[QUOTE=Reagy;50532844]Leaving:
- Government gets full control over what laws it can set
Staying:
- Government continues to have EU restrictions placed upon it
[/QUOTE]
If we wish to have free trade with europe we would still need to follow EU regulations, cept without any say in them.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;50532856]If we wish to have free trade with europe we would still need to follow EU regulations, cept without any say in them.[/QUOTE]
I think this is misleading about the EEA option, which you seem to be describing. This is obviously biased but is still a useful source for information about the EEA option.
[url]http://www.adamsmith.org/evolution-not-revolution/[/url]
[QUOTE]1. “No say”
The argument about having “no say” in EU law-making requires some explanation and can be addressed on several levels.
Firstly, “So what?” We have no say in making American laws either, yet we don’t complain about that and the USA is Britain’s single largest national trading partner.
If that feels a bit glib - and it does - the next level of argument is that the “no say” argument is factually incorrect.
Formal EFTA/EEA influence comes from a complex system of consultative structures, the foundation of which is the “two-pillar” system between EFTA/EEA and the EU. In this system, there is formal consultation and participation between the EU and EFTA/EEA, particularly in the crucial early stages of the law-making process. For example, Norwegian officials take part in over 200 committees in the European Commission. The EEA countries don’t however get a final vote in the EU’s institutions and that is what the Remain lobby actually means. A more accurate Remain statement would therefore be that they have “no say when it comes to the final EU vote on a particular matter”. Shortening this to “no say” makes for a good sound bite but it is false.
Some Norwegians are clear on Norway’s influence in the EEA and the opportunities to advise and influence the EU. This is verified by the Norwegian Foreign Ministry, which acknowledges that Norway does not have a formal vote in the decision making process but:
“Experience has shown that this is less important than the opportunities we have to influence other countries by putting forward effective, coherent arguments”.
…with the emphasis on “this is less important than…”.
Participation in the early stages involves providing experts to give their input. The extent of influence at this stage depends on the quality of the expertise provided but clearly influence can be considerable. Norway has played a key role in shaping directives and influenced amendments to the Consumer Rights Directive in 2008 by lobbying the European Commission. It has also fought off challenges from the British bookmaker, Ladbrokes, over state control of gaming machines (which itself influenced an EU member state to make a similar challenge via the ECJ).
Therefore the “no say” allegation is not only false, but even when it is corrected to the more accurate “no vote”, it still doesn’t tell the full story and one can still demonstrate that influence is exerted.
The next level of argument surrounding “no say” is that despite not having a vote in EU institutions, EEA countries have some ability to protect their own interests from EU law. They retain a “right of reservation” - a veto - as set out in Article 102 of the EEA agreement and thus have the right to opt out of new EU legislation. This is a right that the UK as an EU member does not have.
The EFTA Secretariat has identified more than 1,200 EU acts considered EEA relevant by the European Commission that have then been contested by the EEA/EFTA Member States.
Examples for Norway include postal services and oil & gas, while Iceland was responsible for one of the biggest rejections of the EU in history when the Icesave bank’s online savings account collapsed.
And that brings us neatly to the next level of argument about EEA countries having “no say”, which is that we must recall the UK’s own influence inside the EU is itself severely constrained in a community of 28. Even the big fanfare over David Cameron’s “veto” in December 2011 came to nothing – the other members just went ahead anyway without Britain. One can now add the recent failed EU renegotiation, which further showed starkly the limits of Britain’s influence inside the EU. That’s perhaps why the government quickly stopped talking about it.
The UK does not have anything like the level of freedom of EFTA members, and has the additional constraint of the UK not being able to conduct its own international trade negotiations/policy. These are conducted by the European Commission after agreeing a “common position” with Member States via the Council.
It is also worth noting that the powers of the Parliament and the Council are strictly limited. The ever increasing number of EU laws originating from global standards are increasingly implemented as “delegated legislation” using the EU’s “comitology” procedure. These committees consist of anonymous officials from member states with absolutely no power to amend or reject Commission proposals. They can only approve them or refer them to the Council.
