Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think


Lewes Forum New message

If we vote out

3
3
On 6 Feb 2016 at 5:28pm Q wrote:
Well it's not impossible, but what then, how do we find a government that can achieve a majority in both houses to implement the vote?
Will Cameron remain in power? I can't see any leave candidate with enough Parliamentary support to oust him.
I imagine the wheels of power will turn very slowly after such a vote, there will be panic throughout Europe and our government, still led by Cameron, desperately seeking to implement the will of the people in the least damaging (in their eyes) manner. Which will inevitably mean a very close associate status with the EU, following all the rules and contributing to it's coffers.
How do we ensure that out means out?
3
8
On 6 Feb 2016 at 5:34pm NF wrote:
It's a meaningless question. These days there is no such thing as a truly sovereign nation. There are only those who get to write the rules and those who don't. The anti EU Autobots are living on a pathetic fantasy.
If we do vote out I hope Wales and Scotland (who will vote to stay) tell Little England where to go.
It would be the final irony, started when Letwin told Thatcher she should try out the poll tax on Scotland first: the Union being broken apart by the internal battles of the (ahem) Conservative and Unionist Party.
7
4
On 6 Feb 2016 at 5:59pm Mr Ryder wrote:
NF your babbling lies and rubbish are as bad as paul's.
Its not a meaningless question clearly it's a very good one. With the house of commons 80% pro EU will they honour a leave vote which the polls suggest is likely.
In my view they have too, while they routinely give scant regard for the will of the people, to not follow through on this would make a mockery of the entire system.
With regards to Cameron, he says he wouldn't resign but I can't see how he could stay after his sham PR stunt with his pathetic renegotiations and outright lies. He clearly stated substantial reform and 'full on treaty change' and has done nothing of the sort.
As May, Johnson and Osbourne line up typically for the stay vote, a leave outcome would nullify their chances of succeeding the leadership and would allow an actual conservative and eurosceptic to take the helm and would be of great benefit to the country and party.
10
3
On 6 Feb 2016 at 6:14pm Redballs wrote:
Once we have have had the referendum we can get on with the job of rebuilding the UK and Europe can get on with the job of ever closer union. Simples, no great mystery.
7
4
On 6 Feb 2016 at 10:00pm Paul Newman wrote:
If you listen to the mutually antagonistic factions of the Nobby no mates crew it varies form a socialist paradise to an ultra-Thatcherite tiger economy with more spending less taxes no debts no Johnny foreigner and sugar candy ponies for everyone . Its more like religious sect than an economic prospectus and as such depends more on blind faith than rational thought.
To be fair we are going down a road unknown not only to us but to anyone else , we cannot be sure what the consequences may be but some things we do know .
Firstly we have 2 years in which to try and salvage something from the wreckage ( by which I mean we will be able to trade as normal for that period ) . The assumption here is that we will be the recipient of great good will form the French and Germans. I`d say that is about as likely as there being good will in any other divorce but who knows . How did you feel about Scotland after their referendum ?
Anyway after that two years , which can be extended we will face inward tarrifs on European trade but much more importantly have no right on regulatory discrimination or any mean of selling services ion the EU having lost our pass-porting rights . We may try to join the European Economic area but as this requires full compliance with All trade directive and freedoms( if we succeed ).The same can be said of Switzerland’s series of bilateral treaties . UKIP: have suggested we should try to be like Turkey …. I am not sure if this is a joke or if they are insane but suffice to say Turkey does not want to stay in the position of Turkey.
Anyway while we worry about the end of London`s role as a hub for services or how the million Brits in Spain will be treated or what it will be like being shut out of the EUs trade deal with the US or China we will have to give separate attention to the European Courts and the Convention on Human Rights . While you do have to be part of the European legal frame work to be in the EU it is quite spate institution so what do we do about that ?
Presumably ,as getting out of all those nasty Human Rights is part of the point spend a lot of time telling the world we no longer wish to be part of the Western Post War agreement to foster civili-sation in wake of the horrors of the 20th century .I know the Strasbourg Court can be over mighty and god knows they annoy me , but bloody hell are we really going to do this ? !!!!!
Anyway back to risking your house job and your children`s future . The National Debt is 80 % of GDP and rising . The deficit will be about £75bn this year . One of the main things that has saved us is our ultra low debt servicing costs which you see reflected in you mortgage rates . I can explain all this if anyone is interested its simple stuff but boring .
Bonds do not all have to be refinanced in a day but over a period of years proportion that have to bear yields with new market conditions grows rapidly . Should we lose confidence it is entirely possible that the current debt servicing cost could leap up . Our current servicing cost is not high by historical standards despite massively increased debts . Even a return or normality would be savage . That would mean savage cuts to services and , I guess a war with the Union rep-resentatives of the Public Sector. It would also be savage for your mortgage .
Even the biggest no-mate fans agree that we would face economic hardship , they just say it would be worth it in the end . Also while this dreadful process continues for years no company will dare invest having no idea what their conditions will be in the future ……

