It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UK Vote on EU exit to be Summer 2016

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2016 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: deliberator
a reply to: gortex

I am not surprised. Cameron's negotiation terms were unrealistic. Does he honestly believe he could change or circumvent the ethos that underpins the EU?


Yes.




posted on Jan, 12 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: stuthealien
i'm voting out ,i choose not to spit on our dead who fought to keep british law ,we will still trade as everything is set up already so no change at all really except we decide our laws .


No we don't. First, the EU itself doesn't generally come up with any directives at all. They are all proposed by individual member states and usually of the kind that is good for business (common standards for electricity safety etc) or too controversial to be introduced 'at home', so putting them forward through the EU so as to later be able to blame the EU for the very same is very, very convenient. The sources can often not be traced, but each member state appoints a commissioner, and it is formally them who introduce new legislation. The UK is just as guilty as any other member state in this.

Second, even without the EU, we are still beholden to international treaties and agreements, such as the UN, OECD and many others, which have a great impact on our 'sovereignty' and ability to 'decide our laws'.

Third, if we were to leave, I don't believe for a second that many laws would be abolished. Take VAT for example. Before its EU entry, the UK did not have VAT. It had the consumption tax that was only levied on luxuries and at source. When the UK left the EU, the consumption tax was abolished and replaced with VAT. If we were to leave the EU, I do not believe for a second that VAT would be abolished. We might get the consumption tax back, but in parallel to VAT.



posted on Jan, 12 2016 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Duplicate removed.
edit on 12/1/2016 by moniker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2016 @ 03:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: yorkshirelad

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: gortex

With mad Merkal going bat# crazy with open gates and refusing to comprise even in slightest in EU negotiations.

I say OUT! 2016 cant come sooner. Leave the rest of the EU to crash and burn under Germany.

West Germany absorbed the basket case of East Germany and became the strongest partner of the EU. Your assertion that the EU will crash and burn is so very wrong and straight out of the BS anti EU UK press.

The EU is far from perfect but it is a conglomerate of countries working together. This partnership is the way of the world as the world becomes ever smaller. The UK partners with NAFTA? not a chance. The Uk partners with BRIC not a chance. The Uk partners with the Commonwealth, yeaH Ok , straight out of Farage's book BUT, huge BUT, those commonwealth countries have established trade agreements with other trading blocks AFTER THE UK JOINED THE EU DUH! We might be the 6th largest economic country but we would be insignificant compared to conglomerate blocks like NAFTA, BRIC and EU.

Do you really think one of these trading blocks will shelve certain trading agreements to trade with the UK for the sake of a trade volume that is exceedingly low volume compared to the intra block trading? People need to wake up before it's too late.

How many times have the conspiracy sites predicted the fall of the EU ? As many as the end of the world due to Nibiru! Come on wake up.........


# the EU.

I dont want to be ruled from Berlin or Brussels.



I'll shorten your rather wordy posting so as to make your message a bit clearer (and correctly spelt):

F uck.

I don't want to be ruled.


edit on 12/1/2016 by moniker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2016 @ 03:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: gortex
David Cameron has today unofficially announced the in / out referendum will be held next year.

“It is going to be tough and there is a lot of hard work to do. But I believe 2016 will be the year we achieve something really vital, fundamentally changing the UK’s relationship with the EU and finally addressing the concerns of the British people about our membership.
“Then it will be for the British people to decide whether we remain or leave. It is a choice we will all need to think hard about.”
www.theguardian.com...


Speculation is on a June or July poll , seems to me Cameron has pulled the pin in the face of not getting his demands over the reforms he wants.
2016 could turn out to be a very interesting year , if we vote to leave where does that leave the Union with Scotland.


I am voting for a big hard IN as far as the referendum.

I enjoy the freedom to travel and also the rights of my European friends to live and work here.

As far as the Scotish issue I hope that either way they will call another referendum and make the right choice and leave the UK.


Bollocks the US is not in the EU and I can travel there, same with Japan.
Just because we leave the EU wont mean travel to the EU will magically stop!
It will carry on like the rest of the world.

Hell I still need to show a passport now to use the tunnel or fly into the EU so dont see how leaving will affect travel!


