Brexit: politicians for and against

[rooster59]

Brexit: politicians for and against



On Saturday, February 20th the UK Prime Minister David Cameron, after reaching an agreement with his European counterparts in Brussels finally announced that June 23 would be the day of the referendum which will decide if the UK is to leave the EU.

On the Monday in the House of Commons Cameron faced a packed chamber which was in fractious mood and fractured. The traditional party lines of right and left were fudged as politicians and ministers positioned themselves for the campaign ahead.

The Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was not brimming with enthusiasm and did not reveal his personal feelings.

Across the dispatch box David Cameron was facing party dissent.

The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson was in caustic form criticising the “deal” his friend “Dave” had made. Within days he ‘came out’ in favour of leaving the EU.

And with Boris there were a number of other Tories including Cabinet ministers who, free of a party whip lined up to support Brexit.

The Justice Minister, Michael Gove another friend of the PM was seen as the top politician to put his weight behind the leave campaign.

The leader of the House, Chris Grayling was another to show his support for the leave campaign.

In the opposing camp was David Cameron hitting the phone while forming an unusual alliance and campaigning with the opposition – Europe had united them.

“There are lots of things we disagree about between Labour, Liberals, Greens and others but the fact is we all come together to support the idea of Britain staying in a reformed European Union,” the PM explained.

The leader of the Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn – silent for so long – finally broke cover and publically announced his party’s official stance.

“You cannot build a better world, unless you engage with the world, build allies and deliver change. The European Union, many warts and all, has proved itself to be a crucial international framework to do that. That’s why we are backing the Britain to remain in Europe campaign and I hope you will too,” he told supporters.

Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has been far from silent on the subject. In media interviews she has not been slow to offer David Cameron advice on the campaign. And the leader of the Scottish National Party has called on the British to vote to remain in the EU and so maintain the union.

-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2016-04-16

[alant]

Dodgy Dave says stay in, well that must be right then...

[Srikcir]

The Brexit is all about Brit national pride and the longing for the Empire days.

But the only Brits who will benefit from Brexit will be holders of gold.

The baht will rise against the pound making Brit expats cost of living higher.

[BritManToo]

All British politicians are for staying in the EU, because they all want a share of the EU trough.

[RuamRudy]

All British politicians are for staying in the EU, because they all want a share of the EU trough.

I think that there are one or two for Brexit, but that aside, how does an MP directly benefit from the largesse or otherwise of Europe?

[Kiwiken]

Those who long for a return to the old days of Empire will be sadly disappointed. Most Commonwealth Countries having been shut out from trade with the UK have found other Markets. Entry to you UK for many from the Commonwealth blocked so the old ties are unravelling. We still have some affinity to the Queeen but the days of Where Briton goes so do we are long over and ne'er to return. Briton is better off in Europe

[nontabury]

Those who long for a return to the old days of Empire will be sadly disappointed. Most Commonwealth Countries having been shut out from trade with the UK have found other Markets. Entry to you UK for many from the Commonwealth blocked so the old ties are unravelling. We still have some affinity to the Queeen but the days of Where Briton goes so do we are long over and ne'er to return. Briton is better off in Europe

IF you were a Brit and new All the facts,maybe you would come to a different conclusion.

[wabothai]

We, all Europeans, have to make it tougher for the worldorder mafia to reach their goal.

EU is easy to control. It makes it much harder if each individual country has to be controlled to reach their goals.

BREXIT, short term is not good but in the end it will be the winner and thus way to go. Other countries will follow.

[geriatrickid]

All British politicians are for staying in the EU, because they all want a share of the EU trough.

Doesn't Britain pay more to the EU than it receives?

Isn't Britain at the mercy of the EU when it comes to forced acceptance of economic migrants?

Britain will have to renegotiate all of its treaties with various EU countries. All it needs is a few key EU friends and it will retain access to EU markets. I can't see the Netherlands and Denmark turning their backs on Britain.

[Grouse]

All British politicians are for staying in the EU, because they all want a share of the EU trough.

Doesn't Britain pay more to the EU than it receives?

Isn't Britain at the mercy of the EU when it comes to forced acceptance of economic migrants?

Britain will have to renegotiate all of its treaties with various EU countries. All it needs is a few key EU friends and it will retain access to EU markets. I can't see the Netherlands and Denmark turning their backs on Britain.

