Brexit, in or out.

[itsnoteasy]

Gav what exactly will happen if we stay? Not guesses , exactly what will happen. The truth is no one can forecast either way what the world will be like in five or ten years time, so I don't think it's fair to say the leave campaign should know every detail but the remain shouldn't. As for lies ,Gideon has pushed his £4000 a year worse off all throughout this campaign, even after the treasury told him it was untrue, believe it or not that his own people, the folk who work for him telling him not to use that figure.

[Terry Davidson]

Gav what exactly will happen if we stay? Not guesses , exactly what will happen. The truth is no one can forecast either way what the world will be like in five or ten years time, so I don't think it's fair to say the leave campaign should know every detail but the remain shouldn't. As for lies ,Gideon has pushed his £4000 a year worse off all throughout this campaign, even after the treasury told him it was untrue, believe it or not that his own people, the folk who work for him telling him not to use that figure.

I would reason if 'remain' wins the day then things would carry on exactly as they are now but no one can predict future economic variances to any degree of accuracy. So things might remain largely the same, might improve somewhat or even might degrade somewhat.

But for certain, at the very least in the short term, things for Britain will get worse in the short term if the 'leave' side wins. As soon as Britain leaves all those trade deals within the EU will go away and therefore must be renegotiated between an independent Britain and the EU and as we always see with politicians involved each side will be trying to get the most advantages out of the negotiations and they will take quite awhile although I suppose all the British fishermen will be happy with not having to live with the EU quotas, but the rest of the British export industry will suffer and I expect Britain will place tariffs on imported EU goods which will in turn result in opposing tariffs from the EU with respect to British goods.

Also, in order to export goods to the EU Britain will still have to conform to EU standards.

[itsnoteasy]

I think you give politicians more power than they have Terry, can you really see Merkel turning to BMW and saying no more sales to the UK, because I'm not their friend anymore, you will have to shut the odd factory so I can teach them a lesson, I don't think she would last two minutes.
I have no idea where the idea that we will put tariffs on things from Europe come from, why would we? We want to trade with them, this isn't about turning our backs, it's about Independant countries freely trading and not getting sucked into a European superstate, which is the stated goal , it's not what we signed up for, and it has been drip drip drip handing of powers over.
I agree there will be a short term shock, but that's the markets for you, they will recover in a few months with no great loss, they are gamblers so always over react. I can remember when all these economists wanted us to stay in the ERM said it would lead to a disaster if we pulled out, there was an instant crash on the markets when we did pull out, didn't last long and we have been far better off out of it,same folk who wanted us to join the Euro, told us we would be left behind if we didn't, but because we kept the pound we didn't end up like Greece ( remember our debt was bigger than theirs) because we could devalue the pound, cut interest rates and let the bank of England print money,same folk who didn't see the banking crash coming, these people advised the Tory party there was too much regulation at the time, what on earth are they on?why is everyone treating what they say as gospel all of a sudden? I just don't get it, it just seems like utter fear, even though Cameron himself admits their is no doubt we could be successful outside of the EU.

[gavpowell]

Gav what exactly will happen if we stay? Not guesses , exactly what will happen. The truth is no one can forecast either way what the world will be like in five or ten years time, so I don't think it's fair to say the leave campaign should know every detail but the remain shouldn't.

No, but we have a rough idea of what will happen if we stay, because we know what the contribution is, who we have trading deals with and what the terms are, etc. We've also not got the most stable economy as it is right now, so I'm not convinced cutting ourselves off and starting from scratch with trade deals is a great idea.

And my point is that if we stay in for the moment, we can always vote to leave later - if we vote to leave now, nobody seems to have proper specifics about anty of it, and they're doing Wizard of Oz stuff with money we haven't got yet - "We'll give it to the NHS! And subsidise farmers! And increase wages!"

At some stage, I can see myself voting to come out, because if Turkey finally gets accession, it had better have completely transformed itself on human rights etc. Thankfully Turkey's not likely to join any time in the next decade or so.

At the moment, I despise the government of this country, didn't vote for it and dearly wish it would go away, so the prospect of giving it anymore power than it currently has horrifies me. Unfortunately there's also a shortage of viable alternatives at this stage.

But anyone who wants to vote to leave will get no ill will from me, so long as it's not based on lies like the £350m a week.

[gavpowell]

not getting sucked into a European superstate, which is the stated goal , it's not what we signed up for, and it has been drip drip drip handing of powers over.

The thing is, who is "we"? I mean I never signed up for anything because I was born in 1981, but we elect representatives to make these decisions, they sign the treaties etc. So "We the people" may not have wanted it, but our representatives decided that's what was best. By the time of the first referendum it was clear we had to give up control of certain things to be a member, and we as a country voted to stay in. And we're nowhere near part of some superstate - we've refused the Euro, not interested in Schengen, not interested in an EU army. That's quite a large amount for a would-be superstate!