The UK’s influence in the EU is therefore diminishing as the Union further centralises and quashes democratic protections in its pursuit of full supranational government – its ultimate objective.
That just leaves the final level of argument against “no say”: that EEA countries play a fully independent role in global bodies where the majority of Single Market legislation now originates. In other words they are exerting their influence “upstream” in a way the UK cannot because of its EU membership.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]2. “They adopt 75% of EU laws”
The “no say” argument is an important one, however the allegation about “75% of EU laws” is arguably even more misleading than “no say” and has been completely discredited on more than one occasion. The 75% is derived from single market-related directives being applied to EEA countries. What isn’t accounted for are the far more numerous regulations that come from Brussels but have little EEA relevance. When looking across the number of directives and regulations that constitute the full EU body of law in force and comparing that to what EEA countries have actually implemented, the figure is only 21%. Using different methods of calculation, it is anywhere between 10% and 28%. And the majority of this covers standards originating at global level where EEA countries exert their influence. The allegation is therefore not only wrong but wildly so.[/QUOTE]
Not looking good for the leave side, at least on facepunch anyway.
I really don't expect we'll leave. Polls may say differently but they are often inaccurate. People are seeing more 'leave' signs because it's an extreme position; if you care enough to want to leave, you're more likely to put up a sign. This is not true for the remain supporters because it's the status quo - the only reason you'd put up a remain sign was if you were worried we were going to leave.
I'm not really educated enough on the matter to say whether UK should leave or stay in the EU.
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;50539298]I'm not really educated enough on the matter to say whether UK should leave or stay in the EU.[/QUOTE]
i'm staying in large part because there isn't really any benefit to leaving and if we do then things will be undeniably worse in the short term as least (even in a best case scenario for leave) due to the tangled and messy process of leaving, the uncertainty, the change in laws and economic regulations, etc
it can be argued that it's better in the longrun to leave, but considering that this covers a point in time beyond which predictions are largely useless then you could make just as strong an argument for staying based on longterm implications
I only know like 1 person IRL who is voting remain
[QUOTE=Hezzy;50539992]I only know like 1 person IRL who is voting remain[/QUOTE]
most of the people I know irl are voting leave too. tho I live in the westcountry and I think it's a bit more common here.
[QUOTE=Erfly;50526002]Too bad I can't vote, my birthday's only in a month.[/QUOTE]
18th is on the 24th hahah
Of course most people here would vote remain, most people who'd vote remain are too worried to post their opinions on here because of the accusations it brings and let's be honest, FP is very mostly leftwing in part due to its younger userbase.
[QUOTE=Cypher_09;50541029]Of course most people here would vote remain, most people who'd vote remain are too worried to post their opinions on here because of the accusations it brings and let's be honest, FP is very mostly leftwing in part due to its younger userbase.[/QUOTE]
I am thoroughly unworried to post my opinions bud. The EU might need reform but remain is the right choice here. If we leave we will leave ourselves at the mercy of the EU with no say in it.
[QUOTE=Menien Goneld;50541269][B]I am thoroughly unworried to post my opinions bud[/B]. The EU might need reform but[B] remain is the right choice here[/B]. If we leave we will leave ourselves at the mercy of the EU with no say in it.[/QUOTE]
You really badly missed my point, but whatever. I'm not going to get into an argument.
But just incase you want to know, obviously you are [I]thoroughly unworried[/I] to post your opinion, you're voting leave. You were only confirming what I said. Anybody who wants to voice an opinion that's pro-leave or any other unpopular topic, you know the ones I mean, you gotta be prepared to combat all of the angry posts arguing with you, maybe even a ban. My bet is not everybody can be assed with that hassle.
TTIP makes me think the UK people might benefit from leaving
[QUOTE=Cypher_09;50541571]You really badly missed my point, but whatever. I'm not going to get into an argument.
