Norway implements less than 10% of the EU's regulations (it isn't even compelled to do that much) and chooses for itself on everything else. So how is that resigning sovereignty?
If it wants to sell anything in the EU, the products have to comply with EU regs they can't write.
We sell quite a lot of stuff to the EU...
Almost all manufactured products made almost anywhere in the world are made to comply with US, EU and - soon - Chinese regulations. Simply, given how expensive changing production lines is, it's easier to build products that comply with all the major regulations. It's why any consumer electronics you buy will have both an FCC (the US), CE (EU) and quite possibly a UL (US) stamp too.
I am struggling trying to understand your position Mr. Thompson. Are you saying that you will vote based on the people or on the issues?
Both. If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants and leaving the EEA altogether to facilitate that then I will not just vote but possibly campaign against that. If that nastiness wins it will harm the country.
If this is a referendum on regaining sovereignty whole keeping European free trade then I am quite pleased with that.
Getting rid of migrants?
Get a grip man ffs
It's what I see quite regularly from BNP, UKIP and GO supporters. I'm not voting for any of that bunch.
That's right, you're not voting for any bunch.
On June 24th the bunch will be conservatives.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on anti migrant talk then he'll have to be replaced by a hardliner who is anti migrant.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on pro sovereignty talk then he'll have to be replaced by someone who is probably sovereignty.
If you don't see the difference between those I don't know how much clearer it can be made.
If we vote Leave there's a good chance Cameron will stand down, the Conservatives will elect a new leader who becomes PM. The chances of that govt deporting migrants is zero.
Norway implements less than 10% of the EU's regulations (it isn't even compelled to do that much) and chooses for itself on everything else. So how is that resigning sovereignty?
If it wants to sell anything in the EU, the products have to comply with EU regs they can't write.
We sell quite a lot of stuff to the EU...
If we want to sell anything to the USA, the products have to comply with USA regs we can't write.
I run a small business that does no international trade. Yet I need to observe a whole swathe of European regulations that have nothing to do with trade. If we were in the EEA we could decide on those laws ourselves.
But WOULD we adopt our own measures? Your small business might only trade domestically, but thousands of others will trade with the EU. The demand for UK law to coincide with EU standards would be deafening. And even if it wasn't, companies would mostly choose to adopt EU standards for ease and convenience. And anything imported to the UK from the EU would be of a common EU standard, so our consumers would continue to be used to products meeting EU standards.
Under NAFTA rules, you aren't allowed to use local certification as a 'trade barrier'. This has had the consequence of basically meaning that the Mexican and Canadian certification bodies have ceased to have any influence whatsoever.
I am struggling trying to understand your position Mr. Thompson. Are you saying that you will vote based on the people or on the issues?
Both. If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants and leaving the EEA altogether to facilitate that then I will not just vote but possibly campaign against that. If that nastiness wins it will harm the country.
If this is a referendum on regaining sovereignty whole keeping European free trade then I am quite pleased with that.
Getting rid of migrants?
Get a grip man ffs
It's what I see quite regularly from BNP, UKIP and GO supporters. I'm not voting for any of that bunch.
That's right, you're not voting for any bunch.
On June 24th the bunch will be conservatives.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on anti migrant talk then he'll have to be replaced by a hardliner who is anti migrant.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on pro sovereignty talk then he'll have to be replaced by someone who is probably sovereignty.
If you don't see the difference between those I don't know how much clearer it can be made.
Norway implements less than 10% of the EU's regulations (it isn't even compelled to do that much) and chooses for itself on everything else. So how is that resigning sovereignty?
If it wants to sell anything in the EU, the products have to comply with EU regs they can't write.
We sell quite a lot of stuff to the EU...
The EU, especially Jerry, sells a lot more to us than we do to them. The U.K. will hold the whip hand in negotiations with the EU post-liberation.
Norway implements less than 10% of the EU's regulations (it isn't even compelled to do that much) and chooses for itself on everything else. So how is that resigning sovereignty?
If it wants to sell anything in the EU, the products have to comply with EU regs they can't write.
We sell quite a lot of stuff to the EU...
If we want to sell anything to the USA, the products have to comply with USA regs we can't write.
I run a small business that does no international trade. Yet I need to observe a whole swathe of European regulations that have nothing to do with trade. If we were in the EEA we could decide on those laws ourselves.
But WOULD we adopt our own measures? Your small business might only trade domestically, but thousands of others will trade with the EU. The demand for UK law to coincide with EU standards would be deafening. And even if it wasn't, companies would mostly choose to adopt EU standards for ease and convenience. And anything imported to the UK from the EU would be of a common EU standard, so our consumers would continue to be used to products meeting EU standards.
I'm talking about thing like Labour laws. The Working Time Directive etc
These have bugger all to do with international trade and should not be in the EU's remit and as far as I know are not in the EEA's remit.
As others have said product standards are largely international anyway so would be met whether in the EU, in the EEA or Out of everything.
Then, as day turned into night and I was about to join the rest of the country in forgetting all about Jeremy Corbyn, I stumbled across an article he’d written for the Observer. One of his staff had clearly also recognised his EU response was cutting through like a cold knife through titanium, and so given it another shove.
