EU referendum

[Whitey Grandad]

Yes, there's still a fair bit of immigration, more than I would personally like. But that's not the point. You keep restating untruths on here for some reason, it can only be as a wind up I guess.

 

Which untruths are they?

[hypochondriac]

Which untruths are they?

Well you keep saying we have unrestricted immigration from the rest of the world. We don't.

[badgerx16]

Gove again trotting out the £350m figure - it was a lie a month ago, it is a lie tonight, and it will continue to be a lie every time the Brexiteers quote it.

[Batman]

Gove again trotting out the £350m figure - it was a lie a month ago, it is a lie tonight, and it will continue to be a lie every time the Brexiteers quote it.

 

Much like world war 3 and the Great Depression that is inbound

 

Thought Gove was pretty good actually

Edited 3 June, 2016 by Batman

[aintforever]

Gove again trotting out the £350m figure - it was a lie a month ago, it is a lie tonight, and it will continue to be a lie every time the Brexiteers quote it.

 

What is our net spend then and what is Poland's?

[ScepticalStan]

Ideal for who ? The English plumbers who have to cut wages to compete with him , the English parents who can't get their kid in their first choice school, the English family who could be living in the house he's in, or the Polish nation that educated him at great expense before he ****ed off and started paying taxes that funded our health service rather than theres .

 

Oh cry me a bloody river. When I first graduated with a 2:1 from Southampton I was working at an unscrupulous employer writing market reports just outside the City earning bloody £17k - along with a tonne of other young graduates who had to suck it up to get a foot on the professional ladder whilst competing with the rest of Europe's youth. At my job now I'm surrounded by Europeans, there are 300k French and Italians in London alone competing for professional jobs. So why are plumbers entitled to protectionism when we're not?

 

If the Polish family are making a net contribution to our coffers then its our own stupid fault for not building enough schools and houses. He's doing his bit.

 

As for your concern for the drain on the Polish treasury

 

We'll have high immigration (ideally circular) like it or not. If I thought that leaving the EU would preclude us from keeping a decent amount of EU immigration coming our way I wouldn't vote OUT.

 

As I said before however - that doesn't mean I don't want to control it or have deportations of known terrorists stopped by the European Court of Human rights - or indeed be obliged to let in any old randomer that Germany, Holland, Belgium or France would have every intention to throw a passport to once they get wind of the fact he's on his way to the UK.

[badgerx16]

What is our net spend then and what is Poland's?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12176663/EU-Facts-how-much-does-Britain-pay-to-the-EU-budget.html

[Sour Mash]

Oh cry me a bloody river. When I first graduated with a 2:1 from Southampton I was working at an unscrupulous employer writing market reports just outside the City earning bloody £17k - along with a tonne of other young graduates who had to suck it up to get a foot on the professional ladder whilst competing with the rest of Europe's youth. At my job now I'm surrounded by Europeans, there are 300k French and Italians in London alone competing for professional jobs. So why are plumbers entitled to protectionism when we're not?

 

If the Polish family are making a net contribution to our coffers then its our own stupid fault for not building enough schools and houses. He's doing his bit.

 

As for your concern for the drain on the Polish treasury

 

We'll have high immigration (ideally circular) like it or not. If I thought that leaving the EU would preclude us from keeping a decent amount of EU immigration coming our way I wouldn't vote OUT.

 

As I said before however - that doesn't mean I don't want to control it or have deportations of known terrorists stopped by the European Court of Human rights - or indeed be obliged to let in any old randomer that Germany, Holland, Belgium or France would have every intention to throw a passport to once they get wind of the fact he's on his way to the UK.

 

So we should build new housing and infrastructure in the south and east of England for half a million people every year? Ridiculous.

[Batman]

Just watching BBC news this morning and a 'Remainer' was on (Mirror Journo) and his biggest critic of Gove and his reason not to follow him is that he is a posh Etonian.

 

what on earth has that got to do with anything?