The only reason we're even getting a referendum now is because UKIP was helping the Tory civil war over Europe. If we vote to leave that's fine, but what I primarily want is democratic reform in this country - proportional elections, the right of recall and censure over our MPs, a transparent lobbyists register etc. etc.

Until we get that, I do't see our democracy being any different to the EU - we elect people who appoint or elect other people to positions of power. Except in our case we also spend a fortune keeping a family of inbred billionaires in luxury so they can assent to legislation and read out speeches.

Democratically accountable British politicians, then maybe decide about Europe.

[Byrom]

Anyway - I might be a little fickle here but there was a really hot girl from Eastern Europe in the club tonight. So ignore my previous post ...

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

Anyway - I might be a little fickle here but there was a really hot girl from Eastern Europe in the club tonight. So ignore my previous post ...

If there's one thing the UK needs more than any other it's an influx of slim women. It is no exaggeration to stay virtually the only fit women around my area are eastern Europeans.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

The thing is, who is "we"? I mean I never signed up for anything because I was born in 1981, but we elect representatives to make these decisions, they sign the treaties etc. So "We the people" may not have wanted it, but our representatives decided that's what was best. By the time of the first referendum it was clear we had to give up control of certain things to be a member, and we as a country voted to stay in. And we're nowhere near part of some superstate - we've refused the Euro, not interested in Schengen, not interested in an EU army. That's quite a large amount for a would-be superstate!

The only reason we're even getting a referendum now is because UKIP was helping the Tory civil war over Europe. If we vote to leave that's fine, but what I primarily want is democratic reform in this country - proportional elections, the right of recall and censure over our MPs, a transparent lobbyists register etc. etc.

Until we get that, I do't see our democracy being any different to the EU - we elect people who appoint or elect other people to positions of power. Except in our case we also spend a fortune keeping a family of inbred billionaires in luxury so they can assent to legislation and read out speeches.

Democratically accountable British politicians, then maybe decide about Europe.

It is hardly a fortune, especially when you consider the pull factor for tourists. Certainly less than 368m a week, that's for sure.

The British royal family or art installation projects in rural Poland? Hmmmm.

[Hello, Mr Big Shot]

No, but we have a rough idea of what will happen if we stay, because we know what the contribution is, who we have trading deals with and what the terms are, etc. We've also not got the most stable economy as it is right now, so I'm not convinced cutting ourselves off and starting from scratch with trade deals is a great idea.

And my point is that if we stay in for the moment, we can always vote to leave later - if we vote to leave now, nobody seems to have proper specifics about anty of it, and they're doing Wizard of Oz stuff with money we haven't got yet - "We'll give it to the NHS! And subsidise farmers! And increase wages!"

At some stage, I can see myself voting to come out, because if Turkey finally gets accession, it had better have completely transformed itself on human rights etc. Thankfully Turkey's not likely to join any time in the next decade or so.

At the moment, I despise the government of this country, didn't vote for it and dearly wish it would go away, so the prospect of giving it anymore power than it currently has horrifies me. Unfortunately there's also a shortage of viable alternatives at this stage.

But anyone who wants to vote to leave will get no ill will from me, so long as it's not based on lies like the £350m a week.

Why is it a lie? We get around half that back, but little say on where it is spend. My first job in the civil service was allocating European funding and i thought it a waste of money then, and that over 20years ago.

The money we get back, whether ERDF, ESF, or whatever, is often spent on schemes of questionable benefit and little value. It is costly to administer and bureaucratic. Far better to have control over the 9/10 billion directly.

How long would you play a fruit machine that had a 50% pay out rate, with NO chance of ever hitting the jackpot? Not very long, i suspect.

[gavpowell]

Why is it a lie?

Because we don't send that much in the first place, as has been made clear repeatedly, but it doesn't suit the agenda of Farage and Emperor Boris so they keep peddling it.

We send around £250 million - it wouold be £350 million but we get a "rebate" which isn't a rebate because we don't get it back, we don't give it in the first place.

Of the £250 million, around half of it comes back, but you're right, we don't entirely control what we can spend it on.

But on the other hand, our governments past and present have negotiated, endorsed and voted for the arrangments like the Common Agricultural Policy(indeed even the Leave campaign say they'd maintain the NHS and farming spending, or increase it), so that would leave even less spare cash.

Some of it goes to help poorer areas, and Cameron's two governments have certainly shown they're not really interested in poor people, or people with medical conditions who require assistance.