It was essentially the same “Europe’s rubbish, we must remain in Europe” line, until I reached the passage dealing with the new curbs on migrants’ benefits. “The evidence suggests that Cameron’s much-heralded 'emergency brake' on in-work migrants’ benefits will do nothing to cut inward migration to Britain,” he wrote. “Nor will it put a penny in the pockets of British workers. But there are dangers it could drive down pay rates still further as migrant workers take second jobs to make up for lower incomes”.
Norway implements less than 10% of the EU's regulations (it isn't even compelled to do that much) and chooses for itself on everything else. So how is that resigning sovereignty?
If it wants to sell anything in the EU, the products have to comply with EU regs they can't write.
We sell quite a lot of stuff to the EU...
So companies that sell stuff to the EU can continue as normal and companies that don't can do without all of the stupid regulations. The same is true for any export though, and in reality any company exporting finished goods makes them for global use. You don't run different production lines for exports to different countries, they are all the same and you'll notice that most products are certified for use in more than one region. My current phone isn't officially on sale anywhere in the EU and yet it is certified for use here.
Anyway, I'm sure you will rationalise this into something completely different and pretend that an EEA style solution will leave us at a disadvantage.
I am struggling trying to understand your position Mr. Thompson. Are you saying that you will vote based on the people or on the issues?
Both. If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants and leaving the EEA altogether to facilitate that then I will not just vote but possibly campaign against that. If that nastiness wins it will harm the country.
If this is a referendum on regaining sovereignty whole keeping European free trade then I am quite pleased with that.
Getting rid of migrants?
Get a grip man ffs
It's what I see quite regularly from BNP, UKIP and GO supporters. I'm not voting for any of that bunch.
That's right, you're not voting for any bunch.
On June 24th the bunch will be conservatives.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on anti migrant talk then he'll have to be replaced by a hardliner who is anti migrant.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on pro sovereignty talk then he'll have to be replaced by someone who is probably sovereignty.
If you don't see the difference between those I don't know how much clearer it can be made.
If we vote Leave there's a good chance Cameron will stand down, the Conservatives will elect a new leader who becomes PM. The chances of that govt deporting migrants is zero.
The chance of the new government imposing visa restrictions on new migrants and other European nations doing the same is not zero. It is a lot higher if that is the campaign argument that wins the referendum.
Mr. Tyndall, as you are no doubt aware the EEA is a deal between the EU and three of the four members of the EFTA - Switzerland has negotiated it own deal. Given the size of the UK economy I would expect us to follow the Swiss route rather than accept an off the peg solution designed fro much smaller countries.
Problem is this isn't a stated option on the ballot paper. So Leave is, on any analysis, a leap in the dark in terms of where we end up afterwards - we'd end up with one option, and I'd hope a British Government and civil service would find the best option for Britain, but nobody can assert that because the Swiss have a particular arrangement with the EU/EEA which seems attractive, that we could do too.
It is no more a leap in the dark than staying in. Unfortunately for many who just want things to stay the same as they are now that is basically the one option that is not on the table.
I'm probably Free Movement. So that continuing if we go EEA/EFTA is a good thing not a bad thing.
The pros that have convinced me that switching is better are signing new trade deals and losing a lot of regulations. It would not be miraculous to sign new trade deals, other nations have managed it. The difference is that in the EU we negotiate to the lowest common denominator so if the French want to protect their farmers from Kiwi farmers then free trade with New Zealand is impossible etc - if we go by ourselves we don't need to worry about lowest common denominator. Plus as the world's fifth biggest economy we are a good market to trade with.
As for regulations apparently according to Gove and Hannan the EFTA nations implement less than 10% of EU regulations and even those are typically global standards that would be implemented anyway. So we lose stuff we don't need.
I agree that the crude anti immigration notions don't get my vote which is why a Grassroots Out or UKIP led leave campaign will not get my vote.
I think everything you have said there is accurate. I would add that the EFTA countries in the EEA have far more input into the single market regulations than Flightpath claims.
Personally I feel that for anyone not overly concerned with migration as an issue in the debate, EEA membership is by far the best solution compared to continued EU membership or complete withdrawal.
Mr. Tyndall, as you are no doubt aware the EEA is a deal between the EU and three of the four members of the EFTA - Switzerland has negotiated it own deal. Given the size of the UK economy I would expect us to follow the Swiss route rather than accept an off the peg solution designed fro much smaller countries.
Hopefully the next PM can negotiate a damned sight better than Dave.
....
My cat is a better at negotiation than Cameron, so the bar is quite low. Not that that will necessarily preclude the Conservative Party from choosing a leader who can't jump over it. The pool of available talent isn't very deep or wide.
Judging by what you feed Thomas, he is quite some negotiator!! Spoilt that cat is. I don't get a dinner as nice as he does. And nor do my cats, though they try their very best.
Almost all manufactured products made almost anywhere in the world are made to comply with US, EU and - soon - Chinese regulations.
Right, and how much "sovereignty" do we get by complying?
None. The "more sovereignty" argument is total bollocks.
As part of this agreement with China, they will have obviously asked us to take unlimited numbers of their citizens, and demanded a final say over banking regulation. Or not.