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Just watching BBC news this morning and a 'Remainer' was on (Mirror Journo) and his biggest critic of Gove and his reason not to follow him is that he is a posh Etonian.

 

what on earth has that got to do with anything?

 

Maybe because members of the Vote Leave campaign have leveled EXACTLY the same critism at the PM?

[Batman]

https://www.facebook.com/?ref=tn_tnmn

 

Hancock literally all over the place

[ScepticalStan]

So we should build new housing and infrastructure in the south and east of England for half a million people every year? Ridiculous.

 

What's the problem if the immigrants are making a net contribution to the society? EU migrants put in way more than their fair share. Its migration from outside the EU that costs us when its Ali Al-Jabber bringing over his fourth wife and her cousins etc.

 

Who's costing the country more; Jacek the plumber, or these two who were laughably bumped to the front of the queue for a council flat in Tooting and offered a bilingual 'minder' to help them with things like shopping? (though they turned it down to continue to live on their bench).

 

http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/12898609.Homeless_Somali_family_return_to_another_bench_in_Tooting/

[Batman]

What's the problem if the immigrants are making a net contribution to the society? EU migrants put in way more than their fair share. Its migration from outside the EU that costs us when its Ali Al-Jabber bringing over his fourth wife and her cousins etc.

 

Who's costing the country more; Jacek the plumber, or these two who were laughably bumped to the front of the queue for a council flat in Tooting and offered a bilingual 'minder' to help them with things like shopping? (though they turned it down to continue to live on their bench).

 

http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/12898609.Homeless_Somali_family_return_to_another_bench_in_Tooting/

 

you cant build houses, schools and train doctors quick enough to keep up with demand

pretty simple stuff I would have thought

[badgerx16]

Just watching BBC news this morning and a 'Remainer' was on (Mirror Journo) and his biggest critic of Gove and his reason not to follow him is that he is a posh Etonian.

Are there any non-posh Etonians ?

[ScepticalStan]

you cant build houses, schools and train doctors quick enough to keep up with demand

pretty simple stuff I would have thought

 

Yeah I'd agree; which is why I'm in favour of leaving the EU and bringing net migration down.

 

What I don't want to see is the migrants who miss out being the useful ones who contribute to society - who ironically are the EU migrants.

 

The important thing about migration in terms of leaving the EU is it'll remove the excuse that we can't actually control it when people request it to be lowered. Any government presiding over a net immigration number of 300k+ is going to have to sit there with a straight face and explain why they've made the choice to allow that many migrants in - rather than simply going "Welp...'fraid we're in the EU innit".

[Whitey Grandad]

Yeah I'd agree; which is why I'm in favour of leaving the EU and bringing net migration down.

 

What I don't want to see is the migrants who miss out being the useful ones who contribute to society - who ironically are the EU migrants.

 

The important thing about migration in terms of leaving the EU is it'll remove the excuse that we can't actually control it when people request it to be lowered. Any government presiding over a net immigration number of 300k+ is going to have to sit there with a straight face and explain why they've made the choice to allow that many migrants in - rather than simply going "Welp...'fraid we're in the EU innit".

 

Don't hold your breath. They've been ignoring the public eye for years. This from 2009 relates to earlier years: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

 

So much for sovereignty and control of out own borders. We can't even control our own governments.

[ScepticalStan]

Don't hold your breath. They've been ignoring the public eye for years. This from 2009 relates to earlier years: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

 

So much for sovereignty and control of out own borders. We can't even control our own governments.

 

Well, quite. But they have a clear and easy excuse - our being in the EU prevents us from controlling immigration and whilst we understand the public's concerns, we believe that the economic security of the country rests on us remaining a leader within the EU aaaand blablabla that's the end of that.

 

If we're outside the EU the ruling government will have to make a clear justification for it's choice to bring in X many people per year whenever its held to account in a general election. That's not to say that immigration will come down, but they will have to face the question honestly without the easy excuse of our being in the EU.

