Did we all vote UKIP today

[Lord Duckhunter]

Nice idea Wes, but do you honestly think Germany and France are going to sit back and let us stop paying for membership, but retain the perks? Surely if we suddenly announced an end to our membership, Germany might just end the open borders and free trade that we currently thrive off of.

 

I'd suggest that the economic disadvantages of terminating our membership payments would far outweight the relatively insignificant £15-20billion pa we are currently comitted to.

 

Why do you think successive Tory governments have spoken a hard line about Europe, but nevet once came close to pulling the plug? The answer lies in economics, not in the vote winning rhetoric.

 

It should be up to the people to decide, not you, not me, not Nigel Farage and certainly not Ken Clarke. All I hear from the Establishment is how wonderful Europe is, how they are winning the argument, how business is for it. It therefore should be easy to convince the British people, so they should put it to them.

 

They wont of course, never in a month of Sundays.

[pap]

Nice idea Wes, but do you honestly think Germany and France are going to sit back and let us stop paying for membership, but retain the perks? Surely if we suddenly announced an end to our membership, Germany might just end the open borders and free trade that we currently thrive off of.

 

I'd suggest that the economic disadvantages of terminating our membership payments would far outweight the relatively insignificant £15-20billion pa we are currently comitted to.

 

Why do you think successive Tory governments have spoken a hard line about Europe, but nevet once came close to pulling the plug? The answer lies in economics, not in the vote winning rhetoric.

 

Neither big party will touch the issue of Europe with a bargepole. When they've come to power, both have had to get big business on side in order to be seen as credible. Big business will never turn its back on a potential labour market of 500 million people. Lord D would need to employ British people, FFS!

 

It suits so many vested interests to stay in that the major parties will never offer a fair referendum on EU membership. This nonsense from the Tories about a post-2015 poll is just pre-election carrot. Grant Schapps certainly couldn't repeat the line enough times on the Sunday Politics.

[pap]

I think you're getting confused there Pap, that's the exact policy of the Tory party.

 

UKIP's policy is clear, leave the EU.

 

Or possibly you are, Lord D.

 

I am not the pedg

[pedg]

Or possibly you are, Lord D.

 

I am not the pedg

 

I am sparticus.. or something.

[scotty]

Dear EU we would like to keep the parts of our agreements with you that we like in place but get rid of all the bits we don't like. Hope that's okay with you. Yours UKIP.

 

Can't see the rest of europe having a problem with that at all......................

 

Barroso said years ago that we couldn't remain in Europe "half-in and half-out", when we (ie. Blair and co) were considering whether or not to ditch sterling and adopt the euro. For those with short memories, yes, that horrifying scenario actually was a possibility for a while, and stamping on it is one of the few things I give Gordon Brown credit for.

 

We didn't join the eurozone. It is unlikely that we will do so, at least in my lifetime. Europe has not ceased trading with us, not least because Europe gains far more from their trading relationship with the UK than we do. If we left Europe tomorrow, other european countries would continue to trade with us. We have nothing to lose by renegotiating the terms of our EU

membership except a small amount of goodwill from other european countries who already dislike us anyway.

[Joensuu]

It should be up to the people to decide, not you, not me, not Nigel Farage and certainly not Ken Clarke. All I hear from the Establishment is how wonderful Europe is, how they are winning the argument, how business is for it. It therefore should be easy to convince the British people, so they should put it to them.

 

They wont of course, never in a month of Sundays.

 

Lord D, you and I both know that a referendum on EU membership would see the majority vote us out of the club. They would do so on a heady mix of xenophobia and half-baked ideas about bureaucracy, political correctness, and the 'massive' cost of our membership. This would be fueled by the overwhelmingly jingoistic press, who no doubt would also lay in to the BBC for being impartial, when Panorama hosts a non-partisan investigation of the actual facts. The net result would see our business exports take a substantial hit, as suddenly 40% of our exports would be hit with tax, and find themselves quickly unable to compete on a level pegging with competition within the EU zone. On the international circuit, we'd be held up as at best a black sheep, and at worst as somewhat of a pariah. For every pound we'd save from membership costs, at least £5 would be lost from the turnover of our exporters. The ensuing self-inflicted recession would be longer and deeper than the one we are currently struggling to overcome.

 

That is why no party would offer a referendum, never in a month of Sundays as you so eloquently put it.

 

Question is, if UKIP ever did get themselves into a position of real power, would they really be stupid enough to go ahead with their threats? You've got to hope that they'd find some reason to avoid pulling out once they actually start to think about the economics of the situation. One has to hope that there is some sanity within? Perhaps I hope too much.

 

Neither big party will touch the issue of Europe with a bargepole. When they've come to power, both have had to get big business on side in order to be seen as credible. Big business will never turn its back on a potential labour market of 500 million people. Lord D would need to employ British people, FFS!

 

It suits so many vested interests to stay in that the major parties will never offer a fair referendum on EU membership. This nonsense from the Tories about a post-2015 poll is just pre-election carrot. Grant Schapps certainly couldn't repeat the line enough times on the Sunday Politics.

