UK EU referendum [W:40:728]

[gunner]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

Not bulldozing the Calais "Jungle" often enough?

No. It should not be built in the first place.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

They have to stop because they reached the sea. France could let them board the ferries.

 

[Urethra Franklin]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

They have to stop because they reached the sea. France could let them board the ferries.

Exactly. This is so overlooked. Britain insisted Sangatte be closed so what happened? The jungle sprang up - where else were they going to go? France keeps hold of the immense problem that is the jungle precisely because it can't let another EU state be flooded - hence the fences and the increased protection around tunnels, the ferries, the Eurostar etc. Those who think the French authorities and police are being lax haven't seen anything yet. Should Britain leave the EU, France will have no responsibiity to its neighbour and the migrants will just come spewing forth at Dover. Leaving the EU will not curtail illegal migration to the UK - you will import the problem wholesale.

 

[Camlon]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

They have to stop because they reached the sea. France could let them board the ferries.

That would be seen as a provocation by the UK, and would be stopped very fast.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

That would be seen as a provocation by the UK, and would be stopped very fast.

How? Invasion? The present arrangement where British customs screens all Eurotunnel passengers IN France, (which created the "Jungle") could be withdrawn.

 

[Andalublue]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

Exactly. This is so overlooked. Britain insisted Sangatte be closed so what happened? The jungle sprang up - where else were they going to go? France keeps hold of the immense problem that is the jungle precisely because it can't let another EU state be flooded - hence the fences and the increased protection around tunnels, the ferries, the Eurostar etc. Those who think the French authorities and police are being lax haven't seen anything yet. Should Britain leave the EU, France will have no responsibiity to its neighbour and the migrants will just come spewing forth at Dover. Leaving the EU will not curtail illegal migration to the UK - you will import the problem wholesale.

Good points.

The ridiculous aspect to the Brexit debate is that the outers assume that there will be no consequences to leaving the EU, that the remaining EU will not seek to demonstrate that the consequences of rejecting union are real. They are in denial about the possible consequences for the UK economy. They are delusional about the degree to which EU exit will affect immigration, and they are wilfully selective in their commitment to sovereignty and democracy, demanding independence in the face of the EU 'juggernaut' but supine while giving up UK sovereignty to NATO, the WTO, the USA, the IMF etc.

 

[Andalublue]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

Exactly. This is so overlooked. Britain insisted Sangatte be closed so what happened? The jungle sprang up - where else were they going to go? France keeps hold of the immense problem that is the jungle precisely because it can't let another EU state be flooded - hence the fences and the increased protection around tunnels, the ferries, the Eurostar etc. Those who think the French authorities and police are being lax haven't seen anything yet. Should Britain leave the EU, France will have no responsibiity to its neighbour and the migrants will just come spewing forth at Dover. Leaving the EU will not curtail illegal migration to the UK - you will import the problem wholesale.

Good points.

The ridiculous aspect to the Brexit debate is that the outers assume that there will be no consequences to leaving the EU, that the remaining EU will not seek to demonstrate that the consequences of rejecting union are real. They are in denial about the possible consequences for the UK economy. They are delusional about the degree to which EU exit will affect immigration, and they are wilfully selective in their commitment to sovereignty and democracy, demanding independence in the face of the EU 'juggernaut' but supine while giving up UK sovereignty to NATO, the WTO, the USA, the IMF etc.

 

[Camlon]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

How? Invasion? The present arrangement where British customs screens all Eurotunnel passengers IN France, (which created the "Jungle") could be withdrawn.

They can send the both the cars and the boats back if they try.

The only thing France will manage is to create a massive traffic chaos on their side.

 

[gunner]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

Good points.

The ridiculous aspect to the Brexit debate is that the outers assume that there will be no consequences to leaving the EU, that the remaining EU will not seek to demonstrate that the consequences of rejecting union are real. They are in denial about the possible consequences for the UK economy. They are delusional about the degree to which EU exit will affect immigration, and they are wilfully selective in their commitment to sovereignty and democracy, demanding independence in the face of the EU 'juggernaut' but supine while giving up UK sovereignty to NATO, the WTO, the USA, the IMF etc.

Andy, simple question. Would our commitment to NATO change is we are no longer a member, of the EU?

 

[Red_Dave]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

I´m with Mark Steel on this one Is there some way we can make both sides lose the EU referendum? | Voices | The Independent

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

I´m with Mark Steel on this one Is there some way we can make both sides lose the EU referendum? | Voices | The Independent

True - we lose, whatever decision we make on the 23rd of June.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

Interesting comment resurfacing on facebook in the last 24 hours - from an Evening Standard interview I wasn't aware of before.

Anthony Hilton: Stay or go - the lack of solid facts means it’s all a leap of faith

I once asked Rupert Murdoch why he was so opposed to the European Union. “That’s easy,” he replied. “When I go into Downing Street they do what I say; when I go to Brussels they take no notice.”

That was some years ago but things have not changed that much. Size matters. Individual countries buckle but the EU is big enough to resist. British politicians have to fawn to foreign businessmen so they will invest here. The much-maligned bureaucrats in Brussels can afford to be much tougher — as Honeywell, Microsoft and Murdoch have found in the past and as Google is finding now. That, indeed, is one of the few real certainties in an EU debate which is largely fact-free. Link.

Something for me to consider at the referendum - I also generally agree the campaign on both sides is largely fact-free and voting will come down to hearts and ideology rather than cold hard facts.

 

[Andalublue]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

Andy, simple question. Would our commitment to NATO change is we are no longer a member, of the EU?

No, but I don't see the relevance of the question. Do we suborn our sovereignty to non-national bodies? Isn't this the greatest sin of our relationship with the EU?

