Cameron spending £9 Million on Brexit Propaganda.

Generali

Alan_Brown wrote: »

It would appear that most people who are outside the UK, including various representatives of the US, Canadian, Australian and NZ governments are keen on the UK remaining in the EU.

Whether their keenness is based on what they feel is good for themselves or good for the UK is up for debate.

It does smack as hypocrisy for the governments and citizens of successful independent countries to insist the UK remain shackled to the EU superstate.

I think you should reconsider the meaning of hypocrisy in that case as you clearly don't understand it. You might also consider what NAFTA and ASEAN mean to the wider world and what abandoning the EU without any considered safety net means.

You might also consider that most Britons are perfectly happy with the status quo.

You might want to think why you are on the side of Putin rather than Obama.

Just sayin'.

Alan_Brown

Generali wrote: »

I think you should reconsider the meaning of hypocrisy in that case as you clearly don't understand it. You might also consider what NAFTA and ASEAN mean to the wider world and what abandoning the EU without any considered safety net means.

You might also consider that most Britons are perfectly happy with the status quo.

You might want to think why you are on the side of Putin rather than Obama.

Just sayin'.

The EU has gone way beyond NAFTA and other free trade agreements. I don't think there is a single Out campaigner who doesn't want to be part of free trade agreements, we just want to retain our sovereignty. The United States, Mexico and Canada haven't ceded sovereignty in order to be part of NAFTA. Neither have other countries that have entered into free trade agreements. Their citizens wouldn't stand for it (especially in the US), yet they expect us to. That's the hypocrisy. (Do I 'understand hypocrisy now, or will you explain where I am going wrong?)

The EU status quo is a myth, it exits for this year. The EU will continue to evolve, continue to expand and continue to move towards a federal Europe. It has to because the Euro will fail unless they have fiscal and monetary union. The UK will be left increasingly on the sidelines, acting as a drag on the necessary EU reforms but only slowing the process not stopping it, yet increasing the risk of a Euro collapse that would damage all of us.

Generali

Alan_Brown wrote: »

The EU has gone way beyond NAFTA and other free trade agreements. I don't think there is a single Out campaigner who doesn't want to be part of free trade agreements, we just want to retain our sovereignty. The United States, Mexico and Canada haven't ceded sovereignty in order to be part of NAFTA. Neither have other countries that have entered into free trade agreements. Their citizens wouldn't stand for it (especially in the US), yet they expect us to. That's the hypocrisy.

The EU status quo is a myth, it exits for this year. The EU will continue to evolve, continue to expand and continue to move towards a federal Europe. It has to because the Euro will fail unless they have fiscal and monetary union. The UK will be left increasingly on the sidelines, acting as a drag on the necessary EU reforms but only slowing the process not stopping it, yet increasing the risk of a Euro collapse that would damage all of us.

What do you mean by sovereignty please?

Alan_Brown

Generali wrote: »

What do you mean by sovereignty please?

Death by a thousands cuts?

Definition: a country's independent authority and the right to govern itself

BobQ

mayonnaise wrote: »

Still, the krauts are involved. :mad:

That is like saying Cadbury's chocolates made in Birmingham UK are produced in the USA.

CLAPTON

Generali wrote: »

You might want to think why you are on the side of Putin rather than Obama.

Just sayin'.

you have already specifically acted against the interests of the USA;
expect a strike any day : maybe soon or maybe in a year or two , no-one can know

BobQ

kabayiri wrote: »

I'm still waiting for a definitive answer on the £9m costs. I think they were just production costs, and don't cover brochure development or logistics, but even my OUT mp isn't clear yet.

The German bit is a red herring. If this was done at last minute it won't have gone out to a full competitive tender. They have preferred suppliers, and it will have been a capacity issue ("can you do this volume at short notice").

It is one of the HMRC regular printers.

The £9m covers the all costs too. Design was about 458K.

http://www.printweek.com/print-week/news/1156762/print-is-winner-in-gbp9m-eu-referendum-leaflet-row

kabayiri

BobQ wrote: »

It is one of the HMRC regular printers.

The £9m covers the all costs too. Design was about 458K.

http://www.printweek.com/print-week/news/1156762/print-is-winner-in-gbp9m-eu-referendum-leaflet-row

That's interesting, thanks Bob

People may disagree with the decision to produce it, but I don't think it was an expensive option.

BobQ

kabayiri wrote: »

That's interesting, thanks Bob

People may disagree with the decision to produce it, but I don't think it was an expensive option.

If they won an open competition to become a preferred supplier to HMRC knowing that would get regular orders for bulk printing of millions of items, one would hope their rates were a trifle competitive

kabayiri

BobQ wrote: »

If they won an open competition to become a preferred supplier to HMRC knowing that would get regular orders for bulk printing of millions of items, one would hope their rates were a trifle competitive

The supplier I know did a lot of the so-called high value cheque printing. It's been challenging to adapt to the future demand; all the talk was about "digital" for a while.

It cost a local political office about 60p per unit for distribution and tracking alone on a volume of 60K. It shows what 27m volume must achieve in terms of price benefit.