You need to show an EU-accepted identification but not necessarily a passport. You can apply for a national identity card if you like, and use that to travel instead. In many EU member states, a driver license is valid as one.



posted on Jan, 12 2016 @ 03:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: nonspecific

The immigration of EU citizens is bottom of my list of priorities.


Good, because they don't immigrate. They simply move, just like you could move from Manchester to Cardiff.


Its bad enough being ruled by a one set of corrupt useless politicians and beurocrates in Westminster let alone adding ANOTHER layer of even more corrupt usless beurocrates in brussels.


True, especially considering that around 10% of the MEP's in Brussels are British.


The real decisions are done by unelected beurocrates


Unelected? You mean the commissioners, who are proposed by each member states' government (including our own)? Or you mean the MEPs, which we actually elect? Or perhaps you mean the EU civil servants, who are just as elected as our own British civil servants?


Im all for EU trade, but want none of the politics.


Well that is not going to happen any more than having none of the politics in the UK.



posted on Jan, 12 2016 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: stuthealien
a reply to: nonspecific

i fail to see why you are bemused ,millions gave their lifes to keep british law .


No. They gave their lives (and quite unwillingly) to keep British lives. British law was probably one of the least of their concerns at the time.



posted on Jan, 12 2016 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia
The EU's own auditors have failed to give it a clean bill of health for 19yrs


I'm not sure it has ever been 19 years in a row. The EU auditors have signed off the accounts every year since 2007. Furthermore, the total EU budget is only 2.25% of the sum of all the national budgets, or around 1% of the EU GDP whereas the UK budget is in excess of 40% of the UK GDP.



posted on Jan, 12 2016 @ 06:38 PM
link   
The EU referendum is simple in my opinion. Vote to Leave!

There are very few positive arguments for staying in the EU that we wouldn't still have if we left. The rest seem to be just fear-mongering, mostly from the same people who said we must join the Euro currency or we will be doomed.

My main reasons for wanting to leave are Democracy, the Cost and Immigration.

For me the EU is not only undemocratic, it is sometimes anti-democratic too. For example, when the Greeks voted 61% to 39% in a referendum rejecting the EU bailout and it's austerity package, only days after they implemented an even more demanding austerity package. Yes the Greek government are also to blame for this, but I bet they were under an enormous amount of pressure from the EU and it's institutions to go behind the back of their citizens like that.
en.wikipedia.org...

The UK pays the EU around £55 million A DAY for just being a member. We get some of that back in terms of agricultural aid and some building projects but the net figure is still around £33 million A DAY. If we leave the EU we would still honor the agricultural aid but make it more fair to small scale farmers. Saving over £12 billion (net) a year would take a nice chunk out of the UK's deficit or could be pumped into our NHS...
fullfact.org...

For me immigration is purely about principles and numbers. As a country we should be able to decide who comes into our country. If we leave the EU we could scrap this two tier nonsense and implement a fair points based system instead of discriminating the rest of the World as we currently do. Last year our net immigration was over 350k and it is rising each year. That is putting a massive strain on our infrastructure, it's not sustainable and will lead to an increase in xenophobic far right groups in the UK.



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 02:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: 83Liberty
The EU referendum is simple in my opinion. Vote to Leave!

There are very few positive arguments for staying in the EU that we wouldn't still have if we left. The rest seem to be just fear-mongering, mostly from the same people who said we must join the Euro currency or we will be doomed.

My main reasons for wanting to leave are Democracy, the Cost and Immigration.

For me the EU is not only undemocratic, it is sometimes anti-democratic too. For example, when the Greeks voted 61% to 39% in a referendum rejecting the EU bailout and it's austerity package, only days after they implemented an even more demanding austerity package. Yes the Greek government are also to blame for this, but I bet they were under an enormous amount of pressure from the EU and it's institutions to go behind the back of their citizens like that.
en.wikipedia.org...

The UK pays the EU around £55 million A DAY for just being a member. We get some of that back in terms of agricultural aid and some building projects but the net figure is still around £33 million A DAY. If we leave the EU we would still honor the agricultural aid but make it more fair to small scale farmers. Saving over £12 billion (net) a year would take a nice chunk out of the UK's deficit or could be pumped into our NHS...
fullfact.org...