Mr. Tyndall, as you are no doubt aware the EEA is a deal between the EU and three of the four members of the EFTA - Switzerland has negotiated it own deal. Given the size of the UK economy I would expect us to follow the Swiss route rather than accept an off the peg solution designed fro much smaller countries.
Problem is this isn't a stated option on the ballot paper. So Leave is, on any analysis, a leap in the dark in terms of where we end up afterwards - we'd end up with one option, and I'd hope a British Government and civil service would find the best option for Britain, but nobody can assert that because the Swiss have a particular arrangement with the EU/EEA which seems attractive, that we could do too.
It is no more a leap in the dark than staying in. Unfortunately for many who just want things to stay the same as they are now that is basically the one option that is not on the table.
Indeed. Had it been a straight In/Out referendum without Dave's botched negotiation I might actually have been more inclined to stay, but as it is we're in a worse position for EMU/City regulation than when we started, we've moved from an opt-out to a review system. That's not what I would call an improvement.
Mr. Tyndall, as you are no doubt aware the EEA is a deal between the EU and three of the four members of the EFTA - Switzerland has negotiated it own deal. Given the size of the UK economy I would expect us to follow the Swiss route rather than accept an off the peg solution designed fro much smaller countries.
Problem is this isn't a stated option on the ballot paper. So Leave is, on any analysis, a leap in the dark in terms of where we end up afterwards - we'd end up with one option, and I'd hope a British Government and civil service would find the best option for Britain, but nobody can assert that because the Swiss have a particular arrangement with the EU/EEA which seems attractive, that we could do too.
Yup, no guarantees are possible - from either side. Cameron's deal could be unpicked and rejected by the EU parliament after we vote to accept it. On the other hand the EU could decide to erect trade barriers if we decide to leave. The UK is the fifth largest economy in the world and runs a horrendous trade deficit with the EU. So no guarantees, you make your choice and vote accordingly.
I am struggling trying to understand your position Mr. Thompson. Are you saying that you will vote based on the people or on the issues?
Both. If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants and leaving the EEA altogether to facilitate that then I will not just vote but possibly campaign against that. If that nastiness wins it will harm the country.
If this is a referendum on regaining sovereignty whole keeping European free trade then I am quite pleased with that.
Getting rid of migrants?
Get a grip man ffs
It's what I see quite regularly from BNP, UKIP and GO supporters. I'm not voting for any of that bunch.
That's right, you're not voting for any bunch.
On June 24th the bunch will be conservatives.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on anti migrant talk then he'll have to be replaced by a hardliner who is anti migrant.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on pro sovereignty talk then he'll have to be replaced by someone who is probably sovereignty.
If you don't see the difference between those I don't know how much clearer it can be made.
If we vote Leave there's a good chance Cameron will stand down, the Conservatives will elect a new leader who becomes PM. The chances of that govt deporting migrants is zero.
The chance of the new government imposing visa restrictions on new migrants and other European nations doing the same is not zero. It is a lot higher if that is the campaign argument that wins the referendum.
So you've backtracked on deporting migrants, thanks.
BTW the proposed LSE/Deutsche Borse merger is probably more relevant to the UK's position as a financial centre than the referendum (which I think will result in a Remain vote).
Mind you, for reasons that I'm sure @Charles will understand, I very much hope that DB's current Chief Executive does not take a prominent position in any merged entity.
I am struggling trying to understand your position Mr. Thompson. Are you saying that you will vote based on the people or on the issues?
Both. If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants and leaving the EEA altogether to facilitate that then I will not just vote but possibly campaign against that. If that nastiness wins it will harm the country.
If this is a referendum on regaining sovereignty whole keeping European free trade then I am quite pleased with that.
Getting rid of migrants?
Get a grip man ffs
It's what I see quite regularly from BNP, UKIP and GO supporters. I'm not voting for any of that bunch.
That's right, you're not voting for any bunch.
On June 24th the bunch will be conservatives.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on anti migrant talk then he'll have to be replaced by a hardliner who is anti migrant.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on pro sovereignty talk then he'll have to be replaced by someone who is probably sovereignty.
If you don't see the difference between those I don't know how much clearer it can be made.
If we vote Leave there's a good chance Cameron will stand down, the Conservatives will elect a new leader who becomes PM. The chances of that govt deporting migrants is zero.
The chance of the new government imposing visa restrictions on new migrants and other European nations doing the same is not zero. It is a lot higher if that is the campaign argument that wins the referendum.
So you've backtracked on deporting migrants, thanks.
I never meant deporting migrants so sorry if you misinterpreted what I wrote to mean that.
In any case, we already have a cold trade war, in that lots of EU countries still put up significant barriers to the import of services. Post-Brexit, we could (though I doubt we would) push harder on this in any trade deal that maintained Germany's ability to sell us goods.
Mr. Tyndall, as you are no doubt aware the EEA is a deal between the EU and three of the four members of the EFTA - Switzerland has negotiated it own deal. Given the size of the UK economy I would expect us to follow the Swiss route rather than accept an off the peg solution designed fro much smaller countries.
Problem is this isn't a stated option on the ballot paper. So Leave is, on any analysis, a leap in the dark in terms of where we end up afterwards - we'd end up with one option, and I'd hope a British Government and civil service would find the best option for Britain, but nobody can assert that because the Swiss have a particular arrangement with the EU/EEA which seems attractive, that we could do too.