This is part of the problem: so many misconceptions

1) yes we pay more cash than we receive. Who would you expect to get cash from? Actually, of 10 net contributors, we are 9. (Per head in relation to GDP)

2) is that the only benefit you can think of?

3) why will we be forced to accept economic migrants? We're not even in the Schengen area

4) how can you negotiate individual treaties with countries who are members of EU?

Finally, how do individual MPs benefit from the EU Trough?

No wonder the government needed to send out a pamphlet explains the issues ?

[nontabury]

All British politicians are for staying in the EU, because they all want a share of the EU trough.

Doesn't Britain pay more to the EU than it receives?

Isn't Britain at the mercy of the EU when it comes to forced acceptance of economic migrants?

Britain will have to renegotiate all of its treaties with various EU countries. All it needs is a few key EU friends and it will retain access to EU markets. I can't see the Netherlands and Denmark turning their backs on Britain.

This is part of the problem: so many misconceptions

1) yes we pay more cash than we receive. Who would you expect to get cash from? Actually, of 10 net contributors, we are 9. (Per head in relation to GDP)

2) is that the only benefit you can think of?

3) why will we be forced to accept economic migrants? We're not even in the Schengen area

4) how can you negotiate individual treaties with countries who are members of EU?

Finally, how do individual MPs benefit from the EU Trough?

No wonder the government needed to send out a pamphlet explains the issues

1/ I believe the UK pays more into the EU than any country apart from Germany.

2/ No, the list of benefits to the UK from our exit is endless.

3/ The Brussels bureaucrats are already putting pressure on the UK to accept many economic migrants. Just wait and see if we don't vote to exit.

4/correct. However in the event of a Brit exit, the U.K. would then be in a position to make it's own trade agreements with the rest of the world.

The government sent out pamphlets full of propaganda,thinking the general public would be gullible enough to accept what they were trying to say.

[Johnpound46]

It would be interesting to see what happens to the UK after a Brexit. Personally, I believe it would not benefit the UK, on the contrary, but that's just my personal opinion. If it would turn out to be detrimental for the UK, it would at least (hopefully) shut up parties in other EU-countries advocating a split from the EU.

Another effect of a Brexit could be the end of the UK, as a majority in both Wales and Scotland apparently want to stay in the EU and both countries could (would?) decide to leave the UK.

[Grouse]

All British politicians are for staying in the EU, because they all want a share of the EU trough.

Doesn't Britain pay more to the EU than it receives?

Isn't Britain at the mercy of the EU when it comes to forced acceptance of economic migrants?

Britain will have to renegotiate all of its treaties with various EU countries. All it needs is a few key EU friends and it will retain access to EU markets. I can't see the Netherlands and Denmark turning their backs on Britain.

This is part of the problem: so many misconceptions

1) yes we pay more cash than we receive. Who would you expect to get cash from? Actually, of 10 net contributors, we are 9. (Per head in relation to GDP)

2) is that the only benefit you can think of?

3) why will we be forced to accept economic migrants? We're not even in the Schengen area

4) how can you negotiate individual treaties with countries who are members of EU?

Finally, how do individual MPs benefit from the EU Trough?

No wonder the government needed to send out a pamphlet explains the issues

1/ I believe the UK pays more into the EU than any country apart from Germany.

2/ No, the list of benefits to the UK from our exit is endless.

3/ The Brussels bureaucrats are already putting pressure on the UK to accept many economic migrants. Just wait and see if we don't vote to exit.

4/correct. However in the event of a Brit exit, the U.K. would then be in a position to make it's own trade agreements with the rest of the world.

The government sent out pamphlets full of propaganda,thinking the general public would be gullible enough to accept what they were trying to say.

1) how do you measure the net contribution? Of course we pay more than Luxembourg! But per head as proportion of GDP? 9th out of 10 countries who are net contributors. Netherlands is in pole position

2) benefits from leaving are a guess or at least tenuous. Most stem from. John Bull attitude - quite sad actually. Benefits from staying are known and measurable

3) been successful so far in avoiding absorbing economic migrants. I think the deal with Turkey may well reduce pressure. You are not referring to actual refugees I assume

4) how long will that take? 10 years? Do you think we could get a better deal with other countries (such as China) than the EU WHICH IS 10 times the size of our market? What deal do you think we could get with EU? Poorer than the status quo, that's for sure

The great unwashed are ignorant. Literally. How do you suggest a responsible government should get the facts across? Free copies of the The Economist? Frankly, the Express and other red top rags have much to answer for. Have you seen the inverse correlation between education and Brexit? Same as bringing back the death penalty.