 

Agreed, the Tories would never see power again if they were to actually pull us out of the EU.

[scotty]

 

 

 

 

Agreed, the Tories would never see power again if they were to actually pull us out of the EU.

 

Dont be so sure. The tories are putting out feelers, just tonight Nigel Lawson has said we should pull out of the EU. Why do you think UKIP have been getting the votes they've had lately? No party can afford to ignore that message from the electorate.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Lord D, you and I both know that a referendum on EU membership would see the majority vote us out of the club. They would do so on a heady mix of xenophobia and half-baked ideas about bureaucracy, political correctness, and the 'massive' cost of our membership. This would be fueled by the overwhelmingly jingoistic press, who no doubt would also lay in to the BBC for being impartial, when Panorama hosts a non-partisan investigation of the actual facts. The net result would see our business exports take a substantial hit, as suddenly 40% of our exports would be hit with tax, and find themselves quickly unable to compete on a level pegging with competition within the EU zone. On the international circuit, we'd be held up as at best a black sheep, and at worst as somewhat of a pariah. For every pound we'd save from membership costs, at least £5 would be lost from the turnover of our exporters. The ensuing self-inflicted recession would be longer and deeper than the one we are currently struggling to overcome.

 

That is why no party would offer a referendum, never in a month of Sundays as you so eloquently put it.

 

Question is, if UKIP ever did get themselves into a position of real power, would they really be stupid enough to go ahead with their threats? You've got to hope that they'd find some reason to avoid pulling out once they actually start to think about the economics of the situation. One has to hope that there is some sanity within? Perhaps I hope too much.

 

 

 

Agreed, the Tories would never see power again if they were to actually pull us out of the EU.

 

What you appear to be saying is that the people who don't agree with you , don't understand. That although , the majority would vote for withdrawal , they aren't sophisticated enough to understand the consequences.

 

What other elections do you think us plebs should be barred from, local ones? What about the general election, how can we have a vote we may vote for someone you don't consider worthy . This democracy lark is a pain in the balls isn't it, much easier to let clever people like you tell us how to vote .

 

Personally I think your argument for staying in the EU is a load of pony, I think you've been brainwashed by liars and con men. But that's really beside the point. The British people should have their say,and they have been denied it too long.

[Wes Tender]

Nice idea Wes, but do you honestly think Germany and France are going to sit back and let us stop paying for membership, but retain the perks? Surely if we suddenly announced an end to our membership, Germany might just end the open borders and free trade that we currently thrive off of.

 

I'd suggest that the economic disadvantages of terminating our membership payments would far outweight the relatively insignificant £15-20billion pa we are currently comitted to.

 

Why do you think successive Tory governments have spoken a hard line about Europe, but nevet once came close to pulling the plug? The answer lies in economics, not in the vote winning rhetoric.

 

What exactly qualifies you to assess what the Germans or French would do if we left the EU? Do you not think that they will want to continue selling their products and manufactured goods to us? We are just as big a market if not more so than they are for us. Or do you think that they will want to continue selling to us, but not expect us to want them to buy our goods in return? We went into the Common Market and that is what we should return to. The British electorate have had no opportunity to vote on the changes brought about since. They certainly didn't vote for the European Parliament or their judiciary to take precedence over ours.

 

The Conservative Party have never come close to pulling the plug, as you put it, because the Party has been divided on the issue and the "wets" have blocked it. But I see that you admit that the issue is a vote winner for the party with the guts to put the issue to the electorate. I'm grateful that UKIP will force the issue once and for all and I believe that when the referendum is held, the majority of voters will wish us to leave. If that happens, then there would be the distinct probability of keeping some sort of trading agreement, in the mutual interests of both us and our current European trading partners.

 

Incidentally, what exactly do we get for our £15-20 billion? As one of the pretty exclusive club of nett contributors, do we actually get more from our membership than all those other members who are nett beneficiaries?

[Joensuu]

What you appear to be saying is that the people who don't agree with you , don't understand. That although , the majority would vote for withdrawal , they aren't sophisticated enough to understand the consequences.

 

What other elections do you think us plebs should be barred from, local ones? What about the general election, how can we have a vote we may vote for someone you don't consider worthy . This democracy lark is a pain in the balls isn't it, much easier to let clever people like you tell us how to vote .

 

Personally I think your argument for staying in the EU is a load of pony, I think you've been brainwashed by liars and con men. But that's really beside the point. The British people should have their say,and they have been denied it too long.

 

Personally, I think the general public should never vote on single issue referendum. They do a reasonable job on multi issue elections, but I feel that single issue decisions need to be made by experts in that subject area. To be honest im not sure that MPs have the requisite knowledge for some of the decisions they take; a cross section of experts in a given field might be best expected to make a sensible decision on a given subject. So in the context of EU membership, a panel of economists and perhaps experts in foreign policy might reach the most appropriate solution.

