funny how democracey works for some and not others

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by gynn

My basic instinct is to say "Yes, let's get out of the EU. It's a complete mess and we would be better off out of it.'

But I will only vote to leave the EU when I have a definitive answer from someone in the know to the following simple question:-

'How much will it cost us?'

My worry is that the desire to return to a world where we weren't members of the EU is like an unhappily married man who wants a divorce so he can go back and live with his mum. Unfortunately, the ex will ensure you are taken to the cleaners to the extent that you will be even more miserable than you were when you were married.

Pretty much exactly what I've been trying to say for months but you will probably get shot down for being sensible about it and trying to see the bigger picture. You haven't spent nearly enough time slagging off our MP or conducting straw polls either.

Besides which, what would you know about finances anyway?

[cashman]

Gynn has a perfectly reasonable question, Set against what would or is it costing us to remain in? These n many more can only be answered by information given before any referendum, Meself i suspect whilst it will obviously cost to get out, It will cost more in the long run,to remain in.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

Pretty much exactly what I've been trying to say for months but you will probably get shot down for being sensible about it and trying to see the bigger picture. You haven't spent nearly enough time slagging off our MP or conducting straw polls either.

Besides which, what would you know about finances anyway?

Waste of time discussing the issue.

Your opinion doesn't count.

Your little chum Graham Jones voted against your view counting for anything.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

You haven't spent nearly enough time slagging off our MP

Slagging off?

Unfamiliar with that phrase.

Is it the sort of thing you did constantly on here, targeting our then Council Leader, when you were in opposition?

How soon you forget.

Happily most on here don't.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by garinda

Slagging off?

Unfamiliar with that phrase.

Is it the sort of thing you did constantly on here, targeting our then Council Leader, when you were in opposition?

How soon you forget.

Happily most on here don't.

Or perhaps 'slagging off' is the sort of thing I did, to poor Karen Buckley, when she stood as the Conservative candidate against Graham Jones, in the last General Election.

I do remember I was encouraged by every Labour politican who uses at Accy Web, at the time.

Which makes them equally involved with proceedings.

Like slag bridesmaids.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by ToffeeGuy

No doubt if there was a referendum on leaving the EU people would vote Yes.

If there was a vote on bringing back hanging there would probably be a Yes vote.

If there was a vote to cut taxes there would probably be a Yes vote.

All the things above would be popular. But Governments aren't elected to be popular but to do the right thing. And staying in the EU is the right thing.

Obviously a disciple of Comrade Jones and Comrade Millipede

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

The same poster who said he'd vote for a donkey if they pinned a Labour rosette on it.

It figures.

Ya I was once like that with a blue one but I've mellowed in my old age

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by garinda

...and when your puppet masters in the Labour party eventually decide they too will have to support a referendum, because otherwise it's a guaranteed vote loser, then you'll also agree that it's the right thing to do democratically?

Talk about having no principles...unless ordered to do so.

You are a silly little Baaaa....lamb, aren't you?

Calm down Rindi, he's obviously got the same principles as our illustrious elected member Jones who toes the party line come what may

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by garinda

Slagging off?

Unfamiliar with that phrase.

Is it the sort of thing you did constantly on here, targeting our then Council Leader, when you were in opposition?

How soon you forget.

Happily most on here don't.

Quite right Rindi, hypocrites usually have two faces or even more

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

Pretty much exactly what I've been trying to say for months but you will probably get shot down for being sensible about it and trying to see the bigger picture. You haven't spent nearly enough time slagging off our MP or conducting straw polls either.

Besides which, what would you know about finances anyway?

The thing is Ken(and you know I am a moderate) none of us will know if, what the powers that be, tell us, is the truth, because, to be blunt they haven't got a clue how much it would cost to come out of this corrupt organisation.
Would you hitch your wagon to an organisation that hasn't had a budget audited and signed off as being true, for the last 16 years....16 years?!

Do you want to be ruled by laws that are made in Brussels(and made by unelected officials - officials who have no accountability to us, the electorate of GB)?

The EU was sold to the British public as a trade agreement, there was nothing political implied by joining way back then.
It has turned into something else, and along the way governments of the time have said they would give the electorate a referendum and it still has not happened!

The other thing that is galling, is that some member states seem to follow the edicts from Brussles very loosely - and some not at all....but Britain is slavish in its adherence to the rules.

It was an ill advised, poorly thought out concept. One size fits all doesn't work.......I said it way back then and it is being proved in front of my eyes.
Anyone who spoke out against the EEC back then was deemed to be shortsighted and xenophobic.........and lower class(because it was deemed that the lower classes couldn't understand how good this organisation would be for Britain). It was almost a kind of fascism.
I didn't want to be part of Europe then, and I don't want to be part of in now....and, if I were younger I would flee this country at the very first opportunity.
There......I've said my piece......now I'll go and have a cup of tea.( a panacea for all things).

[Eric]

Originally Posted by ToffeeGuy

Benefits:

1) Peace in Europe for the best part of 70 years.
2) Free movement of people which allows anyone in the EU to live/work in any other EU country.
3) Both of the above and free trade which, generally, have led to rise in living standards and a more prosperous Europe in the past 70 years and have meant that people are able to move to the Dordogne etc.

As for nullifying individualism and national identity. The UK is a good example of why this wouldn't happen. We are a United Kingdom but England, Wales, Scotland & N.Ireland (and regions there in) all have unique identities but have the same currency, no barriers to trade, free movement, parliamentary democracy, monarch, army etc, etc etc. Same with the USA.