[buctootim]

MPs talking about complying with a leave referendum result by leaving the EU but staying in the EEA aka Switzerland Norway etc - so no end to EU migration.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36457120

[Whitey Grandad]

MPs talking about complying with a leave referendum result by leaving the EU but staying in the EEA aka Switzerland Norway etc - so no end to EU migration.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36457120

 

Staying in the EEA would be an absolute minimum, I would have thought.

[Lord Duckhunter]

MPs talking about complying with a leave referendum result by leaving the EU but staying in the EEA aka Switzerland Norway etc - so no end to EU migration.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36457120

 

Remain MP's not accepting the will of the people . If the people vote out , they'll do so on the basis of ending free movement

Edited 6 June, 2016 by Lord Duckhunter

[Whitey Grandad]

Well, quite. But they have a clear and easy excuse - our being in the EU prevents us from controlling immigration and whilst we understand the public's concerns, we believe that the economic security of the country rests on us remaining a leader within the EU aaaand blablabla that's the end of that.

 

If we're outside the EU the ruling government will have to make a clear justification for it's choice to bring in X many people per year whenever its held to account in a general election. That's not to say that immigration will come down, but they will have to face the question honestly without the easy excuse of our being in the EU.

 

Since Blair came to power there are now several million living in the UK who came from outside the EU.

[moonraker]

Remain MP's not accepting the will of the people . If the people vote out , they'll do so on the basis of ending free movement

But that’s not the question on the Ballot paper is it. We are being asked to vote stay or leave the EU not do you want stay in or outside the single market. Perversely the leave campaign started out by claiming we would renegotiate admittance to the single market in response to stay claims we would suffer out side of it, leavers really must make their collective minds up, what it is they actually want, and please can they do it before the vote and publish a coherent post Brexit manifesto.

[Batman]

Leave could well win this

[badgerx16]

Remain MP's not accepting the will of the people . If the people vote out , they'll do so on the basis of ending free movement

 

Which isn't mentioned on the ballot paper.

[badgerx16]

Leave could well win this

 

Given their record in the last election I'd take any poll with a huge pinch of salt.

[Nolan]

MPs talking about complying with a leave referendum result by leaving the EU but staying in the EEA aka Switzerland Norway etc - so no end to EU migration.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36457120

Fine by me. Couldnt give a stuff about immigration. Its law making that concerns me.

[Whitey Grandad]

Fine by me. Couldnt give a stuff about immigration. Its law making that concerns me.

 

We make all our own laws but the UK goldplates those that originate from the EU. If we left the EU we would have to unmake them all again.

[Wes Tender]

Remain MP's not accepting the will of the people . If the people vote out , they'll do so on the basis of ending free movement

 

The benefit of a Brexit, is that if MPs do not accede to the wishes of the people, then they can be voted out at the next General Election. Another weapon is deselection of any errant MP by the local party. As you say, as immigration has become the main issue concerning those who wish to leave the EU, they would be stupid not to attempt to negotiate a trade deal post-Brexit that did not address that problem. The gun against their heads would be the potential further rise of UKIP. With the time still left until the next General Election, there is plenty of scope for the collapse of the EU as other member states are pressured by their increasingly Euro-sceptic electorates into holding their own referenda. Nothing would concentrate the minds of the unelected bureaucracy of the EU towards serious reform of their immigration policy like the potential total collapse of their headlong rush towards their federal United States of Europe.

[Batman]

saying that a vote to leave would spark some form of rejection of that with Pro-EU MPs.

can't see that happening in the UK, to be fair

[hutch]

Interesting that at this stage of the Scottish referendum when the pendulum started to swing against him, Cameron started throwing sweeteners at the Scots to get them on board.

 

This time, if he wants to do the same, he will have to play a game of Ask Angela first.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Whatever the result Cameron has run a shocking campaign again. He should have won an outright majority against Brown , but blew it . Ran an awful Scottish independence campaign , then won a general election on the back of labours unpopularity in Scotland ( partly down to the aforementioned campaign) & the lib dumbs getting blamed for the coalition . He's now running a campaign totally demeaning to his office , making Harold Wilson's one look positively statesmanlike. He's then going to bog off back to kitchen suppers in chipping Norton , leaving his buddy Gideons dream in ruins .