It is no more a leap in the dark than staying in. Unfortunately for many who just want things to stay the same as they are now that is basically the one option that is not on the table.
I do not think for one minute the EU will stay the same. The leaders protested that David Cameron achieved too much when we know that the impending immigration crisis will see the EU implode and at that point a whole new settlement will be required. If we are not at the table we will have absolutely no influence on that
Almost all manufactured products made almost anywhere in the world are made to comply with US, EU and - soon - Chinese regulations.
Right, and how much "sovereignty" do we get by complying?
None. The "more sovereignty" argument is total bollocks.
As part of this agreement with China, they will have obviously asked us to take unlimited numbers of their citizens, and demanded a final say over banking regulation. Or not.
Good afternoon on this bright and sun-EU day.
So, taffys, a question: would you have the UK opt out of Basel III, if you had your way?
It was £80bn officially last year, but that figure is heavily padded by re-exports as the value of our re-exports are much higher (finished goods) than the value of the re-imports (raw materials and parts).
Would have been the other way around in the 1970's.
The 75 refernedum was the start of the split that kept Labour out of power for 18 years. Will that, ultimately, be Cameron and Osborne's legacy? A party divided, destroyed and ruined for a generation?
Newsnight last night had an interesting feature on the 75 referendum.
I am struggling trying to understand your position Mr. Thompson. Are you saying that you will vote based on the people or on the issues?
Both. If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants and leaving the EEA altogether to facilitate that then I will not just vote but possibly campaign against that. If that nastiness wins it will harm the country.
If this is a referendum on regaining sovereignty whole keeping European free trade then I am quite pleased with that.
Getting rid of migrants?
Get a grip man ffs
It's what I see quite regularly from BNP, UKIP and GO supporters. I'm not voting for any of that bunch.
That's right, you're not voting for any bunch.
On June 24th the bunch will be conservatives.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on anti migrant talk then he'll have to be replaced by a hardliner who is anti migrant.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on pro sovereignty talk then he'll have to be replaced by someone who is probably sovereignty.
If you don't see the difference between those I don't know how much clearer it can be made.
If we vote Leave there's a good chance Cameron will stand down, the Conservatives will elect a new leader who becomes PM. The chances of that govt deporting migrants is zero.
The chance of the new government imposing visa restrictions on new migrants and other European nations doing the same is not zero. It is a lot higher if that is the campaign argument that wins the referendum.
So you've backtracked on deporting migrants, thanks.
I never meant deporting migrants so sorry if you misinterpreted what I wrote to mean that.
Well you wrote
If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants
Sam Coates New: Dover MP Charlie Elphick for remain - on grounds of borders being safer
I shared a platform with him on several occasions pre GE, he always said he was for Out, I said he'd go along with what Cameron said.
Hmm...
That's manna from heaven for UKIP in Dover !
Why?
Why does it matter what any MP's view is on the EU now we're having a referendum in June?
The people are deciding this one now, not the politicians.
You are correct.
My point about this MP is pre GE, campaigning in Dover, he was a committed Outer.
So long as he voted to hold the referendum, it really doesn't matter.
Eh?
As a backbencher he has as much say in the referendum as you and me. His role was to vote for the referendum to happen.
Go to the Bruges Group website and check his voting record on EU.
In front of hundreds (several hustings) he sat alongside me saying he was a committed Outer. Draw your own conclusions.
He explained today at Slough how he had traveled on a six year EU journey and had changed his views and was supportive of the EU. Anyone is entitled to change their views in the light of their experiences
Norway implements less than 10% of the EU's regulations (it isn't even compelled to do that much) and chooses for itself on everything else. So how is that resigning sovereignty?
If it wants to sell anything in the EU, the products have to comply with EU regs they can't write.
We sell quite a lot of stuff to the EU...
If we want to sell anything to the USA, the products have to comply with USA regs we can't write.
I run a small business that does no international trade. Yet I need to observe a whole swathe of European regulations that have nothing to do with trade. If we were in the EEA we could decide on those laws ourselves.
But WOULD we adopt our own measures? Your small business might only trade domestically, but thousands of others will trade with the EU. The demand for UK law to coincide with EU standards would be deafening. And even if it wasn't, companies would mostly choose to adopt EU standards for ease and convenience. And anything imported to the UK from the EU would be of a common EU standard, so our consumers would continue to be used to products meeting EU standards.
Under NAFTA rules, you aren't allowed to use local certification as a 'trade barrier'. This has had the consequence of basically meaning that the Mexican and Canadian certification bodies have ceased to have any influence whatsoever.
Though Obama promised to increase regulatory standards in NAFTA in his election campaign, and achieved this with signing of TPP.
Although having pretty much decided to vote LEAVE, I have to say that I was hugely impressed by David Cameron's terrific performance in the House of Commons yesterday ..... a real tour de force to be sure. Answering dozens of very varied questions from all shades of political opinion he was totally in command of all the facts and figures. It is difficult to think of any leader in modern times who has delivered such an impressive performance. If and when he resigns as Prime Minister he will be a great loss to the HoC it has to be said, irrespective of one's personal political persuasion.
