Brexit

[Rovinghawk]

Many are in favour of Brexit, many are against. I'm slightly in favour but could be persuaded one way or the other depending on the good and bad consequences of leaving.

How would you vote and what reasons do you have? I'm hoping to keep the emotive side out of it & stick to logical, financial reasons and the best interests of the UK as a whole.

[Rovinghawk]

XJ40 said:

idealogically I see it as more "progressive" and liberal to have common laws.................with neighbouring countries.

Could an exited UK not simply copy those laws we see the benefit of?

[Rovinghawk]

Moominho said:

I wouldn't like to go down the American route where it would be easier to sack people and less holiday entitlement.

The alternative is the French system whereby it's almost impossible to get rid of someone, no matter how bad they are. Like you said, we can see both sides.

[Rovinghawk]

ClaphamGT3 said:

Remain in.

Quite apart from the economic logic for remaining part of the EU

Might I ask your version of this logic?

ClaphamGT3 said:

an 'in' vote would pave the way to closer political union with the EU

You see this as desirable?????

[Rovinghawk]

I believe we pay lots of money in & get lots of rules & regulations out. It reminds me of HMRC, but without the friendly, cuddly aspect.

[Rovinghawk]

Bluebarge said:

If you don't like those agreements you can..........(b) put pressure on your MEP.

Seriously? How?

[Rovinghawk]

Bluebarge said:

Rovinghawk said:

Seriously? How?

http://www.europarl.org.uk/en/your-meps.html

And when the MEPs ignore everyone, what happens then?

[Rovinghawk]

Bluebarge said:

I believe we pay lots of money in & get access to a Single Market worth 4-5% of UK GDP a year

Turnover, gross profit, net profit, unprofitable?

There's a lot of unknowns regarding would we be better or worse off- your link doesn't (can't) quantify what will be different following a Brexit.

I'm willing to be persuaded but only by facts & figures (or potential for them) rather than by dogma.

[Rovinghawk]

ATG said:

He's accountable to Parliament. How much more democratic do you want?

How about those who hand down EU orders being accountable to someone?

[Rovinghawk]

Bluebarge said:

if you are referring to the Commission, the Commissioners are nominated by individual member states, chosen by the constituent EU member states and their appointments are reviewed by the EU Parliament. They do not hand down "orders" they propose legislation which is reviewed and voted on by EU member governments and the EU Parliament.

To whom are they accountable?

Edited by Rovinghawk on Tuesday 1st December 14:54

[Rovinghawk]

In effect, they're beyond control.

I'm beginning to be more sure of which way I want to jump.

[Rovinghawk]

Mario149 said:

But as I understand it, I can lobby my MEP directly (MP equiv), who will lobby the Commissioners (cabinet equiv), who then put it to the European Parliament (Westminster equiv) where all MEPs vote. I'm not really seeing any extra layers here. I do see that other countries have input from Commissioner level onwards which I may not like, but that's not a layer.

Well if that's not accountability for their actions then I don't know what is.

[Rovinghawk]

MarshPhantom said:

otolith said:

MarshPhantom said:

It's more meritocratic than the country being run by those with most expensive education.

I'm not really up on the social privilege of the European political elite, is it different to ours?

Me either, I can't believe many other countries are run by a bunch of school friends.

So you don''t actually know the facts but are making claims anyway?

Personally, I'd rather be governed by those with a good education than those less well educated. That's possibly just me, though.

[Rovinghawk]

FiF said:

Technically that's absolutely true. It's made absolutely clear to Commissioners that henceforth they represent only the interests of the EU and must not and do not represent their nation. They meet once a week, the agenda for their meeting is decided by the unelected President and is taken selectively from the work of the unelected employees of the Directorates-General. This is the sole institution which can propose laws. Any elected officials have little or no say, they can, if invited, sit on committees which look at specifics in legislation, but their recommendations are simply that.

That's enough for me. I vote leave.