[buctootim]

The benefit of a Brexit, is that if MPs do not accede to the wishes of the people, then they can be voted out at the next General Election.

 

That isnt going to happen. The only party which genuinely wants to leave the EU is UKIP and UKIP aren't going to be elected and are highly highly unlikely to ever wield the balance of power in a coalition government because of first past the post. In any event I and I suspect many others would rather be governed direct from Brussels by Donald Tusk as absolute monarch than have Nigel Farage as Prime Minister.

[buctootim]

Whatever the result Cameron has run a shocking campaign again. He should have won an outright majority against Brown , but blew it . Ran an awful Scottish independence campaign , then won a general election on the back of labours unpopularity in Scotland ( partly down to the aforementioned campaign) & the lib dumbs getting blamed for the coalition . He's now running a campaign totally demeaning to his office , making Harold Wilson's one look positively statesmanlike. He's then going to bog off back to kitchen suppers in chipping Norton , leaving his buddy Gideons dream in ruins .

 

I cant help suspecting that somewhere in there is a man with a decent personal value system and leadership qualities - but that he has suppressed those to

A) get himself elected as 'leader' of the party by not leading but fudging and pretending to be all things to all people

B) abandoned his beliefs to stop his party splitting down the middle.

Edited 7 June, 2016 by buctootim

[Highfield Saint]

If there were no (zero) migration between the UK and EU the UK would still have a net migration figure of 188,000. We talk about points scores etc to restrict migration but I cant see why we cannot implement this to reduce non EU migration now.

 

We also talk about how we can trade our way round the rest of the world as we have before - I remember the 60's and 70's. It didn't go too well for us then did it? Hence one of the reasons why we were battering the EU door to join for so long.

[Wes Tender]

That isnt going to happen. The only party which genuinely wants to leave the EU is UKIP and UKIP aren't going to be elected and are highly highly unlikely to ever wield the balance of power in a coalition government because of first past the post. In any event I and I suspect many others would rather be governed direct from Brussels by Donald Tusk as absolute monarch than have Nigel Farage as Prime Minister.

 

If the Brexit vote wins and then subsequently the Government reneges on the democratic decision by weaselling a way to still be members of the EU in all but name, then they will face the consequences at the next election. It is naive to believe that that will not happen. I agree that it is unlikely that Farage will ever be PM, but it is not an impossibility that he could hold the balance of power. Even with the first past the post system, UKIP could command sufficient number of seats to replace the Lib Dems' result when they formed part of the coalition.

 

It comes as no surprise to me at all that you would be content to have Tusk govern us rather than a Government elected by us, but as half of the electorate at the moment want us to leave the EU, it isn't fanciful to suspect that a far bigger percentage would not be content with being governed by some unelected non-entity.

[buctootim]

If the Brexit vote wins and then subsequently the Government reneges on the democratic decision by weaselling a way to still be members of the EU in all but name, then they will face the consequences at the next election.

 

1. They will have complied with the referendum result

2. Labour, Tories, SNP, Lib Dems and Greens are all still going to be pro Europe so despite your claims nothing is going to change and no-one will get punished at the ballot box because UKIP are unelectable.

[Wes Tender]

Here is the latest bit of bias towards the Remain campaign:-

 

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/polling-card-Bristol-City-Council-EU-referendum/story-29337284-detail/story.html

 

It seems that the people of Bristol are deemed not to be clever enough to follow simple written instructions on how to fill in a voting slip, but it does not follow that they should be shown which box to complete with their cross. At the very least, there is an argument that there is an element of subliminal suggestion attached to it.

[Wes Tender]

1. They will have complied with the referendum result

2. Labour, Tories, SNP, Lib Dems and Greens are all still going to be pro Europe so despite your claims nothing is going to change and no-one will get punished at the ballot box because UKIP are unelectable.

