If we vote for Brexit what happens

Moby

So, after this marathon, we are asked to vote to agree to a "new" membership" with the following "improvements":

- Membership of Euro: No change, we're not in it now and we won't be in it post referendum. Seriously, is that a gain?

- Stop "Ever closer union" - Means nothing - Since this is a loosely worded sentiment, it cannot be legally defined, enforced nor enshrined in any contract. Hence a meaningless trope that does nothing in helping define or protect our nation's sovereignty.

- UK to claw back significant powers from the EU? - No, not mentioned.

- EU to reform itself (maybe to prevent massive !!!! ups like pushing Greece into the Euro, Merkel-immigration and Schengen)? - No, business as usual, Merkel can still ride roughshod over any EU agreement like she did with her mass immigration invitation.

- In work benefits - Hooray we can stop new EU arrivals from receiving them, but only if we get permission from the EU on a sort of case-by-case basis. So every time mass immigration gets to a certain undefined level, we can politely ask the EU for permission to cap benefits.

- Enshrined in treaty - No, the Lisbon treaty will not be changed to include these demands.

- Are these concessions binding and enduring? - No, the EU parliament and the EU courts could vote down or override these at any moment.

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

I'm saying YES it was stage managed!

Cameron was always going to do a deal. We know that. The issues he raised are trivial and after a suitable amount of wrangling he got some of what he wanted.

For those of us who are pro-Europe and many of the Europhobes it was all a warm up for the referendum so we can agree that Dave wasted a lot of people's time for no good reason. On everything else there is a canyon of difference between us.

This referendum will decide what kind of country we will be for many decades. If we stay in the casual racists and xenophobes brought up when such things were an acceptable part of our culture will continue to die off. The neo-Thatcherite cohort will be replaced by people very comfortable with being both British and European. The generation after that will not understand the meaning of the arguments we are having now.

None of the economic arguments being bandied about are really what this is all about. Rather like the Scottish referendum it is about identity. There have been similar debates about identity and sovereignty in other countries.

The difference for them and particularly their older citizens is they have direct experience of what happens when European countries start fighting each other. European and particularly Western European countries have been moving towards "Ever Closer Union" since the Treaty of Rome was signed.

We have to decide whether we want to put aside our ludicrous exceptionalism, our perception of a separate history and our prejudice and be part of this historic process. Of course the EU has faults - the Euro being the most obvious and pressing but guess what - the UK can help sort those issues out even if we don't join the Euro - but we need to engage positively with our partners instead of constantly thinking that they are all out to do us down - they aren't!

why do you think the collective prejudices of the EU are superior to those of the UK people?
It is based on your support and love for the Soviet Empire and Mao's unified empires? They certainly didn't tolerate exceptionalism : you must dream of those glorious days when only one flower could bloom.

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

why do you think the collective prejudices of the EU are superior to those of the UK people?
It is based on your support and love for the Soviet Empire and Mao's unified empires? They certainly didn't tolerate exceptionalism : you must dream of those glorious days when only one flower could bloom.

Clapton......I'll ask nurse to wheel you to near the window ....so you can look outside at the real word for a change.

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

Clapton......I'll ask nurse to wheel you to near the window ....so you can look outside at the real word for a change.

anything better than discussing actual issues : presumably just imitating Corbyn with his support for the IRA but refusing to discuss it.

michaels

CLAPTON wrote: »

why do you think the collective prejudices of the EU are superior to those of the UK people?

The EU elite being much more remote from the voters is much less swayed by the 'populism' that is merely the collected prejudice of the uneducated who are really not bright enough to have a valid opinion.

gfplux

Moby wrote: »

Cameron is a mendacious little weasel who has run out of games. Watching this has been excruciatingly embarrassing, as Porky begged for scraps from the EU table. Of course he achieved absolutely nothing, but anybody with a functioning brain knew that would be the case before he began the pantomime - all he did was alienate everybody in Europe. There never was any question of our EU partners eroding the fundamental principles of the union to placate a mealy-mouthed little englander. The referendum should simply have been held on the basis of the status quo, thus avoiding the futile and humiliating process that we have all been subjected to. Nothing has been gained, and people will vote according to deep held principles when the time comes - as was always the case. of course i understand that Porky wanted to strut around spouting cr*p like 'battling for britain' to impress his more moronic admirers, but if you are burdened with a brain you will have been appalled by his mealy-mouthed hectoring. As ever, the tories quibbled endlessly over a few pennies saved or not, and fail completely to see the bigger picture

Moby, you are so, so, so angry. I can feel the flames from here.

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

anything better than discussing actual issues : presumably just imitating Corbyn with his support for the IRA but refusing to discuss it.

No it really isn't that. I know you too well. What happens with you all the time is that I explain my point and you respond by repeating the same assertion again and again and again. It's as if the more you repeat something....the more true it is.

Just think for a second .....just for once Clapton how many posts you have trolled me with regarding Jeremy Corbyn and the IRA. You've even managed to introduce it in this thread! By the way I have never supported the Soviet Empire or the China of Mao. I really just don't understand you?

Moby

gfplux wrote: »

Moby, you are so, so, so angry. I can feel the flames from here.

I just can't stand the man.....but you are right I need to lie down with a glass of water or even watch the latest Donald Trump town hall debate.:o

gfplux

CLAPTON wrote: »

so in seven years time the UK has nothing : I guess 4 years is a long time in politics

and of course it applies to no-one already here and only applies for 4 years to each new arrival
and of course it doesn't apply to unemployment benefits, housing benefits, disability benefits, child allowances, access to NHS etc etc

and of course the brake can only be applied if there is 'excess pressure' which clearly there isn't

it will never be applied and even if it did it amounts to virtually nothing

Clapton, you might be right.
However the 7 (seven) years number comes from..... Do remember that it was a UK Government that allowed The new Eastern country's that joined to have free entry for workers. Much of the old Europe had a 7 (seven) year breather before they could come to work.
Sadly once again Britain has slept walked into causing its own problems. Perhaps it's something to do with the Little Englander mentality of our politicians.

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

No it really isn't that. I know you too well. What happens with you all the time is that I explain my point and you respond by repeating the same assertion again and again and again. It's as if the more you repeat something....the more true it is.

Just think for a second .....just for once Clapton how many posts you have trolled me with regarding Jeremy Corbyn and the IRA. You've even managed to introduce it in this thread! By the way I have never supported the Soviet Empire or the China of Mao. I really just don't understand you?

I posed a valid question : why do you suppose that the collective prejudices of the 27 are superior to those of the UK people?
History doesn't teach us that great monolithic empires encourage diversity nor to allow many flowers to bloom.

As for Jeremy : he is the leader of the Labour party. That is the party you support and you claim to have meet him.
Why is it invalid to discuss his views? Do you reject he is/was a IRA supporter ; do you reject the view he has never confronted their leaders about the bombings and the killings. Do you think his view about these issues shouldn't be discussed?