But just incase you want to know, obviously you are [I]thoroughly unworried[/I] to post your opinion, you're voting leave. You were only confirming what I said. Anybody who wants to voice an opinion that's pro-leave or any other unpopular topic, you know the ones I mean, you gotta be prepared to combat all of the angry posts arguing with you, maybe even a ban. My bet is not everybody can be assed with that hassle.[/QUOTE]
Whoops, I did actually misconstrue your original point there, my bad. I guess I'm just amazed you'd think anyone would be worried to post their opinion. I don't know if you've been reading all the referendum news threads but there's always been plenty of posts from both sides. Leave posters even seem a bit more vocal, at the start of threads anyway.
Surely a poll with no requirement to post is exempt from all this shaming you think happens anyway? If there were really a bunch of leave advocates too insecure in their political convictions to post about them, surely just voting in a poll is still possible to them?
Also if you're worried that posting your opinions will result in a ban, I'd have to say that that's more of a reflection of how you conduct yourself rather than of your opinion. Being pro-leave isn't bannable.
[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;50541616]TTIP makes me think the UK people might benefit from leaving[/QUOTE]
TTIP is basically irrelevant to the debate as the very thought gives David Cameron and a lot of the Tory party a raging hard on anyway
That's something that UK Parliament will have to face at some point in the near future regardless of the EU
[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;50528254]UK isn't in Schengen[/QUOTE]
i know sorry I should have been more specific when I said EU countries I meant the majority of them
[editline]18th June 2016[/editline]
also there's no way of really knowing if leaving the EU will prevent TTIP
forgive me for sourcing the Guardian which is pretty left wing but [URL="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/25/ttip-vote-brexit-barack-obama-leave-eu-trade-deal"]this article[/URL] makes a good point:
[quote]Is there any hope? Yes – the movement to defeat TTIP received the support of well over 3 million Europeans in a little over a year. In Berlin, 250,000 people took to the streets last October. The deal was meant to be signed by now – but together, Europe’s people have seriously stalled things. Would it really be possible to stop such a move if we couldn’t link up with campaigners across Europe? If being in the EU has brought us TTIP, it has also brought us the means to stop it.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Menien Goneld;50541269]I am thoroughly unworried to post my opinions bud. The EU might need reform but remain is the right choice here. If we leave we will leave ourselves at the mercy of the EU with no say in it.[/QUOTE]
I don't think that Juncker and his cadre are ever going to ever listen to a call for reforms as long they are in charge. And given the abysmally poor course the EU has taken in the last few years, and how much they are sucking up to an almost dictator now, the only way they are ever going to consider a reform, is if the countries which pay the most for the EU do leave.
Leave just had another defection over being a lying bunch of racists (her words, not mine) [URL]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/eu-referendum-baroness-sayeeda-warsi-defects-from-leave-to-remain-a7090741.html?campaign_id=A100&campaign_type=Email[/URL]
I do think the leave vote will win.
It's hard to make up your mind when both sides are filled with lying wankers.
o u t
u
t
I'm not British, but the remain voters imo have been sort of condescending fucks a lot so I'm gonna support leave in this shitshow horse race.
[QUOTE=Camper99;50527296]Indeed I do. Actually, some kind of "bond" between the nations isn't a bad thing at all, but the unified currency (looking at the huge economical gaps between some states) and EU-wide "government" is. It should rather be something like an alliance but not the way it is right now.[/QUOTE]
It is sort of an alliance already though, in an alliance the strongest nation has the most power and the bigger powers in the EU (france, germany, UK) do have most of the influence.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;50561096]It is sort of an alliance already though, in an alliance the strongest nation has the most power and the bigger powers in the EU (france, germany, UK) do have most of the influence.[/QUOTE]
True, but as I said, this alliance has gone a wrong way since it enforces laws and regulations that weren't even wanted by the population of nations which these laws originated from.
They were pushed over our heads "for the greater good of the EU" and see how it turned out, when looking at greece, Spain and so on.
It should be more of a defence pact and nothing more.