LOL! He's the Ted Heath of modern British politics. Though actually he's worse than Heath because at least Ted was honest about this EUPhillia unlike slimy Cameron.
Dave is just an opportunist and a liar (I see today he has been lying that he was actually a eurosceptic when he was LOTO but in office he's "come to his senses" LOL) I should imagine the vast majority of the Conservative Party are wondering whatever they've done having this clown as their leader - They should have just given Ken Clarke the leadership years ago... At least he'd have won the Tories a good majority against Brown in 2010.
Boris hasn't spent years getting people to vote for him on the basis that he's one thing or the other.
I don't mind Cameron being a passionate and committed europhile. I resent the way he has lied for years and years and made out he's eurosceptic only to reveal himself now as probably the most passionate lover of the EU we've ever had as Prime Minister.
The nonsense about his "non reforms" doesn't help either. He is is taking the people he leads for fools and hoping he can get away with it.
Cameron didn't want people 'banging on about Europe', hardly a committed Europhile. The 'most passionate lover of the EU we've ever had as Prime Minister' ?? What about Ted Heath? It's difficult to take what you say seriously when you come out with comments like that.
The words loony and fruitcake simply don't cut it with gin1138
Almost all manufactured products made almost anywhere in the world are made to comply with US, EU and - soon - Chinese regulations.
Right, and how much "sovereignty" do we get by complying?
None. The "more sovereignty" argument is total bollocks.
As part of this agreement with China, they will have obviously asked us to take unlimited numbers of their citizens, and demanded a final say over banking regulation. Or not.
Good afternoon on this bright and sun-EU day.
So, taffys, a question: would you have the UK opt out of Basel III, if you had your way?
Sam Coates New: Dover MP Charlie Elphick for remain - on grounds of borders being safer
I shared a platform with him on several occasions pre GE, he always said he was for Out, I said he'd go along with what Cameron said.
Hmm...
That's manna from heaven for UKIP in Dover !
Why?
Why does it matter what any MP's view is on the EU now we're having a referendum in June?
The people are deciding this one now, not the politicians.
You are correct.
My point about this MP is pre GE, campaigning in Dover, he was a committed Outer.
So long as he voted to hold the referendum, it really doesn't matter.
Eh?
As a backbencher he has as much say in the referendum as you and me. His role was to vote for the referendum to happen.
Go to the Bruges Group website and check his voting record on EU.
In front of hundreds (several hustings) he sat alongside me saying he was a committed Outer. Draw your own conclusions.
He explained today at Slough how he had traveled on a six year EU journey and had changed his views and was supportive of the EU. Anyone is entitled to change their views in the light of their experiences
What was Charlie doing in Slough?
Look, he voted AGAINST a referendum, stated publicly he was for Out, now campaigns for In.
Maybe to you but the reality is millions of jobs in the EU depend on our consumption of their goods. The day we vote to leave will also be the day that the CEOs of BMW, Daimler and VW break down Mrs Merkel's door and demand a free trade deal with us.
I am struggling trying to understand your position Mr. Thompson. Are you saying that you will vote based on the people or on the issues?
Both. If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants and leaving the EEA altogether to facilitate that then I will not just vote but possibly campaign against that. If that nastiness wins it will harm the country.
If this is a referendum on regaining sovereignty whole keeping European free trade then I am quite pleased with that.
Getting rid of migrants?
Get a grip man ffs
It's what I see quite regularly from BNP, UKIP and GO supporters. I'm not voting for any of that bunch.
That's right, you're not voting for any bunch.
On June 24th the bunch will be conservatives.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on anti migrant talk then he'll have to be replaced by a hardliner who is anti migrant.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on pro sovereignty talk then he'll have to be replaced by someone who is probably sovereignty.
If you don't see the difference between those I don't know how much clearer it can be made.
If we vote Leave there's a good chance Cameron will stand down, the Conservatives will elect a new leader who becomes PM. The chances of that govt deporting migrants is zero.
The chance of the new government imposing visa restrictions on new migrants and other European nations doing the same is not zero. It is a lot higher if that is the campaign argument that wins the referendum.
So you've backtracked on deporting migrants, thanks.
I never meant deporting migrants so sorry if you misinterpreted what I wrote to mean that.
Well you wrote
If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants
Hard to misinterpret that
Yes putting up visa restrictions etc to get rid of migrants who would otherwise be coming into the country. Not to deport people who are already in.
My cat is a better at negotiation than Cameron, so the bar is quite low.
No, that's a very high bar. Cats are brilliant at negotiation, employing emotional blackmail, intimidation, or walking away from the deal, as they see fit. That's why they always win against mere humans.
Maybe to you but the reality is millions of jobs in the EU depend on our consumption of their goods. The day we vote to leave will also be the day that the CEOs of BMW, Daimler and VW break down Mrs Merkel's door and demand a free trade deal with us.
The talking down of Britain by the Remainians is quite startling.
Maybe to you but the reality is millions of jobs in the EU depend on our consumption of their goods. The day we vote to leave will also be the day that the CEOs of BMW, Daimler and VW break down Mrs Merkel's door and demand a free trade deal with us.
...unless they can get a better deal with China.
That is why the relative numbers are more important than the absolute.
Are you really claiming the UK is BMW's largest market?
Go to the Bruges Group website and check his voting record on EU.