Plus Westminster feels as distant as Brussels to me. For all the good a Westminster government has done for the North West and Lancashire we might as well be governed by Brussels.

The world has changed over the past 100 years. Due to immigration and emigration personal identity isn't about where you live but who you are.

Peace in Europe? Well let's forget about the Cold War and what it cost European countries ... and that spat in the Balkans ... and what's happening in the streets of major European cities ... Peace broke out inevitably, aided by MAD and the Germans finally getting it throught their thick, square heads that maybe a big juicy war with lots of fancy uniforms wasn't the way to go. Peace was earned by an independent Britain sticking it out alone when the rest of the world, even the U.S. had just about given up on ever being able to beat the Nazis. The turning point of the war, I would argue, was the Battle of Britain ... not Stalingrad, not Midway, not Operation Bagration, not D-Day. Hitler, in order to win, had to beat the British in 1940. After the war, after Trinity, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki, Europe just about had to be peaceful ... the peace of exhaustion after two world wars. A peace of two super powers, aided and abetted by some European minnow states.

And what is so good about the free movement of people running around Europe looking for work? Is this any better than a Britain with a strong manufacturing base, and well-paid jobs for British working men, in Britain? (Sorry about the political incorrectness ladies ... but, I'm old and old fashioned)

And free trade. Gimme a break The only beneficiaries of this are the major transnational corporations. In the US ... and we have to admit that they are a major world economy ... protectionism has become the name of the game. And another booming (although slowing) economy is China's. Protectionism all the way. And the rise in living standards ... mere temporary illusion ... tell it to the Greeks. Tell it to the almost 50% of young unemployed Spaniards. Look at Britain. A few great boom years, and then into a recession that won't be going away any time soon.

In short, I don't agree with you.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Thank you, thank you, thank you Eric.........I couldn't find the will this morning to challenge Toffee Guy on his post, but you have done it....and admirably well too.
I salute you Sir.
I don't agree with him either...but then I think most people knew that anyway.

[ToffeeGuy]

Originally Posted by Eric

Peace in Europe? Well let's forget about the Cold War and what it cost European countries ... and that spat in the Balkans ... and what's happening in the streets of major European cities ... Peace broke out inevitably, aided by MAD and the Germans finally getting it throught their thick, square heads that maybe a big juicy war with lots of fancy uniforms wasn't the way to go. Peace was earned by an independent Britain sticking it out alone when the rest of the world, even the U.S. had just about given up on ever being able to beat the Nazis. The turning point of the war, I would argue, was the Battle of Britain ... not Stalingrad, not Midway, not Operation Bagration, not D-Day. Hitler, in order to win, had to beat the British in 1940. After the war, after Trinity, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki, Europe just about had to be peaceful ... the peace of exhaustion after two world wars. A peace of two super powers, aided and abetted by some European minnow states.

And what is so good about the free movement of people running around Europe looking for work? Is this any better than a Britain with a strong manufacturing base, and well-paid jobs for British working men, in Britain? (Sorry about the political incorrectness ladies ... but, I'm old and old fashioned)

And free trade. Gimme a break The only beneficiaries of this are the major transnational corporations. In the US ... and we have to admit that they are a major world economy ... protectionism has become the name of the game. And another booming (although slowing) economy is China's. Protectionism all the way. And the rise in living standards ... mere temporary illusion ... tell it to the Greeks. Tell it to the almost 50% of young unemployed Spaniards. Look at Britain. A few great boom years, and then into a recession that won't be going away any time soon.

In short, I don't agree with you.

The precursors to the EU, EEC etc, and the Nato Alliance provided strength during the Cold War. So thanks for providing me with another reason for why the EU is a good thing. Resisting Communism during the Cold War.

Plus I think you'll find the Enigma machine had a big hand in winning the war, helped by our current EU colleagues the Poles. Hitler trying to take on Russia didn't help. But basically we wouldn't have won the war without the US. But that's another subject altogether.

[gynn]

How do you think the referendum question should be worded?

'Are you in favour of the UK leaving the European Union' perhaps?

What about 'Are you in favour of returning to the halcyon days where Britannia ruled the waves, there were blue birds over the white cliffs of Dover, Johnny Foreigner was kept firmly in his place and you could have a night out in Accrington, fish and chips on the way home and still have change from a ten bob note?'

Strikes me that either question is as valid because it ain't going to happen, and Graham Jones is merely playing the entirely correct role that an MP should play in protecting the great British public from wasting its time in voting on something that can't be delivered.

[Margaret Pilkington]

The Nato alliance is a totally different thing to the EEC...which later became the EU. The EEC was supposed to be a trading alliance, the EU is a political body...and even today they are talking about closer political ties....that means more power goes to Brussels.(they will make our laws regardless of what we think about them)

I know that in a previous post you said that Westminster feels as far removed as Brussels does........but the difference is we can vote out those who are elected to Westminster.......we do not have that opportunity with the unelected officials in Brussels......What about our MEP's?.......they have as much influence in altering the EU policies, as King Canute had in turning back the tide.
I am never ever going to agree with your views.....and you aren't going to be swayed by anything I have to say...pretty much like the situation with us wanting a referendum.......It makes no difference what our individual views are if we are not allowed to express them in a democratic way...by voting, and having action taken on the result of that vote.