This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Should the UK remain part of the European Union - TSR HoC Referendum

paddy__power

How much is the funding? There will be a lot of money saved by withdrawal but of course I can't guarantee that it would fall in the same places. The point is I'm pretty sure the UK could pay for such things. Although I'm willing to retract this once I know the scale of the funding.

It would never fall in those places. Westminster underfunds Wales by £300 million a year. We get an English MP for our Secretary of State under the ConDems meaning that our single representative in Westminster isn't even accountable to the electorate she supposedly represents in Cabinet. From 2007 - 2013, £2.7 billion will have been invested by the European Union through the Welsh European Funding Office alone. In the six years prior to that, so 2000 - 2006, Wales got £1.5 billion. In Scotland they got E2.3 billion (say £1.8 billion) equivalent between 1994 and 2006. From 2007 - 2013 this amounts to €645 million. Not too bad really.

I can't deny it does this, as of course it does. I see no reason, however, why this could not be achieved without the EU. Just because being part of it facilitates something does not mean that it's the only thing that can. Movement of students et al could be facilitated in the same way so although I do concede that the EU has been a great force in showing what can be achieved in this area I'm not convinced that - given our academic pedigree as a country - we would not be able to form such links with relative ease.

Our academic pedigree, to be quite honest, relies heavily on the movement of people around Europe...

Hmmm this is an interesting one. The flaw in the logic of this though is that very few people pay any attention to the EUs workings at all so actually minority cultures are only being promoted to a few thousand people - which relative to the potential audience is small. Tolerance and diversity are desirable, as is awareness of different [marginalised/minority also] cultures but again I'm not convinced that the EU is the best way to do this, if it actually does it at all in the manner you say it does.

It does and the failure of people to appreciate the inner workings of the EU is not the problem. It's really a failure of the debate to move beyond cat-calling. The use of European languages such as Irish or Welsh in the European Parliament is a massive step forward in terms of cultural recognition. Yet this is left out of the argument becasue it does not suit the NO camp to recognise that the EU has benefits that have to be weighed against the negatives. In insisting that the EU is bad, period, you neglect to spot the many good things that the EU has done for the cultures of Europe.

The problem is that as the scale increses so does the scale of the problem. One of the biggest problems with the EU is how hard it is for anything to actually change. If we assume that both the EU and the UK display the same negative characteristics then it's logical to point out that change would be easier on a nation-state level. I know this runs counter to your statement that this form is redundant but the governments first duty is to the citizens of the UK - most of which BTW have never had a say in whether or not they want to be part of the EU.

No Scotsman, Irishman, Welshman, or Englishman has ever had a say in whether we want to be part of the same country. This kind of argument doesn't wash. Our grandparents made an informed decision and we consistently vote for parties that wish to keep us tied into the European Union this tells us something about the priority of withdrawal in the views of the public.

Surely even you have to admit it hasn't even nearly lived up to it's potential.

I did, but that doesn't mean we walk away in disgust. The UN hasn't lived up to its potential: I don't see us clamouring to leave that organisation.

Reply 61

ByronicHero

20

Adorno

It would never fall in those places. Westminster underfunds Wales by £300 million a year. We get an English MP for our Secretary of State under the ConDems meaning that our single representative in Westminster isn't even accountable to the electorate she supposedly represents in Cabinet. From 2007 - 2013, £2.7 billion will have been invested by the European Union through the Welsh European Funding Office alone. In the six years prior to that, so 2000 - 2006, Wales got £1.5 billion. In Scotland they got E2.3 billion (say £1.8 billion) equivalent between 1994 and 2006. From 2007 - 2013 this amounts to €645 million. Not too bad really.

Nope not bad at all. I don't know enough about this specifically to really dispute your claims effectively. All I can say is that a lot more is saved from leaving - but that's far too broad so I will defer on this point to someone else who knows more about it. Failing this I will revisit it on the morrow if I remember.

Our academic pedigree, to be quite honest, relies heavily on the movement of people around Europe...

Which I've just said I'm confident will be practicable outside the prameters of the EU....

It does and the failure of people to appreciate the inner workings of the EU is not the problem. It's really a failure of the debate to move beyond cat-calling. The use of European languages such as Irish or Welsh in the European Parliament is a massive step forward in terms of cultural recognition. Yet this is left out of the argument becasue it does not suit the NO camp to recognise that the EU has benefits that have to be weighed against the negatives. In insisting that the EU is bad, period, you neglect to spot the many good things that the EU has done for the cultures of Europe.

And EU laws that affect ways of life for people are a step backwards - such as fishing laws in Iceland.