All in all cutting of your own limbs frying them up with some button mushrooms and a hint of garlic and a dab of chilli is a worse idea but only slightly and it will go on for years and years and years

2
2
On 6 Feb 2016 at 10:08pm NF wrote:
Ignoring Newman's word salad, what exactly would rebuilding the UK consist of I wonder? Regaining the trust of the Scots perhaps? How might this be accomplished?
3
9
On 7 Feb 2016 at 1:23am Corbynista wrote:
If we leave the EU we will usher in an age of even greater economic uncertainty,a run on the pound and a lack of confidence in the UK economy,pension funds will crash,social services cut to the bone followed by widespread rioting as the jobs market shrinks..We will experience great tensions and organized violence between left and right, as the far right attempts to seize power and the Tory party collapses.Scotland and Wales will break away.It`s a flaming nightmare.The morons that voted to leave will regret the day they entered the voting booth.to most sensible people they will be regarded as pariahs.
1
1
On 7 Feb 2016 at 8:42am Redballs wrote:
PN your usual made up waffle, best ignored. My dear Corby, your spurious apocalyptic vision is fantasy.
The EU is finished, its economic outlook is going to be stagnant at best there are so many basket case economies that will take many years to recover dragging the better ones down. There is so much resentment stored up within it, and is bound to implode soon. The French have been promised a referendum under Marie Le Penne. Frau Merkel position in her own country becomes more tentative by the day. When we leave the whole pack of cards will come down.

1
4
On 7 Feb 2016 at 9:13am Paul Newman wrote:
Redballs I posted more or less the same piece on Comment is Free and it sparked a detailed debate about whether or not the City of London had any future as a centre of economic activity for Europe whilst actually outside its borders .
Of course we don`t know , and those who like the idea of being on our own argue that our legal framework and so on would save us . Common sense would suggest it was an appalling risk to take but nobody knows for sure
Similarly , to be fair , my point about the yields on UK gilts ( that set your mortgage and might balloon the deficit ) was supported but also challenged . Again to be fair the challenge was that our leaving the EU was such a economic calamity that more money would pile into gilts and our servicing costs would come down
This feels like an argument suspended form sky hooks to me and it is certainly not what the Governor of the B of E says but there it is , I can`t see the future

There will be unforeseen consequences of all sorts and then we come onto the futre of the UK which would , of course be headed straight for a referendum . Even outers accept that there is a cost to this they say it is worth it but if Scotland voted in and sees its money cut off at source that will surely end the United Kingdom
To think that we could quite simply avoid all of this ….yeeeesh
1
1
On 7 Feb 2016 at 11:23am George Gallaway wrote:
Respect... we are out
 