 

We'll just have to wait and see, won't we? As I pointed out, the other option is deselection. The local parties could seek assurances that their MPs would not support an agreement with the EU that did not remove the uncontrolled free movement of peoples as part of our continued trade with them. Most of the local Conservative MPs here in the south are for Brexit, so I'm fairly certain that they would not vote to allow uncontrolled immigration to continue and many MPs from other parties would have to look over their shoulders at UKIP. You might dismiss them, but they are the reason that we are having this referendum.

 

All of the parties you list might be pro-Europe, but you seem to believe that they could ignore a referendum of the electorate which rejected our membership of the EU and continue as if nothing had happened. That would be counter to democracy and the alternative would be anarchy, revolution. Nobody is suggesting that we cease trading with them, or that friendly cooperation would cease, but as immigration is the prime issue for Brexit, that could not be ignored without severe repercussions.

[buctootim]

We'll just have to wait and see, won't we? As I pointed out, the other option is deselection. The local parties could seek assurances that their MPs would not support an agreement with the EU that did not remove the uncontrolled free movement of peoples as part of our continued trade with them. Most of the local Conservative MPs here in the south are for Brexit, so I'm fairly certain that they would not vote to allow uncontrolled immigration to continue and many MPs from other parties would have to look over their shoulders at UKIP. You might dismiss them, but they are the reason that we are having this referendum.

 

All of the parties you list might be pro-Europe, but you seem to believe that they could ignore a referendum of the electorate which rejected our membership of the EU and continue as if nothing had happened. That would be counter to democracy and the alternative would be anarchy, revolution. Nobody is suggesting that we cease trading with them, or that friendly cooperation would cease, but as immigration is the prime issue for Brexit, that could not be ignored without severe repercussions.

 

The number of seats at the next election will reduce from 650 to 600 and the Tories have already promised sitting MPs they will be parachuted into any remaining seat which becomes vacant. The opportunity for deselection will be almost zero.

 

Revolution? anarchy? because the referendum was complied with and we left? You live in fairy land Wes.

[Wes Tender]

The number of seats at the next election will reduce from 650 to 600 and the Tories have already promised sitting MPs they will be parachuted into any remaining seat which becomes vacant. The opportunity for deselection will be almost zero.

 

Revolution? anarchy? because the referendum was complied with and we left? You live in fairy land Wes.

 

The Conservatives aren't the only Party, are they? Many Labour seats will be vulnerable in the Midlands and the North where the Conservative vote will switch to UKIP in order to unseat the Labour MP, unless they are pro-Brexit. But regarding the Conservatives, the local Party will still have the right to vet their MP and lay down what they expect of them in terms of their position on certain policy issues. I don't think that you fully understand the procedures.

 

Regarding the implications of a Government not accepting the result of a referendum, there is sufficient evidence of what the citizens of a country might do if they feel ignored or abused by their political classes even without that coming about via a referendum. You don't have to look far in Europe to witness the rise of the more extremist parties because of the immigration issue and the example of civil disobedience of the Poll Tax riots in England. But you go on believing that it couldn't happen here if you wish.

[ScepticalStan]

Labour, Tories, SNP, Lib Dems and Greens are all still going to be pro Europe so despite your claims nothing is going to change and no-one will get punished at the ballot box because UKIP are unelectable.

 

Regardless of whether or not UKIP are unelectable they've still crippled the Labour vote in the northern heartlands - so much so that I don't expect we'll ever see a Labour government (in their current guise) ever again, to be blunt.

 

Slowly, painfully slowly, the left are coming to terms with the fact that globalisation, the offshoring of low-level jobs and mass immigration simply don't benefit the working class. At all. And there's no longer any way than they can con them into believing otherwise with phrases like 'diversity'/'tolerance'/'open society' etc. which carry about as much meaningful content for a plumber who's wages have been undercut as 'doubleplusgood'. This is why you've got countries like Switzerland considering policies as extreme as guaranteed/universal income etc.

