At the end of the day, there is only one right answer. How can you NOT watch the video and feel the urge to physically dismember yourself from the bureaucratic satanic organisation that is the EU? *heavy sarcasm*
And for those who say we need to take a look at the "wider picture" rather than focusing on Cameron, I give you this: why is the majority of the world grouping themselves into blocs? The CARICOM, MERCOSUR, ASEAN, and African Union? Blocs are the best possible way to increase the power that an individual country has. On it's own, the UK with limited connections has limited appeal.
There is NO guarantee that the USA would perpetuate, or even improve trade with us. Furthermore, on the global market, our economy would be exposed to industrialising nations, who eventually will be able to replace everything we do for less.
Take a look at the bigger picture. INDEPENDENT forecasters, CEOs, economists, and scientists, among others, have spoken of the detriment that leaving the EU would cause. Look at the value of the pound: it is massively unstable since talks of Brexit grew in popularity. It's all well and good to want to be nationalist, but the fact is that corporations clearly do not want to invest in a standalone UK.
Albeit there is Dyson, who argues that red tape hampers his industry. But is this red tape not better than facing extreme competition from the rest of the world where vacuums could be made for cheaper?
There are problems with the EU. But as a voter who is in fact looking at the wider picture, using independent statistics and ignoring the riff-raff petty debates that didn't centre on the issues at hand, Brexit has no guarantees of a brighter future for Britain, and at worst is detrimental.
The points mentioned earlier about democracy in the EU are supported by the other countries who also want moves away from unelected bureaucrats. But democracy requires the ability to be defeated.
Posted from TSR Mobile
This is a challenge to all remain voters (and undecideds). Watch
- 18-06-2016 10:31
- 18-06-2016 13:06
I watched the whole video...
EU Commission power: The Brexit side always miss something out here..They can't just propose any legislation they like. The EU Council (the heads of the national governments) sets the policy directions and priorities for the EU. The Commission's legislative job is to come up with concrete proposals for legislation to implement these policies. It involves a lot of consultations with stakeholders and there is a lot of oversight on them from the EU parliament. In any case the Commission is a prime candidate for further reform (it lost some powers at Lisbon). See the the end of my post for the kinds of things that are actually decided at European level.
As for the claim that EU laws can't be repealed, just google EU directive repealed or EU regulation repealed.
72 no votes, 72 lost in the EU Council: Even with the Eurosceptic Conservative government we've been on the winning side 87% of votes in recent years, but even that's not the whole story. Many things don't even get to a vote because there is too much opposition for it to go through. It only goes to a vote if it's already very likely to go through, albeit sometimes with opposition from us or other countries, some of which might be less likely to register their opposition in the vote. Here's an attempt to measure how close we get to our desired policy outcomes: http://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/is-t...d-in-the-eu-2/
And a measure of UK influence http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/20...-negotiations/
Influence goes beyond votes in the EU Parliament and the EU Council. More important is shaping the policies of the EU that eventually make their way into legislation. Spiegel, the German news magazine remarks that Germans are amazed that the British public don't realise how influential we are in Europe. The Americans want us to stay not just for economic stability, but because we are so influential. Our main interest in Europe is the single market. British MEPs have chaired the powerful internal market committee for the past 12 years. A lot of the things we've been pushing for have real impetus now and as we have built support around Europe:
- Completing the single market in services (not very effective currently, large gains to be made, especially for us). Osbourne has talked about using enhanced cooperation protocols for those countries who want to progress fastest with this.
- Digital single market (good for our world leading creative industries)
- Internal Energy market (efficiency, reducing reliance on Russia etc)
- Reducing regulatory burden, as well as the 2014-20 real terms reduction in the EU's budget, both of which we pursuaded the rest of the EU to support
- Common Consolidated Corporation Tax Base (each country still sets its own corporation tax, but profits are recognised based on where the salaries, sales and capital is deployed, instead of letting multi nationals pretend their profits occur in Ireland or Netherlands etc). This is just an idea at the moment. Tory MEPs are against this, labour and libdems for it.
- Capital Markets Union (increase investment across the EU; Britain's EU Commissioner is overseeing this as well as financial services issues)
59% of laws: I think they are mainly counting regulations as well as directives there, each regulation as a separate law. If they are as significant or controversial as an act of parliament why is there much more discussion in the domestic and political press about domestic legislation than EU legislation?
Expanding Eurozone outvoting us There's widespread acknowledgement that rules are needed to satisfy the differing levels of EU integration, the needs of Eurozone and non Eurozone states so that laws can apply just to certain groups (at the moment its tricky to do that). The renegotiation, while giving up vetoing eurozone intergration, on the other hand has various protections for non-Eurozone countries. We want the eurozone to get on with the integration they need to do to to make the Euro work better, but it sounds to me like they'll just muddle along http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...te-is-quietly/.
Taxation without representation There is no direct eu taxation. Regarding indirect taxation there is harmonisation of VAT rates to avoid market distortions in the internal market. They do however take a lot of non-EU import duties and a small contribution of VAT revenues (0.3%) and of course there is the EU budget coming from the treasury funds, but as above and others have said, we are represented on various levels in the EU.
Finally, what actually happens at EU level?
When I look at lists of EU directives, they seem to cover areas that are best solved at a European level. There's cross border stuff like airline rules (budget airline shares have plummeted since EU ref announced!), crime, anti fraud, anti money laundering. There's single market stuff like product standards. There's avoiding a race to the bottom stuff like employment rights, health and safety, environmental (the UK has been the main driver of the latter, and we led for the EU in the international climate talks). It's harder for multinationals to play one country off against another for weaker regulations this way. And misc directives like implementing sanctions we all agreed to take against Iran.Last edited by spasmodic; 18-06-2016 at 19:35. Reason: corrections
- Community Assistant
- 18-06-2016 13:19
While biased and self selecting, that was actually pretty impressive.