In front of hundreds (several hustings) he sat alongside me saying he was a committed Outer. Draw your own conclusions.
He explained today at Slough how he had traveled on a six year EU journey and had changed his views and was supportive of the EU. Anyone is entitled to change their views in the light of their experiences
What was Charlie doing in Slough?
Look, he voted AGAINST a referendum, stated publicly he was for Out, now campaigns for In.
Almost all manufactured products made almost anywhere in the world are made to comply with US, EU and - soon - Chinese regulations.
Right, and how much "sovereignty" do we get by complying?
None. The "more sovereignty" argument is total bollocks.
As part of this agreement with China, they will have obviously asked us to take unlimited numbers of their citizens, and demanded a final say over banking regulation. Or not.
Good afternoon on this bright and sun-EU day.
So, taffys, a question: would you have the UK opt out of Basel III, if you had your way?
Goodness no!!!
And/but that is the only part of the single rulebook that we are opting in to (CRD-IV).
SSM/SRM we get an opt-out.
Now, I have not rejoined the debate today on all this partly because I think we had a good go at it yesterday, partly because I have a day job, and partly because I am marvelling at the decisive step out of Europe the LSE has just taken by its announced merger with, er, Deutsche Borse.
Suffice to say there is pre-existing and sensible shared banking regulation, via the Basel protocols, and nothing in the negotiated deal has changed that. If you want out of the EU you would still be stuck with CRD-IV.
My cat is a better at negotiation than Cameron, so the bar is quite low.
No, that's a very high bar. Cats are brilliant at negotiation, employing emotional blackmail, intimidation, or walking away from the deal, as they see fit. That's why they always win against mere humans.
True. But they're always suckers for being stroked behind the ears.
In 2012 Romney won just 61% of the white electorate to get 50% of the vote. Trump could get a more Texas like 76% to win it, which in 2012 led to Romney winning Texas with 58%.
If 75% of the electorate are white, and Trump wins 66.6% of that, he wins by a landslide. An updated version of Nixon's southern strategy.
I am struggling trying to understand your position Mr. Thompson. Are you saying that you will vote based on the people or on the issues?
Both. If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants and leaving the EEA altogether to facilitate that then I will not just vote but possibly campaign against that. If that nastiness wins it will harm the country.
If this is a referendum on regaining sovereignty whole keeping European free trade then I am quite pleased with that.
Getting rid of migrants?
Get a grip man ffs
It's what I see quite regularly from BNP, UKIP and GO supporters. I'm not voting for any of that bunch.
That's right, you're not voting for any bunch.
On June 24th the bunch will be conservatives.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on anti migrant talk then he'll have to be replaced by a hardliner who is anti migrant.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on pro sovereignty talk then he'll have to be replaced by someone who is probably sovereignty.
If you don't see the difference between those I don't know how much clearer it can be made.
If we vote Leave there's a good chance Cameron will stand down, the Conservatives will elect a new leader who becomes PM. The chances of that govt deporting migrants is zero.
The chance of the new government imposing visa restrictions on new migrants and other European nations doing the same is not zero. It is a lot higher if that is the campaign argument that wins the referendum.
So you've backtracked on deporting migrants, thanks.
I never meant deporting migrants so sorry if you misinterpreted what I wrote to mean that.
Well you wrote
If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants
Hard to misinterpret that
Yes putting up visa restrictions etc to get rid of migrants who would otherwise be coming into the country. Not to deport people who are already in.
Oh I see, getting rid of people that aren't here yet
My cat is a better at negotiation than Cameron, so the bar is quite low.
No, that's a very high bar. Cats are brilliant at negotiation, employing emotional blackmail, intimidation, or walking away from the deal, as they see fit. That's why they always win against mere humans.
Cats are French: stand offish, occasionally affectionate, elegant, ruthless, contemptuous of non-cats, lethal when they choose and with an enormous sense of entitlement.
No wonder Cameron didn't stand a chance. A cat will see off an enthusiastic Labrador with ease.
Maybe to you but the reality is millions of jobs in the EU depend on our consumption of their goods. The day we vote to leave will also be the day that the CEOs of BMW, Daimler and VW break down Mrs Merkel's door and demand a free trade deal with us.
...unless they can get a better deal with China.
That is why the relative numbers are more important than the absolute.
Are you really claiming the UK is BMW's largest market?
Yes, BMW are really going to walk away from Britain, where their sales are nearly 9% of the total market.
My cat is a better at negotiation than Cameron, so the bar is quite low.
No, that's a very high bar. Cats are brilliant at negotiation, employing emotional blackmail, intimidation, or walking away from the deal, as they see fit. That's why they always win against mere humans.
Indeed. They have even persuaded us to cut unsightly holes in our own doors, so as to better facilitate their ability to snub us.
Yeah he did after the GE, look back to the last parliament
What does anything in the last Parliament have to do with election pledges made this election?
You do realise people don't have a Tardis and that election pledges made in a campaign for this Parliament are for the forthcoming Parliament not the last one.
So you're mad at a politician because he honoured his pledge in full but doesn't have a time machine?
I am struggling trying to understand your position Mr. Thompson. Are you saying that you will vote based on the people or on the issues?