[moonraker]

The Conservatives aren't the only Party, are they? Many Labour seats will be vulnerable in the Midlands and the North where the Conservative vote will switch to UKIP in order to unseat the Labour MP, unless they are pro-Brexit. But regarding the Conservatives, the local Party will still have the right to vet their MP and lay down what they expect of them in terms of their position on certain policy issues. I don't think that you fully understand the procedures.

 

Regarding the implications of a Government not accepting the result of a referendum, there is sufficient evidence of what the citizens of a country might do if they feel ignored or abused by their political classes even without that coming about via a referendum. You don't have to look far in Europe to witness the rise of the more extremist parties because of the immigration issue and the example of civil disobedience of the Poll Tax riots in England. But you go on believing that it couldn't happen here if you wish.

 

Your argument seems to assume that the majority of leave voters would vote UKIP in a General Election if we left the EU but remained in the Single Market, this is a rather ambitious assumption. The Government will have to abide by the letter of the referendum, that does not preclude the Government agreeing to remain in the single market and all that entails, we are not voting on the single market. Evidencing the reactions of electorates in other European counties is not very enlightening. British culture is not one of extremism, the majority of our electorate shun extremist parties and extremist action. The Poll Tax riots are a better example of what might occur. But it needs qualifying as the two issues are not truly analogous. The Poll Tax had an immediate and direct impact on individuals, times change, the riots occurred during a period when Left Wing Socialism had far more influence and support , the All Britain Anti-Poll Tax Federation was set up by the Militant tendency and were the main driver for the London Rally that resulted in the biggest riots. As the big beasts of the leave campaign are almost exclusively on the right of politics but never likely to align with extreme right wing entities such as the EDL or the less extreme UKIP such influence and support is lacking. Like, as you are oft quick to point out in relation to economic assessments, a repeat of the Poll Tax riots whilst not unfeasible, is an ill informed assessment of an unlikely outcome conceived to support your strongly held opinion.

Edited 7 June, 2016 by moonraker

[Wes Tender]

Your argument seems to assume that the majority of leave voters would vote UKIP in a General Election if we left the EU but remained in the Single Market, this is a rather ambitious assumption. The Government will have to abide by the letter of the referendum, that does not preclude the Government agreeing to remain in the single market and all that entails, we are not voting on the single market. Evidencing the reactions of electorates in other European counties is not very enlightening. British culture is not one of extremism, the majority of our electorate shun extremist parties and extremist action. The Poll Tax riots are a better example of what might occur. But it needs qualifying as the two issues are not truly analogous. The Poll Tax had an immediate and direct impact on individuals, times change, the riots occurred during a period when Left Wing Socialism had far more influence and support , the All Britain Anti-Poll Tax Federation was set up by the Militant tendency and were the main driver for the London Rally that resulted in the biggest riots. As the big beasts of the leave campaign are almost exclusively on the right of politics but never likely to align with extreme right wing entities such as the EDL or the less extreme UKIP such influence and support is lacking. Like, as you are oft quick to point out in relation to economic assessments, a repeat of the Poll Tax riots whilst not unfeasible, is an ill informed assessment of an unlikely outcome conceived to support your strongly held opinion.

 

MY argument does not assume that at all. It assumes that there would be severe repercussions if we voted for a Brexit and then remained in the Single Market accepting the payment of a membership fee and the free movement of peoples.

 

Of course we are not voting on the Single Market. We are voting to release ourselves from all obligations of trade, sovereignty and immigration, which would have to be renegotiated. Other nations have trading access to the Single Market without paying for the privilege or having the free movement of peoples imposed as conditions, so that is what I would expect for us. I don't have much faith in Dave being a capable negotiator on our behalf, based on the evidence of his failure to obtain reforms to our position recently, but if he cannot gain decent terms for the fifth largest economy in the World with the Single Market, then there are other avenues open to us. It is only if he is churlish enough to ignore the strongest bone of contention of the Brexit campaign, the immigration issue, that trouble will arise.

