EU Referendum

[Old Skier]

You see with this statement you have absolutely no basis for making it. I suggest that you have very little idea how influential the UK is and has been in forming EU policy - and neither really do I

Therefor you have no bases for disputing it as you admit you have no idea either.

 

[Old Skier]

What Sturgeon says is that if the UK leaving the EU caused a significant shift in the Yes/No independence balance in Scotland for a sustained period, then that would in all likelihood be a trigger for a call for a further referendum. A Brexit in itself will not.

She is keeping her powder dry. Back in the 70s the country with the most No vote to the Common Market vote was Scotland.

 

[FairwayDodger]

Perhaps they realise that their economic credibility is wafer thin, and that their only high value card in the economic debate is this £350million a week figure. Admitting that they have willfully and continually misrepresented what the UK actually pays might not play that well with waverers.

This perplexes me as well. Clearly we pay a significant sum of money as part of our eu membership so why don't they just quote the real figure? Instead they are sticking with a bogus number that everyone knows is a lie and, IMO, ruining what might be a solid vote-winning argument.

 

[Old Skier]

One thing I'm really struggling with with Brexit is that which has caused Sarah Wollaston to change her mind move to Remain.

Shes the next Health Minister. Down hear in Devon the talk is that she will not be the candidate for Totnes at the next election as her main stand was on leaving the EU because of its damaging effects on farming and the fisheries.

Strange that the BBC give her the position of a senior member of the Conservative party and headlines even though she has only been an MP for 2 short years whilst Skinner and his mate get the back bencher treatment with back page treatment .

 

[Doon frae Troon]

This perplexes me as well. Clearly we pay a significant sum of money as part of our eu membership so why don't they just quote the real figure? Instead they are sticking with a bogus number that everyone knows is a lie and, IMO, ruining what might be a solid vote-winning argument.

I can't stand Grayling, but even he looked sorrowfully embarrassed when trying to defend the £350m big lie the other night.
If the separatists came clean and blamed it all on Nigel's economics they just might still have a chance.

 

[Hacker Khan]

What an absolutely stupid and infantile link, I just cant see why you bothered to post it!

Bit quiet in the office today?

Bit of humour to puncture all the serious pontificating and spouting off in this thread. That deep down everyone really knows will mean absolutely chuff all in terms of how people on here vote?

 

[Oohmeoldbacksknackered]

Here's a question I haven't seen discussed on t'tele:

If this question of leave/remain has been floating around the country since before the last election how many other markets have our government been approaching to discuss future trade deals with?

Or are they going to wait to see what is decided and suddenly go "Oh ****, I was going to do something about that, but.... "

For what it's worth, having read the first few pages and last few pages of this thread I think that opinion here has mirrored the country - very little has changed throughout the debate - those who are in are still in and vice versa. All the politicians involved are doing a great job of pontificating about what is best for them as individuals and don't really give a damn about what is best for the proles like me (and maybe you??).

Farage's whole career is based on arguing about leaving, but he doesn't necessarily want that eventuality to happen - if we ever actually leave he'll be out of a job.

Cameron is wholly committed to staying into his marvelously reformed EU - but why the hell did he ever let it get to the state that it needed so much reform unless he was happy with it as it was until he thought he might lose his job over it.

Boris is absolutely for anything that will let him get one over on his old school bud.

And the others are trying to position themselves in the best place for when the dust settles.

My tuppence - I don't think it's actually about trade, I think it's more about sovereignty - most leavers don't like the idea of any other country, or group of countries, having the power to tell us what to do. The remainers think we have plenty of power and it's us that is leading the rest of Europe.

As with the whole of the debate I think the truth is somewhere in the middle.

And I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that very little is going to change either way whichever way the vote goes.

If we leave we'll still have to jump to the EU drum in order to trade.

If we stay we'll fight to keep our sovereignty away from fully immersing with those damned johnny foreigners.

:sbox:

 

[Pro Zach]

One thing I'm really struggling with with Brexit is that which has caused Sarah Wollaston to change her mind move to Remain. It is a fact that we UK does not pay £350m a week into the EU. A fact. And my goodness when looking forward we seem to be rather short of these in this debate - from both sides.

