The UK and the European Union - in or out? (Part 1)

First topic message reminder :

EUROSCEPTICS & UKIP CANNOT ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS

In the late 1980s the nations of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) began to seriously contemplate joining the EU, there were many reasons for this, but they included the realisation that it was the only way forward for trade and prosperity, in the case of Sweden it was also the fact that several large companies made it clear they would relocate if Sweden stayed outside the EU.

Current EFTA members: Iceland - Lichtenstein - Norway - Switzerland

EFTA members who joined the EU: - Austria - Denmark - Portugal - Sweden - United Kingdom - Finland

In 1994 the European Economic Area was formed (EEA), this was a compromise organisation for those members of EFTA who did not or could not join the European Union, joining the EEA meant access to EU markets, but the deal also meant accepting EU rules, even though these states were not / are not EU members.

THE QUESTION TO THE EUROSCEPTICS IS THIS: After leaving the EU, would the UK be free of all EU rules, regulations, directives and laws?

And the straighforward answer is: NO  and here is why:-

A meat production company in Lincolnshire is close to signing a multi-million pound deal with a European supermarket chain, just before the two managing directors take out their pens to sign the agreement, the boss of the supermarket chain pulls out a list of conditions.

The list of conditions consist of EU rules, unfortunately Britain has left the EU and unless the British meat producer conforms to EU standards the deal cannot go ahead, the rules cover everything from animal welfare, temperature control, employee rights, labeling, weight, moisture content and hygiene.

So no matter what happens in the future, the UK will always have to accept EU laws

Think of Norway as an example of a European nation outside the European Union, Norway is a member of the European Economic Area ( the EEA ), and as such has to accept into law virtualy every EU rule, regulation, directive and law, furthermore Norway has had to sign up to many of the EU treaties.

Norway has no say and no vote on any of the EU legislation which it accepts, and this is exactly how Britain would end up, inside the EU the UK influences legislation, it does have a say, and it does have a vote, unlike Norway.

A FREE TRADE AGREEMENT "JUST LIKE SWITZERLAND" [ Nigel Farage ]

According to UKIP, the future under them would be simple, all we need to do is leave the EU and sign up to a new free trade agreement, and the future would be bright  , but a free trade agreement ?, lets look at that word "agreement", an agreement is not one sided, it is between the parties that make the agreement, and lets face facts here, the EU will call the shots, not Britain.

The European Union is not going to change its rules to cater for a single nation of 60 million, especialy when that nation has left the EU but still wants all the benefits of belonging, namely trade.

I am afraid that under such circumstances, Germany, France, Italy and the rest would say "our way or not at all", the best solution by far is to simply remain within the EU and go forward into the future together.

Brexit: throwing the baby out with the bathwater

From a blog by Stefanie Lehmann:-

"In Germany, and arguably in most of the other 28 member states, not being part of the EU is not even really considered an option. So my encounter with anti-EU sentiment, when I moved to the UK five years ago, was a culture shock on the scale of Marmite. While anti-EU sentiment can be traced to a number of origins, it primarily manifests itself in the UK through a discourse of power that harkens back to the golden age of the nation state.

There’s something in the EU for everyone — whether it’s the idealism of its peace and co-operation promoting aims; its pragmatic function of recognising interdependence and extracting maximal value from it; or the self-interested motive of deepening trade links, with adequate regulation to protect consumers. The EU affects millions of people positively and measurably. Those are the stories we need to voice and hear over the misinformed hubbub of banning bent bananas. Solidarity is likely too antiquated a concept to count on, but consumer protection and a progressive blend of self-interest and idealism are not.

The referendum is not a choice between Britain or the EU, we can have both. The refugee crisis would still have happened if we didn’t have the EU. A vote against the EU may also be a vote against Scotland. In uncertain times, why should we give up established international relationships? We don’t know what life outside the EU would look like, how much of a risk it would be. We know Britain will survive either scenario. But a vote to remain translates into a vote for facing a future of cross-border opportunity together."

For the whole of this blog:-
http://thealternativepolitics.com/2015/10/16/brexit-throwing-the-baby-out-with-the-bathwater/

Cameron's ludicrous 'struggles' with Europe, trying so hard to get them to agree to what they already have, are so gut-turning as to suggest that Labour might beat him despite the hate-blast against Mr Corbyn from their paid hacks.

