The 'No to the EU' campaign
Discussion
FiF said:
Flexcit has just been revised and it's nothing to do with UKIP. Offers a sensible route to out with various options. Significant that the other out groups keep nicking ideas from it and claiming them as their own. Also of note is that even Cameron seems to be concentrating on trying to discredit one of the options which demonstrates the uselessness of the EU.
It's quite amusing that some of the Remainders, as I am going to refer to them from now, rather that argue facts just seem to have a chant of "ooh scary big world, fud, fud, fud, ukip, kippers." Pathetic.
That's not saying the ukip are helping in any way on this as by the grunting of some of their supporters does harm to the Leavers cause simply due to the nature of the messages.
I agree 100%. The Flexcit option is a sensible (the only realistic?) way of leaving the EU with little or no negotiation needed, on either trade or other issues. Therefore an exit would be achieved in the 2 years as per an Article 50 exit.It's quite amusing that some of the Remainders, as I am going to refer to them from now, rather that argue facts just seem to have a chant of "ooh scary big world, fud, fud, fud, ukip, kippers." Pathetic.
That's not saying the ukip are helping in any way on this as by the grunting of some of their supporters does harm to the Leavers cause simply due to the nature of the messages.
For those who want to learn more::
http://www.eureferendum.com/documents/flexcit.pdf
The problem of cause for most kippers is this option does not give immediate control of movement of labour .
Einion Yrth said:
SilverSixer said:
turbobloke said:
The In/No angle
In/No? From the Daily Telegraph, 27th May 2015: "Downing Street has disclosed that Britons will be asked in the referendum if they wish to “remain a member of the European Union”
In what way can "In/No" be presented as an answer?
Evidently your side of the argument can't even be straight about the question, what chance have you got of convincing us you're straight about the answer?
Anyway, so what? It seems the question is “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”, so I'm still baffled as to how anyone can present that as "In/No". The answers seem to be either "Remain" and "Leave". In/No does not work. It's a disingenuous way of presenting the options. As someone who remains to be convinced of the arguments (I used to be firm "Remain", but I'm wavering as it goes), it gives me no faith in the "Leave" side that there is a willingness to be honest.
Einion Yrth said:
Stay "In/No" the UK should not leave.
HTH
What rot. You'd be the first to be all over left wing spin, I imagine.HTH
There is no "No", the electoral commission has deliberatly suggested removing it.
This is preceisely the kind of thing that prevents me from wavering a bit more your way.
Do the arguments properly without any silly tricks and I'll listen.
Problems is it works both ways. You can equally say "Out/No" - The UK should not remain.
See the problem?
Just say Remain or Leave. Don't try to inflict a negative connotation on either side, just as the Electoral Commision has advised. It just looks like a dirty, and somewhat lame, trick.
See the problem?
Just say Remain or Leave. Don't try to inflict a negative connotation on either side, just as the Electoral Commision has advised. It just looks like a dirty, and somewhat lame, trick.
Edited by SilverSixer on Thursday 29th October 15:06
Hang on a second
I got told that there's more chance of an asteroid hitting me in the face (or words to that effect) than us leaving the EU but retaining free movement of people and yet:
I got told that there's more chance of an asteroid hitting me in the face (or words to that effect) than us leaving the EU but retaining free movement of people and yet:
Pete North said:
As participants in the European single market we will probably keep open borders
Edit: Given that a huge amount of UKIP's (and PH'ers) have open borders as a key reason to leave the EU-how does mr North's statement above fit with that?Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 31st October 11:29
cookie118 said:
Hang on a second
I got told that there's more chance of an asteroid hitting me in the face (or words to that effect) than us leaving the EU but retaining free movement of people and yet:
The issue of immigration has been a key point of discussion not only around the EU and a possible Brexit, except of course for the BBC which considered the topic unmentionable for some time, until it apologised for its error of judgement.I got told that there's more chance of an asteroid hitting me in the face (or words to that effect) than us leaving the EU but retaining free movement of people and yet:
Pete North said:
As participants in the European single market we will probably keep open borders
Edit: Given that a huge amount of UKIP's (and PH'ers) have open borders as a key reason to leave the EU-how does mr North's statement above fit with that?If the referendum results in an Out vote then Post-Brexit there may still be more immigration than some expect, but immigration is being protrayed as the main reason why people on PH want out of the EU. Is that really the case?