Also, with all due respect I have aid many times - indeed I said it in the last post - that I recognise the may benefits, the implication is quote clear that, on balance, I fid the negatives to outweigh them but this doesn't = EU is bad full stop. I find the latter parts of this rather tenuous, even presumptuous tbh. Nobody with a brain thinks the EU is 100% bad.

No Scotsman, Irishman, Welshman, or Englishman has ever had a say in whether we want to be part of the same country. This kind of argument doesn't wash. Our grandparents made an informed decision and we consistently vote for parties that wish to keep us tied into the European Union this tells us something about the priority of withdrawal in the views of the public.

I'm not so sure tbh. There has just not been a viable anti-EU party for a majority of people. The EU is just one issue as well so it's not logical to state that because people have not chosen the party that offers it means they don't want it because people are obviously more concerned with what's happening to them in terms of taxes, education, healthcare etc. No party will win a GE based on the fact they wish to leave the EU the same as no party will win purely because they wanted to do X or Y, it's a package you vote for. Besides which - people are simply not informed enough to know the implications of the EU. At the very least a referendum would properly open the debate to a far wider section of people.

I did, but that doesn't mean we walk away in disgust. The UN hasn't lived up to its potential: I don't see us clamouring to leave that organisation.

They are very different things tbh.

Reply 62

StatusRed

15

No! I believe I may be the only Socialist MP voting no :redface:

Reply 63

lotpp

xXedixXx

No! I believe I may be the only Socialist MP voting no :redface:

Good to have you on our side.

Reply 64

lotpp

Samrout

gotta say that the "no" side is awfully... Daily Mail-y

Can I ask you to elaborate? Do you mean in real life? Or the TSR 'no' campaign? Because I think if you take a bit of time to look at the TSR 'no' campaign it is completely different to the views of the Daily Mail.

Reply 65

A Cat

3

lotpp

Can I ask you to elaborate? Do you mean in real life? Or the TSR 'no' campaign? Because I think if you take a bit of time to look at the TSR 'no' campaign it is completely different to the views of the Daily Mail.

the TSR no campaign is in a Mail-style of writing.

Reply 66

Wednesday Bass

15

Samrout

the TSR no campaign is in a Mail-style of writing.

Care to elaborate?

Reply 67

SergioMZ

12

paddy__power

I though both sides were meant to give the list of people that were on that side - so Jangra should have had Adorno/Sergio etc. Not a big deal.

Why exactly is it that we aren't a great deal?
Thanks.

Jangrafess

QFA

Can you put the rest of our "manifesto" up, please?
Thanks.

Reply 68

Adorno

1

paddy__power

I'm not so sure tbh. There has just not been a viable anti-EU party for a majority of people. The EU is just one issue as well so it's not logical to state that because people have not chosen the party that offers it means they don't want it because people are obviously more concerned with what's happening to them in terms of taxes, education, healthcare etc. No party will win a GE based on the fact they wish to leave the EU the same as no party will win purely because they wanted to do X or Y, it's a package you vote for. Besides which - people are simply not informed enough to know the implications of the EU. At the very least a referendum would properly open the debate to a far wider section of people.

Well yes but the NO campaign has been entirely directed at the neo-liberal economics which most of us recognise as being bad. It therefore plays on the xenophobia inherent in Daily Mail politics whilst failing to recognise that many of the benefits of the EU are those things that we, as the youngest politically-aware generation in the country, take very much for granted. We take it for granted that, as EU citizens, we can go and study at highly-respected English-language universities in the Netherlands or Belgium, for example, for nothing (except what the Dutch or Belgians themselves pay). I'm sorry to keep banging on about this but your assurances that this could happen without the EU are false: without the EU we would be classed as international students paying international rates. In other words, we might as well be Australian or Chinese not sitting on an island 30 miles away.

I'm attempting to get the NO campaign to open up and to conceive of the EU as more than an economic body but you don't seem particularly willing to do so!!!

However I will say this:

Paddy

Besides which - people are simply not informed enough to know the implications of the EU.

If this is absolutely true then what good is a referendum? What good is asking those who are "simply not informed enough to know the implications of the EU" whether or not they wish to be part of it? This is precisely why any NO campaign on Europe, be it yours or one run by Nigel Farage, relies heavily on little Englander (and I say this advisedly) attitudes to the world. I don't think that's good enough really to make this kind of a decision.

Reply 69

ByronicHero

20

SergioMZ

Why exactly is it that we aren't a great deal?
Thanks.

Can you put the rest of our "manifesto" up, please?
Thanks.

Big not great; the issue not the people.