As Churchill famously stated: if you want an argument against universal suffrage, have a 5 min conversation with an average voter!

[Rancid]

My country doesn't belong to the EU, there again neither do most in the world. How have we all ever survived, why aren't we bankrupt?

As an outsider can't see the appeal, but imagine the money and adverts will be flowing into the stay campaign, plenty of snouts in that trough wanting to keep the party going.

[Grouse]

My country doesn't belong to the EU, there again neither do most in the world. How have we all ever survived, why aren't we bankrupt?

As an outsider can't see the appeal, but imagine the money and adverts will be flowing into the stay campaign, plenty of snouts in that trough wanting to keep the party going.

Have you not noticed the trend towards trading blocks? ASEAN?

Unless you favour turning the clocks back and introducing currency controls and protectionist measures, the case is overwhelmingly in favour of grouping together

It's not just about financial trade barriers, there are multiple others such as technical conformance with standards

For academic interest, where are you from? I'm British

[Slain]

The EU has continued to be the main reason why there have been no major wars between the various countries within it, for a very long time.

Look at the former history of the area.

Just one major war between the European countries would have set the economies back for years.

That's good enough for me. I will vote to stay in.

[peterpop]

Heart says LEAVE, head says STAY AAaaarrggh

[nontabury]

The EU has continued to be the main reason why there have been no major wars between the various countries within it, for a very long time.

Look at the former history of the area.

Just one major war between the European countries would have set the economies back for years.

That's good enough for me. I will vote to stay in.

If I were to think that being in the EU was the sole reason there has been no European war in the last 70yrs. I would vote to remain in.

What about NATO and the threat of the USSR of course the deterrent.

[Grouse]

The EU has continued to be the main reason why there have been no major wars between the various countries within it, for a very long time.

Look at the former history of the area.

Just one major war between the European countries would have set the economies back for years.

That's good enough for me. I will vote to stay in.

If I were to think that being in the EU was the sole reason there has been no European war in the last 70yrs. I would vote to remain in.

What about NATO and the threat of the USSR of course the deterrent.

It's not the sole reason but it has been a great stabilising factor

Just one of many reasons to stay inside the tent pissing out!

[Top man]

The EU has continued to be the main reason why there have been no major wars between the various countries within it, for a very long time.

Look at the former history of the area.

Just one major war between the European countries would have set the economies back for years.

That's good enough for me. I will vote to stay in.

you are typical of ignorant people, nato was set up after the war. If the uk vote to leave, there is only one thing that we have learnt from the past, is that will never happen again in Europe.

[Grouse]

The EU has continued to be the main reason why there have been no major wars between the various countries within it, for a very long time.

Look at the former history of the area.

Just one major war between the European countries would have set the economies back for years.

That's good enough for me. I will vote to stay in.

you are typical of ignorant people, nato was set up after the war. If the uk vote to leave, there is only one thing that we have learnt from the past, is that will never happen again in Europe.

It's about getting along inside the EU not external defence. And you talk about ignorance? Ha!

[dunroaming]

Both sides are trying scare tactics and stretching reality to further their cause. I think when push comes to shove it is unlikely that people will vote to leave. It would be voting for the unknown and people seldom rush to do that. It is clear that the EU want us to stay in but what would be the fallout if we didn't? I suspect that the impact would de-stabalise the EU even further and that it may even fall apart.

That in itself would be an argument for leaving as it would be an opportunity to start again with a totally fresh appoach and form a a new 21st century EU without the weaker links.

It is widely accepted that the EU needs radical changes and of course that should be done by the members within, however with each member state only trying to better their own position it inevitably means most radical changes will be blocked.

The really sad thing is that at the moment it is all about political pot shots from all sides and it shouldn't be because this is way more important than that

[Anon999]

The problem with posts on here is that they are one sided and some posters are vociferous to say the least.