The most likely outcome will be that Cameron will hail as a great victory some agreement to take out from the Lisbon Treaty a few commas and insert semi-colons, upon which the British People will solemnly vote to maintain the status quo ante.

A typical British fudge you might think, but not likely to change much in British politics.

Germany And The Future Of Social Democracy In Europe

From an article by Maria Joao Rodrigues:-

"Social democracy will not survive on this continent unless European integration is pushed to a higher stage. Thus, the social democratic agenda calls for the expansion and rebalancing of the economic and fiscal union combined with a deepened and more fully democratized political union. These considerations are especially important in Germany, the cradle of social democracy.

If social democracy is to survive, the need for fair treatment of all member nations within the European Union ought to suffice to convince social democrats across all national boundaries that a change of course in the eurozone is urgently necessary. The eurozone should see to it that policy making responsibilities in the financial markets, the economy, and social and political matters are co-ordinated, not allowed to drift apart as they are now. That would entail not merely the full implementation of the banking union, but also intensified coordination of economic policies designed to boost demand, as well as the development of a broadened, tax-supported European financial policy. This new financial resource could facilitate the merging of structures by supporting reforms and investments while sheltering member states from economic shock waves. All this presupposes enhanced co-ordination and consolidation of taxation. Europe needs a New Deal, which can only be negotiated by social democrats."

For the whole article:-
http://www.socialeurope.eu/2015/11/germany-and-the-future-of-social-democracy-in-europe/

The EU has its faults. For a start, its agricultural policy is long overdue for reform. And although we elect MEPs to the European Parliament, there’s plenty of scope for more democracy (we could also say the same about Westminster); isn’t it time that the president of the EU was elected? The EU also deserves criticism for adopting austerity, a policy which is just an excuse for shrinking national states and handing over power to corporations. Then there is the EU-US trade deal known as TTIP…..

Nevertheless, and despite all of the EU’s warts, I’m convinced that the UK is better off in it. UKIP supporters and others like to cite Norway as a model of how we could exist after an exit from the EU. Norway is a prosperous country, much richer than most EU countries, and it has large oil and gas reserves. However, to be able to operate in the biggest free trade area the world has ever seen, Norway has to make a financial contribution to the EU and to accept its rules. This extract from an article by Jonty Bloom explains:-

How does Norway's relationship with the EU work?

“As Norway is not a member of the EU, it has no say over any EU rules. It can lobby against them, but it does not sit round the table when they are proposed, discussed, amended, debated, or voted into law.

The single market is seen by many as one of the few true successes of the EU, more than just a free trade area it co-ordinates and enforces common rules, regulations and standards, so any manufacturer anywhere in the EU can sell in any other part of the EU.

Companies in Norway have to follow the rules of the single market even if they have never exported so much as a single widget to the European Union. That is just one of the costs of Norway's non-membership of the EU. It does a higher percentage of its trade with the EU than we in the UK do, in fact more than the vast majority of EU members do. But it pays hundreds of millions of pounds a year for the right to do that and has to accept all the rules and regulations without a say in how they are made.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35354288

Those who advocate withdrawal from the EU are under the mistaken impression that we would no longer have to contribute to its budget, and that we could ignore all its laws, while still trading within those 27 other countries. Furthermore, the many trade deals which the EU has negotiated with other countries throughout the world would no longer apply to the UK, and we would have to negotiate new arrangements with them. As H.L.Mencken said: “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong”.

As many a teenager might respond to a parental inquest, "Well, it's complicated."

If Little Englanders get their way, the British Economy will be in a similar situation to Captain Bligh set adrift on the vast ocean in a small boat following the Mutiny on the Bounty.

Europe has its own problems, and remaining members of the EU are unlikely to be very sympathetic to the preferences of a former member who thinks it can do better without them.

Against which can be set the fortuitous circumstances whereby we are not in the Schengen (open-borders) agreement nor do we use the Euro for currency.

So what's the rush to get out, when we're only half-in anyway?

As I said, it's complicated.

“Quitting Europe would make the UK less safe” says Labour shadow minister Keir Starmer

Starmer says the UK relied on EU criminal justice systems “24/7” to combat terrorism and serious organised crime at home. Drawing on five years’ experience as the head of the Crown Prosecution Service, he warned that ‘Brexit’ would risk vital partnerships with police and investigators in other European countries.

“There’s the potential for a real reduction in our capacity to deal with serious and organised crime and terrorism”, he said. “Anybody who’s been involved in this on a practical, operational level recognises the risks here. It’s a risk to the safety of people in this country.”

