New Poll. Europe: In or Out

[JC Footy Genius]

This one

View attachment 72595

Y,Y,Y*,Y


* Needs to raise her game in the personal grooming department .. it's not the 70's ffs.

 

[5ways]

Taxpayer-funded civil servants have been authorised by David Cameron to use public resources to campaign for Remain. Will advisers and officials working for ministers who back Leave have the same freedom? They have tonight been issued a strict ban on their activities by the Cabinet Secretary Jeremy Heywood.

Civil servants working in the departments of Grayling, Whitto, IDS etc have been barred from giving their ministers briefings supporting their position on the EU. They are banned from providing speech material, and will be denied access to government papers relating to the referendum. Special advisers working for Leave ministers are banned from supporting their boss’ position in office hours. They are also banned from using annual leave on campaign activity. Pro-Remain ministers are meanwhile allowed to use public resources to campaign.

Amusingly, Heywood writes that these restrictions mean:

“The principles of impartiality and the proper use of public resources continue to apply to all government communications activity, including activity related to the EU referendum.”

This is laughable – Downing Street civil servants like Chris Hopkins are authorised to use taxpayer-funded resources to campaign for Remain, yet civil servants and SpAds for Eurosceptic ministers who want to do the same thing for the Leave campaign are banned from doing so. This is the exact opposite of “the principles of impartiality and the proper use of public resources”. It’s “do as we say, not as we do…”
Nadine Dorries has grilled the PM about Guido’s revelation that a pro-EU letter supposedly from FTSE 100 bosses, due to appear in tomorrow’s papers, was actually drafted by a Downing Street civil servant. Cameron said Chris Hopkins wrote the letter with his authorisation:

“He’s a civil servant working in No.10 and his authority comes from me, and he’s doing an excellent job… the government’s view is that we should Remain in a reformed European Union and the civil service is able to support the government in that role”
http://order-order.com/2016/02/23/downing-street-do-as-we-say-not-as-we-do/

The Civil Service is fulfilling its constitutional duty to support the policy of the government.

 

[5ways]

Have you read this letter? Can hardly accuse these guys of scaremongering.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...-to-lose-the-security-provided-by-the-EU.html

Letters: In an increasingly unstable world, Britain can’t afford to lose the security provided by the EU

Signed

Field Marshal Lord Bramall
Former Chief of Defence Staff
Field Marshal Lord Guthrie
Former Chief of Defence Staff
Marshal of the RAF Jock Stirrup
Former Chief of Defence Staff
Admiral of the Fleet Lord Boyce
Former Chief of Defence Staff
Admiral Lord West
Former First Sea Lord
Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope
Former First Sea Lord
General Sir Mike Jackson
Former Chief of the General Staff
General Lord Dannatt
Former Chief of the General Staff
General Sir Michael Rose
Former Director of Special Forces
General Sir Rupert Smith
Former Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe
General Sir Richard Shirreff
Former Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe
Lieutenant General Sir John Kiszeley
Former Director General of the Defence Academy
Lieutenant General Sir Rob Fry
Former Deputy Chief of Defence Staff

 

[El Presidente]

Y,Y,Y*,Y


* Needs to raise her game in the personal grooming department .. it's not the 70's ffs.

See what you mean JC, it looks like Terry Waite's allotment on number 3.

 

[GT49er]

The Civil Service is fulfilling its constitutional duty to support the policy of the government.

The shame is that it isn't government policy to allow a democratic level playing field, but then, I never expected any better.

 

[beorhthelm]

Have you read this letter? Can hardly accuse these guys of scaremongering.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...-to-lose-the-security-provided-by-the-EU.html

Letters: In an increasingly unstable world, Britain can’t afford to lose the security provided by the EU

Signed

we must remain in the EU, as long as we keep a veto on doing what the EU demands if we dont want to do it. an excellent position to take until that veto goes and we have to follow EU direct foreign and defense policy. as common among many support to remain in the EU, the arguments are made as if the EU is to remain as it is today, that there will be no further integration or assimilation. that is not the objective of the EU.