What the Brussels eurocrats have in store for the UK is to slowly but surely to make is subjected to the needs of all the other EU countries as it needs the UK, the 5th largest trading nation, more than the reverse. However, the thing they are scared of most is that the EU dream could easily collapse as a result of a Brexit.

That the EU sells 21% of its output to the UK far outweighs the amount they buy in return. Will they cut off their nose to spite their face in the event of a Brexit? There are many other benefits that are only one way, setting up a business in the UK is far easier and that is why there are a large number of French in London. The judicial system has to bow to EU directives and is not permitted to extradite undesirables without their say so, as do every other business, many of them crazy. For instance Jam is not Jam unless it contains 60% sugar and therefore must not be labelled as such and there are hundreds of other examples.

What else do they want, well a european military force and police force and who will they demand pay the most into them? You have one guess. If you do some research then you'll find that lurking in the background awaiting the Referendum result are a number of pending regulations being kept quiet that are not beneficial to the UK.

The whole idea is to make the UK a subordinate state within the EU, answerable to Brussels and the two parliaments they have, with all 28 and counting, countries directed in an ever increasing draconian way, while their national parliaments will have no power to rule in any meaningful way, becoming largely redundant.

The question is where do the people from the poorer countries that are being added to the count gravitate too? Yes the richer 'states' as it is mandatory to allow them all to enter without any restrictions and benefit from the services of the indigenous population, without ever making any contribution to it, yes NHS and benefits. And what about all the other services, police, fire service, etc, etc?

Yes there are benefits in being a sponsor of the 'club', however, the drawbacks well and truly outweigh them. All the time the two richest nations continue to bankroll the others then there can never be an equitable situation until such times as the sponsors are as just as poor.

What about the Schengen situation, an open door for all the criminal element and terrorists. Well the powers that be in Brussels are finally admitting that experiment is a failure and a number of national governments are also complaining loudly. Will it last your guess is as good as mine.

The UK is a small country, as any cursory look at a map will confirm and it already has more people living there than the last Census declared, do all the illegals and those who want to remain under the radar register? How many is open to discussion. When you have a full house how many more are permitted free entry with all the overheads that that incurs?

Having said all that, having ever more communities within communities that want to follow their own laws, often illegal and allowed to ignore those of the UK too, is totally out of order.

[wabothai]

In the old days, which most of us remember, there was the high spirit of working together to rebuild Europe after the devastating WW2. Coops were formed, business deals were made. Each country in its own way flourished. Southern Europe stayed somewhat behind. The banking mafia in their ivory towers were having a ball, but kept quiet.

This great spirit unfortunately has turned into a spirit of greed fed by the banking, media and marketing mafia.

A large scale organization was necessary to lead this in proper channels.

The EU was created to make control easier for the mafia. The poor countries were invited to join. Great, one big Europe. Yes, we were made to believe this and bought it. Trade organization like the TPP and TTIP are pushed through just for better control, eastern European countries are invited to join, even Turkye and the Ukraine are invited despite all protests. Big steps forward for easy domination and control. Masses of people form the Middle East and Africa are storming into Europe because it is easy. None of this would have happened if there was no EU.

The EU is a mechanism put in place to control the masses and to lead them into apathy and finally into being owned by those in their comfortable ivory towers.

My point: Brexit is very welcome to fight the war against domination and apathic slavery. We may hope that other countries will follow, Eventually this will result in the implosion of the EU. Let us regain the spirit which made the world a better place.

[Grouse]

The problem with posts on here is that they are one sided and some posters are vociferous to say the least.

What the Brussels eurocrats have in store for the UK is to slowly but surely to make is subjected to the needs of all the other EU countries as it needs the UK, the 5th largest trading nation, more than the reverse. However, the thing they are scared of most is that the EU dream could easily collapse as a result of a Brexit.

That the EU sells 21% of its output to the UK far outweighs the amount they buy in return. Will they cut off their nose to spite their face in the event of a Brexit? There are many other benefits that are only one way, setting up a business in the UK is far easier and that is why there are a large number of French in London. The judicial system has to bow to EU directives and is not permitted to extradite undesirables without their say so, as do every other business, many of them crazy. For instance Jam is not Jam unless it contains 60% sugar and therefore must not be labelled as such and there are hundreds of other examples.