[pedg]

What exactly qualifies you to assess what the Germans or French would do if we left the EU? Do you not think that they will want to continue selling their products and manufactured goods to us? We are just as big a market if not more so than they are for us. Or do you think that they will want to continue selling to us, but not expect us to want them to buy our goods in return?

 

There will never be absolutes in this sort of thing but its hard to to guess that if extra barriers are placed between the buyer and one of the sets of prospective sellers that the buyer would be more likely to consider buying from elsewhere. It might be okay if we could keep the advantages of the common market without the other area's but that we would be allowed to get to that position is a lot less than certain. It is an enormous risk to say we will leave without knowing in advance what our trading position with the eurozone will be.

 

As an example there are many rules in europe now to stop governments subsidizing companies so they have a competitive advantage. Do you think we would be allowed to continue in a common trading market if we did not agree to those rules? Who then decided which rules we would have to agree to and if we break the rules how can it be resolved if you don't want to accept the power of the european court?

Edited 7 May, 2013 by pedg

[Wes Tender]

Personally, I think the general public should never vote on single issue referendum. They do a reasonable job on multi issue elections, but I feel that single issue decisions need to be made by experts in that subject area. To be honest im not sure that MPs have the requisite knowledge for some of the decisions they take; a cross section of experts in a given field might be best expected to make a sensible decision on a given subject. So in the context of EU membership, a panel of economists and perhaps experts in foreign policy might reach the most appropriate solution.

 

This opinion is breathtaking in its arrogance. Johnny Voter is deemed capable to vote on a manifesto covering a basket of policies, some of which he likes and others he doesn't, but isn't clever enough to make a decision on a single issue in a Referendum. Presumably there will be plenty of so called expert opinions out there before the Referendum vote, but no, Johhny Voter is still not capable of making his mind up and arriving at the right decision, which is of course the only option according for the super-intelligentsia, to stay in. If he votes to leave, then all the pseudo-intellectuals will shrug their shoulders and murmer darkly that you just can't trust the electorate on such complicated issues; after all, look what happened when they last had their referendum on the voting issue.

 

And who should decide on matters like this? Yes, the economists and the Foreign Office bureacrats. The ones who got us into this current recession, in partnership with Civil Servants who love the overwheening bureaucracy of Brussels and who therefore have a vested interest in the gravy train continuing.

 

Any more bright ideas?

[alpine_saint]

Its about time the UK had a formal mechanism for calling referrenda on single issues.

 

Here in Austria, if you can get 100,000 signatories to an issue, the government is OBLIGED BY LAW to call a referrendum.

[Wes Tender]

There will never be absolutes in this sort of thing but its hard to to guess that if extra barriers are placed between the buyer and one of the sets of prospective sellers that the buyer would be more likely to consider buying from elsewhere. It might be okay if we could keep the advantages of the common market without the other area's but that we would be allowed to get to that position is a lot less than certain. It is an enormous risk to say we will leave without knowing in advance what our trading position with the eurozone will be.

 

As an example there are many rules in europe now to stop governments subsidizing companies so they have a competitive advantage. Do you think we would be allowed to continue in a common trading market if we did not agree to those rules? Who then decided which rules we would have to agree to and if we break the rules how can it be resolved if you don't want to accept the power of the european court?

 

The proposal is to continue with the trading part, the Common Market and discard the political and legal powers of Brussels, so I don't see that should be a problem. There is no reason why the rules regarding subsidies should not continue to be observed to maintain a level playing field. We are usually the ones to observe these rules meticulously, when everybody else ignores them anyway.

[pedg]

The proposal is to continue with the trading part, the Common Market and discard the political and legal powers of Brussels, so I don't see that should be a problem. There is no reason why the rules regarding subsidies should not continue to be observed to maintain a level playing field. We are usually the ones to observe these rules meticulously, when everybody else ignores them anyway.

 

I think you are wildly optimistic to think that the rest of europe will allow us to stay in the trading part whilst dropping all the other parts. Do you have any evidence to show that such a move is both feasible and likely to succeed or are you trusting the future of the economy to a "Well it should be okay" gut feeling without any evidence to support it?

[Wes Tender]

I think you are wildly optimistic to think that the rest of europe will allow us to stay in the trading part whilst dropping all the other parts. Do you have any evidence to show that such a move is both feasible and likely to succeed or are you trusting the future of the economy to a "Well it should be okay" gut feeling without any evidence to support it?

I'm trusting on the political clout that the major European manufacturers and producers have with their respective Governments. I'm making an assumption that the German car manufacturers, the Italian fridge and washing machine manufacturers, the French wine and cheese manufacturers, etc, will still wish to sell their products to us. That trading arrangement can therefore continue on a reciprocal basis. Do you have any evidence that a Common Market trading arrangement cannot continue? Have any of our European partners ruled it out? There might have been some rhetoric attempting to convey the impression that they wouldn't allow us to continue on that basis, but if push came to shove, then I'm fairly confident that any of the major European players wouldn't wish to jeopardise their trading links with us. It is certainly feasible to trade with Europe without being a member of the EU, as several other countries prove.