 

[GT49er]

History repeating itself; dirty campaign for 'In' now, dirty campaign for 'In' in 1975. Interesting item from the BBC about the dirty campaign in 1975 - by the person who was in charge of the campaign (happily admitting it!)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/features/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35641263/35641263

Look out for some interesting clips of some little political tart giving her all to be part of the EEC ...... tut tut, who'd have thought it?!!

 

[gregbrighton]

we must remain in the EU, as long as we keep a veto on doing what the EU demands if we dont want to do it. an excellent position to take until that veto goes and we have to follow EU direct foreign and defense policy. as common among many support to remain in the EU, the arguments are made as if the EU is to remain as it is today, that there will be no further integration or assimilation. that is not the objective of the EU.

Save the hundreds of millions we give to the EU club and vote OUT so we don't have to be part of it anymore.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Have you read this letter? Can hardly accuse these guys of scaremongering.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...-to-lose-the-security-provided-by-the-EU.html

Letters: In an increasingly unstable world, Britain can’t afford to lose the security provided by the EU

Signed

Wading through the hyperbole/appeal to authority the only specific claim that they make to support their view is

"Inside it, we can continue to collaborate closely with our European allies, just as we did when we helped to force the Iranians to the negotiating table through EU-wide sanctions, or made sure that Vladimir Putin would pay a price for his aggression in Ukraine. ... adds to our capability and flexibility when it comes to defence co-operation and allows us to project greater power internationally."

We would still collaborate closely with our European allies including supporting sanctions where necessary as other independent nations do. They give no examples of how this adds any capability or flexibility to defence cooperation beyond what can be achieved through NATO or projecting greater power.

Probably just another letter organised by No10 to put forward the establishment vested interest position. Expect more of the same in the coming weeks.

 

[5ways]

The shame is that it isn't government policy to allow a democratic level playing field, but then, I never expected any better.

It would be strange for the government to allow the use of Civil Service time and resources against its own policy.

 

[5ways]

Wading through the hyperbole/appeal to authority the only specific claim that they make to support their view is

"Inside it, we can continue to collaborate closely with our European allies, just as we did when we helped to force the Iranians to the negotiating table through EU-wide sanctions, or made sure that Vladimir Putin would pay a price for his aggression in Ukraine. ... adds to our capability and flexibility when it comes to defence co-operation and allows us to project greater power internationally."

We would still collaborate closely with our European allies including supporting sanctions where necessary as other independent nations do. They give no examples of how this adds any capability or flexibility to defence cooperation beyond what can be achieved through NATO or projecting greater power.

Probably just another letter organised by No10 to put forward the establishment vested interest position. Expect more of the same in the coming weeks.

These are all retired officials who have served their country, not careerists mandarins. As they said if we speaking with a unified voice on Ukraine or Syria our message is amplified. For example we have taken a harder line on Putin than many European countries would have done independently. There is the issue of hard power projection. Moreover:

"At the same time, our firm veto over EU foreign policy decisions guarantees not only that we will never be forced to join EU initiatives that are against our strategic interest, but also that we can block the rest of the EU from going ahead in such circumstances."

It's the fact that we have a hand on the tiller. Outside of the EU our policy on any issue of international security is weaker - we are able to amplify our voice when we are in unison, and we are able to block EU initiatives not in our strategic interest.

 

[GT49er]

It would be strange for the government to allow the use of Civil Service time and resources against its own policy.

It's pure hypocracy, then, to call it a free vote (ie allowing cabinet ministers to vote for what they think is right) and then rig the playing field. Shows how desperate Cameron is to save his bacon.

 

[GT49er]

It would be strange for the government to allow the use of Civil Service time and resources against its own policy.

