EU, impartial facts. Where to find

[hamster]

It is pretty clear that for the next 5 years which way things will go with remain. However, out is definitely a leap in the dark. Currency devaluation, inflation and interest rates happen awfully rapidly. I remember paying 14.75% on my mortgage in 1990.

FWIW Turkey is nowhere near accession to the EU. Look at the criteria (for a start about government and the judiciary) and you can see how far. Alternatively believe the conspiracy theories and say that the secret unelected Elite have a plan to let Turkey in anyway. see this explanation
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-polit ... -35603388#

 

[technodup]

The past 300 years have made it abundantly clear it is in our national interest to engage in Europe...from Blenheim, Trafalgar and Waterloo to the consequences of the assassination of a politician in Bosnia.

Out of those 300 years we've been in the EU as is for about 20.

Literally nobody is saying we shouldn't engage with Europe and Europeans. Nobody. Conflation of 'Europe' and 'EU' is happening all over the remain side and it's pretty pathetic.

And as for certainty, there is none on either side. None. We might think we know what the EU will do, but we thought in 73 that we knew what the EC was about. We were wrong then. I suspect we'll (well you'll) be wrong again.

 

[dyna-ti]

I think we know what Rupert Brookes thoughts would be on this :?

 

[JohnH]

Philip Stephens in the FT pointed out that the Brexit referendum is different: its consequences are asymmetric. If Britain opts for Remain it could well think again in, say, a decade or two.

The way that the "Withdrawal of a Member State" is decided by the EU switches in late 2017 from Treaty of Nice rules (every nation gets a veto) to Treaty of Lisbon rules (no individual veto, a qualified majority vote decides the issue).

In other words, it becomes a heck of a lot harder to leave the EU after 2017.

Sorry, it's not rubbish. A Brexit means an immediate separation and disjoint in all trading, commercial and legislative processes.

No it doesn't. A vote for Brexit means that the Prime Minister goes to Brussels and invokes Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. There then follows 2 years of continued EU membership while the UK and the EU negotiates the separation.

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-li ... le-50.html

 

[technodup]

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html

Which handily also sets out the process for re-admittance. Which of course makes this statement

A Leave vote would be forever

utter bollocks as previously mentioned.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.

Any European State which respects the values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them may apply to become a member of the Union. The European Parliament and national Parliaments shall be notified of this application. The applicant State shall address its application to the Council, which shall act unanimously after consulting the Commission and after receiving the assent of the European Parliament, which shall act by an absolute majority of its component members. The conditions of admission and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the Union is founded, which such admission entails, shall be the subject of an agreement between the Member States and the applicant State. This agreement shall be submitted for ratification by all the contracting States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements. The conditions of eligibility agreed upon by the European Council shall be taken into account.

(My emphasis. We can't be towed anywhere, that much is true. Which means we will still be a European state. And article 2 is agreement to law, equality and human rights, so we'll not be vetoed on that.)

This thread is about impartial facts. I can't say the EU itself is impartial, but the facts are clear. Something Mr FT seems to have missed, or more likely misrepresented (or misspoken in parliamentary language). Or to use common parlance, lied about.

 

[highlandsflyer]

Re:

I am glad some of the cliched myths are being refuted here.

"A Leave vote would be forever.."

Whatever happens I will still love my other European family and friends.

Like family and friends, I don't always want to share my bank account and the rules of my house with them.

The odd weekend meetup or dinner party is sufficient.

 

[technodup]

I think the Guardian have chucked the towel in already.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... referendum
A lefty making precisely the point I did about Labour not representing their voters.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ge-leavers
Another lefty making the point I did about Farage. In her words (if we Brexit) 'the most extraordinarily successful British politician of a generation'. From outside Westminster. That's the Guardian btw, just in case anyone forgot. The Guardian.

**** me, it's almost as if I don't talk complete shite. Let's have it.

 

[al-onestare]

Re:

Don't get ahead of yourself!

 

[technodup]

Oh I'm not. I can see the scaremongering leading people to opt for the 'less risky' option in the end.

I just thought it was funny two Guardian columnists seem to have accepted defeat for the glorious project.

 

[highlandsflyer]

I am out of Europe soon enough anyway. Thank feck.