Outside the EU, the UK would have to renegotiate joint agreements on criminal justice issues with individual EU member states, and could lose mutual arrangements that allow short-notice information-sharing on court rulings and convictions in other EU states, which Starmer said could be vital for setting bail conditions for arrested suspects.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-quitting-europe-would-make-the-uk-less-safe-warns-sir-keir-starmer-a6815151.html

The emphasis when considering the EU has always tended to focus on economics and trade or on the union as a political entity, and in particular "sovereignty", and all the associated arguments.

Bearing in mind that virtually all potential threats to this country are from the direction of continental Europe, security is the least considered topic when considering our future relationship with the European Union, and in my humble opinion it is becoming more relevant, and ought to be taken more seriously.

Of course security and defence is closely related to foreign policy, we are part of NATO, but here we will always have major discrepancies between the two sides of the Atlantic, because there are significant differences in how America sees things, and how most of Europe views the world.

Take for example the "Middle East Problem" where Europe tends to be far less one sided, and where there is significant support and sympathy for the Palestinian cause; Very different to attitudes across the pond where Israel has a built-in favourable status.

Many within the Tory Party, UKIP'ers and Little Englanders would point to our ties with the United States, and their perceived "special relationship", whilst ignoring the fact that most of our problems are also Europe's problems, they ignore the fact that continental Europe is within eyesight of England, and that America is 4000 miles away across the Atlantic.

Imagine if you will, the foreign and defence policy of the United States if there were to become a President Trump ?, the idea of it is frightening, but would the likes of Cameron, Merkel or Hollande pretend that everything was fine, how on earth could Europe sit comfortably with a nation with a president so far removed from Europe's proud tradition of liberty and progressive advancement, which has often left America catching up.

To me there is no other future except with Europe, we ARE Europe, and whilst there is nothing wrong in maintaining a friendly, cordial and co-operative relationship with the United States, it makes sense to work closest with our neighbours.

I would like to know if the watered down deal that Davy boy has from the EU, could it be rebuked after & IF we vote to stay in the EU because in my mind it would not take a treaty change to withdraw the watered down deal.

I have watched the deal being debated in the EU Parliament this morning and what I heard "I DID NOT LIKE" some of the MEP where saying we need to change to the EURO and have a very close POLITICAL UNION with the rest of the EU.

The EU is also stopping the media from reporting the attacks on the German public mostly on women & OAPs by the imigrants that have arrived in Germany in recent months, if you do not believe me I suggest you watch one of the news programs on the RT channel this is where I get the truth about what is happening in the UK because we all know the Tory party stops our media from telling us the truth about what is really going on in the UK.

All media are concerned to present their particular view of matters, so it's a question of making a personal selection of what one chooses to believe.  I was vastly amused by a tirade in the Sunday Times from the shy and reticent Jeremy Clarkson complaining about the left-wing bias of Twitter.

As to Brexit/Referendum/Negotiations with Brussels/ it is mainly about Cameron posturing for the benefit of his divided Party.  Nothing much is going to change.  For the lesson of History just look back at the Ellis Island era of immigration to the USA, and insert the name Victoria Coach Station which has translations of Welcome to Britain on its walls in most European languages.

As for the referendum on Brexit OW I will vote OUT, and nothing from the cakehole of Farage or the Tory back benchers has brought me to this conclusion , but my own research and keeping my lug holes well pinned back and getting some truth from the RT channel & twitter.

As I said in my earlier post I watched the EU Parliament debating Davy boys wants on reform of the EU and if I was him I would not hold my breath that the EU will give him this watered down piece of SHYTE, what the EU actually wants is the UK to accept the Euro and closer political union with the rest of the EU.

One thing I am glad about is Kate Hoey Labour MP is heading the Labour leave the EU campaign as I did not want to join anything that Ukip where heading up.

The problem for Labour at the moment is how to rubbish the meaningless deal which Cameron has negotiated from the EU without giving ammunition to the Brexit brigade. If Cameron had been serious about EU reform, he would have weighed in on the Common Agricultural Policy, but many rich Tory landowners (including Iain Duncan Smith’s in-laws) receive massive subsidies, so he wouldn’t dare do that. The questions that need to be asked are: why is leaving the EU not an issue on the table in the other 27 member countries, and why should those other countries amend EU rules just to save Cameron’s backside with his own right-wing MPs and to stop more desertions to UKIP?