[Batman]

I find it astonishing that one of the world major importers, the 5/6th largest economy etc etc would be turned away from a trading agreement if they were not in the EU

[pedg]

I'm trusting on the political clout that the major European manufacturers and producers have with their respective Governments. I'm making an assumption that the German car manufacturers, the Italian fridge and washing machine manufacturers, the French wine and cheese manufacturers, etc, will still wish to sell their products to us. That trading arrangement can therefore continue on a reciprocal basis. Do you have any evidence that a Common Market trading arrangement cannot continue? Have any of our European partners ruled it out? There might have been some rhetoric attempting to convey the impression that they wouldn't allow us to continue on that basis, but if push came to shove, then I'm fairly confident that any of the major European players wouldn't wish to jeopardise their trading links with us. It is certainly feasible to trade with Europe without being a member of the EU, as several other countries prove.

 

I am sure that those companies will want to trade with us but there is no proof that any arrangement would be as beneficial to the UK as the current one. What will happen with VAT and import duties for example. My opinion, and that's all we have here to go on is our opinions, is that leaving the EU would result in a reduction of exports to the EU. Whether it results in a reduction of imports depends on whether you think we are able to economically producing the required good in the UK ourselves.

 

You are the one proposing we break away so its up to you to provide proof that it will all be fine.

 

I believe the other european countries that have trading agreements with the EU are relatively small, such as sweden etc and IMO its debatable whether the EU would accept the UK on the same agreements after we have been a pain in the arse in leaving the other area's of the EU.

 

But your bottom line is you have no proof only that you are 'fairly confident'.

[Batman]

I am sure that those companies will want to trade with us but there is no proof that any arrangement would be as beneficial to the UK as the current one. What will happen with VAT and import duties for example. My opinion, and that's all we have here to go on is our opinions, is that leaving the EU would result in a reduction of exports to the EU. Whether it results in a reduction of imports depends on whether you think we are able to economically producing the required good in the UK ourselves.

 

You are the one proposing we break away so its up to you to provide proof that it will all be fine.

 

I believe the other european countries that have trading agreements with the EU are relatively small, such as sweden etc and IMO its debatable whether the EU would accept the UK on the same agreements after we have been a pain in the arse in leaving the other area's of the EU.

 

But your bottom line is you have no proof only that you are 'fairly confident'.

I dont think he is, its UKIP and many other people in power

[pedg]

I find it astonishing that one of the world major importers, the 5/6th largest economy etc etc would be turned away from a trading agreement if they were not in the EU

 

I am sure we would get a trading agreement. The question is would it be as beneficial to the UK as the current agreement.

[Batman]

I am sure we would get a trading agreement. The question is would it be as beneficial to the UK as the current agreement.

 

weigh up the £53m per day we pay in, then who knows

[Joensuu]

I find it astonishing that one of the world major importers, the 5/6th largest economy etc etc would be turned away from a trading agreement if they were not in the EU

 

So you think that they'd be happy with us leaving without removing the free trade perks?

 

Let's face it politics can get very petty, there is no way Germany would let us leave without penalty. That penalty would be their standard 17% import tax being applied to our c. £140bn annual exports to the EU.

 

Let's give you an example. Your run a company exporting, let's say pencil sharpeners (but it could be anything), you sell your pencil sharpeners to a German company at, say, £1 per unit. You have strong competition from rival firms in, say, Portugal and Estonia, both of whom produce a similar quality product for a similar price - but your firm manages to sell to the German company thanks to your slick marketing. UKIP pull us out of the EU, and in anger, the EU slaps a 17% levy on all our exports to the zone. Suddenly at £1.17 a unit, your pencil sharpeners aren't as attractive to your German (now ex-) customer.

 

Let's look at it another way. Germany exports c. £68bn to the UK per annum; we export c. £140bn to the EU per annum. While overall the EU would just be spiting themselves if they introduced import tax on UK exports, each individual country would loose far less the the UK would (only exception being Ireland). Would Germany press for a penalty if we pulled out of the EU, you bet they would (how could they not?). Would they opt for a penalty that damages us more than it damaged them - of course.

 

Let's face it, it's hard to predict the loss of trade the the UK would face; but anything greater than a 10% loss of trade would start to easily outweight any financial benefit that pulling out of the EU could potentially bring. And that's not even considering out loss of influence on the International stage (both in terms of trade and political influence) e.g. a firm in, say, Indonesia want to establish a relationship with a European importer - how could the UK compete outside the EU? A Croatian want's to fly to the States - do they transfer at Heathrow or have a lower-taxed fare via Frankfurt or Schiphol?

 

I thought right-wingers were against protectionism and pro free trade - but yet when it comes to EU membership many seem to forget their economic principles. Does xenophobia really trump economics? (Oh yeah, that's right, some of you seriously think we can just simply up sticks and leave the EU without penalty.)