 

I see that you comfort yourself by believing that the lefty Poll Tax rioters are now mostly pensioners and that UKIP are as right wing as they need to be as an effective protest vote. But the Remainians love to portray the Brexit camp as older and typically blue collar workers. These are surely the Labour Party's electorate and if their most left-wing leader since Michael Foot is incapable of raising his dissent to a referendum campaign led by Tory toffs beyond a wimper, then I have to laugh at your self-assurance that the potential rebellion isn't going to happen because it isn't British.

 

The crux of the matter is that there has been no historical precedent for this, so it is arrogant to dismiss any conjecture of what might occur as ill-informed.

[moonraker]

MY argument does not assume that at all. It assumes that there would be severe repercussions if we voted for a Brexit and then remained in the Single Market accepting the payment of a membership fee and the free movement of peoples.

 

Of course we are not voting on the Single Market. We are voting to release ourselves from all obligations of trade, sovereignty and immigration, which would have to be renegotiated. Other nations have trading access to the Single Market without paying for the privilege or having the free movement of peoples imposed as conditions, so that is what I would expect for us. I don't have much faith in Dave being a capable negotiator on our behalf, based on the evidence of his failure to obtain reforms to our position recently, but if he cannot gain decent terms for the fifth largest economy in the World with the Single Market, then there are other avenues open to us. It is only if he is churlish enough to ignore the strongest bone of contention of the Brexit campaign, the immigration issue, that trouble will arise.

 

I see that you comfort yourself by believing that the lefty Poll Tax rioters are now mostly pensioners and that UKIP are as right wing as they need to be as an effective protest vote. But the Remainians love to portray the Brexit camp as older and typically blue collar workers. These are surely the Labour Party's electorate and if their most left-wing leader since Michael Foot is incapable of raising his dissent to a referendum campaign led by Tory toffs beyond a wimper, then I have to laugh at your self-assurance that the potential rebellion isn't going to happen because it isn't British.

 

The crux of the matter is that there has been no historical precedent for this, so it is arrogant to dismiss any conjecture of what might occur as ill-informed.

 

Hardly arogant to have a different opinion. You are correct there is no historical precedent and yet you are the one who invoked the Poll Tax riots, make your mind up.

[CB Fry]

MY argument does not assume that at all. It assumes that there would be severe repercussions if we voted for a Brexit and then remained in the Single Market accepting the payment of a membership fee and the free movement of peoples.

 

Of course we are not voting on the Single Market. We are voting to release ourselves from all obligations of trade, sovereignty and immigration, which would have to be renegotiated. Other nations have trading access to the Single Market without paying for the privilege or having the free movement of peoples imposed as conditions, so that is what I would expect for us. I don't have much faith in Dave being a capable negotiator on our behalf, based on the evidence of his failure to obtain reforms to our position recently, but if he cannot gain decent terms for the fifth largest economy in the World with the Single Market, then there are other avenues open to us. It is only if he is churlish enough to ignore the strongest bone of contention of the Brexit campaign, the immigration issue, that trouble will arise.

 

I see that you comfort yourself by believing that the lefty Poll Tax rioters are now mostly pensioners and that UKIP are as right wing as they need to be as an effective protest vote. But the Remainians love to portray the Brexit camp as older and typically blue collar workers. These are surely the Labour Party's electorate and if their most left-wing leader since Michael Foot is incapable of raising his dissent to a referendum campaign led by Tory toffs beyond a wimper, then I have to laugh at your self-assurance that the potential rebellion isn't going to happen because it isn't British.

 

The crux of the matter is that there has been no historical precedent for this, so it is arrogant to dismiss any conjecture of what might occur as ill-informed.

So in this scenario there's a Conservative party arguing to stay in the Single Market, a Labour party agreeing with them, and Lib Dems and SNP also agreeing with them.

 

Who exactly would this electorate vote for to dish out these severe repercussions?