Leaving the EU is a particularly stupid idea, and there are plenty of arguments on our European issues board which explain why that’s the case. We don’t “lose sovereignty” by being a member, we pool it. People who talk about “taking back control” make it sound as if we haven’t been a member of the EU, and had a say in its operation, for the past 43 years. If we have made a mistake, it is in nearly always having one foot in the exit door - because Tory PMs Thatcher, Major and now Cameron have been more concerned with party rather than national interest.

As for Kate Hoey, she is one of two Labour MPs I would not vote for (Simon Danczuk is the other) under any circumstances. She rubbished Gordon Brown in an interview with ‘The Daily Telegraph’ in 2009, saying that she “wouldn’t be devastated” if the Tories got in. More recently, she’s attacked her own party as “unpatriotic”, when it’s the Tories who are flogging off state assets to global corporations and even foreign governments. And the reason above all why I detest her is that she not only supports the cruel pursuit of foxhunting, but she’s even chaired the Countryside Alliance.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/5262963/Kate-Hoey-I-would-not-be-devastated-if-the-Conservatives-won-the-election.html

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/06/kate-hoey-labour-has-become-extremely-unpatriotic-party

IVAN Got to take you up on this what Davy boy asked the EU for and what he actually got was watered down, even Jacob Rees Mogg and I am no Tory lover as you know but even they can see right through his Incompetence in negoaiting anything.

I am glad to see Kate Hoey Labour MP is for leaving the EU as she is the one I will follow and help where I can, rather her than Farage or the Tory back benchers, did you know that the EU forced Cypress to sell of a piece of land to friends of Merkel for HALF the price it was worth and then just look at what they did to Greece and yes I know it was partly there own fault but most of it was down to the EU because they knew that Greece should never been allowed to join the euro.

Once again one has to acknowledge the prescience of George Orwell in his novel Animal Farm, which he wrote as a satire on The 1940s Soviet Union of Joe Stalin.

At least one of his propositions could equally describe the principal fault of the Eurozone, which is that disparate countries share a common currency without sharing a single common Exchequer.

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

"The Sun" headline:

Who do EU think you are kidding, Mr Cameron?

I just hope that the people of the UK see through this pile of CRAP ( I mean the brown stuff) that Davy boy is trying to feed the people of the UK, even his own MPs know this offer would not stop the EU from withdrawing this offer once we vote to stay in which would mean excepting the EURO & closer political ties which would mean we would become the Federal States of Europe within a couple of years.

Can we have “a rational and enlightened discussion” on this thread, not the sort of scaremongering and misinformation which we normally expect from Tories? Only new member countries of the EU have to adopt the euro as their currency, there is no way that the UK could be forced to do so. We haven’t even had to sign up to the Schengen Agreement and have open borders.

A federal Europe is now much less likely than it was twenty years ago, and it would require a treaty change, which would probably trigger a referendum in every member country. The migration issue demonstrates the need for closer co-operation between countries, but the continuing threat of terrorism means that the re-introduction of border controls is beginning to happen (for example, on the border between Germany and Austria).

Maybe there are valid reasons for leaving the EU, but I haven’t heard any. I think there’s something remarkable about 28 countries overcoming centuries of conflict and realising that if they stop fighting they will all be better off. So the likes of Nigel Farage, Nigel Lawson, Daniel Hannan, John Redwood, Chris Grayling and Iain Duncan Smith won’t convince me that we should leave the largest single market the world has ever seen.

Ivan wrote: ....So the likes of Nigel Farage, Nigel Lawson, Daniel Hannan, John Redwood, Chris Grayling and Iain Duncan Smith won’t convince me that we should leave the largest single market the world has ever seen.

I agree, as I think will anyway be evident from my various postings on the matter. It is also by now apparent that David Cameron does not really want any material change, which is the reason that all the eurosceptics are jumping up and down shouting the odds as they see the likely referendum result slipping away from them.

The MP for Birmingham Ladywood "Shabana Mahmood" cornered the deputy leader of UKIP on Question Time last Thursday, and for a good while Paul Nuttall really did not know what to say.

She asked him what would happen to the UK if we left the EU, what kind of relationship would we have with the rest of Europe, and on what, or who's terms. ?

The answers to these questions, and many others, are unknown, no one really knows what our future would be if we exited the EU.
Some people point to Norway as an example of a nation outside the EU, but as was rightly pointed out to Mr Nuttall, Norway has to accept most EU laws, rules and directives in order to have unlimited access to the EU market, but Norway has no say on those rules or laws, no vote.