The civil service is not allowed to contribute to a General Election debate (or even take part in it at some levels) and presumably the outgoing government wishes to promote its policies then, too. This is Cameron misusing the civil service when it suits him.

 

[Gwylan]

History repeating itself; dirty campaign for 'In' now, dirty campaign for 'In' in 1975. Interesting item from the BBC about the dirty campaign in 1975 - by the person who was in charge of the campaign (happily admitting it!)

That's a fascinating clip but I have no idea what you mean by dirty campaign. I remember 1975 very well and, while it may have produced the wrong result, there was nothing underhand about the campaign to stay in. I think that this time round, things won't be quite so decorous

 

[Don Quixote]

The PM is using the same scare tactics as the General Election. They are proven to work, but it shows he's worried, and so he should be. A leave vote would finish him.

 

[sten_super]

History repeating itself; dirty campaign for 'In' now, dirty campaign for 'In' in 1975. Interesting item from the BBC about the dirty campaign in 1975 - by the person who was in charge of the campaign (happily admitting it!)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/features/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35641263/35641263

Look out for some interesting clips of some little political tart giving her all to be part of the EEC ...... tut tut, who'd have thought it?!!

Are you referring to a specific incident? From the coverage I've seen so far, both sides are as bad as each other, making up/adjusting statistics and facts to fit their narrative.

The civil service is not allowed to contribute to a General Election debate (or even take part in it at some levels) and presumably the outgoing government wishes to promote its policies then, too. This is Cameron misusing the civil service when it suits him.

Yes, and there will be a period of purdah for 28 days ahead of the referendum, a similar period as is enforced ahead of a GE. Until that time both sides can fight it out as much as they want.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

These are all retired officials, not careerists mandarins. As they said if we speaking with a unified voice on Ukraine or Syria our message is amplified. For example we have taken a harder line on Putin than many European countries would have done independently. There is the issue of hard power projection. Moreover:

"At the same time, our firm veto over EU foreign policy decisions guarantees not only that we will never be forced to join EU initiatives that are against our strategic interest, but also that we can block the rest of the EU from going ahead in such circumstances."

It's the fact that we have a hand on the tiller. Outside of the EU our policy on any issue of international security is weaker - we are able to amplify our voice when we are in unison, and we are able to block EU initiatives not in our strategic interest.

How is our message amplified? I could equally claim the UK position is diminished, subsumed within an EU voice. For instance do you know for a fact that we didn't call for more severe actions but were limited to agreeing to a consensus EU position?

Some EU countries may want fewer sanctions some more, how do you know that we arrived at an overall harder position?

How many times have we blocked the rest of the EU from taking a Foreign policy decision against our interests? And I take it 27 other EU countries can block our Foreign policy interests.

This "Outside of the EU our policy on any issue of international security is weaker " is obviously rubbish. We would never get EU consensus on deploying our armed forces in numerous conflicts or situations only as an independent nation can we truly act in our national interest.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Are you referring to a specific incident? From the coverage I've seen so far, both sides are as bad as each other, making up/adjusting statistics and facts to fit their narrative.

At the moment, we just seem to be going through the process of airing the Tory splits. Once we've got through them dividing themselves up, I guess there could be more meaningly debate about membership beyond security and safety.

 

[El Presidente]

Regardless of your views on the vote, the campaigning has been appalling from both sides of the divide.

Fear, ignorance and prejudice are no way to determine such an issue, but it seems to be the way of this debate.

 

[5ways]

The civil service is not allowed to contribute to a General Election debate (or even take part in it at some levels) and presumably the outgoing government wishes to promote its policies then, too. This is Cameron misusing the civil service when it suits him.

Correct me when if I'm wrong but the Civil Service at a GE prepares briefs and policy papers for all major parties based on their manifesto commitments. Depending on who wins the GE those papers are then put into the CS machinery. This is not a GE, the CS serves the democratically elected government and the policy it has won a mandate from the public to implement.