EU to charge Britain more money due to success of economy....

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

To some extent I can agree with this, the freedom of movement arrangement was known, however how many nations were in the EEC then.......six?

That is not the case now, yet the UK, not mention EU electorate, have never got a say on something as important as EU enlargement, or did we ever know who actively supported and who didn't. When it was explained on the accessation for Poland we were told freedom of movement was not a big deal and only 15,000 poles would arrive.

The 1957 Treaty of Rome, which the UK is signed up to, clearly invites other countries to join the EEC so I really don't understand your point suggesting that there should be a referendum every time there's a new applicant:
eg:
".............RESOLVED by thus pooling their resources to preserve and strengthen peace and
liberty, and calling upon the other peoples of Europe who share their ideal to join in
their efforts,
HAVE DECIDED to create a European Economic Community and to this end have
designated as their Plenipotentiaries:..............."

 

[Camicus]

Aah so all of this is because we can't trust the Germans? Facepalm. Reading this thread it seems we don't want freedom of movement when it is Europeans moving here but we want to move anywhere we want. We don't want to be in the Eu as it's undemocratic inspite of having pr elections. But mostly we don't like European laws like the 48 hour working week wich we opted out of. Wish someone would explain why that doesn't make you all hypocritical

 

[Seagull on the wing]

Ok I was leaving this thread but some of you are so stuck in your anti EU views you don't see the havoc that will be wrecked to cut the arteries that tie us the the EU.

1. I mention challenges because the UK can challenge a law or directive, the fact that it has the least amount of challenges in the EU says something. It says that the hysteria around EU law is not shared in government and for good reason.
Because most laws are an improvement in our society, and the uk's lack if challenges proves that.
2. The fact that you can vote out an mp that votes for Laws in the uk you don't like means nothing, when they vote in a law when the party whip puts the pressure on there's not a damn thing you can do about it. Vote them out (if the vote goes your way), and then hope the next guy does what you want. I'm not saying I want no say but the EU does have to send its law proposals to the Parliment of which you should have voted on an mep.
3. Again I say, what is so bad? What EU laws (excluding immigration) would a British government change once out of Europe?
4. If it's only immigration that is the issue, is it worth throwing billions away from the EU's trade that contributes 78bn to our GDP?
5. There is NO exit policy! Strategy, preparation. No explanation how we would get over the financial crash and turbulence after an exit? Is it really worth it because of worrying over a few Bulgarians?

Must challenge your point 4.Throwing billions away from EU trade ?..when will you pro Europe people realise...we IMPORT more from the Eu than we EXPORT...we therefore have a trade deficit that is on top of our £55m a day and the latest demand for £1.7b,nobody has come on here and given a reasonable answer of what we gain in the EU,they all break the rules on immigration,they control each nations economy,yet cannot control their own...corruption is rife and as soon as this rotten house of cards collapses the better...or at least...as soon as we get out the better.
We once had a decent trade trade with nations...namely the commonwealth

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

The 1957 Treaty of Rome, which the UK is signed up to, clearly invites other countries to join the EEC so I really don't understand your point suggesting that there should be a referendum every time there's a new applicant:
eg:
".............RESOLVED by thus pooling their resources to preserve and strengthen peace and
liberty, and calling upon the other peoples of Europe who share their ideal to join in
their efforts,
HAVE DECIDED to create a European Economic Community and to this end have
designated as their Plenipotentiaries:..............."

You can keep banging on about a treaty signed just 12 years after WW2 when Europe was still devastated by the struggle against the Nazis and ALL of of the acesion states were still all firmly behind the iron curtain if you want but don't try and convince me or anyone else that the original 6 signatories ever thought that the union would end up embracing millions of poorly paid but well educated eastern Europeans who would have a massive highly motivated and CHEAP mobile workforce as their only meaningful export.

Britain does almost zero trade with Albania or Romania in terms of goods sold but we have to allow their citizenry access to our job market and economy at the expense of our own low paid working class.

If I was a fruit farmer, property developer or a hotelier I'd be deliriously happy to have access to cheap labour because it would mean more profit for me but it's not going to help our own brickies barmaids and cleaners who can't make a living anymore.

If anyone seriously thinks that there is a healthy amount of inward migration they should just go for a visit to the Jobcentre or the high street and count how many eastern European voices they hear. How many Slovenian or Romanian vehicles did you see on the roads three years ago? None...now there's a LOT believe you me. It's not being done in a managed sensitive way and it's pissing people off.

 

[Buzzer]

Aah so all of this is because we can't trust the Germans? Facepalm. Reading this thread it seems we don't want freedom of movement when it is Europeans moving here but we want to move anywhere we want. We don't want to be in the Eu as it's undemocratic inspite of having pr elections. But mostly we don't like European laws like the 48 hour working week wich we opted out of. Wish someone would explain why that doesn't make you all hypocritical

How many strawman arguments can one person post in one go? Is that the best you can do?