My point here is that leaving the EU will not mean that we escape EU rules or laws, and in order to continue to do business with Europe will mean abiding by EU regulations which we would then have absolutely no influence, no say and no vote upon.

The simple mathematics of it all (UK pop 65 million / EU 443 million) indicates where the upper hand would be, and a completely new "yet to be negotiated" trade deal, would most certainly not be in our favour, indeed why should it be ?, the rest of Europe will naturally put its own interests first.

But its not only our trade with Europe which would be up for renegotiation, it would be our entire trade with the every nation on earth which would require new trade deals, with China and India each with over 1 billion population, with the USA, Russia, Brazil and all fast emerging markets.

Those of you who advocate exit, must accept that you really have no idea what the future holds, and you need to be honest and accept that we could very easily be very much worse off.

oftenwrong wrote:It is also by now apparent that David Cameron does not really want any material change, which is the reason that all the eurosceptics are jumping up and down shouting the odds as they see the likely referendum result slipping away from them.

I agree OW Davy boy does not want any change because the bankers hedge fund managers & big Corporations who would be the real losers if the UK exit's the EU, why would he bite the hand that feeds the Tory party funding. I will be voting to leave the EU and none of my reasons are anything to do with immigration so if you wish I would be willing to list my reasons for those that wish to know.

Redflag. I'm sure we'd all like to see your reasons for voting to leave the EU. Speaking personally, I can't think of any that make sense.

I hope you are aware of what a 'Brexit' vote across the UK (possible) if coupled with a 'Remain' vote in Scotland (highly likely) would do to the union. Another referendum on Scottish independence would soon be held and the result would be a foregone conclusion.

The refreshingly honest opinions of individuals, set forth on these pages, is what continues to make Cutting Edge essential reading.

If I can bore everyone yet again with a reminder of "The Curate's egg" story - this is the rejoinder of an unfortunate man served a noticeably stale boiled egg, that it was "good in parts", in order to avoid giving offence to anyone present.

Sometimes in politics we have to accept an election- or referendum-result that partly corresponds to our preferences, but not entirely. That's Democracy. In the immortal words of Mick Jagger, "You can't always have what you want."

Ivan wrote:Redflag. I'm sure we'd all like to see your reasons for voting to leave the EU. Speaking personally, I can't think of any that make sense.

I hope you are aware of what a 'Brexit' vote across the UK (possible) if coupled with a 'Remain' vote in Scotland (highly likely) would do to the union. Another referendum on Scottish independence would soon be held and the result would be a foregone conclusion.

I would noit give too much credence to Sturgeons claim that the majority of Scots want to stay withing the EU Ivan, the SNP as you know Ivan will use ANYTHING to threaten another Independence referendum.

Here are some of my reasons for voting OUT in the EU referendum; The EU has not has its books audited in 20 years, as for referendum if it does not come out with the answer the EU wants it refuses to reconising the result a few years ago Southern Ireland voted NO so the EU sent them back to think again recently in Portugal voted for a left wing gov't and the EU told the sitting gov't not to let the left wing gov't take there rightfull seats of course it was a right wing sitting gov't. The EU is also stopping the press from putting certaain stories in there papers a story came out today that a 10 year old boy in Vienna had been raped at a liesure centre by a Iraq refugee this had happened in December 2015 but like other stories of rape and sexual harrassment did not come out to the public until January & february 2016, yes all these crimes are committed by our own people but what sticks in my throat is instead of feeling glad that they are out of the road of bombs ect in there own country they think they will get away with murder here in Europe.

As too Davy boys reforms that the EU watered down how do we know they will not go back on there word ONCE the UK has voted to stay within the EU or at some time down the road,there is also two treaties going through the EU at the moment TTP & TTIP none of which will benefit the UK in fact there WILL more attacks on our public services if not why the bloody secrecy while these treaties where being sorted out without giving any trade secrets we the voters of the UK will not even get a vote whether or not we want these treaties.

As for Scots may well vote OUT of the EU so that will give the SNP an excuse to bring another Independence Referendum so they can get away from England who are the ones that always vote the Tories in.