 

So, lets pose a question to the anti-EU lobby - If it were made clear by the EU that if the UK leaves we wouldn't continue to benefit from free-trade agreements (i.e. made clear that our economy would definately suffer more than it would gain), would you still want to leave the EU? (and if so, what would be your motivation?)

[Batman]

i want us out of the EU, no long posts, or highlighting points will change that

[pedg]

Did you know that for all the countries in europe our contribution as a percentage of gross national income is the lowest?

[Batman]

Did you know that for all the countries in europe our contribution as a percentage of gross national income is the lowest?

 

I dont care

I know that they have just negotiated (the EU) a very good trading agreement with canada who pay £0 in to the EU

[Wes Tender]

I dont think he is, its UKIP and many other people in power

 

My position is one of disgust that despite numerous promises by Governments both Labour and Conservative that the British electorate would be offered a say about the changes made since we joined the Common Market, those promises have been broken time and time again. I have not advocated a break away from Europe. Rather a renegotiation of what we are a part of. I voted for us to join a trading partnership in the Heath referendum. Had I known at the time that it would evolve into a political and legal union with the resultant loss of sovereignty of our Parliament, then I would have voted against our membership and I suspect that a majority of voters would have too.

[pedg]

I dont care

I know that they have just negotiated (the EU) a very good trading agreement with canada who pay £0 in to the EU

 

Can I borrow your crystal ball as all the new stories are about the fact that no final agreement has been reached with canada, let alone any details of the final agreements (given it has not been reached).

 

http://www.euractiv.com/trade/canada-close-agreeing-long-delay-news-519573

 

Canada is close to finalising a long-delayed free-trade deal with the European Union but will not set a timetable for reaching an agreement, even though the EU is set to start talks with the United States, a top official said on Monday (6 May).

 

 

Ottawa and Brussels started negotiations to open up access to each other's economies in 2009 and a deal was supposed to be concluded by the end of 2011.

That deadline was pushed back to the end of 2012 but the two sides are still trying to resolve differences over how much beef Canada can export and how much freedom EU companies will have to bid for Canadian government contracts.

[Batman]

Can I borrow your crystal ball as all the new stories are about the fact that no final agreement has been reached with canada, let alone any details of the final agreements (given it has not been reached).

 

either way, Canada will have a good agreement and still pay £0 into the EU

[buctootim]

The leader of the Conservative party in Norway reckons their paying for trade access to the EU would not fly in the UK. It costs them £205m pa for a population of 5m, so about £2.46 bn equivalent for the UK. Basically if the UK left and negotiated a trade agreement ala Norway and Switzerland it would be basically basically the same costs as at present, we'd still have to accept 75% of the legislation and get none of the say.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22188028

 

The thing with the EU is that for years it has deliberately been demonised as the bogey man by the media and successive governments. For example the EU didn't force us to give free admittance to the new Eastern bloc citizens, the Blair government chose to. The EU costs us £4bn pa nett, compared with Health at £120bn or Social Security at £190bn its small potatos.

By all means have a vote on In/Out, but do so on the basis of balanced information - and you wont get that from the Telegraph or Daily Mail.

[pedg]

either way, Canada will have a good agreement and still pay £0 into the EU

 

How do you know it will be a good agreement? Do you know how it compares with the agreement we have being part of the EU?

[Joensuu]

i want us out of the EU, no long posts, or highlighting points will change that

 

Interesting. This sounds like good solid anti-EU avoiding the question to me.

 

"It's not our policy, it's a proposal"

 

"yeah, but, well erm, sometimes the [insert rival party here] economics don't add up either"

 

"The only problem with this country is all the immigants coming ere stealing our jobs; but no way am I going to work as a bus driver, bin man etc on minimum wage, can't some [insert nationality] do that for me?"

 

"Germany wouldn't penalise us in any way, for sticking our fingers up at them and the union they have spent decades fostering"

 

Let's face it, UKIP don't like to be scrutinised - as their egg-shellesque logic has nothing whatsover to suppot it.

[Batman]

How do you know it will be a good agreement? Do you know how it compares with the agreement we have being part of the EU?

it is widely accepted that the deal will be a free trade agreement.

 

if that is so, why can Canada get that whilst paying £0 into the pot, yet we have to pay £53m a day to have that wilth canaga

[Wes Tender]

So you think that they'd be happy with us leaving without removing the free trade perks?

 

Let's face it politics can get very petty, there is no way Germany would let us leave without penalty. That penalty would be their standard 17% import tax being applied to our c. £140bn annual exports to the EU.

 

Let's give you an example. Your run a company exporting, let's say pencil sharpeners (but it could be anything), you sell your pencil sharpeners to a German company at, say, £1 per unit. You have strong competition from rival firms in, say, Portugal and Estonia, both of whom produce a similar quality product for a similar price - but your firm manages to sell to the German company thanks to your slick marketing. UKIP pull us out of the EU, and in anger, the EU slaps a 17% levy on all our exports to the zone. Suddenly at £1.17 a unit, your pencil sharpeners aren't as attractive to your German (now ex-) customer.