Both. If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants and leaving the EEA altogether to facilitate that then I will not just vote but possibly campaign against that. If that nastiness wins it will harm the country.
If this is a referendum on regaining sovereignty whole keeping European free trade then I am quite pleased with that.
Getting rid of migrants?
Get a grip man ffs
It's what I see quite regularly from BNP, UKIP and GO supporters. I'm not voting for any of that bunch.
That's right, you're not voting for any bunch.
On June 24th the bunch will be conservatives.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on anti migrant talk then he'll have to be replaced by a hardliner who is anti migrant.
If Cameron loses a campaign based on pro sovereignty talk then he'll have to be replaced by someone who is probably sovereignty.
If you don't see the difference between those I don't know how much clearer it can be made.
If we vote Leave there's a good chance Cameron will stand down, the Conservatives will elect a new leader who becomes PM. The chances of that govt deporting migrants is zero.
The chance of the new government imposing visa restrictions on new migrants and other European nations doing the same is not zero. It is a lot higher if that is the campaign argument that wins the referendum.
So you've backtracked on deporting migrants, thanks.
I never meant deporting migrants so sorry if you misinterpreted what I wrote to mean that.
Well you wrote
If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants
Hard to misinterpret that
Yes putting up visa restrictions etc to get rid of migrants who would otherwise be coming into the country. Not to deport people who are already in.
Oh I see, getting rid of people that aren't here yet
This argument over BMW walking away / not walking we away etc is very tiresome. Nobody will want to surrender a profitable market, so stay in or come out arrangements will be made. BMW will still.flog us cars & British business will still have to make stuff to eu regs.
It really comes down to are we better with a tiny voice in eu and have to put up with the ratcheting of non-trade related laws vs uncertainty of coming out no voice in shaping eu regs but not having to take on all their bs.
Neither option is really what people want, but the best thing for UK is not an option nor will it ever.
The EU, especially Jerry, sells a lot more to us than we do to them.
Scott_P:
No, they really don't
Yes, they don't. I'll try again, and type slowly...
What percentage of UK exports goes to the EU? Clue, it's a big number. We sell them lots of our stuff
What percentage of EU exports come to the UK? Clue, it's not a big number. They don't sell us lots of stuff
The EU, does not sell us a lot more to us than we do to them. We are a small EU customer. They are a huge UK customer.
Sorry if this is too complicated for some
The EU accounts for around 35% of our exports once re-exports are stripped out.
We account for for about 9% of EU imports once re-imports are stripped out.
Trade in goods, figures from Eurostat and some estimation of re-import/export values.
We are also the single biggest consumer market in the EU and have the highest consumption per capita within the bloc.
I highly doubt that the EU would start a trade war with Britain if we left. If you really believe that then I think you are just stupid, if you are just trying to make a point then it is disingenuous. Not even RN and other europhiles are arguing that the EU would decide to put a trade barrier up. You need the new crib sheet.
In 2012 Romney won just 61% of the white electorate to get 50% of the vote. Trump could get a more Texas like 76% to win it, which in 2012 led to Romney winning Texas with 58%.
If 75% of the electorate are white, and Trump wins 66.6% of that, he wins by a landslide. An updated version of Nixon's southern strategy.
Trump will get a lot more of the black vote than Romney did because 1 Hillary isn't black ( Romney was up against Obama ) and 2 Trump is far more attractive to black Americans than Romney was.
Keep on talking down our hand Scott - "Meh we only have 3 aces - lets fold to Brussels"
It's not three Aces. Scott is entirely right that they hold both the Aces and the bigger stack as you need to look in percentage times. You should always look at costs and revenues in percentages not nominal terms.
The Ace we have is that we have low unemployment and are growing while they're struggling.
This argument over BMW walking away / not walking we away etc is very tiresome. Nobody will want to surrender a profitable market, so stay in or come out arrangements will be made. BMW will still.flog us cars & British business will still have to make stuff to eu regs.
Quite - there are good reasons to stay in the EU but these silly scare stories are just pathetic.
This argument over BMW walking away / not walking we away etc is very tiresome. Nobody will want to surrender a profitable market, so stay in or come out arrangements will be made. BMW will still.flog us cars & British business will still have to make stuff to eu regs.
That raises an interesting dynamic. What happens when we manufacture goods for the rest of the World markets ignoring EU regs
Scott is entirely right that they hold both the Aces and the bigger stack as you need to look in percentage times. You should always look at costs and revenues in percentages not nominal terms.
Comments
None. The "more sovereignty" argument is total bollocks.
Good time for Jezza to have a good day if he's any sense.
The U.K. will hold the whip hand in negotiations with the EU post-liberation.
These have bugger all to do with international trade and should not be in the EU's remit and as far as I know are not in the EEA's remit.
As others have said product standards are largely international anyway so would be met whether in the EU, in the EEA or Out of everything.
Anyway, I'm sure you will rationalise this into something completely different and pretend that an EEA style solution will leave us at a disadvantage.
What % of EU exports are to the UK?
Which side can afford a trade war?
In front of hundreds (several hustings) he sat alongside me saying he was a committed Outer. Draw your own conclusions.
There are standard World Trade tariffs that apply in the mean time, and we would have a £20billion / year war chest to play with.