What else do they want, well a european military force and police force and who will they demand pay the most into them? You have one guess. If you do some research then you'll find that lurking in the background awaiting the Referendum result are a number of pending regulations being kept quiet that are not beneficial to the UK.

The whole idea is to make the UK a subordinate state within the EU, answerable to Brussels and the two parliaments they have, with all 28 and counting, countries directed in an ever increasing draconian way, while their national parliaments will have no power to rule in any meaningful way, becoming largely redundant.

The question is where do the people from the poorer countries that are being added to the count gravitate too? Yes the richer 'states' as it is mandatory to allow them all to enter without any restrictions and benefit from the services of the indigenous population, without ever making any contribution to it, yes NHS and benefits. And what about all the other services, police, fire service, etc, etc?

Yes there are benefits in being a sponsor of the 'club', however, the drawbacks well and truly outweigh them. All the time the two richest nations continue to bankroll the others then there can never be an equitable situation until such times as the sponsors are as just as poor.

What about the Schengen situation, an open door for all the criminal element and terrorists. Well the powers that be in Brussels are finally admitting that experiment is a failure and a number of national governments are also complaining loudly. Will it last your guess is as good as mine.

The UK is a small country, as any cursory look at a map will confirm and it already has more people living there than the last Census declared, do all the illegals and those who want to remain under the radar register? How many is open to discussion. When you have a full house how many more are permitted free entry with all the overheads that that incurs?

Having said all that, having ever more communities within communities that want to follow their own laws, often illegal and allowed to ignore those of the UK too, is totally out of order.

Let's just say that I disagree with most of your points. However, please present facts not propaganda. EU exports 16% of total exports to UK. 46% of our exports go to Europe.

Why do you think the malign EU powers would take a benign stance to UK negotiating a trade deal? Don't you think other EU countries would like to take up the slack?

[Baerboxer]

Sturgeon once again threatens this and that to push her own agenda. Lies to the Scottish people when she lost, has no respect for democracy and tries to link unconnected things for her own ends. Wish someone would shut this wee demented pixie up and put her in her place. Whines on about the benefits of leaving the Union, as she sees them, but wants to be dictated to by the EU and be part of a federal state. Oh, really.

Gove is a an example of the worst of the Tory party - a nut case. Johnson a rich buffon whose antics can be an embarrassment. Dodgy Dave is another rich elite hiso determined to look after the interests of his rich elite hiso family and mates. Osborne, his fellow wealthy Old Etonian, is helping him do just that.

Corbyn quickly reversed his view on Europe once he became party leader - now "sees the bigger picture" instead of his former principled views - wonder whose pulling his strings?

Farage and his mob don't really have much idea and like Sturgeon are one trick ponies.

Where are some decent, capable, politicians when we need them?

[Anon999]

The problem with posts on here is that they are one sided and some posters are vociferous to say the least.

What the Brussels eurocrats have in store for the UK is to slowly but surely to make is subjected to the needs of all the other EU countries as it needs the UK, the 5th largest trading nation, more than the reverse. However, the thing they are scared of most is that the EU dream could easily collapse as a result of a Brexit.

That the EU sells 21% of its output to the UK far outweighs the amount they buy in return. Will they cut off their nose to spite their face in the event of a Brexit? There are many other benefits that are only one way, setting up a business in the UK is far easier and that is why there are a large number of French in London. The judicial system has to bow to EU directives and is not permitted to extradite undesirables without their say so, as do every other business, many of them crazy. For instance Jam is not Jam unless it contains 60% sugar and therefore must not be labelled as such and there are hundreds of other examples.

What else do they want, well a european military force and police force and who will they demand pay the most into them? You have one guess. If you do some research then you'll find that lurking in the background awaiting the Referendum result are a number of pending regulations being kept quiet that are not beneficial to the UK.

The whole idea is to make the UK a subordinate state within the EU, answerable to Brussels and the two parliaments they have, with all 28 and counting, countries directed in an ever increasing draconian way, while their national parliaments will have no power to rule in any meaningful way, becoming largely redundant.