Reply 70

ByronicHero

20

Adorno

Well yes but the NO campaign has been entirely directed at the neo-liberal economics which most of us recognise as being bad. It therefore plays on the xenophobia inherent in Daily Mail politics whilst failing to recognise that many of the benefits of the EU are those things that we, as the youngest politically-aware generation in the country, take very much for granted. We take it for granted that, as EU citizens, we can go and study at highly-respected English-language universities in the Netherlands or Belgium, for example, for nothing (except what the Dutch or Belgians themselves pay). I'm sorry to keep banging on about this but your assurances that this could happen without the EU are false: without the EU we would be classed as international students paying international rates. In other words, we might as well be Australian or Chinese not sitting on an island 30 miles away.

Deals could easily be made.

I'm attempting to get the NO campaign to open up and to conceive of the EU as more than an economic body but you don't seem particularly willing to do so!!!

This is simply incorrect. Read my posts and I've acknowledged many times that it's not - saying it is not exclusively able to provide things does not = saying that it doesn't =/

However I will say this:

If this is absolutely true then what good is a referendum? What good is asking those who are "simply not informed enough to know the implications of the EU" whether or not they wish to be part of it? This is precisely why any NO campaign on Europe, be it yours or one run by Nigel Farage, relies heavily on little Englander (and I say this advisedly) attitudes to the world. I don't think that's good enough really to make this kind of a decision.

Because they will be informed, the referendum would do that as prior to that there would be masses of debate and literature on the subject....

Reply 71

Adorno

1

paddy__power

Deals could easily be made.

Could they? Do we have deals for Chinese students studying at UK universities? No, they pay the full wack.

This is simply incorrect. Read my posts and I've acknowledged many times that it's not - saying it is not exclusively able to provide things does not = saying that it doesn't =/

With all due respect Paddy, you're not the NO campaign! Just look at the other NO posters here. The ones who claim it as a EUSSR or a Nazi empire or whatever. They're hardly being quite as objective as you.

Because they will be informed, the referendum would do that as prior to that there would be masses of debate and literature on the subject....

Ah so we've gone from this referendum to a mythical real life one. A get away vehicle if ever there was.

Reply 72

ByronicHero

20

Adorno

Could they? Do we have deals for Chinese students studying at UK universities? No, they pay the full wack.

Do we have purple phoneboxes? But could we?

With all due respect Paddy, you're not the NO campaign! Just look at the other NO posters here. The ones who claim it as a EUSSR or a Nazi empire or whatever. They're hardly being quite as objective as you.

That's fair enough - I can't really dispute that!

Ah so we've gone from this referendum to a mythical real life one. A get away vehicle if ever there was.

No but I'd have liked this referendum to run differently so that's not really my fault. I wanted to be able to create more extensive documents to be given out some time in advance of the actual debate/voting as well as other things.

Reply 73

Drogue

19

aaran-j

Yeah, because there's no protectionism in the EU. :rolleyes:

There isn't, just protectionism outside the EU :p:

(and not actually that much, due to the WTO).

.:Doctor:.

It would appear you missed a bit.

TSR's Right Wing: apparently it's everyone else that are the fascists!

Reply 74

ByronicHero

20

Drogue

I'm a conservative in real life so don't listen to me trollin'

The implication of your sig is that, without the EU, the UK would not observe 'human rights'. What say you :hmmm:

Reply 75

simontinsley

3

Nor would the UK trade freely, nor cooperate on anything ever and we'd actually cease to be a part of Europe and move our island to become part of Latin America if we pull out of the EU. That's all implied, no? :p:

Reply 76

Adorno

1

simontinsley

Nor would the UK trade freely, nor cooperate on anything ever and we'd actually cease to be a part of Europe and move our island to become part of Latin America if we pull out of the EU. That's all implied, no? :p:

What as opposed to the United Kingdom being summed up by a racist fickle git? To many outside the UK that would probably be quite an apt analogy.

Reply 77

username359983

paddy__power

The implication of your sig is that, without the EU, the UK would not observe 'human rights'. What say you :hmmm:

Human rights in this country would not be the same without the ECHR and EU, that is the implication of the sig; not that human rights would cease to exist.

simontinsleyr

Nor would the UK trade freely, nor cooperate on anything ever

Co-operation would be reduced, but thats not as catchy as 'yes to cooperation'. As is 'we may still trade freely with europe but we would also be bound by its regulations with no way of helping create them' , simplicity not complexity makes a good slogan.

Reply 78

ByronicHero

20

spidergareth

Human rights in this country would not be the same without the ECHR and EU, that is the implication of the sig; not that human rights would cease to exist.