Putting aside what comes back to the UK in the form of funding - it is a fact that the rebate is taken off before the UK pays a penny. Yet Brexit continues to claim that we pay £350m to the EU every week when we just don't. It is quite simply a lie.

There are many things that Remain and Leave are predicting that will happen - but these are not lies - these are predictions that can be debunked if you wish or you can say are based on false premises and assumptions. But the £350m figure is just simply not true.

But Brexit refuse to admit it - last night we heard BoJo Buffon refuse to accept it; yesterday on Today prog being interviewed by Nick Robinson, John Redwood just would not admit that the figure as being presented by Brexit was wrong,

I'm guessing Brexit is simply thinking we've got the £350m figure in our sympathisers head, so why admit we have been lying and risk losing some. So they persist - quite happily running with the lie. And when they so blatantly and brazenly continue to perpetrate this lie, why should I believe a single word that they say.

They are not lying. It is a gross figure. We pay £350m, we negotiated a £80m REBATE. We did not negotiate a reduction in the payment. So we now have a Gross payment of £350m and a Nett payment of £270m. Both of these figures would be factual and true.

If they actually want an out vote then I personally think they were wrong to use the gross figure. This is because most people, like you, will see the nett figure as being true and the gross figure as therefore being false or a lie. But it is not.

As a golfer you should find it easy to understand that they are both true. Last Saturday I scored a gross 86 which is a nett 74 after my 'rebate'. If I say I scored 86 will you call me a liar because it is a fact I scored 74. Or do you understand that the gross and nett are both factual and true.

 

[Oohmeoldbacksknackered]

Last Saturday I scored a gross 86 which is a nett 74 after my 'rebate'. If I say I scored 86 will you call me a liar because it is a fact I scored 74.

Or will they call you a liar because there is video evidence of you kicking the ball out of the rough on the dogleg 13th???



​(The above is blatantly untrue and I'd hate to cast nasturtiums about Pro Zach's 'gardening' skills, but there are times when it's just too easy to jump in with both feet...)

 

[Pro Zach]

Or will they call you a liar because there is video evidence of you kicking the ball out of the rough on the dogleg 13th???



​(The above is blatantly untrue and I'd hate to cast nasturtiums about Pro Zach's 'gardening' skills, but there are times when it's just too easy to jump in with both feet...)

They can't have this evidence as I only played the front nine and then filled the rest in in the bar. Level gross front nine but needed point one back for this weeks knock-out.

 

[ColchesterFC]

They are not lying. It is a gross figure. We pay £350m, we negotiated a £80m REBATE. We did not negotiate a reduction in the payment. So we now have a Gross payment of £350m and a Nett payment of £270m. Both of these figures would be factual and true.

But we don't pay £350 million per week and we are certainly not sending "over £350 million to the EU every week" which is the claim in the latest Leave leaflet. The rebate is deducted before we make any payment so we are sending approx £270 million to the EU every week. Therefore the claim in the leaflet is a lie. Doesn't matter about gross or nett it's factually incorrect.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

I loved Dimbledum explaining the maths behind the alleged £375m to Grayling as if he was a 4 year old.

 

[Old Skier]

Good old Woolfgang helping the out campaign.

 

[MarkE]

But we don't pay £350 million per week and we are certainly not sending "over £350 million to the EU every week" which is the claim in the latest Leave leaflet. The rebate is deducted before we make any payment so we are sending approx £270 million to the EU every week. Therefore the claim in the leaflet is a lie. Doesn't matter about gross or nett it's factually incorrect.

But the rebate is not enshrined in law and there's no guarantee our rebate won't fall if we vote to remain. If you trust the eu to stick to the negotiated rebate and do what's best for the UK, fair enough. On the other hand if like me you believe our contribution will continue to rise, to prop up all the basket case nations they continue to welcome into the eu, that 350million could soon look low.

 

[ColchesterFC]

But the rebate is not enshrined in law and there's no guarantee our rebate won't fall if we vote to remain. If you trust the eu to stick to the negotiated rebate and do what's best for the UK, fair enough. On the other hand if like me you believe our contribution will continue to rise, to prop up all the basket case nations they continue to welcome into the eu, that 350million could soon look low.