 

[Andalublue]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

Interesting comment resurfacing on facebook in the last 24 hours - from an Evening Standard interview I wasn't aware of before.



Something for me to consider at the referendum - I also generally agree the campaign on both sides is largely fact-free and voting will come down to hearts and ideology rather than cold hard facts.

That Murdoch quote is just about all you need to know about the motivation of the media forces that are trying their best to push us away from our European neighbours. I'm not saying it's everyone's motivation, just those who have the idea that being in possession of a large company gives them the right to political influence as well as commercial power.

 

[joG]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

No, but I don't see the relevance of the question. Do we suborn our sovereignty to non-national bodies? Isn't this the greatest sin of our relationship with the EU?

There is no reason a country cannot decide to transfer its sovereignty to another body shared with others. It seems irresponsible to do so without a much more solid majority than 50 50.

 

[joG]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

Interesting comment resurfacing on facebook in the last 24 hours - from an Evening Standard interview I wasn't aware of before.



Something for me to consider at the referendum - I also generally agree the campaign on both sides is largely fact-free and voting will come down to hearts and ideology rather than cold hard facts.

That quote doesn't at all support, what you say.

 

[joG]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

Good points.

The ridiculous aspect to the Brexit debate is that the outers assume that there will be no consequences to leaving the EU, that the remaining EU will not seek to demonstrate that the consequences of rejecting union are real. They are in denial about the possible consequences for the UK economy. They are delusional about the degree to which EU exit will affect immigration, and they are wilfully selective in their commitment to sovereignty and democracy, demanding independence in the face of the EU 'juggernaut' but supine while giving up UK sovereignty to NATO, the WTO, the USA, the IMF etc.

You do realize the difference between sharing a treaty and accepting a common constitution?
You do not argue that way.

 

[Andalublue]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

You do realize the difference between sharing a treaty and accepting a common constitution?
You do not argue that way.

There is no common EU constitution. That was rejected years ago, and not by the British btw.

 

[joG]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

There is no common EU constitution. That was rejected years ago, and not by the British btw.

That is the myth. The true story is revealed, when one reads the original EU Constitution and compares it with the Lisbon Treaty text. What you find is that the EU adopted the Constitution passage for passage without calling it by that name. This was done, because the Eurocracy was convinced that unlike the Irish the French would not accept being asked to vote again and a revote could crash the project.
Thus the dishonest solution the EU is still saddled with.

 

[joG]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

There is no common EU constitution. That was rejected years ago, and not by the British btw.

I put a lot of work into understanding the EU structure and the legality of the treaties a number of years ago and would point out that it takes a large amount of time and considerable formal effort to even roughly work through the texts and legal documents alone let alone the legal interpretations and theories. But as a summary article this might b an interesting one.
Valéry Giscard d'Estaing: The EU Treaty is the same as the Constitution | Commentators | Voices | The Independent

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

That quote doesn't at all support, what you say.

Sometimes it's best not to comment if you don't follow a post clearly.

 

[Andalublue]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

There is no reason a country cannot decide to transfer its sovereignty to another body shared with others. It seems irresponsible to do so without a much more solid majority than 50 50.

Of all the supra-national bodies the UK is involved with, the EU is probably the one where it could exert most influence, yet it chooses to behave as if it were an ignored slave. But then, that has been Tory policy for just about ever; the eternal victim of Johnny Foreigner.

 

[joG]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

Of all the supra-national bodies the UK is involved with, the EU is probably the one where it could exert most influence, yet it chooses to behave as if it were an ignored slave. But then, that has been Tory policy for just about ever; the eternal victim of Johnny Foreigner.

A number of other members seem to have realized that the UK was right in its reservations and warnings. That might yield the chance for the populations to roll back the EU to a manageable type organization that could actually fulfill the promises its leaders would then make. This would be a reason to stay in, while blocking all movement towards deeper union till legitimacy was again possible.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

Most Britons are Eurosceptic (65%) - the causes which support the Eurosceptic cause are immigration, soveriegnty and identity however till the Leave campaign begins to prove their economic claims most Britons will vote to stay.

Of the possible voters asked - the 65% who are sceptic drops to 30% who would go the next step and vote to leave. (Professor John Curtice)

 

[PeteEU]

Re: UK EU referendum [W:40]

I put a lot of work into understanding the EU structure and the legality of the treaties a number of years ago and would point out that it takes a large amount of time and considerable formal effort to even roughly work through the texts and legal documents alone let alone the legal interpretations and theories.

Could have fooled me!

But as a summary article this might b an interesting one.
Valéry Giscard d'Estaing: The EU Treaty is the same as the Constitution | Commentators | Voices | The Independent

So you spent lots of time and effort to come up with this?

Okay lets get some thing straight here.. and you should know this according to yourself.

The EU/EEC has evolved since it got started in 1957, where the original treaty was called The Treaty of Rome. Now what most people seem to not understand, is that this Treaty is still valid. Since then there has been add-on treaties to factor in more members and the implementation of factors of the Treaty of Rome.

Now the EU constitution would have replaced it all, with the SAME content plus the Treaty of Lisbon. Now the problem in doing this, is that would require referendums in many countries. The problem with referendums on stuff like this, is that it becomes more about national politics and not so much about the actual issue. It happened in Ireland and in France. Dont even try to deny that.

So yes, the EU members had to do another amending treaty instead of replacing the whole thing with a Constitution. And of course the Lisbon Treaty would be very similar to the Constitution because most of the changes were needed because of changes in number of members and so on.

There is no conspiracy here.. the process was very open and clear what they did. A new constitution would require referendums because.. it is new.. where as an amendment treaty in most cases does not because it is not.. new. Not hard to understand.