As if trade would be something that's impossible without something like the EU. It worked before and it would work again, just with less "oppression" if you want to put it that way.
Just look at TTIP. None of us want it and yet there's not much we can do against it except for protesting but we can't even be sure if that would make a difference because of America's hidden grip around the bigger powers here, especially Germany with Merkel. She's become nothing more than Obama's pet and would agree to EVERYTHING he wants to be done, if there are ways to do it in a not so obvious way so people don't realize it.
All in all, I was talking about a form of alliance, where Europe helps each other out in times of tragedy and war and not tries to assimilate and compress everything to something similar to America with a single government, able to control us without there being any necessity for it. It would be the start of becoming the Puppet union of America.
[QUOTE=Camper99;50561811]True, but as I said, this alliance has gone a wrong way since it enforces laws and regulations that weren't even wanted by the population of nations which these laws originated from.
They were pushed over our heads "for the greater good of the EU" and see how it turned out, when looking at greece, Spain and so on.[/QUOTE]
Like which?
[QUOTE=Camper99;50561811]
It should be more of a defence pact and nothing more.
As if trade would be something that's impossible without something like the EU. It worked before and it would work again, just with less "oppression" if you want to put it that way.[/QUOTE]
Trade would be possible without the EU, but it's is just way easier and cheaper with the EU. Europe as a whole is also stronger in the world with the EU.
And we already have NATO, why would this need to be a defense pact?
[QUOTE=Camper99;50561811]Just look at TTIP. None of us want it and yet there's not much we can do against it except for protesting but we can't even be sure if that would make a difference because of America's hidden grip around the bigger powers here, especially Germany with Merkel. She's become nothing more than Obama's pet and would agree to EVERYTHING he wants to be done, if there are ways to do it in a not so obvious way so people don't realize it.[/QUOTE]
France refuses to support it in its current state, and any EU decision has to be made with the support of each member state.
[QUOTE=Camper99;50561811]
All in all, I was talking about a form of alliance, where Europe helps each other out in times of tragedy and war and not tries to assimilate and compress everything to something similar to America with a single government, able to control us without there being any necessity for it. It would be the start of becoming the Puppet union of America.[/QUOTE]
There are some politicians within the EU that would like that, but a United States of Europe or something isn't actually going to happen.
[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;50561947]Like which?[/QUOTE]
For instance the Euro as a currency itself. We were presented the option to vote wether we want it or not. The major parts of Germany voted against it, so it simply got pushed through without paying further notice to our voices. Of course this example is kinda odd, seeing as the currency is a part that defines the EU, but well as I said earlier.. Trying to push every country to the same economic level while there were too huge gaps to begin with was something that just couldn't work out. We also majorly voted [b]against[/b] sending Greece money. We did that for the first helping-package, we did it for the second and we kept going on and yet they kept sending [b]our[/b] tax-money over there, without any security of getting it back anytime. Or even a compensation, nothing!
It's easy to say that the EU didn't bring negative conditions, seeing as your country hasn't dumped billions of euros into other countrys. Mine did.
Now we already dumped millions of euros into greece and we won't see a single penny back, while their condition still hasn't really improved in relation to the amount of money they received.
[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;50561947]Trade would be possible without the EU, but it's is just way easier and cheaper with the EU. Europe as a whole is also stronger in the world with the EU.[/QUOTE]
In my opinion it just doesn't justify all the other negative sideeffects that come along with it.
[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;50561947]And we already have NATO, why would this need to be a defense pact?[/QUOTE]
Exactly, this is why we don't need the EU if we take away the economical/currency parts.
[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;50561947]France refuses to support it in its current state, and any EU decision has to be made with the support of each member state.[/QUOTE]
Just wait till the people needed to change that get bought/corrupted. Happened in so many countrys already.. and just the fact that France is the only thing between TTIP and us is even morer frightening. If it weren't for the EU I'd bet my sweet ass that it would be the other way around. 1 or 2 nations supporting something like that while everyone else stands against it because they'd decide for their own and not following America's instructions.