1
On 7 Feb 2016 at 11:24am Kinnock wrote:
All three of us are in.
4
1
On 7 Feb 2016 at 12:05pm Q wrote:
Paul, I am old enough to remember independence, you clearly are not. It is not something to be feared but would be the continuation of our island story. I don't want it to become a continent story.
As far as the economic arguments go, I am sure there will be some small gains and losses whichever way it goes. To imagine that all Brits living abroad will have to repatriate or be in some awful position is ridiculous. The Spanish economy and property prices would tank even more.
The freedom to choose our own course is worth more than anything else.
Imagine if we had joined with all Europe in the 17th century and been no different from them. There would have been no industrial revolution, or if there had been it would not have been of our doing. The freedom to be different means the freedom to be better and succeed (as well as to fail).
U.K. breaking up is a risk but not a huge one with oil prices so low and likely to remain so for some time. Scotland has been the engine house of much of our progress in the past, canny Scots may even vote out,who knows? Now seems the perfect time to vote out.
Interest rates are low worldwide at the moment and likely to remain so for a long time. There is a self fulfilling aspect of interest rates in that the longer they remain at one point the more decisions are made on the basis of that rate and therefore the more entrenched those rates become. The Bank of England is not able to increase rates very much currently even if it wanted to because to do so would kill our fragile recovery.
The City of London is a success for many reasons, European cities are jealous rivals only too willing to do it down. They will continue to snipe away at it if we remain. This fact as much as anything else shows that we would be foolish to remain. Other countries are rivals not friends, countries do not have friends and that applies in or out of the E U. Even our relationship with the USA is one of mutual advantage rather than friendship. That mutual advantage is easier to find in countries that have a basis of Common Law, English language and a common history and culture.
To be an outer is not to be anti European, we can all agree that we love Europe and all it has to offer but that we want to follow a different course, we can wish them well without rancour if we leave. Or remain and continue to be the awkward buggers slowing everything down by dragging our heels.
After our vote, if we remain, our voice will be totally ignored. We will have no further influence on slowing the course of ever closer union and eventual super statehood. All decisions will go against us.
If we leave, we are not inconsequential, we are the 5th largest economy and 1/5 the size of the USA economy and any other country or bloc will be happy to have a trade agreement with us, Just as we would be happy to trade with such a country. World trade agreements would prevent any other country or bloc treating us unfavourably.
I still remember that when we joined the Common Market food prices rose at least 20% and our fishing industry was destroyed, would it not be worthwhile to reverse these 2 things?
There, arguments for out and not a word about immigration! Ukippers can be human too you know.
2
3
On 7 Feb 2016 at 12:11pm Q and A wrote:
Are delusions of grandeur a treatable condition on what is left of our NHS? I strongly suggest Mr Q presents himself at his nearest A and E A.S.A.P.
2
2
On 7 Feb 2016 at 12:14pm Metatron wrote:
Great post Q
1
1
On 7 Feb 2016 at 12:29pm Mr Ryder wrote:
Great post Q , Paul can barely string a sentence together and relies on rehashed scare stories with no foundation in either truth or logic.
1
1
On 7 Feb 2016 at 12:48pm trooper wrote:
@ Q. Great stuff, well done.
1
2
On 7 Feb 2016 at 1:04pm Q and A wrote:
Group therapy would perhaps be suitable, as long as they are kept sedated, to stop them fighting amongst themselves.
2
1
On 7 Feb 2016 at 2:12pm Paul Newman wrote:
he Bank of England is not able to increase rates very much currently even if it wanted to because to do so would kill our fragile recovery.

I agree with the second half of that sentence and , incidentally , I appreciate you managing to disagree without adopting the usual nasty tone. Nonetheless you only have half the picture
The Bank of England can only vary rate within markets parameters set ultimately on the yields from issuing UK gilts . A fall in demand for traded gilts means higher yields on price . That must be matched when new financing is issued . This is rolling process but the affect would be felt remarkably quickly .
With £1.6 ( odd ) trillion of debt to finance currently costing a tiddly £40bn per annum , the risks are horrendous . That is exactly what Mark Carney is getting at . Once out we could be stuck in a vicious circle of increased borrowing costs , less demand for gilts and still more interest rate rises.
That , feeds directly through to Household borrowing costs as we have seen in the past
It has also happened in Ireland and Italy recently , you may say I am being melodramatic but no more so than the Chairman of the B of E , not a man known for panic.
On the industrial revolution and our supposed splendid isolation I don`t see it quite that way .
Without allies Napoleon would have won . Without Dutch Banking skills , there would have been no Navy ( what was the glorious revolution if not a reverse takeover of Dutch Banking Naval expertise Royalty and Indian Company ) . In fact I would argue that the history of British foreign Policy has had one overriding objective which was to avoid isolation form the entire Continent .
The WTO has certainly done good work and one of the engines of that has been the EU . It has no power over a single market however and while the outright tarrif question looms less large than in the 70s say , the no tariff blocks are formidable especially to services . This is not just waffle this is a reality that will hurt jobs right here
I am no fan of immigration actually but the sort I feel has been hardest to accommodate and certainly the most costly has been that form outside the EU . EU migration has also had great advantages not least in providing much needed growth .
1
 