 

Let's look at it another way. Germany exports c. £68bn to the UK per annum; we export c. £140bn to the EU per annum. While overall the EU would just be spiting themselves if they introduced import tax on UK exports, each individual country would loose far less the the UK would (only exception being Ireland). Would Germany press for a penalty if we pulled out of the EU, you bet they would (how could they not?). Would they opt for a penalty that damages us more than it damaged them - of course.

 

Let's face it, it's hard to predict the loss of trade the the UK would face; but anything greater than a 10% loss of trade would start to easily outweight any financial benefit that pulling out of the EU could potentially bring. And that's not even considering out loss of influence on the International stage (both in terms of trade and political influence) e.g. a firm in, say, Indonesia want to establish a relationship with a European importer - how could the UK compete outside the EU? A Croatian want's to fly to the States - do they transfer at Heathrow or have a lower-taxed fare via Frankfurt or Schiphol?

 

I thought right-wingers were against protectionism and pro free trade - but yet when it comes to EU membership many seem to forget their economic principles. Does xenophobia really trump economics? (Oh yeah, that's right, some of you seriously think we can just simply up sticks and leave the EU without penalty.)

 

So, lets pose a question to the anti-EU lobby - If it were made clear by the EU that if the UK leaves we wouldn't continue to benefit from free-trade agreements (i.e. made clear that our economy would definately suffer more than it would gain), would you still want to leave the EU? (and if so, what would be your motivation?)

 

Let's consider another scenario. Germany slaps a trade import tax on our exports. We retaliate by slapping an equivalent import tax on all of their exports to us. Do Germany export more to us than we do to them? Who do you think has the most to lose? Forget your hypothetical pencil-sharpener situation. If it becomes less profitable to trade with Europe because of trade tariffs on our exports, then we will seek to do business eleswhere.

 

It really is a simple matter of expediancy and I don't think that VW, Mercedes, BMW, Bosch and all of the German manufacturers will be happy with their Governement making their products less competitive in one of their best export markets.

 

What is this penalty you talk about should we leave? Please do tell me which of our current EU partners has indicated that there will be any penalty and what it will comprise? Pie in the Sky.

[Joensuu]

it is widely accepted that the deal will be a free trade agreement.

 

if that is so, why can Canada get that whilst paying £0 into the pot, yet we have to pay £53m a day to have that wilth canaga

 

Will Canada have ever renegotionated, then pulled out of an commitment they've previously made with the EU - costing the union billions?

[pedg]

Why is it that when I read about people saying "well lets just have a vote and leave the EU and all will be fine" I think of this:

 

[Wes Tender]

Let's face it, UKIP don't like to be scrutinised - as their egg-shellesque logic has nothing whatsover to suppot it.

 

What exactly do you have to support your position? Please have the temerity to accept that your position is entirely based on conjecture, as is everybody elses'.

[bridge too far]

Let's consider another scenario. Germany slaps a trade import tax on our exports. We retaliate by slapping an equivalent import tax on all of their exports to us. Do Germany export more to us than we do to them? Who do you think has the most to lose? Forget your hypothetical pencil-sharpener situation. If it becomes less profitable to trade with Europe because of trade tariffs on our exports, then we will seek to do business eleswhere.

 

It really is a simple matter of expediancy and I don't think that VW, Mercedes, BMW, Bosch and all of the German manufacturers will be happy with their Governement making their products less competitive in one of their best export markets.

 

What is this penalty you talk about should we leave? Please do tell me which of our current EU partners has indicated that there will be any penalty and what it will comprise? Pie in the Sky.

 

Robert Peston's take on the matter following Lawson's comments today

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22432001

[Joensuu]

Let's consider another scenario. Germany slaps a trade import tax on our exports. We retaliate by slapping an equivalent import tax on all of their exports to us. Do Germany export more to us than we do to them? Who do you think has the most to lose? Forget your hypothetical pencil-sharpener situation. If it becomes less profitable to trade with Europe because of trade tariffs on our exports, then we will seek to do business eleswhere.

 

It really is a simple matter of expediancy and I don't think that VW, Mercedes, BMW, Bosch and all of the German manufacturers will be happy with their Governement making their products less competitive in one of their best export markets.

 

What is this penalty you talk about should we leave? Please do tell me which of our current EU partners has indicated that there will be any penalty and what it will comprise? Pie in the Sky.

 

See my post you quoted ("Germany exports c. £68bn to the UK per annum; we export c. £140bn to the EU per annum"). Yes, Germany would suffer, but not anywhere near as much as the UK.

 

Do you honestly think they wouldn't want blood?

