If we vote for Brexit what happens

kabayiri

BobQ wrote: »

I have never said that the EU stops employers from basing jobs abroad and neither can it. What could Britain along do about this problem outside of the EU?
...

The common theme being expressed is that the EU is the only way we can protect jobs.

But it isn't able to protect jobs that much at all (unless you happen to work in the EU political machinery itself).

Why is having millions more fighting for a diminished pool of jobs an attractive long term outlook?

Generali

This was, I thought, a pretty even-handed look at how not being in the EU impacts on life in Norway:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/03/06/what-if-britain-left-the-eu-and-could-be-more-like-norway/

The points that stood out to me were:

- The EEA doesn't provide Norway with completely free trade with the EU
- Norway was threatened by the EU with being kicked out of the EEA for picking and choosing which regulations to follow

Rather more positively for a Brexit:

While Norway follows around three-quarters of EU directives, this is not the same as saying that Norway obeys three-quarters of EU laws.

According to the report, Norway has adopted 1,369 out of 1,965 EU directives, or goals. However, there were also 7,720 EU regulations in force in 2008, just 1,349 – or around 17.5pc – of which were incorporated into the EEA agreement.

However, I guess that to see what is being put in and omitted are probably more important than the numbers. Something broad stroke like freedom of movement is more important than the minutiae of banana straightness.

antrobus

Generali wrote: »

...- The EEA doesn't provide Norway with completely free trade with the EU...

The EEA doesn't cover agriculture or fisheries. For that the EU has the CAP and the CFP. So the Norwegians face restrictions on the export of fish. There are ways around that. There are reasons why so many Scottish salmon farms are Norwegian owned.

Generali wrote: »

...Rather more positively for a Brexit:..

But the EEA does cover people. You must have free trade in people. Which I gather is a big problem for some people.

kabayiri

kabayiri wrote: »

You could probably class my cousin as one of those A.L.E's then. His facebook is full of a curious mixture of ex-army; mild nationalism; and deep scepticism of the European project.
...

Cousin update which is Brexit related I suppose!

There are plans afoot to offer free produce from some of his market stalls for people who he says "agree" to vote out.

Democracy in action eh? lol

I can't see how he would know if people even bothered to turn out.

I know it's early days but this is the only example of grassroots campaign I can think of. Maybe this is not an issue quite as engaging with folk as the Scottish indy ref ?

gfplux

BobQ wrote: »

I have never said that the EU stops employers from basing jobs abroad and neither can it. What could Britain along do about this problem outside of the EU?

The EU does provide a reasonable employment law framework for the 28 nations. When those advocating Brexit speak of removing bureaucracy this is an area where they contemplate reducing regulation (although they do use other words like "freeing the UK from the constrains of over regulation"

http://www.cipd.co.uk/pm/peoplemanagement/b/weblog/archive/2015/06/01/how-a-brexit-from-the-eu-could-change-employment-law.aspx

well said BobQ.
This "over regulation" is something that will disappear after Brexit BUT WILL NOT IMPROVE our way of life.
Much of this regulation has been put in place by the EU to protect the worker and consumer. The headline might be "bendy banana" but the underlying regulation was there to protect the producer AND the consumer.

gfplux

Generali wrote: »

This was, I thought, a pretty even-handed look at how not being in the EU impacts on life in Norway:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/03/06/what-if-britain-left-the-eu-and-could-be-more-like-norway/

The points that stood out to me were:

- The EEA doesn't provide Norway with completely free trade with the EU
- Norway was threatened by the EU with being kicked out of the EEA for picking and choosing which regulations to follow

Rather more positively for a Brexit:



However, I guess that to see what is being put in and omitted are probably more important than the numbers. Something broad stroke like freedom of movement is more important than the minutiae of banana straightness.

let us be clear. An EU directive is
"A directive is very different from a regulation in several ways: firstly, it is not directly applicable and therefore does have to be enshrined into UK law through an Act of Parliament. This allows each member state, and its courts, to interpret or adapt slightly differently from the particular directive."

this is from http://findlaw.co.uk/law/government/european_law/basics_european_law/eu-directives.html

Hopefully someone can tell us how many directives our UK Government has implimented in comparison to Norway or perhaps other EU Country's.

it does appear that we are in charge of much of our own destiny but our Politiciens are the ones who determine whether we adopt these directives or NOT.

Once again I find myself feeling our Politiciens have taken the easy way out, or perhaps have cherry picked those directives they like over the ones they don't.
No full member of the EU would be kicked out for NOT adopting ALL the directives, but as quoted above Norway is not in such a secure position. Nor would the UK after Brexit.

CLAPTON

gfplux wrote: »

let us be clear. An EU directive is
"A directive is very different from a regulation in several ways: firstly, it is not directly applicable and therefore does have to be enshrined into UK law through an Act of Parliament. This allows each member state, and its courts, to interpret or adapt slightly differently from the particular directive."

this is from http://findlaw.co.uk/law/government/european_law/basics_european_law/eu-directives.html

Hopefully someone can tell us how many directives our UK Government has implimented in comparison to Norway or perhaps other EU Country's.

it does appear that we are in charge of much of our own destiny but our Politiciens are the ones who determine whether we adopt these directives or NOT.

Once again I find myself feeling our Politiciens have taken the easy way out, or perhaps have cherry picked those directives they like over the ones they don't.
No full member of the EU would be kicked out for NOT adopting ALL the directives, but as quoted above Norway is not in such a secure position. Nor would the UK after Brexit.

the issue isn't whether a particular regulation is good or bad per se, it is whether it should be made or not made by the UK parliament or by the 28 eu members

Generali

CLAPTON wrote: »

the issue isn't whether a particular regulation is good or bad per se, it is whether it should be made or not made by the UK parliament or by the 28 eu members

As the Norwegian experience tells us, a Brexit would simply mean the UK adopting EU rules as decided by the remaining 27 members.

angrypirate

The most interesting and important sentence in this article:
"The 36 FTSE-100 companies that signed a pro-EU letter in The Times last month spent €21.3 million lobbying the EU; they got back €120.9 million in grants from Brussels. Hard to argue with a 600 per cent return on investment."

http://capx.co/britains-obsolescent-conglomerates-are-backing-remain/

CLAPTON

Generali wrote: »

As the Norwegian experience tells us, a Brexit would simply mean the UK adopting EU rules as decided by the remaining 27 members.

the norwegian solution is totally inappropriate.

I am fully willing to go for the Australian solution and suffer the consequences whatever they may be : maybe it will tempt you to return home