On 7 Feb 2016 at 2:19pm Mark wrote:
I'm inclinded to agree with NF that it's all a bit of a storm in a teacup.,.
I just cannot for a moment envisage a situation whereby our Prime Minister announces to his friends in the hedge funds that from now on they will be operating from outside of the European bloc or announces to business that from now on they will have to pay tariffs in order to trade with Europe. “I’m sorry chaps but that’s how it is. After all, the people have spoken and I’m bound to respect that”.
It’s inconceivable. If a clear question is asked and the answer is No then work will start next day on drafting a new agreement that appears to offer a different arrangement but has absolutely zero effect of any sort. A fudge, in short.
3
2
On 7 Feb 2016 at 3:56pm Clifford wrote:
Q wrote: 'Paul, I am old enough to remember independence, you clearly are not. It is not something to be feared but would be the continuation of our island story.'

You must be very old Q. Since 1942 Britain was no more than an American aircraft carrier, the US's first line of defence in the Cold War that followed. 'The markets' rule and politicians are simply creatures in their hands.
2
2
On 7 Feb 2016 at 4:01pm Redballs wrote:
Mark how do you think the Eu could apply a trade tarrif against the UK.
They can't even stop Chinese steel being dumped onto the European market
We import more from the Eu than we export. Please give fact not rhetoric. Do you think Siemans don't want to supply our trains or that V.wW don't want to sell their Motors in the uk?
Give facts & not scare stories with no substance.
Even J.C knows that he can't change or nationalise anything in the UK until we are out.
4
2
On 7 Feb 2016 at 4:09pm Mr Ryder wrote:
Clifford what a silly thing to say. The country ceased to be an independent nation in 1972 plenty of people still around including those who fought for independence and put their lives on the line in the second war and also those who were assured when they voted in 1975 that it would lead to no loss of sovereignty.
Post exit- the Lisbon Treaty stipulates that the EU must make a trade agreement with a country which leaves the EU.
World Trade Organization (WTO) rules lay down rules for international trade by which both the EU and UK are obliged to abide.
These are facts get used to it. The UK and EU would negotiate a free trade deal that is mutually beneficial. The UK has the stronger hand seeing as they export much more to us.
This is boring now, even when presented with facts and codified examples in treaties the remainers can't understand.
2
 
On 7 Feb 2016 at 4:41pm Mark wrote:
The mention of tariffs was in the context of Q's post which was harking back to pre-Common Market times. It was a great post but just struck me as such a pipe-dream given that this whole issue is a charade - just as the renegotiation was.
2
 
On 7 Feb 2016 at 4:56pm Q wrote:
I agree Mark, which was the point of my first post, but it got side tracked.
1
3
On 7 Feb 2016 at 6:34pm Paul Newman wrote:
Ryder -The world Trade Organisation has no power, its most important member is the EU with 20% of world GDP ( in fact the EU has been key in reducing world protectionism. )
Yes we may be protected from punitive tariffs but we will certainly face the common tarrifs unless we negotiate around them and access to a trade deal does not mean access to a good one .We will not be party to the Freedom of services Act ( and services are the largest employer in the South East ) and we will have no recourse against any protectionist act by any member country . If you want to protect your own producers there are many ways . I am afraid your cheery supposition that the world is no longer a pond in which which big fish do not eat small ones, is a little premature
You mention a trade deal with Germany . Yes they might be amenable to such an idea although I think they could easily withstand an increase in the cost of the goods the export here ( more fun for us but then so many prices will be going up it hardly matters ). That would mean doing a series of bi lateral trade agreements so as to arrive in the position Switzerland are in .Switzerland , as you may be aware is as bound by the regulatory agreements and basic freedoms of the EU as we are
Still nice of you to make up policy on the hoof I had no idea you were so important. ……. is that the plan then ? Or is it still " Hope for the best / no idea /try a few things ?"