 

Moreso, many EU products would still be purchased by UK consumers, despite the price hike (think VW, Mercedes, BMW, Bosch etc). What British products would EU consumers continue to lap up despite the extra cost? Err? Banking? Quite simply, I'm sure Germany would take a hit from slapping an Import tax on our goods; but we would take a massive chunk out of our economy overnight. Germany companies might even find they can take advantage by taking over from UK companies in exporting goods to the rest of the EU.

[PhilippineSaint]

See my post you quoted ("Germany exports c. £68bn to the UK per annum; we export c. £140bn to the EU per annum"). Yes, Germany would suffer, but not anywhere near as much as the UK.

 

Do you honestly think they wouldn't want blood?

 

Moreso, many EU products would still be purchased by UK consumers, despite the price hike (think VW, Mercedes, BMW, Bosch etc). What British products would EU consumers continue to lap up despite the extra cost? Err? Banking? Quite simply, I'm sure Germany would take a hit from slapping an Import tax on our goods; but we would take a massive chunk out of our economy overnight. Germany companies might even find they can take advantage by taking over from UK companies in exporting goods to the rest of the EU.

 

Does the UK manufacture anything that is not already owned by a foreign company?

[buctootim]

The leader of the Conservative party in Norway reckons their paying for trade access to the EU would not fly in the UK. It costs them £205m pa for a population of 5m, so about £2.46 bn equivalent for the UK. If the UK left and negotiated a trade agreement ala Norway and Switzerland it would basically be the same costs as at present, we'd still have to accept 75% of the legislation and get none of the say.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22188028

 

The EU has deliberately been demonised as the bogey man by the media and both the left and right for narrow domestic political self interest . For example the EU didn't force us to give free admittance to the new Eastern bloc citizens, the Blair government chose to. The EU costs us £4bn pa nett, compared with Health at £120bn or Social Security at £190bn its small potatos.

By all means have a vote on In/Out, but do so on the basis of balanced information - and you wont get that from the Telegraph or Daily Mail.

[Joensuu]

What exactly do you have to support your position? Please have the temerity to accept that your position is entirely based on conjecture, as is everybody elses'.

 

Sorry Wes, but when challenged over UKIP policy, instead of trying to defend it you've instead (bizarrely) attacked Lib Dem policy instead. When confronted over the ludicrous nature of the UKIP flat tax (aka tax cut for the rich paid for by the poor and middle), you argued that it is only a proposal an not official policy (which is a duck and weave if ever I've seen one). Now UKIP supporters (admittedly yourself excluded) are being confronted with cold economics about what is likely to happen if we quit the union, and instead of trying to think about or answer the points raised they avoid them again with ducks and dives like " no long posts, or highlighting points will change that".

 

Looking at the evidence on this thread, one could only sensibly conclude that UKIP's policies would result in economic disaster.

Edited 7 May, 2013 by Joensuu

[Joensuu]

Does the UK manufacture anything that is not already owned by a foreign company?

 

I can't think of much - but we must export $479bn worth of something.

 

(NB, £479bn is less than 1/3 of Germany's total exports. What is wrong with our country? Are we too insular and protectionist?)

[pap]

The leader of the Conservative party in Norway reckons their paying for trade access to the EU would not fly in the UK. It costs them £205m pa for a population of 5m, so about £2.46 bn equivalent for the UK. Basically if the UK left and negotiated a trade agreement ala Norway and Switzerland it would be basically basically the same costs as at present, we'd still have to accept 75% of the legislation and get none of the say.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22188028

 

The thing with the EU is that for years it has deliberately been demonised as the bogey man by the media and successive governments. For example the EU didn't force us to give free admittance to the new Eastern bloc citizens, the Blair government chose to. The EU costs us £4bn pa nett, compared with Health at £120bn or Social Security at £190bn its small potatos.

By all means have a vote on In/Out, but do so on the basis of balanced information - and you wont get that from the Telegraph or Daily Mail.

 

Incorrect. Those citizens would have had rights by now anyway, and that is everything to do with the EU.

 

When new member states join the Union, any existing countries can restrict citizens from the new state from entering their labour market for seven years. After that, anyone in the new state gets full EU rights. Blair's government waived the right to seven years grace; they had no long-term power to prevent Eastern European citizens from coming here. No government will while we are signed up for the treaty.

[Wes Tender]

Sorry Wes, but when challenged over UKIP policy, instead of trying to defend it you've instead (bizarrely) attacked Lib Dem policy instead. When confronted over the ludicrous nature of the UKIP flat tax (aka tax cut for the rich paid for by the poor and middle), you argued that it is only a proposal an not official policy (which is a duck and weave if ever I've seen one). Now UKIP supporters (admittedly yourself excluded) are being confronted with cold economics about what is likely to happen if we quit the union, and instead of trying to think about or answer the points raised they avoid them again with ducks and dives like " no long posts, or highlighting points will change that".

 

Looking at the evidence on this thread, one could only sensibly conclude that UKIP's policies would result in economic disaster.

 

The irony here is delicious. You accuse me of ducking and diving as your response to my request that you accept that everything you have posted is based purely on conjecture. And your position is illustrated by examples of how competitive pencil sharpeners would be if a trade tariff were to be added to them? LOL.

