Printable View
i would have voted to stay in if they had guaranteed no interferance with our laws our views etc and allowed tougher immigration laws but would it happen no . the problem is now ramanag if they decide to try and stop democracy then are 17 million not likely to stand up and say no most of england and wales said leave . tell me i am interested in your views why stay besides financial reasons ? do you want to be ruled by brussels or pushed around as a part of germanys greater europe plan .?
Interesting...but don't forget that the Parliament, which might use its all important 'sovereignty' to overturn the wishes of the 17.5m significant minority, was democratically elected. It's a conundrum. ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by southernram22
Fair question...I don't want to be ruled by Brussels and I don't actually feel as if I am. I actually regard myself as both English and European and I do believe that the existence of the EU is *****ly important for the maintenance of peace throughout Europe and our security within a worldwide context. I travel a fair amount and I don't see massive evidence of the destruction of the various cultures that make up the continent of Europe. Germany, France and Spain for instance still have all their customs and idiosyncrasies intact and no one has tried - not recently anyway - to make us drive on the right, measure distance in kms or buy litres of beer in the pub. I genuinely recognise people's objections to the increased bureaucracy and the level of corruption although let's not pretend that we are corruption free in the UK...we most certainly aren't. I recognise too the problems caused by immigration and think that whole issue has been mishandled in many ways over the years and now needs addressing. Overall though I believe we will be both safer and stronger as part of the EU. I support the concept of our young people benefitting from freedom of movement and employment abroad and have been impressed by the attitudes of one particular European country to my own son who lives, works and now has a family abroad. I believe it is invariably better to try and change things from within and don't want us to become isolated and viewed as a bunch of 'island monkeys' by the rest of Europe. Short term, at least, I also believe that our possible imminent withdrawal is also the closest a country can come to committing trading and financial suicide. All the experts warned us of this and I'm always more likely to take notice of the likes of Mark Carney and even Branson, Sugar and Lewis, where financial matters are concerned, than Johnson, Gove and Farage who have, to my mind, yet to achieve anything at all of any note.Quote:
Originally Posted by southernram22
Quote:
Originally Posted by southernram22
I've seen debates on the merits or otherwise of a Derby manager degenerate into anarchy, this debate despite obvious polarised views has nor done so and long may that be the case. Theres naff all happening on the football front and this is a crucial topic.
The "interference" in our laws is what usually happens when one joins a club, mutually agreed rules (many of which we had a veto over anyway) so its a level playing field for all members who benefit. Tougher immigration laws, membership of the EU requires free movement of goods, capital and labour, the UK has benifitted from that in many ways especially economically, it was the Uk's sovereign government who failed to manage this process, they were happy to take the tax income and other economic benefits but did not plan for the services etc needed to cope.
Like it or not the reality is that EU immigration has kept this country's economy afloat and it wasn't the Eu that has left large areas of this country economically disadvantaged.
We werent "ruled" by brussels, we signed up to a mutually beneficial club and anyway the real power lies with global corporations, not individual governments and voting to leave the EU hasn't changed that one iota.
I'd rather be in an EU however imperfect, with a voice and a vote, access to the single market is important for our economy, free movement across europe for jobs and education is important to the young who may not forgive the generation who may have blighted thier future.
You seem to have overlooked the fact that apart from a proportion of the Tory party and UKIP (who had 1 MP elected last time!) the other political parties were for Remain - UKIP didnt achive this referendum, Cameron gambled with the Uk's future to attempt to stamp out the eurosceptics in the Tory party, maybe they should have split and stood as a separate party on a leave ticket?
The General Election was won on a vote for a Referendum. As the Election was fought mainly on immigration it would seem that the outers won the General Election for the Tories by effectively voting for a Referendum to leave the EU even though lot of the MP's they voted for probably supported membership of it. In effect 2 votes have been held on the EU both being won by the 'outers'!!
With respect mac I don't think that's true. There were three main concerns at the last election. The economy, health and immigration. The Tories were trusted more on the economy, Labour on the NHS and UKIP on immigration. The Tories won a narrow victory, largely because the Labour vote collapsed in Scotland, and UKIP won just one seat. Other contributory factors were, imo, the perceived inadequacy of Milliband - based largely on his poor communication skills and inability to eat a bacon sandwich - and the collapse of the Liberal vote who were - a little unfairly I always felt, regarded as 'turncoats'. There is no way you can view the last election as a vote on the EU.Quote:
Originally Posted by macstheman
I was deliberately being pedantic, the point being that one can argue how the current situation has been arrived at by using statistics, development of events, personal opinion, personal beliefs etc to argue an explanation of those events. Yes there were many issues as you say at the GE but I believe the one that decided that result was ultimately immigration. The anti immigration lobby felt that the Tories promise of a referendum on the EU was their best chance of addressing that issue hence the Tory win and including the effect on other parties. That led to the Referendum which was then won by the outers who were definitely wanting immigration tackled and so turned the GE result.
Mangara - it is interesting that you say labour were a remain party at the last election (by which I assume you mean the Parliamentary Labour Party) whereas the leave vote was largely underpinned by voters in traditionally labour voting areas. Yes there were fishermen, pensioners and an unholy right wing alliance, but in many typical labour strongholds there was a heavy leave vote.
You cannot therefore blame the leave outcome on Cameron's gamble to hold his party together as his dissidents were joined by many from other political arenas.
What is the most interesting political outcome to me is rhe clear schism between the labour party members and the parliamentary labour party. The PLP didnt want Corbyn as leader, the party did. The PLP wanted remain and the party clearly didnt. The PLP want Corbyn out by a vast majority - the party doesnt appear to want to.
What has been achieved by the referendum, aside from the obvious, is that while Tory differences have not been healed, the split between the PLP and the Labour Party has been widened. Blairite moderate reformed labour is finally being rejected by its supporters which could leave it unelectable in the immediate future as the middle band floating voters attracted by Blair politics would reject the more extreme values being espoused by the party.
If there is no effective opposition as a result of the referendum reinforcing the growing divide between the PLP and its supporters, forcing labour policy further left and so losing moderate support, what then will act as a brake on the exteemes of the Tories.
We can debate the impact of the referendum decision until the cows come home, but the greater worry to me is how our own politics will react. The collapse of any effective opposition could remove the "checks and balances" inherent in our own parliamentary democracy for many years to come, or even create new party alliances with centrist MPs of each side allying and creating two ineffective minoriry wings.
mAnagra, my point is that those who voted to take the new direction had already considered the merits of attempting to fix the current (now previous) solution. There was another thread asking if those who voted out would now vote remain if given a 2nd vote - well I was all for remain when the referendum was initially called, its only after full consideration that I chose leave. Only bummer is that my hols will cost an extra few quid this year! In the long run, I believe its better to take the new path, even if a little prickly at the start.
Roger, I think it's good that the Labour divide has been brought forward, otherwise we'd have to wait for another election to truly expose it to the mainstream media. The party needs to address this in order to become an effective opposition (whether they can or not is debatable), at the moment it is all a bit toothless.
This is the most constructive debate on the subject I've seen on any social media site!