 

[Ernest]

Be interesting to see the reaction of some when the truth gets pointed out at the HOC committee

 

[BigGully]

The 1957 Treaty of Rome, which the UK is signed up to, clearly invites other countries to join the EEC so I really don't understand your point suggesting that there should be a referendum every time there's a new applicant:
eg:
".............RESOLVED by thus pooling their resources to preserve and strengthen peace and
liberty, and calling upon the other peoples of Europe who share their ideal to join in
their efforts,
HAVE DECIDED to create a European Economic Community and to this end have
designated as their Plenipotentiaries:..............."

But this is THE problem, with the ever evolving EU we have never had a referendum, on anything that has been proposed or implemented.

You sound like a good Bowling club secretary explaining the current club rules, without thought to whether there is an overwhelming feeling that actually the rules are crap.

We know the implications and associated obligations of being a member state, we just no longer think its something that we need to be part of.

 

[Gwylan]

But this is THE problem, with the ever evolving EU we have never had a referendum, on anything that has been proposed or implemented.

Er... we had one in 1975. We voted to stay in the enlarged EEC by quite a large majority

 

[BigGully]

Er... we had one in 1975. We voted to stay in the enlarged EEC by quite a large majority

You for real, the current EU reflects absolutely NOTHING what my parents voted for, you see thats the point.

 

[nicko31]

Its official we've now done £1.7 big ones in more debt since this thread started. Has anyone mentioned our £400B annual welfare bill, or is this all because of our membership of the EU?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Its official we've now done £1.7 big ones in more debt since this thread started. Has anyone mentioned our £400B annual welfare bill, or is this all because of our membership of the EU?

No one has, because the annual welfare bill is well under £200bn.

 

[Gwylan]

You for real, the current EU reflects absolutely NOTHING what my parents voted for, you see thats the point.

Can you describe these supposed differences?

 

[Greyrun]

You for real, the current EU reflects absolutely NOTHING what my parents voted for, you see thats the point.

Agree,Edward Heath and pro EU campaigners knew what was on the agenda but kept the British public in the dark.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

So you are overrun by immigrants then? Where? From which nation? Why does it bother you? How does it negatively impact on you? Does it make you feel uncomfortable?

Please explain, and if it's not YOU personally, the same questions regarding another person that is badly affected by immigrants that you mention.

Maybe you need to make idiots like me understand why I need to be so afraid.

The former (Labour) Home Secretary seems rather concerned.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29799725

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

Er... we had one in 1975. We voted to stay in the enlarged EEC by quite a large majority

Yes. Yes we did. In 1975 there were 3 more Ireland, Denmark and us. That is still not really a very fair argument because, in those days, we were asked about joining an Economic Union with France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark and Ireland.

It was just after the oil crisis when the economies of the developed nations had suffered a terrific shock and it made a lot of sense to enter a trade bloc with Northern European nations to protact our interests better.

Now. It STILL makes sense to be inside a European trade area with shared labour between nations with a similar economic structure to ours but it doesn't make sense to allow member states much lower costs and earning ratios to access the job markets in other states with no control whatsoever because, predictably, it allows employers to boost profits by engaging in a race to the bottom in terms of pay and conditions by employing people with far lower salary expectations. It's really not that difficult to understand. The British markets are very attractive to migrants because people are treated well by the state and there is far less protectionism in our labour markets than there is in, say, France. It's also a fact that English is taught as a second language in schools all across the EU so there is less of an issue with integration as far as migrants are concerned.

I know, through work, that there is a growing resentment in the other big economies about the ease of migration from the poorer EU members. It's further up the agenda politically in the UK because we are not burdened with living memories of oppression and genocide being perpetrated by the Nazis etc. so we don't have the same brakes on our conscience as Germans, Austrians and others when it comes to tolerance towards "foreigners".

The EU is effectively forcing the UK out of the club by insisting on every edict being followed no matter whether it is in a countries own national interest. I can see us voting OUT because we are given no choice. That would be a pity.

 

[Buzzer]

So you are overrun by immigrants then? Where? From which nation? Why does it bother you? How does it negatively impact on you? Does it make you feel uncomfortable?.

Mass immigration in many urban areas has changed the location so completely that many long-term residents no longer feel comfortable there. It's simply not true to say otherwise. Even people like Billy Bragg acknowledge this. His excellent play 'Pressure Drop' deals precisely with this issue and one scene in particular sticks out when an old lady gets a flyer from a witchdoctor through her door (drawn from Bragg's personal experience from his own mother who has lived all her life in Barking).

"Do you know what came through the door yesterday? Something from a witch doctor. A witch doctor? I just don't know any more. I'm starting not to recognise the place."

Of course, the reason for this is that the powers that be (from all parties) have quite blithely pushed the immigrants into poor areas without consultation and this inevitably causes tensions. Poor immigrants competing with poor indigenous folk for crap jobs with crap pay, competing for social housing, competing for healthcare and education. And because it mainly only affects the lumpenproletariat, their concerns can be dismissed as racist, ill-informed rantings.

I really thought that even the most ardent of immigration fans had conceded that this is an issue. Clearly I was wrong and I recommend you go and see Bragg's play 'Pressure Drop'. He's right on the money and can put you straight on this.