 

Why should anybody draw any sensible conclusions on the outcome of us leaving the EU or renegotiating a trade only membership from this thread? I'm sure that before we or our European partners decide on anything, they will look at the opinions on this forum as compulsory reading before they accept that the outcome would be disasterous. And they should also bear in mind that any decision taken by the electorate in a referendum is fundamentally flawed to begin with and can be ignored on the basis that the electorate are basically a bit thick and don't have the expertise to make a sensible judgement.

[goneawol]

 

Let's look at it another way. Germany exports c. £68bn to the UK per annum; we export c. £140bn to the EU per annum......

 

Apples & oranges

[Wes Tender]

See my post you quoted ("Germany exports c. £68bn to the UK per annum; we export c. £140bn to the EU per annum"). Yes, Germany would suffer, but not anywhere near as much as the UK.

 

Read what I asked a bit more carefully, please. You have responded as you did before and ignored my question. I didn't ask for what our exports were to the whole of Europe. I asked for a comparison between what Germany exported to us against what we exported to them.

 

Again, I ask what evidence do you have that Germany or any other EU country would slap trade embargos on our exports to them, especially if we wished to negotiate a continuation of trade as before but stepped back from the other aspects of the Union?

[Joensuu]

Apples & oranges

 

Yup. We import a lot more from the EU, than we export, so of course the EU as a whole would take a bigger hit than we would.

 

However, the EU isn't a single federal state. Each country would be considering their own profit and loss if/when they decide to clamp down on the UK. Ireland are the only individual country that would take a bigger hit than us from our leaving the EU. The hit on say, Germany or France individually would be small compared to the hit we'd take. Of course, that isn't factoring in the potential gains French or German companies could make at the expense of (suddenly) expensive UK-based traders.

[pedg]

What I would like to see (and what has not got a snowballs chance in hell of happening) is for the government to set up a truly independent commission that would examine possible scenario's for different levels of engagement with europe and for each clearly state both the advantages and disadvantages, the likelihood that each such a scenario would be possible and the risks involved if we decided to pick that option but agreement could not be reached. At the end producing a report that was comprehensible to 'the common man' without having to be 'interpreted' for them by the media.

[Joensuu]

Read what I asked a bit more carefully, please. You have responded as you did before and ignored my question. I didn't ask for what our exports were to the whole of Europe. I asked for a comparison between what Germany exported to us against what we exported to them.

 

German exports to UK 6.4% of c. £1000bn pa = c. £64bn pa. UK exports to Germany c. £30bn pa.

 

So, yes, if Germany acted idependenty of the EU the impact on them would exceed the impact on us.

 

A couple of points:

 

1) I am not suggesting Germany would act independent of the EU - the union would act as a whole.

2) The above numbers assume that trade would continue at the current levels - changing import duty would change the amount of trade conducted. It's impossible to substantiate, but I honestly believe the UK would have more requirement to continue importing from Germany than Germany would from the UK.

 

Also see my response to goneawol above.

 

Again, I ask what evidence do you have that Germany or any other EU country would slap trade embargos on our exports to them, especially if we wished to negotiate a continuation of trade as before but stepped back from the other aspects of the Union?

 

Put yourself in Merkel's shoes. The UK have just caused you a massive problem. Germany has invested in the EU up to the hilt; and now someone has to make up the shortfall. How do you react? Denmark, say, are threatening similar - do you roll over and face the wrath of your angry voters, or send a message to the UK and others that you won't be messed with?

 

I can't see a way that any German leader could possibly let us walk without some form of reprecussions. Their voters simply wouldn't stand for it.

 

Can you see anything else that a German leader could sensibly do?

[Lord Duckhunter]

Sorry Wes, but when challenged over UKIP policy, instead of trying to defend it you've instead (bizarrely) attacked Lib Dem policy instead. When confronted over the ludicrous nature of the UKIP flat tax (aka tax cut for the rich paid for by the poor and middle), you argued that it is only a proposal an not official policy (which is a duck and weave if ever I've seen one). Now UKIP supporters (admittedly yourself excluded) are being confronted with cold economics about what is likely to happen if we quit the union, and instead of trying to think about or answer the points raised they avoid them again with ducks and dives like " no long posts, or highlighting points will change that".

 

Looking at the evidence on this thread, one could only sensibly conclude that UKIP's policies would result in economic disaster.

 

We don't know whether UKIP's policies would lead to "economic disaster". We do know that Labour's and now the other 2's have done so.

 

What is so ludicrous about a flat tax? Surely a % is a %. If you earn more, you will pay more. Why should someone on 100k have to pay a higher % than someone on 30K? What is "fair" about that? Tax policy should be designed to bring the most money in, not punish people for earning more. As the Thatcher Government showed, you can lower taxes for the higher paid and generate more money into the revenue.

 

They would merge tax and NI and also take the lowest paid out of tax altogether.