David Cameron sets out EU reform goals

mrginge

Much like Scotland, a result for maintaining the status quo will do nothing other than galvanise those who demand change.

Assuming a 60-40 for remain, then the challenge is where the leavers go next. If they are indeed 99.4% ideologically opposed, then the opportunity for UKIP is immense. A huge block of the electorate who become disenfranchised from their mainstream parties and minor party who has built their reputation over the previous few years to suddenly become a realistic alternative.

The Scotland result might have been no on the day, but the real result depends entirely on how the SNP manage their subsequent success over the next few years. The EU vote is no different and it seems like DC's fudged list of requirements will do nothing other than help send us down the same path.

Generali

mrginge wrote: »

Much like Scotland, a result for maintaining the status quo will do nothing other than galvanise those who demand change.

Assuming a 60-40 for remain, then the challenge is where the leavers go next. If they are indeed 99.4% ideologically opposed, then the opportunity for UKIP is immense. A huge block of the electorate who become disenfranchised from their mainstream parties and minor party who has built their reputation over the previous few years to suddenly become a realistic alternative.

The Scotland result might have been no on the day, but the real result depends entirely on how the SNP manage their subsequent success over the next few years. The EU vote is no different and it seems like DC's fudged list of requirements will do nothing other than help send us down the same path.

Maybe. What we do learn from Scotland is that those agitating for change are a noisy bunch and happy to twist and lie in order to gain their ultimate goal which at least has the asset of simplicity.

If nothing else it would be bloody funny for 10 minutes to see a UK run by UKIP and Scotland run by the SNP.

Moby

Generali wrote: »

It's because you both hate Mr Cameron. He could walk on water and feed the five thousand and you'd be going on about how he got wet feet and it wasn't the right people he was feeding and it was all a pathetic stunt from old posho pig botherer.

His stance on Europe is patently a posture. The claim that he is negotiating hard for a better deal is nonsense. I'll guarantee you now that he will recommend a 'Yes' vote. He was always going to recommend a 'Yes' vote. The negotiation is a charade!
Why wasn't he just more honest and principled and just say he wanted to stay in from the start?.....because he wants to pretend to the British people and his party that he has been negotiating hard on our behalf and will win significant concessions. Did you hear what Bernard Jenkin said? ....remember him he was the man who called porky dave out on his sexist attitudes a couple of years ago:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2452410/Bernard-Jenkin-Conservative-man-change-sexist-attitudes-women-including-PM.html

mrginge

Generali wrote: »

Maybe. What we do learn from Scotland is that those agitating for change are a noisy bunch and happy to twist and lie in order to gain their ultimate goal which at least has the asset of simplicity.

The change bunch may be a bit noisier, but I think you'll find that twisting and lying has been standard practice for pretty much all political parties in as long as I can remember.

Iraq anyone?

If nothing else it would be bloody funny for 10 minutes to see a UK run by UKIP and Scotland run by the SNP.

Funny indeed, but ukip don't need to win majorities to cause chaos within the Tories. Dare I suggest that JC is only labour leader because of the knock on from the Scottish no?

martinsurrey

Graham_Devon wrote: »

In my mind, you either need to be in it, or out of it. Not hamshackled by watching from the sidelines but still having to operate under EU law.

You have to follow a lot of EU law to be in the EU free trade area, If we leave Europe but want to stay in the free trade area (and I don't think anyone wants us to leave that), our bananas will still have to be straight, but we wont have a say when they decide what shade of orange our oranges have to be, we'll just have to abide by their decision.

We will also have to pay to be apart of the EEA, Norway pays without getting a say, and is subject to 21% of all EU law, including the free movement of people, which seems to be the one that a lot of anti EU care about.

Thrugelmir

The migrant crisis is resulting in borders being reimposed. Perhaps free movement of people isn't as practical as it seemed some years ago. The world is now a very different place.

Generali

Moby wrote: »

His stance on Europe is patently a posture. The claim that he is negotiating hard for a better deal is nonsense. I'll guarantee you now that he will recommend a 'Yes' vote. He was always going to recommend a 'Yes' vote. The negotiation is a charade!
Why wasn't he just more honest and principled and just say he wanted to stay in from the start?.....because he wants to pretend to the British people and his party that he has been negotiating hard on our behalf and will win significant concessions. Did you hear what Bernard Jenkin said? ....remember him he was the man who called porky dave out on his sexist attitudes a couple of years ago:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2452410/Bernard-Jenkin-Conservative-man-change-sexist-attitudes-women-including-PM.html

!!!!!! has that got to do with the EU? It's just about you hating Tories.

It's funny really. Labour have had one PM elected in the last 40 years and 2 in the last half century, 3 since the war. They have a set of policies that people don't want and can only finance themselves because the union movement props them up. Basically the only thing they have going for themselves electorally is that they're better than the Lib Dems.

They've been found out in Scotland and I do rather wonder if the clock is ticking in England too. Who does Labour represent these days except public sector junior managers?

Thrugelmir

Generali wrote: »

Real wages are rising at c3% a year.

Minimum wage perhaps, yes. Public sector only 1%.

CLAPTON

martinsurrey wrote: »

You have to follow a lot of EU law to be in the EU free trade area, If we leave Europe but want to stay in the free trade area (and I don't think anyone wants us to leave that), our bananas will still have to be straight, but we wont have a say when they decide what shade of orange our oranges have to be, we'll just have to abide by their decision.

We will also have to pay to be apart of the EEA, Norway pays without getting a say, and is subject to 21% of all EU law, including the free movement of people, which seems to be the one that a lot of anti EU care about.

to trade with USA we need to obey their laws, to trade with china we need to obey their laws, to trade with Aus we need to obey their laws.
and surprise surprise we don't get a says in them except via negotiation.

outside the EU we will be able to import bendy bananas at lower prices and will not need to reject and wast nutritious food from poor countries.

seems like a win win to me

Generali

mrginge wrote: »

Funny indeed, but ukip don't need to win majorities to cause chaos within the Tories. Dare I suggest that JC is only labour leader because of the knock on from the Scottish no?

Labour would have lost the last election even if they took every single seat in Scotland so TBH I don't think it had much of an impact.

I think that Mr Corbyn's election was largely the result of putting the vote out to the membership who are quite a long way to the left of the MPs it appears.

I expect the plan next is to re-position the MPs to closer to the party as a whole. I don't see that ending well for the Labour party at the next election. Indeed it could even deliver opposition to UKIP.