[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;50561947]There are some politicians within the EU that would like that, but a United States of Europe or something isn't actually going to happen.[/QUOTE]
Those few politicians can be more than enough, given the fact that they sport the hightest ranking positions in each respective country.
At this point I'd like to point out that I am no fleshed out specialist in terms of politics, but I'd say my understanding is medium at least and judging by everything I have seen and heard, there's some real nasty shit going on in terms of who gets to decide above our heads and that alone is reason enough for me to support leaving the EU. Not just for Britain, I'd all the more love Germany seeing to leave.
You just have to take a look at the EZB (don't know the term in English. European Central bank?).
How lightly they throw around their money. The money we fed them. And the best: They're independend. We can't do shit about them wasting our money for shit like Helicoptermoney or flying politicians to other places, even better [b]paying their travelcosts for vacations[/b].
[QUOTE=Camper99;50563286]
Just wait till the people needed to change that get bought/corrupted. Happened in so many countrys already.. and just the fact that France is the only thing between TTIP and us is even morer frightening. If it weren't for the EU I'd bet my sweet ass that it would be the other way around. 1 or 2 nations supporting something like that while everyone else stands against it because they'd decide for their own and not following America's instructions.[/QUOTE]
How do you know people have been bribed? And how do you know more politicans will be? The EU and the US haven't been able to come to an agreement on TTIP for some time now, I think these negotations would be going a lot faster if the EU didn't stick by its principals at least a little.
[QUOTE=Camper99;50563286]
Those few politicians can be more than enough, given the fact that they sport the hightest ranking positions in each respective country.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah but again, every member state has to approve those kinds of decisions. I seriously doubt there are currently any Euro governments that would like a USE.
[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;50563475]How do you know people have been bribed? And how do you know more politicans will be? The EU and the US haven't been able to come to an agreement on TTIP for some time now, I think these negotations would be going a lot faster if the EU didn't stick by its principals at least a little.
Yeah but again, every member state has to approve those kinds of decisions. I seriously doubt there are currently any Euro governments that would like a USE.[/QUOTE]
I know, don't get me wrong I'm not trying to say that everyone here would want to jump at the first chance to validate TTIP, but "at least a little" is not enough for me when it comes to something with such a huge negative effect on all of us. It's like most of them don't see how much health-standards or rather quality control in terms of food etc would degenerate but I guess I don't have to tell ya.
It's just that I'm worried as this is no small matter and seeing that only some small instances half-heartly try to reject it just concerns me and that's the problem.
What good is a government if it's people don't feel safe with it or can't have full faith in them not doing the wrong thing?
About bribing: I'm not one hundred percent sure wether someone was bribed or else and I can only speak for the actions of Germany's government but man, Merkel's doing like everything to be Obama's most favourite and that's dangerous.
Most times even ignoring the demands and needs of our people for doing so.
Of course there is no water-proof backing for that accusation, but if she does it, what would other politicians stop from doing so?
I mean even after the whole NSA-spying stuff, she was just like "yeah well.. it's k." well knowing that the espionage would continue. She was even spied on herself, but now no one is even mentioning it and of course it hasn't stopped. Just one example.
And my own opinion on that.
[QUOTE=Cypher_09;50541029]Of course most people here would vote remain, most people who'd vote remain are too worried to post their opinions on here because of the accusations it brings and let's be honest, FP is very mostly leftwing in part due to its younger userbase.[/QUOTE]
"voting remain are too worried"
yes... because the government has a nice history of screwing up their finances.
If there was a clear plan post-Leave, and it was made official and ensure all citizens were informed, then I'd have confidence.
As a state which can't even properly react to an MP being murdered because of a referendum, I'm not interested.. they're all a mess.
[editline]22nd June 2016[/editline]
and it's this mess that causes a 50/50 outcome.
I have no idea how many votes will swing either way.
agh, I meant most people who'd vote leave are too worried to post their opinions. my mistake
The whole national debate is baseless and degrading.
Every argument being put forwards is a completely selfish one.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