The question is where do the people from the poorer countries that are being added to the count gravitate too? Yes the richer 'states' as it is mandatory to allow them all to enter without any restrictions and benefit from the services of the indigenous population, without ever making any contribution to it, yes NHS and benefits. And what about all the other services, police, fire service, etc, etc?

Yes there are benefits in being a sponsor of the 'club', however, the drawbacks well and truly outweigh them. All the time the two richest nations continue to bankroll the others then there can never be an equitable situation until such times as the sponsors are as just as poor.

What about the Schengen situation, an open door for all the criminal element and terrorists. Well the powers that be in Brussels are finally admitting that experiment is a failure and a number of national governments are also complaining loudly. Will it last your guess is as good as mine.

The UK is a small country, as any cursory look at a map will confirm and it already has more people living there than the last Census declared, do all the illegals and those who want to remain under the radar register? How many is open to discussion. When you have a full house how many more are permitted free entry with all the overheads that that incurs?

Having said all that, having ever more communities within communities that want to follow their own laws, often illegal and allowed to ignore those of the UK too, is totally out of order.

Let's just say that I disagree with most of your points. However, please present facts not propaganda. EU exports 16% of total exports to UK. 46% of our exports go to Europe.

Why do you think the malign EU powers would take a benign stance to UK negotiating a trade deal? Don't you think other EU countries would like to take up the slack?

That was not unexpected and you'll probably disagree with the following figures too. Furthermore all the comments can be proven if you would care to research them for yourself so there is no propaganda in my post but in your posts! Additionally the following are also known published facts.

A confirmed overhead is a 2015 study that found the 100 most burdensome EU regulations costs the UK £33.3 billion a year. You could do quite a lot with that.

The latest figures show the UK in 2015 had a deficit with the EU on trade of £68 billion, the figures being £291 billion (53.1% of their total exports), against £223 billion (43.7% of UK exports) and a surplus of £31 billion with non EU countries. Therefore the UK does have a have an imbalance as previously said, " its output to the UK far outweighs the amount they buy in return. Will they cut off their nose to spite their face in the event of a Brexit?"

You can find that data in a House of Commons Briefing Paper dated 13th April.

[RuamRudy]

Sturgeon once again threatens this and that to push her own agenda. Lies to the Scottish people when she lost, has no respect for democracy and tries to link unconnected things for her own ends. Wish someone would shut this wee demented pixie up and put her in her place. Whines on about the benefits of leaving the Union, as she sees them, but wants to be dictated to by the EU and be part of a federal state. Oh, really.

She is the leader of the party that trounced every single other party in Scotland in the last UK election, and is on course to do the same again next month in the election for the Scottish Parliament. Clearly she has a mandate to speak up for those who elected her, despite your unashamed misogyny. As the SNP has been consistent in its intent to campaign to remain in the EU, she is entirely within her right to continue to campaign for it. If there was appetite for Brexit in Scotland, UKIP wouldn't be the utterly pathetic shambles that they are in Scotland.

Personally, I am coming round to hoping for a Brexit, but only because shortly after that I hope for the UK to become history too.

[nontabury]

Sturgeon once again threatens this and that to push her own agenda. Lies to the Scottish people when she lost, has no respect for democracy and tries to link unconnected things for her own ends. Wish someone would shut this wee demented pixie up and put her in her place. Whines on about the benefits of leaving the Union, as she sees them, but wants to be dictated to by the EU and be part of a federal state. Oh, really.

She is the leader of the party that trounced every single other party in Scotland in the last UK election, and is on course to do the same again next month in the election for the Scottish Parliament. Clearly she has a mandate to speak up for those who elected her, despite your unashamed misogyny. As the SNP has been consistent in its intent to campaign to remain in the EU, she is entirely within her right to continue to campaign for it. If there was appetite for Brexit in Scotland, UKIP wouldn't be the utterly pathetic shambles that they are in Scotland.

Personally, I am coming round to hoping for a Brexit, but only because shortly after that I hope for the UK to become history too.

I agree with much of what you say, however do not think that UKIP are irrelevant in Scotland,in spite of the antics of the tartan brown shirts on Nigel Farages last visit.

[South]

53 years old, bought up in commonwealth countries early 60's, returned to UK 1976, seen nothing but a decline since ...... moved out 1981, no carrot will ever entice me to go back.

Stay in, get out, don't care. Worry about those still there though.