The wonderful EU and Migration thread!

[Hoboh]

The arguments about Trade Agreements are not a misnomer. If I export something to the EU today, from within the EU, it costs me nothing on the Common Customs Tariff. The Common Customs Tariff will apply to us if we were outside the EU.

We might negotiate it down. It might end up in our favour on some products and us disadvantaged on others. Then again it might not. We're only asking, what the outcome is going to be and when we do, we get soundbites, obfuscation, basic supply and demand theory but no actual numbers.

Whilst the EU relies on the UK for 16% of it's exports, we rely on the EU for pushing 50% of Sourceours. Given that 16% is split across 27 member states and our 40-odd percent is solely ours, I'm singularly failing to see all these aces we're supposedly holding.

Europe now accounts for 50% of the total value of UK exports of services and 51% of the total value of UK imports of services. 2013
source
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/itis/inte ... vices.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Aye is about half. So the UK having the EU as an export market is in numbers way more intrinsic to our economy than the EU having the UK as an export market. If we fell out over the negotiations, they damage 50% of our economy, we can damage only 16% of there's split across 20 odd countries.

Don't that make you feel really powerful.

I doubt falling out with over half of those 20 odd countries would make much difference, now the 9 or 10 that do matter might not like it!

They're a trading bloc, or had that bit passed you by? Come one, come all.

Ah, so the Germans won't worry about billions of exports to the UK because of Latvia being in the block?
And the UK will shit themselves at Latvia penalising us?
I think the Germans might just tell them to shut the f*ck up.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

The arguments about Trade Agreements are not a misnomer. If I export something to the EU today, from within the EU, it costs me nothing on the Common Customs Tariff. The Common Customs Tariff will apply to us if we were outside the EU.

We might negotiate it down. It might end up in our favour on some products and us disadvantaged on others. Then again it might not. We're only asking, what the outcome is going to be and when we do, we get soundbites, obfuscation, basic supply and demand theory but no actual numbers.

Whilst the EU relies on the UK for 16% of it's exports, we rely on the EU for pushing 50% of Sourceours. Given that 16% is split across 27 member states and our 40-odd percent is solely ours, I'm singularly failing to see all these aces we're supposedly holding.

Europe now accounts for 50% of the total value of UK exports of services and 51% of the total value of UK imports of services. 2013
source
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/itis/inte ... vices.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Aye is about half. So the UK having the EU as an export market is in numbers way more intrinsic to our economy than the EU having the UK as an export market. If we fell out over the negotiations, they damage 50% of our economy, we can damage only 16% of there's split across 20 odd countries.

Don't that make you feel really powerful.

I doubt falling out with over half of those 20 odd countries would make much difference, now the 9 or 10 that do matter might not like it!

They're a trading bloc, or had that bit passed you by? Come one, come all.

EFTA - European Free Trading Association is a trading bloc. EU is much much more than that, it's a new federal country in the making. We're already part of EFTA, just like the Scots argued they have Stirling.

[Worthy4England]

Not sure I get your point there, Spotty? I know EFTA and the EU aren't the same thing.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Not sure I get your point there, Spotty? I know EFTA and the EU aren't the same thing.

We can get all the trading benefits of being EFTA without the political inconveniences of the EU. Intra trade between us and EU members can then progress apace whilst still having trade agreements with the rest of the world. A compromise second best of both worlds.

[Worthy4England]

There's lots of Agreements we could look to try and piggy on. I'm just waiting for the out campaign to tell us which one(s) we're going to do. We could do this, or that, or t'other isn't a strategy...

[Prufrock]

There are more than just economic reasons why trade will be hurt and barriers will be put up. Yes, it will hurt Europe too, but not as much as they worry they'll be hurt if the European project falls apart and they all have to try to negotiate with China, the US et al as individual small nations. Anyone who thinks they'll give us even the same deal as Switerland and Norway (who both have to pay contributions to the EU, in Norway's case more per capita than us, who both have to adopt reams and reams of EU legislation about the striaghteness of bananas - or the equivalent non-fictional standarisation legislation and in Norway's case who still have free movement rules and have a higher number of immigrants per capita than we do, all of which comes with no say in any of that legislation) is bonkers.