For me immigration is purely about principles and numbers. As a country we should be able to decide who comes into our country. If we leave the EU we could scrap this two tier nonsense and implement a fair points based system instead of discriminating the rest of the World as we currently do. Last year our net immigration was over 350k and it is rising each year. That is putting a massive strain on our infrastructure, it's not sustainable and will lead to an increase in xenophobic far right groups in the UK.


to continue trading with the eu yet not be part of it costs much more than 55 million a day, check out norway and switzerland.
check out their immigration numbers too, to keep the eu onside they, and we have to double the quota.
funny ukip never mentions that.
isolating ourselves and using either iceland, norway or switzerland as a role model is not the way forward



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 02:42 AM
link   
a reply to: stinkelbaum

I'm not advocating having similar deals to Norway or Switzerland, they have negotiated their own deal to suit them.
I think we are big enough and strong enough to have our own deal.



posted on Jan, 25 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: 83Liberty
a reply to: stinkelbaum

I'm not advocating having similar deals to Norway or Switzerland, they have negotiated their own deal to suit them.
I think we are big enough and strong enough to have our own deal.


Norway has a straight EEA membership agreement, with defined contributions to the EU purse. Switzerland has a complex maze of interlocking, individual agreements. And they, too, have defined contributions to the EU purse. If Switzerland is trying to negotiate or get out of one of them, the EU has the right to terminate all of them.

Neither is quite suitable for Norway and Switzerland.



posted on Feb, 1 2016 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: moniker

originally posted by: 83Liberty
a reply to: stinkelbaum

I'm not advocating having similar deals to Norway or Switzerland, they have negotiated their own deal to suit them.
I think we are big enough and strong enough to have our own deal.


Norway has a straight EEA membership agreement, with defined contributions to the EU purse. Switzerland has a complex maze of interlocking, individual agreements. And they, too, have defined contributions to the EU purse. If Switzerland is trying to negotiate or get out of one of them, the EU has the right to terminate all of them.

Neither is quite suitable for Norway and Switzerland.


Norway signed THEIR agreement in 1992. Switzerland signed THEIR agreement in 1972.

A lot has changed since then and it doesn't matter what other countries have. We will negotiate our own deal.
Why can't you understand that?

Mexico, for example, has a free trade agreement with the EU, without most of the baggage, so it CAN be done...
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 1 2016 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: moniker

originally posted by: eletheia
The EU's own auditors have failed to give it a clean bill of health for 19yrs


I'm not sure it has ever been 19 years in a row. The EU auditors have signed off the accounts every year since 2007. Furthermore, the total EU budget is only 2.25% of the sum of all the national budgets, or around 1% of the EU GDP whereas the UK budget is in excess of 40% of the UK GDP.



I provided a link from many that I found confirming the information

I posted , there are very many other sites confirming this same

information. Check them out ... IF and as you started your post with >>>>

*I'm not sure*.... and disagreed with info provided.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 06:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: 83Liberty

originally posted by: moniker

originally posted by: 83Liberty
a reply to: stinkelbaum

I'm not advocating having similar deals to Norway or Switzerland, they have negotiated their own deal to suit them.
I think we are big enough and strong enough to have our own deal.


Norway has a straight EEA membership agreement, with defined contributions to the EU purse. Switzerland has a complex maze of interlocking, individual agreements. And they, too, have defined contributions to the EU purse. If Switzerland is trying to negotiate or get out of one of them, the EU has the right to terminate all of them.

Neither is quite suitable for Norway and Switzerland.


Norway signed THEIR agreement in 1992. Switzerland signed THEIR agreement in 1972.

A lot has changed since then and it doesn't matter what other countries have. We will negotiate our own deal.
Why can't you understand that?

Mexico, for example, has a free trade agreement with the EU, without most of the baggage, so it CAN be done...
en.wikipedia.org...
mexico is not in europe, we like norway, switzerland and iceland are, you also would like to base our future economy on mexico?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: stinkelbaum

Sigh. This is getting really pathetic now.

Yes you are correct, Mexico is not in Europe.

Yes you are correct, UK, Norway, Switzerland and Iceland are in Europe.

I never said I want to base my future economy on Mexico.

Again I repeat myself. We don't want to copy a deal that another country has (whether be it inside or outside of Europe in doesn't matter), we will negotiate our own deal, that suits us. Seriously it's not hard to grasp.



posted on Feb, 6 2016 @ 08:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: 83Liberty
For me the EU is not only undemocratic, it is sometimes anti-democratic too. For example, when the Greeks voted 61% to 39% in a referendum rejecting the EU bailout and it's austerity package, only days after they implemented an even more demanding austerity package.


