The Student Room Group

Do you think we should stay in the European single market?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Napp
Why is that? Especially considering ultimately they're all decided outside of this country anyway. To say that Westminster has or will have any particular power is a ludicrous assertion, they are beholden to everyone else, as has been aptly demonstrated by the governments disgusting policy of crawling sycophancy to other nations who could not give a flying toss.


Laws in general may be influenced outside of this country -- there's nothing objectionable about diplomacy -- but there is a difference between power and influence, and it is important that the ultimate binding power is here. It is inherently important in general, but it is especially important in this context since (a) it is partly what the vote was about, and (b) there are clear respects in this case in which different substantive policies would be produced.
Original post by paul514


We live in a democracy, if we vote on something it happens, you’re going to need to get over that.


Wow. You certainly solved political science there. Don't forget your humble roots when you win that nobel prize.



I wonder if there is a way to try and get people to vote for specific things? Has anyone ever thought about this? Someone totally should :hmmmm2:
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Wow. You certainly solved political science there. Don't forget your humble roots when you win that nobel prize.



I wonder if there is a way to try and get people to vote for specific things? Has anyone ever thought about this? Someone totally should :hmmmm2:


Forgive me if you are being sarcastic, but it's called direct democracy. There's a project to implement it in this country within the next 3 years.

www.reboot2020.com
No. Because we would have no say over future laws.
Plus we cannot renationalise industry while in due to Article 107 preventing it
Plus we would have to accept the four freedoms
Original post by Hatter_2

We can run our own justice system better, Europe runs on even worse principles to us, whereby a European Arrest Warrant can be used to imprison elected Catalan leaders because they held a referendum. No evidence is required to use it of course0


The UK is a signatory to many extradition and mutual assistance treaties, at a multilateral and bilateral level. It has treaties with the UN, the Council of Europe and the EU. The closest to the EAW outside of the EU is the Interpol Red Notice which effectively calls for the capture of a person in another's territory: this is not binding on the "requested" state, but in practice neither is the EAW. MSs take their good old time processing EAW requests, and made considerable efforts to find an exemption. In reality, most countries comply with the Red Notice request.


Masses of cross-Europe legislation is a burden for companies which don't sell exclusively to the EU, trademarks make winners and losers (eg we can't call our Champagne Champagne). If all this was such a benefit I wonder why Europe is the slowest growing continent.



UK is a signatory to WCT, TRIPS and many IP-based international agreements. IP law is not administered only at the EU-level.

TRIPS Art XXII:1 provides for the "protection of geographical indications [...] which identify a good as originating in the territory of a Member, or a region or locality in that territory, where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the good is essentially attributable to its geographical origin." Art XXIII makes explicit "additional protection for geographical indications for wines and spirits". It would, therefore, be wrong to suggest that we would be "home free" by virtue of leaving the EU. We still have international obligations.


Ok, you are right that (like the UK) most of the economy is domestic (within the single market). But if we ignore that since it's already barrier-free trade, they would be looking at benefiting exports by minimising barriers, and it makes little sense to put Mexico above the UK when we are their largest export market (which they have a £70bn surplus with). Unless they are trying to punish the UK for political reasons...


UK and EU are part of the WTO, which requires all WTO members to be treated equally in terms of tariffs by a given state. EU could not impose higher tariffs on the UK than it does Mexico. On the one hand, that principle ensures the EU cannot impose discriminatory tariffs on the UK, and on the other hand it means that the EU will free ride off any trade deals we make with other states. The only exception being is if the trade deal amounts to a regional free trade area, which is quite an extreme trade deal indeed. So the ambition of us jet setting all over the place to strike trade deals with Yemen, Brazil and Thailand is not quite realisable.
(edited 6 years ago)
Reply 25
Original post by paul514
You may as well have wrote blah blah blah.

We live in a democracy, if we vote on something it happens, you’re going to need to get over that.


The referendum asked people whether they wanted to leave the EU, not whether they wanted to leave the single market... all the government really has to do is leave the EU.
Reply 26
The single market is not some sort of solid entity with a membership independent of the EU. It's a casual term for a zone of common regulation, standards and trade.

No country outside of the EU fully implements the "four freedoms" in the same way the EU member-states do. I don't see why we should, or how that would fairly represent the result of the referendum.

As a more general point, people seem to constantly want to pick an off-the-shelf solution to our future relationship with the EU. That's frankly silly - countries outside of the EU have adapted their relations to suit their particular needs. Even the EEA countries share many common economic characteristics and those are reflected in the EEA agreement. Britain needs to do the same, not just to expect there is a default we can fall back on. Annoying and difficult, but that's the nature of disentangling ourselves from such a complex economic bloc.
Original post by Trapz99
The referendum asked people whether they wanted to leave the EU, not whether they wanted to leave the single market... all the government really has to do is leave the EU.


As if the single market and all that goes with it isn't the fundamental part of the EU.

Every major campaigner on both sides said leaving the EU means leaving the single market. Was the ballot paper really meant to say

'Should the UK leave or remain a member of the European Commission, the European Parliament, European Council, Council of the European Union, the European single market, customs union, ECJ, EIB, ECB, ECA, Common Fisheries Policy, Common Agricultural Policy, ......'
Reply 28
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Our economic well being and the future of our job prospects, prices and living standards should not be left to the arbitrary decision making of people who are only concerned about their racism, elderly people (the majority of those who voted in the referendum) who don't care what the country is going to be like for us and the influence of very wealthy foreigners (who backed the Brexit campaigns) and least of all, Vladimir Putin, who we now know strongly influenced the campaign.


I understand your point and agree to an extent but elderly people have contributed to the UK for the longest amount of time, it's only fair that their voices are also heard.
Original post by Trapz99
The referendum asked people whether they wanted to leave the EU, not whether they wanted to leave the single market... all the government really has to do is leave the EU.


And the main reasons were...

Money
Immigration
Trade deals
Laws

All of the above rule out the single market
Original post by Hatter_2
It's not one of our biggest budget expenditures, but far too high and unnessecary in my opinion. Why do we need to service our debt? Because for the last decade (and in years before) we have had big deficits still at £50bn. Not having to pay EU contributions would have saved about the same as the entire austerity programme (considering growth had a bigger effect than cuts)


Why do we need to service debt? Because all debt requires at least the minimum payment to be made!

And the cost of paying the EU will seem like small change after we have hugely increased or customs and duplicated many of the functions the EU offer. And after a hard Brexit the cost currently paid through taxes will simply move to us via higher goods and services costs. The UK will see no £350 million a week to the NHS. That was always a lie of the most cynical type.
Original post by paul514
And the main reasons were...

Money
Immigration
Trade deals
Laws

All of the above rule out the single market


It doesn't matter what the reasons are. All that people voted for was to leave the EU, we just need to give the idiots a Brexit and that'll get them to shut up about it for a while hopefully while ensuring that Britain doesn't turn into a trash can
Original post by Ladbants
It doesn't matter what the reasons are. All that people voted for was to leave the EU, we just need to give the idiots a Brexit and that'll get them to shut up about it for a while hopefully while ensuring that Britain doesn't turn into a trash can


Yea that will go down really well
Reply 33
Gove.JPG

Source

But this source argues that that is a mis-representation
(edited 5 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest