If there is a second referendum ...

MobileSaver

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

when the veto is eliminated

IF the veto is ever eliminated we can revisit whether we still want to be in the EU but to give up years or even decades of future EU benefits because of something that might happen in the future is nonsensical; talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face!

Enterprise_1701C

That is just one of the mounting number of very good reasons for leaving.

I voted remain, but I have learned more and more about the eu as time has gone on, really do not want to be part of it.

Herzlos

That just sounds a lot like project fear; that we should leave the EU because it might do things we don't like in the future.

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Do you recall the fuss the eu kicked up when we threatened to pull our intelligence section before? That is one of the most valuable things we have, we are world leaders in intelligence circles.

Yup. But is it enough for the EU to give us a special deal? Will threatening to pull it again cause friction and make us look petty? How badly will we suffer if the EU don't share their security information with us?

Bear in mind that when we threatened to pull our military support, they ramped up talk of the "EU Army" because both the UK and US had become "unreliable partners".

The majority of our current concerns are the fault of the eu

No, they aren't.

they are the ones that want to head to a us of e.

Noones been able to tell me why this is a bad thing?

We have waited for too long for the eu to realise they have to change, they are like dinosaurs that don't realise they are extinct yet, they also tend to favour France and Germany, look at the CAP, yes the funds get distributed, but france tends to get the most.

So why aren't we pushing them to change?

It is my belief that they will find a way to remove the rebate, find a way to remove the veto and to force us into the euro and the Schengen

But, according to their rules, they can't. There's no route to any of it. If somehow it does happen, then we can leave at that point and get a clear consensus?

or it will be a two speed Europe meaning we end up sidelined anyway.

I thought we wanted to be sidelined in a 2 speed europe?

The eu is planning to remove the member states' veto on taxation, probably will do so on a lot more things. They may not be able to turn around and say we no longer have a veto, but they most certainly can change things from absolute majority to qualified majority voting.

Again, nope. They can't take away our veto without our consent, and they can't use qualified majority voting without our consent.

We are like toothless tigers in the eu, between 2010 and 2015 the UK voted no 23 times and abstained 18 times, all the measures went through costing us billions. It gets worse the further back you go. So when the veto is eliminated the eu will turn into an even worse beast.

Any how many times did we vote in agreement?


How do you think we're going to become more gain teeth on the outside when we don't even get a vote?

MobileSaver

BikingBud wrote: »

We use the veto which indicates we wish to operate outside what the EU wants. We may as well leave.

So if we don't agree with something we should have a Trump Temper Tantrum and storm out of the room?!?!

Can you remind me how well that's working out for the effing moron on the other side of the pond?

Herzlos

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

We are like toothless tigers in the eu, between 2010 and 2015 the UK voted no 23 times and abstained 18 times, all the measures went through costing us billions. It gets worse the further back you go. So when the veto is eliminated the eu will turn into an even worse beast.

From Fullfact.org:

Official EU voting records* show that the British government has voted ‘No’ to laws passed at EU level on 56 occasions, abstained 70 times, and voted ‘Yes’ 2,466 times since 1999, according to UK in a Changing Europe Fellows Sara Hagemann and Simon Hix.
In other words, UK ministers were on the “winning side” 95% of the time, abstained 3% of the time, and were on the losing side 2%.

Doesn't look so good when you include the full picture, does it?

Moe_The_Bartender

Herzlos wrote: »

Again, nope. They can't take away our veto without our consent, and they can't use qualified majority voting without our consent

Obliginingly, the EU have just this week released a document wanting to remove members' vetoes on tax policy. Read it.

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/taxation/files/15_01_2019_communication_towards_a_more_efficient_democratic_decision_making_eu_tax_policy_en.pdf

Honey_Badger

Herzlos wrote: »

From Fullfact.org:





Doesn't look so good when you include the full picture, does it?

But that’s not the full picture is it, just a very selective quote from Fullfact?

Reading further into the article it says

In recent years the UK has been more often on the losing side of these votes.

Research by Dr Hagemann and Professor Hix shows that between 2009 and 2015 the UK voted against the majority 12.3% of the time, compared to 2.6% of the time between 2004 and 2009.

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts-behind-claims-uk-influence/

Herzlos

It does show we're disagreeing more (though still only 1/8th of the time), but we're hardly being steamrolled by the EU.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Moe_The_Bartender wrote: »

Obliginingly, the EU have just this week released a document wanting to remove members' vetoes on tax policy. Read it.

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/taxation/files/15_01_2019_communication_towards_a_more_efficient_democratic_decision_making_eu_tax_policy_en.pdf

And Ireland have promptly said they'll veto it.

Like I said, politicians float ideas all the time, but taxation is one of many matters where the EU cannot change the rules from Unanimity to QMV without the agreement of all member states.

chucknorris

adindas wrote: »

Ruling out no-deal scenario will leave the UK without leverage in the negotiation. That is what the remoaners keep pushing.

I definitely want to remain, I think that we should have a second referendum, and if the result is still to leave, then we should take a tough stance and use brinkmanship to drive a hard bargain, and if the EU calls our bluff, we should leave with no deal, but make it clear to them from the very start that we'll do it without hesitation.