Britain and the EU

Mistermeaner

There was an interesting discussion on the radio regards this this morning. Nothing new to you well informed people I'm sure but I learned a couple of things

- 40% of Britain exports go to the EU
- 60% elsewhere (obviously!)
- So while not the majority of our exports, they are our largest single export partner
- 24/27 (i think) of the EU member states have a trade surplus with us (that is they sell more to us than we buy from them) - or in other words they have more to lose than us if we stopped trading with them

Loads of stats in the link below that I am sure (Generali) or someone else will make sense of........

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Intra-EU_trade_in_goods_-_recent_trends


I wanted to add a poll but can't figure out how but, where do you stand?

1. We should be fully in, unconditionally
2. We should be completely out (whatever that means)
3. We should exit with a view to negotiating a free trade agreement (ala Canada/Norway et al.) - [is there a risk of a backlash though?]
4. Big Dave has the right approach, we should negotiate as best we can a treaty so that we remain in but more on our terms
5. Pending on the results of 4 I might go for 3 or 2
6. Regardless of the outcome of 4 I would stay in, but hope we get the best deal we can.
7. I don't like foreigners
8. I wonder what happens to Scotland?


I think I am leaning 4 at the moment, lets see how Dave gets on as I am not sure on our ability to negotiate a free trade agreement after exit, but if the terms of staying in are not acceptable then I would be up for taking our chances.

For perspective while I live in England approx 80% of my income is derived from work I do on behalf of EU businesses........

Carl31

I think the EU should be broken up, it doesnt work in various ways for most countries in it, it assumes that all states are on a level playing field in terms of economic conditions, where we are not, as seen with Greece etc..

I dont think it would impact trade that much either, its not like we were a third world country before the EU came and saved us

mystic_trev

Carl31 wrote: »

I think the EU should be broken up, it doesnt work in various ways for most countries in it, it assumes that all states are on a level playing field in terms of economic conditions, where we are not, as seen with Greece etc..

I dont think it would impact trade that much either, its not like we were a third world country before the EU came and saved us

The more I see of the EU makes me think it's being run on similar lines to FIFA

Tromking

I'm coming to the conclusion that it's either fully in or completely out. The current halfway house irritates both sides. In the event of the UK voting to leave the EU I'm loving the thought of Scotland then voting to stay in the Union and abandoning the EU in a fresh indyref.

michaels

I suspect if we vote in we will no longer have a choice but ever closer union as any threat to leave if we don't sign up to whatever the EU decides will no longer be credible.

I think the referendum is a real mistake for Eurosceptics, the majority will decide the stats quo is the safer option and then it is next stop federal Europe.

It is a strange one, on most issues I think I know my mind. On this one I am completely uncertain. And I am convinced that any campaign will feature a lot of heat and absolutely zero light when it comes to making a rational decision.

kabayiri

It's seeming clearer by the day that the European politicians see our EU referendum as an opportunity to 'state the terms' just as much as we do.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/francois-hollande/11917960/Back-an-integrated-EU-or-quit-Francois-Hollande-warns-Britain.html

Hollande and Merkel want closer integration on many things.

They obviously resent the opt-outs that Britain has.

They will seek to rewrite the Dublin agreement, and Schengen.

This is *not* an European Zone of equals. Although enlarged, it is still a concept dominated by a small number of European countries at the heart.

kabayiri

michaels wrote: »

...
And I am convinced that any campaign will feature a lot of heat and absolutely zero light when it comes to making a rational decision.

How can we make a rational decision without clearly knowing the possible end goals?

Thrugelmir

mystic_trev wrote: »

The more I see of the EU makes me think it's being run on similar lines to FIFA

There's certainly a huge amount of wasted money.

chris_m

kabayiri wrote: »

Hollande and Merkel want closer integration on many things.
They obviously resent the opt-outs that Britain has.
They will seek to rewrite the Dublin agreement, and Schengen.
This is *not* an European Zone of equals. Although enlarged, it is still a concept dominated by a small number of European countries at the heart.

I wonder how it'll end up - the Fourth Reich or the Sixth Republic?

kabayiri

chris_m wrote: »

I wonder how it'll end up - the Fourth Reich or the Sixth Republic?

Is there anyone who would really know at this point?

There are a lot of problems in the UK, but we have a political framework dating back almost a thousand years; a long lived judicial system; and an union which has lasted 300 years.

This European project is barely several generations old; yet they believe they know the right direction. They might not, IMO.

As soon as there are stress points, for example the Euro issues or the refugee crisis, it all starts going pear shaped and individual countries revert to protectionism.

The whole European project may just need a rethink and a frank and honest discussion with all the European citizens.

Generali

1. We should be fully in, unconditionally - Likeliest outcome in effect IMHO
2. We should be completely out (whatever that means) - Ruinous for the UK. Even worse than it would be for Scotland if Scotland was to quit the UK.
3. We should exit with a view to negotiating a free trade agreement (ala Canada/Norway et al.) - [is there a risk of a backlash though?] - You do have to wonder if the EU would negotiate in good faith if we'd just told them to go forth and multiply.
4. Big Dave has the right approach, we should negotiate as best we can a treaty so that we remain in but more on our terms - I don't really see what he can come back with. Maybe a change to the welfare rules so people moving countries have restricted access to benefits would be popular but I can't imagine there would be a massive change in reality. France and Germany see freedom of movement as a Red Line as they should quite frankly. Why have a free market for goods without one for labour?
5. Pending on the results of 4 I might go for 3 or 2 - Okay.
6. Regardless of the outcome of 4 I would stay in, but hope we get the best deal we can. - Natch
7. I don't like foreigners - I married one!
8. I wonder what happens to Scotland? - Nobody cares. If you speak to the French, for example, about Wales and Scotland then they don't really understand what a Scotland is outside them fielding a rugby/soccer team.

I think that a precondition of a successful negotiation is wanting a particular outcome. Doubtless Mr Cameron has a view of the outcome he wants but I'm not convinced that many other people do, even people in his party.

I'm not sure that referenda are the way forward. The Westminster System means you put someone up to represent you. Let them represent you not crap themselves because a tricky decision needs to be made so they chuck it back to you.