Rightly or wrongly, mainland Europe is committed to the EU. Their experience of war is less heroic last-stand and more being occupied. Euroscepticism is much more of a fringe position even than it is here. If you think there is a chance, to take one example that Francois Hollande or UMP rival is going to let Britain have a deal that lets the FN say "look, Britain left and they're fine", you're off your trolley. Us leaving threatens the whole project; they aren't going to make it easy. And there will be some who (understandably) say, well,f*ck 'em then. I'd rather not get f*cked.

Plus, also, things are fine. Leaving is a risk. If you want to convince genuine "don't know"s, you're going to have to come up with better than "I reckon we'll be fine because". The burden is on "out", and I'm yet to see anything apporaching a convincing case.

[bobo the clown]

^^^ panic fanny

[Hoboh]

There are more than just economic reasons why trade will be hurt and barriers will be put up. Yes, it will hurt Europe too, but not as much as they worry they'll be hurt if the European project falls apart and they all have to try to negotiate with China, the US et al as individual small nations. Anyone who thinks they'll give us even the same deal as Switerland and Norway (who both have to pay contributions to the EU, in Norway's case more per capita than us, who both have to adopt reams and reams of EU legislation about the striaghteness of bananas - or the equivalent non-fictional standarisation legislation and in Norway's case who still have free movement rules and have a higher number of immigrants per capita than we do, all of which comes with no say in any of that legislation) is bonkers.

Rightly or wrongly, mainland Europe is committed to the EU. Their experience of war is less heroic last-stand and more being occupied. Euroscepticism is much more of a fringe position even than it is here. If you think there is a chance, to take one example that Francois Hollande or UMP rival is going to let Britain have a deal that lets the FN say "look, Britain left and they're fine", you're off your trolley. Us leaving threatens the whole project; they aren't going to make it easy. And there will be some who (understandably) say, well,f*ck 'em then. I'd rather not get f*cked.

Plus, also, things are fine. Leaving is a risk. If you want to convince genuine "don't know"s, you're going to have to come up with better than "I reckon we'll be fine because". The burden is on "out", and I'm yet to see anything apporaching a convincing case.

And I've never seen anything from the Europhile camp to convince any doubter either!
If the debate was merely about business links and trade I doubt the out campaign would be more than one man and his dog, it's not though, it's about a United States of Europe!
It is about Johnny foreigner deciding what is good for the UK when they have little or feck all understanding of what it's like to be British. Most of the EU members are in receipt of cash from the rest and would clear a site by hand for a NATO base, so they are hardly going to rock the boat.
The French??
You mean that country with tax levels so high a hell of a lot of wealthy French are settling over here?
The same France who, with it's nutcase past of immigration, has more terrorist cells than Syria?
France that grinds to a halt after lunch, has unions so militant they make ours weep with envy?
More laws and red tape than you could imagine?
A France were no one will buy a top tech tyre manufacturing plant because of the attached conditions (I don't think Eddie has shares there btw).
Their experience of war has been one of occupation?, Most of the buggers have been quick enough in the past about starting them.
The EU is slowly stopping to work in it's current form for a lot of the larger members fortunately for the present at all cost Europhile, not all at once, the UK is the first to show it's hand
The future looks bleak for the EU, just wait until the first of our European partners uses leathal force to protect it's border.

[Hoboh]

Sir Francis Jacobs, a former advocate general at the European Court of Justice, said EU law will ‘always prevail’ as long as Britain remains in the 28-state bloc. Sir Francis asked whether EU law would remain sovereign under Cameron’s proposals, said: ‘the answer is clearly yes. If the European Union is to work at all then European Union law has to prevail over the law over the member states.
‘If the 28 member states are each taking a different view of what European Union law should mean then it would be impossible for the European Union to function so it does require that European law should be recognised as prevailing over national law.’
He added that the only way to regain sovereignty for the British Parliament would be to leave the EU entirely. The Prime Minister is expected to say the British Supreme Court outranks the European Court of Justice, making it similar to Germany’s constitutional court.
But Sir Francis played down the significance of the German court, saying The German Constitutional Court – the model for the changes - has never disapplied EU law in practice and never will.
The doctrine of the supremacy (sometimes referred to as primacy) of EU law is a principle that when there is conflict between European law and the law of Member States, European law prevails; the norms of national law have to be set aside.
R (Factortame Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport was a case taken against the United Kingdom government by a company of Spanish fishermen who claimed that the United Kingdom had breached European Union law by requiring ships to have a majority of British owners if they were to be registered in the UK. The UK lost and had to change UK law.
Sir Geoffrey Howe, as British Foreign Secretary, used to say Sovereignty could be shared. What most people are thinking of when they talk about our loss of sovereignty within the European Union is the fact that many of the laws, which apply in the United Kingdom, are made, not by our Parliament, but by the collective decision making of all the Member States and the European Parliament.
We have definitely sacrificed our Sovereignty in a hundreds of different ways. We are just one state in the European Union.