We do not send £350 million to the EU each week. That is a lie. Dress it up however you want but it's simply not true. If Leave were saying "if we lost our rebate we would be sending £350 million to the EU each week" then that would be fair enough but that isn't what they are saying.

You are correct in one sense in that the rebate is not set in any of the EU treaties but is discussed as part of the "Multiannual Financial Framework" every 7 years which has to be unanimously agreed by all 28 EU members. This means that they can't change it unless whoever the UK Prime Minister agrees to it being changed. We have a veto to stop any changes in this area. Do you think that there is any UK politician that would be willing to torpedo their own career and the hopes of their party by agreeing to give up the rebate?

 

[Pro Zach]

But we don't pay £350 million per week and we are certainly not sending "over £350 million to the EU every week" which is the claim in the latest Leave leaflet. The rebate is deducted before we make any payment so we are sending approx £270 million to the EU every week. Therefore the claim in the leaflet is a lie. Doesn't matter about gross or nett it's factually incorrect.

We send them £270m NETT. It very much matters if it's gross or nett, because if it was gross we could deduct £80m rebate from it. You are arguing that it is a physical fact that we send £270m therefore it must be untrue that we send £350m.

This means that my nett 74 is untrue. I didn't physically score 74, my actual score was 86. but my 74 is not untrue, it is a fact by definition of a nett score.

So we don't physically send £350m but we do send £350m gross by fact of definition of a gross amount.

 

[MarkE]

We do not send £350 million to the EU each week. That is a lie. Dress it up however you want but it's simply not true. If Leave were saying "if we lost our rebate we would be sending £350 million to the EU each week" then that would be fair enough but that isn't what they are saying.

You are correct in one sense in that the rebate is not set in any of the EU treaties but is discussed as part of the "Multiannual Financial Framework" every 7 years which has to be unanimously agreed by all 28 EU members. This means that they can't change it unless whoever the UK Prime Minister agrees to it being changed. We have a veto to stop any changes in this area. Do you think that there is any UK politician that would be willing to torpedo their own career and the hopes of their party by agreeing to give up the rebate?

You can't quote a nett figure and ignore the gross. You call it a lie. I call it quoting the gross figure. Consecutive PM's have sold us down the river where the eu is concerned, from both parties, so no I have little faith in the current incumbent doing what's right for the UK.

 

[Tashyboy]

Neither you, nor I, have any idea if State intervention in the coal-mining industry would have actually saved any jobs in the medium to long term.

As for your pensions being within the PPF at least the major part of your benefits will still be payable. This was not always the case prior to the establishment of the PPF.

So it all depends how one interprets the "facts" that are presented to us all.

The "facts" are Mickie that, Poland, Germany, Czech, Spain, France and every country within the EU that applied for EU state aid to prop up failing coal mining company's recieved said aid. that is fact, not how one interprets facts. Another fact is that David Cameron with his inability to support UK jobs, inadvertently supports Coal mining jobs within the EU and the rest of the world over well mine and thousands of others. Another fact is that this Government plans to have all coal powered stations closed by 2025. Another fact is that when my mine was due to close with EU aid was 2018. Another fact is 2018 is before 2025. Another fact is that this government quite rightly wants to reduce CO emissions. Another fact is that now we have no coal industry coal is still being imported from the rest of the world which is actually increasing CO emissions as it has to be transported from Columbia, Australia and the rest of the EU. Another fact is that no jobs would of been saved Medium to long term. Another fact is that jobs would of been saved Short term.

I really could go on but there is only one way to interpret facts, facts are facts. Sometimes people just don't like how it sits with there thoughts.

my vote on in or out is based upon facts that happend to me, not how you interpret them.

 

[MarkE]

Pro Zach is spot on. In golfing parlance, you can kid yourself you've gone round in 74. But everyone knows it took you 86 strokes to get round.

 

[ColchesterFC]

You can't quote a nett figure and ignore the gross. You call it a lie. I call it quoting the gross figure. Consecutive PM's have sold us down the river where the eu is concerned, from both parties, so no I have little faith in the current incumbent doing what's right for the UK.

Straight forward question for you then that simply requires a yes or no answer.........

Does the UK send £350 million per week to the EU?