Leaving the EU gets us away from unelected eurocrats determining our future in many areas of policy, and start to re-establish a higher degree of self-determination. The idea that a government knows what's best for us is wrong-minded and the idea that the EU has acted and will act in our interests is folly.
The EU wants us to vote In primarily to protect their project and the top people's positions, partly by not being the first leaver and so not encouraging other nations to do likewise.
They want our net contribution, and along with it they want the option to plunder or neuter our most successful business sector. While a UK government would still have self-interested politicians determining policy, we would be mostly rid of one additional, unnecessary, costly, inefficient and strongly self-interested supranational layer of bloat.
This essay (link below) takes a line based on reason and agrees that a Brexit doesn't solve the immigration question instantly, but it does concede that there are more degrees of freedom post-Brexit and that's also a good thing in terms of less external interference and greater self-determination, whatever the new determined position may be.
http://www.niesr.ac.uk/blog/what-would-uk-immigrat...
UKIP can want what they want, they didn't do as well as expected in the election but in spite of that their views appeal to a lot of voters. The rest of us of a vaguely centre Right perspective don't follow a UKIP line any more faithfully than we toe the line with CMD, of whom personally I am no devotee.
turbobloke said:
The issue of immigration has been a key point of discussion not only around the EU and a possible Brexit, except of course for the BBC which considered the topic unmentionable for some time, until it apologised for its error of judgement.
If the referendum results in an Out vote then Post-Brexit there may still be more immigration than some expect, but immigration is being protrayed as the main reason why people on PH want out of the EU. Is that really the case?
Leaving the EU gets us away from unelected eurocrats determining our future in many areas of policy, and start to re-establish a higher degree of self-determination. The idea that a government knows what's best for us is wrong-minded and the idea that the EU has acted and will act in our interests is folly.
The EU wants us to vote In primarily to protect their project and the top people's positions, partly by not being the first leaver and so not encouraging other nations to do likewise.
They want our net contribution, and along with it they want the option to plunder or neuter our most successful business sector. While a UK government would still have self-interested politicians determining policy, we would be mostly rid of one additional, unnecessary, costly, inefficient and strongly self-interested supranational layer of bloat.
This essay (link below) takes a line based on reason and agrees that a Brexit doesn't solve the immigration question instantly, but it does concede that there are more degrees of freedom post-Brexit and that's also a good thing in terms of less external interference and greater self-determination, whatever the new determined position may be.
http://www.niesr.ac.uk/blog/what-would-uk-immigrat...
UKIP can want what they want, they didn't do as well as expected in the election but in spite of that their views appeal to a lot of voters. The rest of us of a vaguely centre Right perspective don't follow a UKIP line any more faithfully than we toe the line with CMD, of whom personally I am no devotee.
I'm not sure I agree with all of it but it's a good post.If the referendum results in an Out vote then Post-Brexit there may still be more immigration than some expect, but immigration is being protrayed as the main reason why people on PH want out of the EU. Is that really the case?
Leaving the EU gets us away from unelected eurocrats determining our future in many areas of policy, and start to re-establish a higher degree of self-determination. The idea that a government knows what's best for us is wrong-minded and the idea that the EU has acted and will act in our interests is folly.
The EU wants us to vote In primarily to protect their project and the top people's positions, partly by not being the first leaver and so not encouraging other nations to do likewise.
They want our net contribution, and along with it they want the option to plunder or neuter our most successful business sector. While a UK government would still have self-interested politicians determining policy, we would be mostly rid of one additional, unnecessary, costly, inefficient and strongly self-interested supranational layer of bloat.
This essay (link below) takes a line based on reason and agrees that a Brexit doesn't solve the immigration question instantly, but it does concede that there are more degrees of freedom post-Brexit and that's also a good thing in terms of less external interference and greater self-determination, whatever the new determined position may be.
http://www.niesr.ac.uk/blog/what-would-uk-immigrat...
UKIP can want what they want, they didn't do as well as expected in the election but in spite of that their views appeal to a lot of voters. The rest of us of a vaguely centre Right perspective don't follow a UKIP line any more faithfully than we toe the line with CMD, of whom personally I am no devotee.
I think it's a risk for the 'out' side to frame too much of the argument around immigration which Farage was doing a lot during the run up to the election.