Sums up the sovereignty over law lie!

[Worthy4England]

Our sovereign parliament can choose to leave if it wants, you might have spotted we're currently testing that,, in 40 years we haven't. Which bit of EU law is stopping us doing this, because I'm missing it.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Our sovereign parliament can choose to leave if it wants, you might have spotted we're currently testing that,, in 40 years we haven't. Which bit of EU law is stopping us doing this, because I'm missing it.

The Law of Diminishing Returns?
The Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum?
The Law of Merkel's Handbag?

but , but, Worthy, under the present guidelines of 'ever closer union' at some stage in the near future we all meld into the Greater EuroBorg, at which stage our sovereign parliament will no longer be sovereign and the question of leaving will be one of secession, which as a few of the US states can tell you is a much harder act to pull off.
I'm only pointing this out, because I'm actually a bigger fan of the EuroBorg than I am of the EU (the EU has inherent weaknessses that will be smoothed out by a EuroBorg) because in the interest of debate I thought it only fair.

[Worthy4England]

The point is Sir, if there's anything now or in the future we don't like we can leave. Don't even need a referendum and according to the exit group, it's a piece of pi$$. Clearly nothing to worry about here.

[Worthy4England]

Oh and as an aside, which Law makers do we get a vote on today? 30+ % population vote for government, They draft shit under the offices of the AG? Who we didn't know at the time of the election. Those Laws are then changed over time by some people from the Department of Funny Wigs who no fckr got to vote in. The notion that Joe Public's interests are being protected regardless of where the Lawmakers sit is fallacious.

[Worthy4England]

And if we're not in control of our own Laws, why the fck are we employing 640 fatuous wankers in Government?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

And if we're not in control of our own Laws, why the fck are we employing 640 fatuous wankers in Government?

Worthy, at least get the numbers right: Which ten aren't fatuous wankers, and shirley the 191 females may well be fatuous but I don't think that (technically) they wank, and you've forgotten the 760 fatuous wankers that we employ on a part time basis in the other place.

[Beefheart]

And if we're not in control of our own Laws, why the fck are we employing 640 fatuous wankers in Government?

Worthy, at least get the numbers right: Which ten aren't fatuous wankers, and shirley the 191 females may well be fatuous but I don't think that (technically) they wank, and you've forgotten the 760 fatuous wankers that we employ on a part time basis in the other place.

I think you've got the speaker, three deputies - (who I'm not sure can vote or not) and 5 sinn fein wankers who don't sit in parliament. So he's only one off unless I've missed someone.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

And if we're not in control of our own Laws, why the fck are we employing 640 fatuous wankers in Government?

Worthy, at least get the numbers right: Which ten aren't fatuous wankers, and shirley the 191 females may well be fatuous but I don't think that (technically) they wank, and you've forgotten the 760 fatuous wankers that we employ on a part time basis in the other place.

I think you've got the speaker, three deputies - (who I'm not sure can vote or not) and 5 sinn fein wankers who don't sit in parliament. So he's only one off unless I've missed someone.

I think Beefy, that we still employ them, the fact they don't turn up, and/or vote, makes them even more fatuous and wankerish, surely?

[Beefheart]

Point taken!

[Hoboh]

Our sovereign parliament can choose to leave if it wants, you might have spotted we're currently testing that,, in 40 years we haven't. Which bit of EU law is stopping us doing this, because I'm missing it.

Of course we can leave.
But we are at the behest of laws set by the EU even if they are detrimental to the UK!
Sorry mate, this is about who sets the law, UK or EU? Nice try to deflect the point.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

And if we're not in control of our own Laws, why the fck are we employing 640 fatuous wankers in Government?

Worthy, at least get the numbers right: Which ten aren't fatuous wankers, and shirley the 191 females may well be fatuous but I don't think that (technically) they wank, and you've forgotten the 760 fatuous wankers that we employ on a part time basis in the other place.

I think you've got the speaker, three deputies - (who I'm not sure can vote or not) and 5 sinn fein wankers who don't sit in parliament. So he's only one off unless I've missed someone.

There's the one on maternity leave...I think.