[moonraker]

At the beginning of this campaign the leave line was we would renegotiate access to the single market if we were to leave. Now the arch brexiter Wes tells us (assumes) if we did this there will be severe repercussions? Why, because this is really a single issue campaign, immigration and you can't access the single market without free movement. You may not like those nasty Johnny foreigners telling us what will happen if we leave , but it would be arrogance of the highest order to ignore them.

[Wes Tender]

At the beginning of this campaign the leave line was we would renegotiate access to the single market if we were to leave. Now the arch brexiter Wes tells us (assumes) if we did this there will be severe repercussions? Why, because this is really a single issue campaign, immigration and you can't access the single market without free movement. You may not like those nasty Johnny foreigners telling us what will happen if we leave , but it would be arrogance of the highest order to ignore them.

 

You reply is all over the place. The Brexit camp have examined all of the potential trade options and I have posted a link to them some time ago, but I can understand that you probably couldn't be bothered to read it. I have explained the background which could cause severe repercussions a couple of times in plain enough English and I'm sorry for you that you seem unable to comprehend it. I fully expected that you would dislike immigration and sovereignty being the main causes that concern the Brexit camp, but please do try to be a bit more original than attempting to label everybody who dares to raise the subject as being xenophobic. It really is becoming a bore. I'm probably more Johnny Foreigner than you.

[Joesaint]

Sounded to me like Cameron though that democracy is not as important as the economy, which I cant help but feel is ******, and that it was more about him and his rich buddies getting richer.

[CB Fry]

Sounded to me like Cameron though that democracy is not as important as the economy, which I cant help but feel is ******, and that it was more about him and his rich buddies getting richer.

If we leave the EU Cameron and all his rich buddies will continue to get richer.

[Saint86]

Was interesting tonight.

 

Firstly you could tell that Cameron is obviously the more polished stage speaker. He's had the practice, the training etc. Farage has suffered over the years from being demonised in the press pretty much non-stop, and i think that showed in his defensiveness and awkwardness.

 

I did feel that those two girls that attacked him as racist missed (or had no interest in what he said) his responses. And in fact his argument that he would rather see more commonwealth immigration which is currently harmed by the EU immigration essentially overriding it was interesting. It was good to see Mr Boparai having a go at Cameron for immigration figures being out of control and harming his access to medical care, education, housing etc. It made the two girls seem even more stupid given they'd previously said that Farage was a racist and no one in ethnic minorities supported his arguments. Still, not a great showing from him.

 

Cameron largely danced around all the issues, he can't hide the fact that his deal is useless, that we have now been threatened with punishment by the EU whether we remain or leave. I think the only point he has any leg to stand on his change to immigration benefits where they must now pay in for 4 years to get anything out. Still this is too little to late and it was nice to see the audience boo him when he said he had no forecast on future immigration figures.

 

At the end of the day, i think its telling that the last general election was 52% to Ukip and Tories. We know that most tories will vote leave, Ukip obviously will, and then a fair chunk of labour will. We also know that the "silent tory" and fear of bring branded right wing or racist keeps the poll figures hidden. The government know they are losing, hence the house hold leaflet drop at the start and the purposeful misinformation throughout and keeping the argument centred over tiny topics like the aspects of cameron's deal and the economy. In truth people are voting on whether we want to be part of a european super state, whether we want to continue with 55% of our laws being made in brussels and how we feel about our ability to rule ourselves and trade with the rest of the world and commonwealth. I think people are also being scared into believing that Europe is key to our security, when in fact controlling our borders will handle a lot of that, and NATO is the defensive alliance, not the EU, no matter how much we want to tell ourselves otherwise. If we leave, we can stop worrying about this, we are the worlds 5th largest economy, 12% of it depends on the EU, and over a gradual break away we will be able to trade with a far larger and more diverse set of economies.

 

Sadly, my wife's sister and mother have paid no attention to the politics debates etc and are voting according to the government leaflet earlier on. I honestly wish that if people didn't know how to vote that they wouldnt! rather than voting for status quo without understanding what it means.

 

We'll see what happens.