is invaled

Also i heard the paper says we lose 23billion pound which is what I have heard elsewhere several times from news items

Originally Posted by Damien

Surely the law would have to be re-passed as it is a europen law and no longer applys if we are not in the eu as the law is invaled

Not if it's already on the UK statute books.

Well some have admitted to 'being economical with the truth' .

If that's not lying I don't know what is.

I've said that they are mostly all liars many,many times.If you believe this then you are never disappointed when they live up to expectations.

When an truthful and truly honourable member comes to light I'm totally delighted.However they are becoming fewer year by year.Even the 'characters' are disappearing or have become silent.They are such a dull bunch these days.

[Theodoric]

As Lenin famously said over a century ago, "What is to be done?" So, we elect a UKIP government and promptly withdraw from Europe. Then what? I don't fancy becoming the 51st state, or even becoming part of Nafta so that all our jobs can move to Mexico rather than India or China. As someone in Norway once said, they are now ruled from Brussels by fax.

[Florence]

WE will be ruled and broke when they have finished with us. with no royalty and no government just EU puppets doing the dirty washing...

Originally Posted by Theodoric

As Lenin famously said over a century ago, "What is to be done?" So, we elect a UKIP government and promptly withdraw from Europe. Then what? I don't fancy becoming the 51st state, or even becoming part of Nafta so that all our jobs can move to Mexico rather than India or China. As someone in Norway once said, they are now ruled from Brussels by fax.

Norway is an interesting comparison - afaik they are still not official members of the EU, but they have several factors which make their 'survival' possible.

- the population is only about 5 million people.
- over 90% of their electricity is generated by hydro power
- they export massive amounts of gas & oil (only Russia & Saudi do more)


but - the majority of their trade is with EU countries and to do that they must comply with EU legislation. I guess this is what was meant by the 'ruled by fax from Brussels' quote. Food producers have to have EU licences, for example - and to get them they have to comply with EU standards.

notwithstanding that, the Norwegians enjoy a good standard of living, reliable,sophisticated communications & transport, plus they have a culture that combines being outwardly modern, with retaining a true pride in their tradition & heritage.

It may change when the oil & gas run out, but for now Norway demonstrates you can live with the EU, without having to be in it.

I'm quite happy to retain the mechanism of the trading agreements and the consistent standards for export licences, for example - but when it starts to involve a constitution & a common currency, I'm not so sure.

[downquark1]

I want Britain run by people with British tans dammit. Bloody orange skins coming over here stealing our xenophobic politicians jobs.

I don't want us out of Europe I just don't want us in a federal state of Europe.

It's not what I voted for in the referendum what ever Edward Heath thought.If I'd actually been asked I'd would have said no.All I voted for was to join a Common Market.

[TigaSefi]

I want blair removed and us out of Europe apart from the minimum standard of trade levels. That is all but Blair must be removed ASAP.

Originally Posted by TigaSefi

I want blair removed and us out of Europe apart from the minimum standard of trade levels. That is all but Blair must be removed ASAP.

did you mean 'voted out' , rather than 'removed' - lol

[MadGamer]

I don't want us to move to the Euro. Too complicated.

I think gettin the UK out of europe wil involve filling sandbags and errecting bardedwire at the beaches.................. again.

I want to remain in europe and to join the euro but thats it as for the EU constitution I dont really care it doesn't really set anything in stone and for the first time theere will be a way to opt out but there are loads of benfits economy wise and trade and law wise so we should be careful before we hastly decided to withdraw