I’m starting to hate the EU. But I will vote to stay in

From an article by George Monbiot:-

"Many issues – perhaps most – can no longer be resolved only within our borders. Among them are grave threats to our welfare and our lives: climate change and the collapse of the living world; the spread of epidemics whose vectors are corporations (obesity, diabetes and diseases associated with smoking, alcohol and air pollution); the global wealth-grab by the very rich; antibiotic resistance; terrorism and conflict. I recognise that the only legitimate corrective to transnational power is transnational democracy.

If you imagine the EU is a progressive force, I believe you are mistaken. The EU is like democracy, diplomacy and old age: there is only one thing to be said for it – it is not as bad as the alternative. However, if you are concerned about arbitrary power, and the ability of special interests to capture and co-opt the apparatus of the state, the UK is in an even worse position outside the EU than it is within. Without the EU's directives, we can kiss goodbye to the protection of our wildlife, our health, our conditions of employment and, one day perhaps, our fundamental rights. Without a formal constitution, with our antiquated voting arrangements and a corrupt and corrupting party funding system, nothing here is safe.

On behalf of party donors, old school chums, media proprietors and financial lobbyists, the government is stripping away any protections that European law has not nailed down. Cameron’s defence of national sovereignty, subsidiarity and democracy mysteriously evaporates as soon as they impinge upon corporate power."

For the whole article and reader comments:-
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/10/eu-in-health-wildife-european-union

IVAN If the EU was a business HMRC would be on there backs whatever country that business was in not unless it has an HMRC like the UK has.

More reasons to leave the EU; The countries of Portugal & Greece when there gov'ts refused to implement the EU Austerity they sent UNELECTED BUREAUCRATS to run that country. Then there is La Gardes List of 100 names of people and businesses that moved there money out of Greece when they found out the screws where going to be turned on them for non payment of tax, what did La Garde do she put the list in HER SAFE only because someone got a hold of it eventually that it came out otherwise nobody would have heard of it.

Redflag wrote:-
The EU is also stopping the press from putting certain stories in their papers

Yes, lies. Lies which annoy you when they invariably support the Tory cause. Lies about Ed Miliband's father and Jeremy Corbyn's views on Russia and terrorists. Why do you think Murdoch and the owners of other Tory papers continually spread negative stories about the EU and are trying to get us to vote to leave?

In 2013, the EU started its ‘Mediadem’ project, aiming to reclaim a free and independent media. The British press is the most right-wing in Europe, and ‘Mediadem’ produced “recommendations for the UK”, demanding the “imposition of sanctions beyond an apology or correction” on errant media outlets and the “co-ordination of the journalistic profession at the European level”. The recommendations call for the press to be controlled by the same body and on the same basis as broadcasters, who are currently regulated with statutory 'balance' obligations (in theory, at least) that do not apply to newspapers.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9992229/EU-pours-millions-into-groups-seeking-state-control-of-press.html

IVAN The only paper I buy and read is the Daily Mirror have done for a long time, you are spot on about the press here in the UK that is why I tend to watch the RT channel that way I know I am not been fed a pile of SHYTE.

Redflag wrote:-
The countries of Portugal & Greece when there gov'ts refused to implement the EU Austerity they sent UNELECTED BUREAUCRATS to run that country

I think you’ll find it was Italy and Greece where that happened. Portugal was expected to balance its books with widespread privatisation in 2011, but I don’t suppose implementing that policy offended the elected right-wing government in that country at the time.

So why did all that happen? Because those are three of the nineteen countries that use the euro, which means they must implement the monetary policy of the European Central Bank, which has its headquarters in Frankfurt. As the UK is not part of the eurozone (thanks to Gordon Brown) and has absolutely no intention of joining it, that doesn’t affect us. Yes, the eurozone has adopted the policy of austerity, but the UK decided to follow it, not because we had to, but because the Tories saw it as a convenient smokescreen for implementing their ideological desire to shrink the state.

Having the same currency in more than one country means that all of them must follow the same monetary policies. That was the major weakness in the campaign for Scottish independence, because Alex Salmond wanted to keep the pound. In that situation, far from being independent, Scotland would have been subject to the policies of the Bank of England, because it’s not possible for one currency to have two different values.

A further thought. If the UK does vote to leave the EU, and then a few years later some politicians decide that it was all a terrible mistake, we would, like all new member states, be obliged to adopt the euro if we were allowed to rejoin. Speaking personally, I still haven't seen a good reason for leaving.