On the other hand I wonder how much of the 'out' support is based on the immigration argument and 'taking back control of our borders'?
cookie118 said:
I think it's a risk for the 'out' side to frame too much of the argument around immigration which Farage was doing a lot during the run up to the election.
In some ways, so do I, but immigration isn't really at the heart of why the UK should leave the EU, it's one symptom which some people have strong views on. In my previous post I mentioned self-interested unelected ideologues (eurocrats) as an obvious negative aspect of the EU, at least with our own home-grown self-interested ideologues we can and do kick them out every few years. We can't do that when the people involved are unelected by us. Nor can we have ever more distant union under the current regime where the masterplan espouses ever closer union and less self-determination for the UK. cookie118 said:
On the other hand I wonder how much of the 'out' support is based on the immigration argument and 'taking back control of our borders'?
In a way it's still a valid form of expression, since it can be re-framed as having more options over our borders. These would be options that we can choose from; we could end up roughly in the same position as now, or far from it (for which there would be other consequences). So post-Brexit with greater self-determination we get to choose, whereas at the moment we don't. That's essentially what control means. What was implied, I think, is not so much to control i.e. make decisions on borders, but to take one pre-determined line.turbobloke said:
In a way it's still a valid form of expression, since it can be re-framed as having more options over our borders. These would be options that we can choose from; we could end up roughly in the same position as now, or far from it (for which there would be other consequences). So post-Brexit with greater self-determination we get to choose, whereas at the moment we don't. That's essentially what control means. What was implied, I think, is not so much to control i.e. make decisions on borders, but to take one pre-determined line.
Yes-if it's framed as part of a self determination argument it works, even if in reality leaving the EU might not change that much with regards to border control.A pure anti-immigration argument for leaving the EU is too easy to shut down, the EU can simply roll out an argument of no free trade with no free movement, and opens up the out campaign to attacks of being xenophobic etc. A 'look at how little control' argument works a lot better, and is much harder to counter!
cookie118 said:
Yes-if it's framed as part of a self determination argument it works, even if in reality leaving the EU might not change that much with regards to border control.
A pure anti-immigration argument for leaving the EU is too easy to shut down, the EU can simply roll out an argument of no free trade with no free movement, and opens up the out campaign to attacks of being xenophobic etc. A 'look at how little control' argument works a lot better, and is much harder to counter!
The recent migrant/refugee crisis has shown that the open border policy throughout the EU isn't just an issue for OUT campaigners like UKIP. Merkel is as pro EU as Farage is anti, but her reaction of demanding other EU countries follow her lead of an open to all policy then needing to close borders when Germany couldn't cope has highlighted a problem for the proEU side. Different national policies of asylum rules, social care, welfare provision and freedom of movement within the EU can be unbalanced. A pure anti-immigration argument for leaving the EU is too easy to shut down, the EU can simply roll out an argument of no free trade with no free movement, and opens up the out campaign to attacks of being xenophobic etc. A 'look at how little control' argument works a lot better, and is much harder to counter!
I'm pro immigration but I want the UK to have full control of it, so that our infrastructure can cope. My other concern is that whilst Dubai and Saudi declined to take 'Syrian'migrants for security reasons we have a situation where once another EU country accepts people in and grants them an EU passport, they can freely travel to the UK. The EU isn't homogenous enough for open borders to be nationally advantageous to us IMO.
Having said all that, immigration and open borders aren't my main concern about the EU, but I think the proEU side will be less unified behind the principle than before.
Oh dear...
after making a song and dance about US trade:
Farage says:
it then comes out that Michael Froman has been a paid up EU “Forward Studies Unit” member
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/11/02/exclusi...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NsPkNqX0-s
after making a song and dance about US trade:
Michael Froman said:
US warns Britain: If you leave EU you face barriers to trading with America
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/29/us-warns-britain-it-could-face-trade-barriers-if-it-leaves-euFarage says:
Farage said:
HE’S PAID TO TRY AND KEEP BRITAIN IN THE EU
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/11/02/farage-slams-obama-trade-official-hes-paid-to-try-and-keep-britain-in-the-eu/it then comes out that Michael Froman has been a paid up EU “Forward Studies Unit” member
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/11/02/exclusi...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NsPkNqX0-s
Edited by Scuffers on Monday 2nd November 17:35
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff