EU referendum voting
 

Looks like voting on membership (or otherwise) of the EU will be only open to those who have left the UK for 15 years or less - despite what was promised last year by the tories.

Looks like they are beginning to worry about what the result might be, and are trying to put thumbs on scales.

EU referendum voting rights will not be extended to all UK citizens living abroad | Politics | The Guardian

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Neither will EU immigrants be allowed to vote.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

shouldn't the entire EU population vote on this?

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Why should the rest of the EU have a say in what decision the UK makes, they don't give UK citizens a say in their decisions.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

It is in line with the rules on voting in a general election. Also, why should people have a say at all on the country they have chosen to leave.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

I guess some would argue they still have a vested interest but I agree with you. :thumbup:

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Well, there is an argument that if you have citizenship of the country, you have a possibility of returning etc. and a valid interest in its shape and future. Useless/corrupt governments may come and go, but significant changes to the makeup of the country (such as need a referendum) are long lasting enough that you should be able to have a say (eg its more valid to have a say on those matters, than on which bunch of liars gets in for the next 5 years).

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Yep, agree too. As an escapee, I not only think I shouldn't have the right to vote on this, I also have bigger fish to fry, like watching the first series of Blacklist in 2 days.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Why? Only Scots living in Scotland were allowed to vote whether to have independence last year.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Yes, I suspect Scotland would have been long gone had the rest of the country had anything to say in it.


S

Re: EU referendum voting
 

:nod: I don't want the UK to leave the EU but I fail to see why I should have a vote regardless of whether I decide to go back to the UK to live in the future. And I don't really see why people anywhere else in the EU should have a vote either.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

I think that Brits living in the EU should have a vote though - They are the people that will be mostly affected. It is their British citizenship that gives them the right to live there - If this right is in any way in jeopardy, then they should have a vote in it. They certainly have standing in the matter IMHO.

I'm keen for the UK to remain as well - My plans for retirement in France are currently in jeopardy!


S

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Maybe they should do it the same way the Irish did the Gay Marriage vote at the weekend. If UK citizens get back to the country to vote, they can.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

I think the entire UK should have been given the vote.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

As I said before, that wold have seen the end of the union...


S

Re: EU referendum voting
 

The EU - as it stands - is not a very good idea but it is too late for the UK to leave. To do so would be economic suicide

Their best hope is to renegotiate terms

Re: EU referendum voting
 

The vote should be for people only living in the UK and Northern Ireland, I certainly cannot understand why anybody from the Public of Ireland should have a vote.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Unlike the Scottish referendum, the Electoral Commission has suggested the wording should be 'should the UK remain a member of the EU'? so:

YES is to stay and NO is to leave.

"Citizens from most EU countries living in the UK will not get a vote in the referendum on Europe, No 10 has said.

The eligibility rules will be broadly the same as for a general election, rather than local or European votes.

Irish citizens in the UK are eligible. Residents from two other EU nations, Malta and Cyprus, also qualify, along with others from the Commonwealth."

Re: EU referendum voting
 

I disagree. Europe and the UK can simply enter free trade deals. Europe would be as keen as the UK.

Don't mean to sound patronising, but there are lots of successful economies outside of Europe!

Until recently, the UK's biggest trading partner was not Europe but the U.S. arguably given the state of the European economy a better option.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

UK would lose companies like EADS (Airbus), Honda, Toyota etc who have all said that they will leave if UK withdraws

Re: EU referendum voting
 

It wasn't only Scots living in Scotland that could vote. Anyone resident in Scotland at that time could vote in the referendum - even foreign students, who were told by the No voters that they would have to leave the country if "Yes" won, could vote. If only the Scots had voted I'm sure the result would have been different.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Maybe but I read that non-UK but EU citizens who live in Scotland - and there's lot of them - were overwhelmingly in favour of independence

Re: EU referendum voting
 

I cannot find a single, logical reason why the UK should bail out of the EU. Seems like hitting the self-destruct button would be all pain and no gain...

The economy will be in the doldrums, investments will be doing a detour and steering clear of the UK, political isolation will mean a less significant say in global affairs with the US putting a greater emphasis on its partnership with Germany and France with the UK then left on the sidelines.

Need I mention Scotland leaving the UK is pretty much a done & dusted deal should negativity prevail? So maybe we should just rephrase the question: should England leave the UK?

And what exactly are we running away from? Immigration? Heck, for each and every year since 2005 there has been GREATER immigration from outside the EU... than from the EU (yup, it's all there in the numbers, folks). So all the tools necessary to curb the MAJORITY of immigration if need be are already in our hands.

But of course this is a very inconvenient (and rarely mentioned) statistic as blame cannot be shovelled onto any outside entity such as the EU...

Re: EU referendum voting
 

The SNP is urging that the UK remain in the EU (but they don't want to be part of the UK). Nicola Sturgeon is saying that if the UK votes NO to membership on the EU referendum then they will call for a 2nd referendum on being part of the UK (despite it being a once in a lifetime/generation) They can see the benefits to Scotland of EU membership but not benefits to UK membership (?)

Nicola Sturgeon warns of Scottish backlash if UK exits Europe | Politics | The Guardian

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Nicola Sturgeon will use any excuse to call another referendum; their ultimate goal is independence, as she herself declared in the debates leading up to this year's general election.


I think that a lot of people voted for the SNP because they wanted change and not necessarily because they fully resonated with the SNP's policies. The political classes and parties of all colours have been operating in the Westminster bubble for years - safely insulated from the trials of the working classes. This sentiment is felt throughout the UK, not just in Scotland, and I don't blame people for becoming disillusioned and seeking a radical change.


When people feel ignored by the mainstream political parties is it any wonder that they move to the far left or right? They want something to change, but many will not be fully aware of the real consequences of such a change. The fact is, if Scotland had gained independence last year the economy would be in tatters, as it was largely based upon revenue generated from oil, the price of which has nearly halved in the last twelve months, resulting in redundancies within the industry.


Are the SNP dangerous? At present, probably not (apart from the usual anti-English sentiment thrown around), but nothing good ever came from a party whose core values are nationalism and socialism.


Scotland will succeed in gaining independence by hook or by crook; the SNP will not rest until they achieve this, yet all they'll accomplish is making the nation subservient to their unaccountable EU masters.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

All they really need to do is a france - give lip service to the EU statements, but basically ignore them. The onus would then be on the EU to throw them out - something it's not going to want to do once Greece upsets the apple cart by defaulting and finally implementing plan B.

They can see an opportunity ....

Re: EU referendum voting
 

My concerns with EU immigration are purely economic in nature. If you flood a country with labour willing to work for minimum or below minimum wage, employers will take advantage of this to cut down on labour costs. Why pay a native Brit care worker/cleaner/farm hand/hotel worker £8.50 per hour when you can pay a European £6.50 per hour? Result: Increase in unemployment amongst working-class Brits, thus increase in unemployment benefits and an increase in low-paid EU workers, thus increase in-work benefits (like tax credits). It's a lose-lose situation, except for the employers of course! Working class Brits feel cheated and start to resent EU immigrants who they see as "taking their jobs" (because they are!). I can give you countless examples of industries where this has taken place. The truth is that this country affords no protection to its native workforce and has no incentive to do so because the political elite are often closely affiliated with big businesses. This is completely wrong. Why should the (historically disadvantaged) blue collar working class have to compete with the whole of Europe for jobs in their own country?


As for non-EU immigration, the problems are both economic and social. LSE studies have shown that there is a net loss to the treasury as a significant number do not contribute for whatever reason and there is also massively increased pressure on services, further straining the public purse. Socially, unlike EU migrants, many non-EU migrants do not share our culture, religion, language, tolerance for others, etc. and do not intend to do so. Living in silos amongst only your own minority community leads to division, ghettoisation and all the associated social problems that ensue. The aim must be integration, rather than multi-culturalism.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

For the first part I would say that without a common market there would be a shortage of people to fill many jobs, from nurses to lorry drivers, builders to doctors even. If it's a question of say a 2 quid difference per hour then let's just raise the min. wage by that amount. Also, it's worth keeping in mind that Europeans are in fact funding "the system" by putting in more than they are taking out in terms of taxes/benefits/etc. Unfortunately locals are net benefactors of the system. So luckily there is someone to pay for it and keep the system afloat...

In a way it's a similar situation with the Chinese - they are generally accepted and allowed in because they work hard and contribute to the economy - unlike those whose aim is to come to a country (even on a raft) because they feel that if they make it then they are set for life and everything will be handed to them on a silver platter.

With Europe we're lucky because integration isn't so much of an issue as with the Chinese or others. Across the continent we have similar people, a similar culture (though some do say that the Germans are strangely devoid of humour), and once their kids go through local schools they come out as... English adults. As you mentioned, non-EU immigration is totally the opposite as integration is such an obstacle - even for the kids - as we are recently seeing with all these efforts to join some stoneage savages trying to create a barbaric state.

The real problem though is a much more long-standing one and involves much larger amounts of jobs simply being "shipped out" to the likes of China. The same thing has happened in the US, where corporate America has in a way betrayed the country by shifting such a large part of traditionally-American jobs overseas. No wonder the red dragon is so strong nowadays and Western corporations are the ones guilty of feeding it over the last decades.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

You, like many people, fail to understand why sceptics want out. It's nothing to do with the minutae that "renegotiation" might or might not reform: it's the total loss of sovereignty and political accountability that being in the EU entails.

They even had to coin a new weasel word for it - comitology.

Voters elect their MEPs but don't realise that they effectively have no place in law and rule making. They cannot propose legislation, only vote on the mass of legislation proposed by the commission's UNELECTED backroom committees. By all accounts the vast majority of this is never even looked at before a vote. And on the odd occasion that the commission's bills are turned down, they just get trivial changes before being presented again until the "right" vote is made. Ireland? France?

The fundamentally undemocratic way the UK no longer has control - no, it's more than that, no member states have voter control - of their own laws via the ballot box is one of the reasons I left.

The way that centuries of freedoms have been signed away by lying politicians of all parties is a national catastrophe.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Umm, what do you mean by all this? There is no total loss of sovereignty nor has the UK lost all its powers to enact law.

There are some common standards, benchmarks and laws that have been implemented across Europe but those are vastly helpful and not the opposite, mainly to facilitate trade and streamline important areas.

Where exactly is something terrible happening to us with our hands tied behind out backs?

Re: EU referendum voting
 

No, the UK has not lost ALL powers to enact legislation, but it has effectively given most important power to the unelected and unsackable backroom committees. MEPs are the virtually powerless front men to make us think it's democratic.

Power lies with a group of ex Marxists, Maoists and fellow travellers such as Junker. (Forget about the questionable history of many of them.)

The elite with their obsession with the Grand Project will stop at nothing to complete integration of more than 2 dozen completely different cultures, economies, laws etc. The €uro fiasco shows the length they will go to - Greece, which under their own rules couldn't join - can never repay its debts, but as it is a political issue the can is kicked down the road time and time again.

I voted to join/stay in the common market in ignorance of the hidden agenda of a federal state. All the people like Heath etc were committed Europhiles and kept the agenda secret. Since then politicians have managed to keep it out of the public eye quite successfully.

Like most €urosceptics I would fully accept the concept we voted for. But federal government by committee and QMV, which is the objective, is a nightmare in the making.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

I suppose the question is, what commons standards, benchmarks, and laws do you actually need to allow a common market?

If we can deal with different languages, differing plugs, etc. then I'd suggest what's actually needed for a common market is fairly limited in scope. A minimal set would make sure the customers were getting what they expected, and that terms such as warranties would be clearly spelt out; but that's about it. You might create a separate 'business currency' that trade could be conducted in, to offset some currency risk - but only if both sides wanted to use it.

A few thousand people to manage it, tops, in a building, somewhere cheap.

The whole 'ever closer union', common currency for everyone, zero borders, idea isn't a common market; it's a federal superstate. And nobody in the UK has ever signed up to one of those.

So the outcome ought to be quite simple - yes we'll have some of that minimal set common market, but none of the federal superstate - thanks. And all that's needed to achieve that is to recognises that none of the previous politicians had the right to give away rights to the EU that they had only ever been temporarily loaned - so all those subsequent treaties don't bind the UK at all.

And given that the EU is structurally screwed as a result of trying to bind all these different cultures and financial systems together against the forces pushing apart - that's actually the best position for everyone - which is why there's large and growing support for it across the EU countries (just not with the EU politicians, who'd be kicked off the gravy train).

Re: EU referendum voting
 

I think the Euro is a very good concept that is inevitable unless you want each country to have its own dinky, little currency that gets kicked around and is constantly vulnerable to the financial behemoths of this world. You either sign up for a strong, single currency that acts like a "financial umbrella" for the continent or you can choose to go it alone. The Euro is one of Europe's strengths, not weaknesses.

Greece is NOT an example of why there is something wrong with the Euro. It is a prime example of an entity that never qualified for joining the Euro but falsified accounts and committed grand fraud in order to do so. If any individual does something similar on a smaller scale they "Go directly to jail, do not pass Go, do not collect $200."

In Greece this was done at the highest echelons of government and of course there is no responsibility to be had. The Euro has benefited them as it has given them access to cheap financing. This is a brilliant thing when used wisely, but can be abused by mindless politicians who think that they can now borrow more (due to lower financing costs) and pass on the debt problem to future generations.

Greece's problem is that it does not want to face reality. They have no money yet they think that they can still retire early, give each other big salaries and retirement payouts, etc. And they think that European taxpayers should basically pay for their lavish existence. Un-frigging-believable. It's like that joke: "Don't have the time to go down to the beach, to go out for a long dinner, to lay by the pool doing nothing? No problem! Hire someone from Greece to do all that for you!"

In terms of European integration we need a strong and ever-closer union for the future. Otherwise we'll be picked apart by the rise of Asia. Even today's political crisis caused by the Putin has shown how far Europe has come - years ago he could have manipulated each country on its own, but today he has overestimated Europe's lack of cohesion.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

[QUOTE=astera;11670118]
Greece is NOT an example of why there is something wrong with the Euro. It is a prime example of an entity that never qualified for joining the Euro but falsified accounts and committed grand fraud in order to do so. If any individual does something similar on a smaller scale they "Go directly to jail, do not pass Go, do not collect $200."
/QUOTE]


But you identify one of the fundamental flaws of the whole project. Before the €uro started it was transparently obvious that it could not work longterm without full fiscal union. That is part of what the Eurocrats are always working towards. OK, the Greeks fiddled all their numbers - as did many other countries - but (and this is crucial) they did so with the full cooperation of the European commission. Th Grand Project cannot be allowed to fail, politically.

The €uro is a political entity, masquerading as a currency. They will go to any lengths to "save" it.



》In terms of European integration we need a strong and ever-closer union for the future. Otherwise we'll be picked apart by the rise of Asia. Even today's political crisis caused by the Putin has shown how far Europe has come - years ago he could have manipulated each country on its own, but today he has overestimated Europe's lack of cohesion《

There is no cohesion. 27 or so independent countries with different world views cannot agree on most important issues or not, at least, in a timely manner. That's part of the reason there's haste for "ever closer union" - things become much simpler when a few unelected peploe can meet in back rooms and determine how the plebs are going to be governed, sans the inconvenient need to retain voters' backing.

.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

You cannot have a strong, common market and yet have two dozen dinky currencies with which people and companies have to deal with, each being played by the massive banking mobs out there who also get a cut out of every cross-border transaction. So screw the banks and their attempts to topple the Euro and get back to the days of robbing everyone in Europe on a daily basis.

The Euro has worked very well thus far. The only time things get rocky is when someone is too lazy to work, too lazy to admit that they cannot afford their lavish lifestyle, yet they still decide to continue with their way of life (racking up an enormous debt) and then believe that it's only fair for other people (those more hard-working) to be the ones who foot the bill.

Frankly I don't think this kind of attitude would work in any kind of setup.

We all share similar values, are in the same economic block and most of us are even part of the same military alliance.

Currently the majority of our immigration is from outside the EU where we are in fact letting in a lot of people with very different world views and values. So I'm surprised that tabloids choose to focus on the smaller part of today's immigration which is also the most beneficial part. Then again how bright are the people who read the tabloids? I rest my case....

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Astera:

We evidently inhabit different planets, so must agree to differ.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Of course you can. The cheapest and most risk free way of dealing with the issue you mention is for governments to do the currency exchange at zero cost (probably for defined purposes, like goods trade and holiday money) cutting the banks out. The very threat of that is enough to get those 'banking mobs' into line.

The euro has been the disaster that was predicted at the beginning. The whole point of 'convergence criteria' was that the economies have to be essentially the same for it to work - but it was fudged, then fudged again - because 'every closer union' was more important than sane decision making.

Face it, the economies of europe are all different, running on different behaviours, methodologies, timelines, etc. The ONLY way to make a single currency work in that scenario is for ONE government across the EU, with money from one area going to bail out another (eg the germans bailing out the greeks) as a matter of course. Since that's not going to happen, the euro is, and will remain, a destructive failure. The closer you attempt to bind the dissimilar regions without automatic bailouts, the worse you make it - and the more force it comes apart with.

The euro is a timebomb.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Well, it is a typical view for many in the UK to see the Euro as something that was doomed to fail from the very outset. It's been the favourite tune of tabloids from day one. If the Euro was destined to fail the banks would know this and the currency would have been swept off the economic map. As it stands you can still get more Dollars for your Euros so obviously the financial world at large sees the Euro as a normal, safe currency that is here to stay. Not something that is waiting to fall over...

Banks love the UK and being able to shake people down on every transaction. Guess who sponsored the "Save the Pound" campaign? Not too difficult to figure this one out... Going overseas? Step right in. :) Banks will do anything and spend whatever it takes to keep the perception of the Euro in the UK as negative as possible. This is their biggest cash-cow in Europe right now, and losing it is not an option.

The economies don't have to be the same for a currency to work. That is just a tabloid cop out excuse. Scotland has a different economy from the south of England yet it's not like the Pound cannot be used in both places. Is the UK in a constant state of internal bailouts due to this, propping up a Pound that would otherwise fail? Don't think so. The economies of various states in the US are vastly different (Washington State's Boeing/Microsoft/Amazon/Starbucks/etc. vs Idaho's potato industry) and yet all are able to survive under a single currency without Idaho constantly needing a bailout to keep the currency viable.

Just look at Greece now... still thinking that they can live above their means and that others will pay for their lavish existence. There shouldn't be a need for bailouts such as Greece, which are purely down to a mentality factor and nothing to do with economics if you are in fact dealing with a sensible person and not a parasite. If I have a CC and I overspend and become insolvent, is the CC to blame or my spending habits? Replace 'CC' with 'Euro' and you have your answer.

Re: EU referendum voting
 

Err yes, that's the point, it evidentially is doing just that:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/resources/...m77-354061.png

The ones at the top bailout the ones at the bottom. If each had a separate currency there would be some serious revaluation and service cutting for the ones at the bottom - why do you think regional income taxes are an idea on the rise for the tories?

Re: EU referendum voting
 

The way they treat the City as if it's such a huge part of GDP is just plain wrong. Derivatives and voodoo products are not that huge a part of the economy - they look more like a bubble that's artificially inflating the stats.

Remind me a bit of Singapore and all that trade, high GDP, when in reality a lot of it has little to do with Singapore except for the paperwork (invoicing). Or Cyprus.

London is a huge metropolic in its own right, and a big economy at that, but when you see numbers suggesting that the banks in the city centre make up 1/5 or 1/4 of the UK economy it does look rather amusing.