Edit - but I think immigration is a red herring in this debate. For me, the main issue, in fact the only issue is about self-determination.

 

[CheeseRolls]

Mass immigration in many urban areas has changed the location so completely that many long-term residents no longer feel comfortable there. It's simply not true to say otherwise. Even people like Billy Bragg acknowledge this. His excellent play 'Pressure Drop' deals precisely with this issue and one scene in particular sticks out when an old lady gets a flyer from a witchdoctor through her door (drawn from Bragg's personal experience from his own mother who has lived all her life in Barking).

"Do you know what came through the door yesterday? Something from a witch doctor. A witch doctor? I just don't know any more. I'm starting not to recognise the place."

.

For the sake of perspective, what happens when you substitute witch doctor, for any of the following ?

Lesbians ?
Skateboarders ?
Youngsters ?
Unmarried couples ?
Drug Sellers ?
Jehovahs Witnesses ?

Over the course of a lifetime, places do change immeasurably and hearing old folk complaining is nothing new is it ?

 

[halbpro]

Er... we had one in 1975. We voted to stay in the enlarged EEC by quite a large majority

There are around 15,000,000 people alive and eligible to vote who weren't in 1975 by my calculations. I certainly wasn't alive yet in 1975, and while I'd vote to stay in the EU it does seem reasonable to give another generation a go.

 

[Buzzer]

For the sake of perspective, what happens when you substitute witch doctor, for any of the following ?

Lesbians ?
Skateboarders ?
Youngsters ?
Unmarried couples ?
Drug Sellers ?
Jehovahs Witnesses ?

Over the course of a lifetime, places do change immeasurably and hearing old folk complaining is nothing new is it ?

That's a fallacious argument, I think. Unmarried couples, youngsters, Jehovah's Witnesses and skateboarders are unlikely to come from such a different culture that their sudden appearance changes the cultural landscape of an area. And I sincerely doubt that drug dealers and lesbians would push flyers through the doors advertising their wares. And is there any area of the UK where Jehovah's Witnesses have moved en masse and changed the area beyond recognition?

In fact, I'm really not sure what you're getting at here at all. That witchdoctor quote comes directly from the Bragg play and he has said in interviews that those comments come from his own mum. I really recommend you go and watch his play. It's far more than just a few old biddies moaning about the price of a loaf nowadays.

 

[Gwylan]

Yes. Yes we did. In 1975 there were 3 more Ireland, Denmark and us. That is still not really a very fair argument because, in those days, we were asked about joining an Economic Union with France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark and Ireland.

That's right but there were always plans to expand from the original six (in fact the UK was asked to be a founder member in the 50s but declined - and after that De Gaulle put the block on us joining). If there hadn't been plans to expand, how did we join? And in 1975 there were already discussions about Greece and Portugal joining at some point in the future (and Spain too after Franco's death). It was made clear that Norway and Switzerland could join but they declined to do so.

It STILL makes sense to be inside a European trade area with shared labour between nations with a similar economic structure to ours but it doesn't make sense to allow member states much lower costs and earning ratios to access the job markets in other states with no control whatsoever because, predictably, it allows employers to boost profits by engaging in a race to the bottom in terms of pay and conditions by employing people with far lower salary expectations. It's really not that difficult to understand

No, it's not difficult. The Treaty of Rome states very clearly there will be free movement of labour across all member states. That's certainly something we signed up to 1973 and ratified in a referendum in 1975

The British markets are very attractive to migrants because people are treated well by the state and there is far less protectionism in our labour markets than there is in, say, France. It's also a fact that English is taught as a second language in schools all across the EU so there is less of an issue with integration as far as migrants are concerned.

That's all true (and I think the language issue is something that is far too often by commentators when talking about EU and non-migration). It should be pointed out though as a proportion of our population we're (I think) tenth in the table when it comes to EU immigrants, so we're not that popular. And in real terms, Germany takes more than us too - and that's despite the language issue.

I know, through work, that there is a growing resentment in the other big economies about the ease of migration from the poorer EU members. It's further up the agenda politically in the UK because we are not burdened with living memories of oppression and genocide being perpetrated by the Nazis etc. so we don't have the same brakes on our conscience as Germans, Austrians and others when it comes to tolerance towards "foreigners".

They may be something in this: certainly major German parties have no problem with levels of migration - and Merkel enjoys astronomic ratings. Not so sure about others though: in Austria, Haider got rather a lot of votes until he smashed his car up. Italy also has ignored its fascist past and elected a new generation of fascist leaders.And the countries that have a historic antipathy to foreigners - Hungary for example, elect far-right nutters.

The EU is effectively forcing the UK out of the club by insisting on every edict being followed no matter whether it is in a countries own national interest. I can see us voting OUT because we are given no choice. That would be a pity.

Those are the rules though - it's not something I'm particularly happy about (I'd vote no in a referendum) but it does seem that we want the advantages of EU membership with none of the responsibilities. It's a bit like QPR moaning about FFP - they played in the Championship under those rules and now object when they're applied. I'm not happy with the EU but I'm even less happy about our country being seen as the QPR of Europe