In reality a deal would be done, without all the extra EU baggage.
Mind you, for reasons that I'm sure @Charles will understand, I very much hope that DB's current Chief Executive does not take a prominent position in any merged entity.
But I bet Clair Hawkins would have voted against having a referendum.
Project Fear from the Remainers is really revving up now.
Phone the bloke in charge of BMW and ask if he'll put his prices up if we Leave.
Clue, in one case it's a much bigger sum than the other
You claimed we don't have a balance of trade deficit with the EU - now everyone is pointing at you and saying "Ha Ha" in Nelson Buntz accent.
In any case, we already have a cold trade war, in that lots of EU countries still put up significant barriers to the import of services. Post-Brexit, we could (though I doubt we would) push harder on this in any trade deal that maintained Germany's ability to sell us goods.
Clair would definitely have voted against it.
So, taffys, a question: would you have the UK opt out of Basel III, if you had your way?
It was £80bn officially last year, but that figure is heavily padded by re-exports as the value of our re-exports are much higher (finished goods) than the value of the re-imports (raw materials and parts).
It's hard to start a trade war these days. We seem to forget the other supra-national organisation that deals with global trade.
If this is a proxy referendum on getting rid of migrants
Hard to misinterpret that
MonikerDiCanio :
The EU, especially Jerry, sells a lot more to us than we do to them.
Scott_P:
No, they really don't
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/02/breaking-david-icke-backs-brexit/
Wonder what he thinks of the Lizard Line.......
Look, he voted AGAINST a referendum, stated publicly he was for Out, now campaigns for In.
That is some journey
"The End of the Establishment?"
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/02/23/the_end_of_the_establishment_129755.html
What percentage of UK exports goes to the EU? Clue, it's a big number. We sell them lots of our stuff
What percentage of EU exports come to the UK? Clue, it's not a big number. They don't sell us lots of stuff
The EU, does not sell us a lot more to us than we do to them. We are a small EU customer. They are a huge UK customer.
Sorry if this is too complicated for some
Was the one-off Survation poll that was accurate pre-2015 General Election online or by telephone?
I wonder if we'll see herding again.
That is why the relative numbers are more important than the absolute.
Are you really claiming the UK is BMW's largest market?
Go to the Bruges Group website and check his voting record on EU.
In front of hundreds (several hustings) he sat alongside me saying he was a committed Outer. Draw your own conclusions.
He explained today at Slough how he had traveled on a six year EU journey and had changed his views and was supportive of the EU. Anyone is entitled to change their views in the light of their experiences
What was Charlie doing in Slough?
Look, he voted AGAINST a referendum, stated publicly he was for Out, now campaigns for In.
That is some journey
My mistake. I thought you were referring to DC
SSM/SRM we get an opt-out.
Now, I have not rejoined the debate today on all this partly because I think we had a good go at it yesterday, partly because I have a day job, and partly because I am marvelling at the decisive step out of Europe the LSE has just taken by its announced merger with, er, Deutsche Borse.
Suffice to say there is pre-existing and sensible shared banking regulation, via the Basel protocols, and nothing in the negotiated deal has changed that. If you want out of the EU you would still be stuck with CRD-IV.
True. But they're always suckers for being stroked behind the ears.
If 75% of the electorate are white, and Trump wins 66.6% of that, he wins by a landslide. An updated version of Nixon's southern strategy.
No wonder Cameron didn't stand a chance. A cat will see off an enthusiastic Labrador with ease.
Is someone paying you to post this garbage?
isam: William Hill go 4/11 he isn't, 2/1 he is.. I'll have £100@9/4 with you he is
ScottP: What do you mean by 9/4? What do you mean by in the debates?
isam: I'll have £100 to win £225. And that he will be in one of the debates as a participant
ScottP: You're not being clear, I don't get it. You'll be thanking me when Farage isn't in the debates
Be LEAVE!
Clinton 1990 vs
Sanders 1085 delegates / 3075 "regular" delegates.
It'll become more accurate as more polls roll in.
Does not include the "supers"
You do realise people don't have a Tardis and that election pledges made in a campaign for this Parliament are for the forthcoming Parliament not the last one.
So you're mad at a politician because he honoured his pledge in full but doesn't have a time machine?
"Smaller, not the same as far away..."
It really comes down to are we better with a tiny voice in eu and have to put up with the ratcheting of non-trade related laws vs uncertainty of coming out no voice in shaping eu regs but not having to take on all their bs.
Neither option is really what people want, but the best thing for UK is not an option nor will it ever.
Losing our biggest market is in our favour?
We account for for about 9% of EU imports once re-imports are stripped out.
Trade in goods, figures from Eurostat and some estimation of re-import/export values.
We are also the single biggest consumer market in the EU and have the highest consumption per capita within the bloc.
I highly doubt that the EU would start a trade war with Britain if we left. If you really believe that then I think you are just stupid, if you are just trying to make a point then it is disingenuous. Not even RN and other europhiles are arguing that the EU would decide to put a trade barrier up. You need the new crib sheet.
The Ace we have is that we have low unemployment and are growing while they're struggling.
I'm happy to listen to decent arguments for Remain, but these ones are just scaremongering and farcical.
Cruz 37, Trump 29
The Donald coming in on BF POTUS market.