As you are in such an elevated position can you tell me , and I really don`t know if the plan ( pssst there is no plan …) is to take us out of the European Convention On Human Rights and the Council of Europe as well ?
I merely enquire or is that another … we`ll tell you later
Just wondering about the European framework on workers rights .Do we keep that do we get rid of it do we invent a new one and if so who decides , presumably the Conservative Party as they are our elected government and likely to stay that way ….
What’s the plan Ryder , what will happen to all that ?

5
1
On 7 Feb 2016 at 8:07pm Tony Pollybee wrote:
As I see it, the stay campaign has only one card, and that is the card that you are playing Paul, the economic card. Don't get me wrong, it's a big card and a very important card but the out campaign have many cards, the biggest being boarder control then you can take your pick from getting back our sovereignty, being in control of our laws/human rights but mostly being more democratic ( our elected government making the big decisions without interference from Brussels.
No where in your argument do you mention the fact that we will be saving the 14.3 billion pounds which is our current net contribution. I agree trading will be harder but we will be free to negotiate and trade with anyone at any time.
The other big point is that the stability of the EU at present is shaky to say the least. I think it is fair to say that they need us more than we them at the moment, an out vote in the referendum will very likely see other countries follow suit.
I have all ways respected your posts on the forum Paul and really dislike the amount of abuse you get for mearly writing your opinion. You have surprised me on your stance on this issue as, if you don't mind me saying, it seems a little one dimensional and pessimistic.
1
4
On 7 Feb 2016 at 9:25pm Paul Newman wrote:
I`m not out of sympathy with some of the UKIP concerns . I attended several Bruges group meetings years ago so as to meet Christopher Booker , Norman Tebbit , the historian Andrew Roberts and other luminaries of the “resistance “ . I vastly preferred them to the awful homogeneity that , at the time was the zeitgeist under Blair . I know the arguments well .
I don`t accept the waste idea £8 bn is closer to the mark ( net) but that supposes all the functions of the EU would be completed gratis by our home grown bureau crats which I seriously doubt . It is any case a microscopic fraction of our annual spend .
I suppose over the years it has come to seem too causey and far far too dangerous. Opposition is too utopian . Too much “good debating points ”, and not enough “ what has been proven to work quite well” . Classic conservatism if you like. The world is full of people who can tell you what is wrong with what we have, with very very few capable of putting together a coherent and workable alternative .I didn`t like the managerialism of Blair but now I find the Populism of today even less to my liking .I am aware that I may have seemed to think the outers had nothing of merit to add , and that is not my view . I intended to correct that at some point
On controlling our borders, I am going to be frank, I never liked the imposition of multiculturalism and I loathed the arrogance with which Blair opened the doors to world immigration. It is not bigoted to observe that integrating an illiterate forced bride from rural Bangladesh is a quite different problem from an English speaking Polish graduate at Sports Direct or French City Worker. Brits are working and living all over the EU and that is a great freedom. EU migrants add to the exchequer ,seriously add to growth .
I would like to see far more determination to get ROW immigration under control but EU freedom of movement is a much more nuanced case . As we cannot do without the growth right now leaving the EU would be wrong on immigration IMHO.
Overall for me, the economic dangers far outweigh the wish to send the Poles home ( to be blunt ) but I do see a need for Euro scepticism within the EU but more of that another time.
2
1
On 7 Feb 2016 at 10:50pm Incredulous wrote:
This guy wants to keep our ability to control our own borders in the hands of unelected idiots who hate Britain
Breathtaking stupidity in the face of the migration crisis.
We. Are. Full.
Zero benefit to the exchequer.
5
2
On 8 Feb 2016 at 12:17am wrote:
When you say 'zero benefit to the exchequer' you don't mean the chancellor thereof, do you?
If we remain in Europe there's likely to be more scrutiny of multinationals' tax cheating, and then poor old Gideon won't get his Google kickbacks, you know; first class travel and generous hospitality at the Super Bowl, for example.
2
 