Don't blame (just) the EU for that. The IMF had an even greater part in it.


The UK pays the EU around £55 million A DAY for just being a member. We get some of that back in terms of agricultural aid and some building projects but the net figure is still around £33 million A DAY.


You know... I actually don't mind paying my 51 pence a day because that is what it is per British resident. The UK could easily reclaim most that amount by demanding all amounts to be rounded up to the next higher pound in self assessments rather than being rounded to the nearest pound.


For me immigration is purely about principles and numbers. As a country we should be able to decide who comes into our country. If we leave the EU we could scrap this two tier nonsense and implement a fair points based system instead of discriminating the rest of the World as we currently do.


It all comes and goes in waves. It was not too long ago that British engineers moved to Germany in masses in search of jobs because there were none to be found in the UK.

Limit EU movement (EU immigration is people moving to the EU from outside the EU) now because it appears the right thing to do at this point in time, not taking the longer-term view into account, and we might find ourselves in deep, deep trouble further down the road.

People move to where the jobs are. Make the UK unattractive for jobs, and people will leave. Including some Britons. The fact that people want to move to the UK at this point in time is a sign of strength, but take that ability away and it spells trouble.



posted on Feb, 6 2016 @ 08:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: 83Liberty
a reply to: stinkelbaum

Sigh. This is getting really pathetic now.

Yes you are correct, Mexico is not in Europe.

Yes you are correct, UK, Norway, Switzerland and Iceland are in Europe.

I never said I want to base my future economy on Mexico.

Again I repeat myself. We don't want to copy a deal that another country has (whether be it inside or outside of Europe in doesn't matter), we will negotiate our own deal, that suits us. Seriously it's not hard to grasp.


The UK government has already publicly ruled out an EEA membership (Norway), a jungle of bilateral treaties (Switzerland) and a customs union (Turkey). The only way that remains is an unchartered, as yet undefined fourth way. Let's not fool ourselves that we can demand whatever we like. Well, technically we can, but we might not get it. There are always two (or more) parties to an agreement, and both have to agree (see, it's in the name). If the EU believe that whatever we demand is unfair to them they won't have to agree to anything. Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty says that exit negotiations must be completed within two years after a notice to leave the EU. Whatever has been negotiated up to that point will be put in the agreement and anything else we are still debating won't happen. Article 50 doesn't oblige the EU to agree to anything.



posted on Feb, 6 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: moniker
People move to where the jobs are. Make the UK unattractive for jobs, and people will leave. Including some Britons. The fact that people want to move to the UK at this point in time is a sign of strength, but take that ability away and it spells trouble.


The UK has *unemployment,* so how are they moving to where the

jobs are?


The fact that people want to move to the UK is that the UK has

a very attractive *benefit* system.... I have watched live interviews

of the Calais immigrants on news casts, and without exception that

comes out in the interview.



posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: 83Liberty

originally posted by: moniker

originally posted by: 83Liberty
a reply to: stinkelbaum

I'm not advocating having similar deals to Norway or Switzerland, they have negotiated their own deal to suit them.
I think we are big enough and strong enough to have our own deal.


Norway has a straight EEA membership agreement, with defined contributions to the EU purse. Switzerland has a complex maze of interlocking, individual agreements. And they, too, have defined contributions to the EU purse. If Switzerland is trying to negotiate or get out of one of them, the EU has the right to terminate all of them.

Neither is quite suitable for Norway and Switzerland.


Norway signed THEIR agreement in 1992. Switzerland signed THEIR agreement in 1972.

A lot has changed since then and it doesn't matter what other countries have. We will negotiate our own deal.
Why can't you understand that?


Why can't the proponents of a brexit understand that, as they continuously keep bringing up Norway and Switzerland as the fine examples to follow? Neither would work for the UK and until there is a credible alternative I'm not convinced.

Furthermore, it takes two to negotiate, and if the EU is not interested in negotiating on our terms (we tend to demand things rather than arriving at a compromise that suits both parties), there will be no deal whatsoever.
edit on 10/2/2016 by moniker because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join