Quote:
Originally Posted by g jones
I have not read back over what I wrote but what I said has occurred; anti EU views haveswung to the right. Cameron has made clear he wanted repeal of the working hours directive, repeal workers rights and conditions, a clawing back of EU powers in fields of environment, social affairs and crime. He wants to remain in the single market. Wholly unacceptable.
The repeal of the EU arrest warrant for example would have left 39 pedophiles free to offend, British courts unable to convict them as they did.
Cameron's has finally and openly said in effect his EU referendum is a policy to undermine workers pay and conditions and their families. To make the labour market 'more flexible'. I made this point consistently then and suggested then it was changing my view and losing support on the left. Jobs and growth are the priority and most business leaders have stated, a referendum will undermine that objective clouding the issue. I have to consider the views of businesses locally. Their view is pro EU on the whole as your would expect.
But the OUT divisions are not just Labour left and UKIP/Tory right. Even the right are divided on what OUT means.
It is fundamental that the case for OUT is explained in full.
However no-one can explain what OUT means. Norway often cited by many as a position Britain should adopt however it pays 80% of what British citizens pay and we would pay far more than 80% to be able to access the single market, without any say and with Britain's crucial banking at the mercy of Berlin and Paris.
Switzerland also pay and have to accept all single market EU rules (like Norway) but negotiate every single trade agreement separately. Red tape?
Some believe OUT is OUT with no trade with Europe, no single market. 50% of our export trade is currently with Europe employing 3million workers.
So no-one can agree on what OUT means. Or now what IN means with Cameron's intervention. Whether Britain will have to pay more for the SM with no say... The list of questions just goes on and on ...
I made these points last time.
Opinion polls are quickly shifting against OUT because of this. The EU skeptic right needs to quickly and thoughtfully explain what OUT will result in because otherwise my view will keep moving away towards a solid IN.
At the same time Euroskeptics have to recognise that Ed Miliband has targeted what are my concerns (and of the left - a necessary component of a successful out vote) for reform ... but within Europe.
On the final point about a referendum I have met with the people's pledge to listen closely to their points of view. The question is whether a referendum could offer Britain a better future.
What Labour voters may face in a referendum is Hobson's choice. OUT and the risk of losing of employment and economic damage or IN and a renegotiated relationship that attacks workers, the environment. As I made absolutely clear last time, in this scenario, why would a Labour MP wholeheartedly endorse a possible lose-lose referendum even if he was a Euroskeptic? To not have a referendum, as disappointing as that may be would be the best option for business and workers.
|
Sorry. Graham, although I've quoted what you said, couldn't be bothered to read it, too much and too late.