On 8 Feb 2016 at 8:09am Mark wrote:
Good God Paul. So many words and so little content. Remind me what specific measures Tony Blair introduced that opened the door to world migration? I must have missed that.
1
2
On 8 Feb 2016 at 4:42pm Observer wrote:
Good points Mr N.
You missed out the point that French protestant refugees had a huge role in kicking off the industrial revolution in places like Manchester, or that the Birmingham-based early innovators such as Watt and Boulton were part of a European 'republic of letters'. Or the German communities in many of the Northern cities.
The Dutch have had a huge role in shaping Britain, more than anyone. One of the reasons why they fought so hard to keep us in.
There are geopolitical issues too - if we leave the balance tilts. PErhaps France and Germany might begin to develop a separate defence policy, think about their NATO membership and look a bit more to the east? Not good for Britain.
3
1
On 8 Feb 2016 at 4:50pm Seriously? wrote:
Only someone completely devoid of intelligence and understanding would say that Germany might 'look a bit more to the east' because of Brexit.
You do realise the EU is a German empire supported by the US as bulwark against Russian expansionism.
This was where the main tensions/battleground in WW1 and WW2 was and is where the main geopolitical tensions are once again.
Go read 'the deluge' by A. Tooze - a good book which will teach you a few things
1
1
On 8 Feb 2016 at 5:37pm Observer wrote:
You obviously haven't heard of German "ostpolitik" or the close relationship between part of the German elite and Russia - e.g. Schroder being good mates with Putin & on the board of Gazprom.
Here's two quotes from two commentators: Gideon Rachman in the FT and Mark Pritchard (Tory Eurosceptic MP) in the Sunday TImes.
Pritchard: "A decision to isolate Britain from Europe would have significant national security implications. First, a British exit would end Britain’s political and diplomatic counterbalance to France and Germany’s strategic clumsiness. An exit would rob Europe of the elder Anglo statesman: a country that brings huge international experience, a voice of political reason and diplomatic pragmatism, as well as a key driver of economic liberalism.
Second, Britain’s exit could also weaken Nato, with Germany and France extending Europe’s own defence structures and budgets, such as the European Defence Agency. In itself this is not a hostile undertaking, but soon, complementary defence could be replaced by defence competition, undermining an alliance that has safeguarded Europe for nearly seven decades. This weakening of Nato would be a huge strategic miscalculation by Europe and would embolden the alliance’s enemies.
Third, a British exit would rob the EU of Britain’s diplomatic advice and counsel. Diplomacy is an integral part of national security. This loss of foreign policy effect and leverage would lead to Europe’s responses to international conflicts and humanitarian crises being devoid of Britain’s input. Over time, proven and collective European foreign policy would be replaced by a Franco-German-dominated foreign policy, less Atlanticist and higher risk."
Rachman: "The Brexit camp believes that the Channel can once again serve as a firebreak, protecting Britain from what is happening in Europe.
But that view, while superficially attractive, ignores the patterns of history. These suggest that if there is political turmoil and conflict in Europe, Britain inevitably gets sucked in, whether it is the wars of the Spanish succession, the struggle against Napoleon or the two world wars of the 20th century.
Britain cannot isolate itself from the troubles of Europe. In its own interests, it must contribute to the stability on the European continent. For the past 50 years, the EU has been crucial to underpinning peace, prosperity, diplomatic dialogue and the rule of law within Europe. It would be a serious mistake for the UK to undermine an organisation that, whether we realise it or not, is crucial to Britain’s own security."
 
 
On 8 Feb 2016 at 6:26pm Seriously? wrote:
Yes we dealt with the crafty hun twice and their empire building ways and will have to do so again.
Sausage sucking swine!!!
 
 
On 8 Feb 2016 at 6:30pm Vladimir Putinson wrote:
Cheese eating surrender monkeys,sausage scoffing Huns and spaghetti sucking Eyties who needs them,GET OUT NOW!
2
2
On 8 Feb 2016 at 10:13pm Aemon wildes wrote:
Just listen to 'Farming today! 5.45 radio 4 occasionally. British agriculture will collapse if we come out of the E.U. Listen to the farmers. There are so many reasons to stay in and I can't be bothered to write a huge post like PN and co. But, coming out would be disastrous. I'm thinking of my grandchildren.
 
1
On 9 Feb 2016 at 10:23am prat wrote:
Speaking as one farmers would be better off outside you absolute moron.


This thread has reached its limit now
Why not start another one


 

Arched gateway 5:132
Arched gateway

Hi, I would like to add an event but the system won't let me. Please help! Maia Eden more
QUOTE OF THE MOMENT
Believe you can or believe you can't... Either way you're right
Paul