Depends what you mean by "Hitting the jackpot" doesn't it? If your aim is to help build a stronger Europe and strengthen trading links, you look at the money spent as invested - if you're looking to make a simple, direct profit, you change the tax rules and bung 10 billion a year in an ISA.

[gavpowell]

It is hardly a fortune, especially when you consider the pull factor for tourists. Certainly less than 368m a week, that's for sure.

Have we funded any art installations in rural Poland or did you make that up?

Nobody, even Buck House, has accurately proven the Royals have any net benefit from a tourist point of view. France of course struggles with tourism, as do all the stately homes of the National Trust/English Heritage.

Yeah, the royals cost less than the EU, but I thought we wanted to get away from unelected officials?

So we have a wholly unelected upper chamber, an unelected head of state and an unelected civil service. Scrap the Lords and the monarchy, I reckon you'd equal the cost of the EU contribution, plus you gain some new tourist attractions. Force them all to get jobs and you voila! net benefit to the economy!

[vmax4steve]

The thing is, who is "we"? I mean I never signed up for anything because I was born in 1981, but we elect representatives to make these decisions, they sign the treaties etc. So "We the people" may not have wanted it, but our representatives decided that's what was best. By the time of the first referendum it was clear we had to give up control of certain things to be a member, and we as a country voted to stay in. And we're nowhere near part of some superstate - we've refused the Euro, not interested in Schengen, not interested in an EU army. That's quite a large amount for a would-be superstate!

The only reason we're even getting a referendum now is because UKIP was helping the Tory civil war over Europe. If we vote to leave that's fine, but what I primarily want is democratic reform in this country - proportional elections, the right of recall and censure over our MPs, a transparent lobbyists register etc. etc.

Until we get that, I do't see our democracy being any different to the EU - we elect people who appoint or elect other people to positions of power. Except in our case we also spend a fortune keeping a family of inbred billionaires in luxury so they can assent to legislation and read out speeches.

Democratically accountable British politicians, then maybe decide about Europe.

I agree with you, and the polling card should have several questions on it regarding the rules of the EU and what as a nation we the people want to sign up to. Then when the result is in our politicians can start a renegotiation of in or out unless the concerns of the UK electorate are resolved.
If the polling card read 'would you remain if the free movement of people was only between countries of equal economies' then I would vote yes on that, because to me that's the only issue.
Use EU funds to get these poorer countries economies driving forward, then when they earn as much as we do they wouldn't want to leave home unless seeking a different culture or lifestyle.

But seeing as the polling cards reads only leave or remain then it has to be leave and start again from there.

[jim evans]

What not many people are looking at are the possible increases that might arise by staying in,it's not going to get any cheaper to stay in,it's like renting a property the rent goes up.

[gavpowell]

What not many people are looking at are the possible increases that might arise by staying in,it's not going to get any cheaper to stay in,it's like renting a property the rent goes up.

Well we have some control over that, but yeah, it might get more expensive. But like Scotland, there's nothing to stop us forcing another referendum in the future.

All this once-in-a-generation business is hard to take seriously, because the UK electorate has much better access to information now and UKIP aren't likely to be going away any time soon.

Whatever happens, this whole campaign has benefited me - I've never even turned out to vote for my MEP in the past, but will do in the future because in the past few months I've learnt a hell of a lot about how the EU works and how we fit into it. That's going to make me a lot more engaged in the future, whether we're in the EU or not.

[gavpowell]

I agree with you, and the polling card should have several questions on it regarding the rules of the EU and what as a nation we the people want to sign up to. Then when the result is in our politicians can start a renegotiation of in or out unless the concerns of the UK electorate are resolved.

Use EU funds to get these poorer countries economies driving forward, then when they earn as much as we do they wouldn't want to leave home unless seeking a different culture or lifestyle.

Those two points I can agree with, though the free movement of people doesn;'t bother me as I'm not cinvinced overall it makes the country worse - we should be doing more to support areas where it does have an impact though(Boston in Lincolnshire is always on our local news for that reason)

We ARE using EU funds to drive countries forward, it's just arguably not enough. It also doesn't help that a lot of ex-Communist countries are now run by ex-Communists acting as plutocrats. My friends in Romania were telling me their roads are in appalling condition - Ceausescu started building a motorway network but was overthrown, after which it was abandoned. The EU has stumped up some cash to finish the job, but meanwhile the Romanian government has been doing a Thatcherite sell-off of mining rights and other infrastructure. I imagine similar stories are to be found elsewhere.

Again, it would help if we had a decent government that genuinely seemed interested in the people of this country, rather than grandstanding and political convenience.

Oh, and we could really do to stop the American lapdog thing as well - that schtick got old some time ago.