Then it would be up to the general public (VOTERS) of the UK to tell them to FCUK OFF not unless the UK wanted to be used like Portugal Italy Spain Greece & Southern Ireland. If you cast your mind back to September 2014 (Scotlands Independence vote) that is one of the things the stay in campaign used to frighten the Scots to vote to stay within the UK the dreaded EURO so why would the UK accept it NO matter who is in gov't after we leave the EU.

I'm having difficulty envisaging the current Tory administration allowing itself to be "used" for anything at all.

Why Australia wants Britain to stay in the EU

From an article by Wayne Swan, former deputy PM of Australia:-

"Europe’s single market is the largest free-trade zone in the world, where trade barriers at the border (in the form of tariffs) are eliminated, and where barriers behind the border (in the form of regulations) are minimised. This should be valued and developed: it is vital for Britain’s economy as it makes you a highly attractive destination for global investment.

International companies from outside the EU – from the US, Japan and Australia – base themselves in the UK in no small part so they can access the wider European market. The single market is especially beneficial for your vibrant and world-beating financial services industry, which benefits from having all of Europe as its home market instead of just Britain. I can see no good reason why the UK would want to give up such a beneficial economic relationship with its nearest and largest trading partners – nor am I clear what you would replace it with.

For over 20 years I have been an MP for the Australian Labor Party. The links between my party and the British Labour movement have always been close, so I know well how EU law has provided the basis for vital protections for working people in Britain – from four weeks’ paid holiday and protections for agency workers, to maternity and paternity leave. Europe has the world’s largest international development programme, it has led the world in tackling climate change, and protected and spread democracy across its continent. Britain has been part of this effort and has its voice amplified in the world through Europe."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12154630/Why-Australia-wants-Britain-to-stay-in-the-EU.html

Now John Kerry intervenes over Brexit: US Secretary of State tells Brits to STAY in EU

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/643838/John-Kerry-Brexit-US-Secretary-of-State-tells-Brits-to-STAY-in-EU

All these things could be brought in by a UK gov't Ivan, because they are good things for the UK but sorry to disagree with you Ivan there is a lot more bad things within the EU plus we do not know what else will be brought in by the EU after & IF we vote to stay in then and only then will the EU show there true hand.

Redflag. A British government can’t give us free healthcare in EU countries if we cease to be a member of the EU. Most of the other benefits listed could be brought in by a British government, but it’s the Tories who want to get rid of many of those workplace rights. And then there’s Farage, who said that maternity leave should be at the discretion of an employer!

The EU gives us a modicum of protection from Tory governments, which is why so many Tories want us out of it. Doesn’t it worry you that you’re on the same side in this debate as malevolent people like Redwood, Duncan Smith, Grayling, Lawson and Bone, who want us to leave, rather than with Alan Johnson, Ed Miliband, most Labour MPs and the ‘Unite’ union?

IVAN What the EU gives us while on holiday in a EU is just the basics in health care if you need to kept in hospital or need an operation the Green card is not enough to cover the serious problems so there you would need Insurance just like if in a NONE EU country no difference there.

Sorry Ivan I have not seen any protection from the Tories since May 2010, the 2012 NHS care bill the bills that have forced people to live below the bread line on cuts to housing benefit or the cuts for the sick disalbed & vulnerable & it will not stop the the Trade Union Bill going through the HOC at the moment or any other NASTY Bill the Tories want to bring into law. When I look at what the EU has done to Portugal Greece Spain Italy & Cypress that is more than enough for me.

As a by-line Ivan I am glad to see Kate Hoey & Gieslla Stewart are Labnour MPs that have come out against staying in the EU at least I am in good company.

Redflag wrote:-
What the EU gives us while on holiday in a EU is just the basics in health care if you need to kept in hospital or need an operation the Green card is not enough to cover the serious problems so there you would need Insurance just like if in a NONE EU country no difference there.

That is completely wrong! When I travel to Germany, I do not take out any additional private insurance. If the airline loses my suitcase, it is liable for reimbursing me. My home contents insurance covers any valuables when away from the house. And my European Health Insurance Card ensures that I will get the same access to necessary medical treatment under public sector health care (e.g. a doctor, a pharmacy, a hospital or a health care centre) as nationals of the EU country I am visiting. I know the system works because I had to use it once.

The card also ensures that if I have to receive medical attention in a country that charges for health care, I will be reimbursed, either immediately or after I get home.

http://ec.europa.eu/ireland/the_eu_and_you/faq/health/index_en.htm

So that's a good reason for staying in the EU. I'm still waiting for a valid reason for leaving .......