Have you watched the Brexit Movie ?

[waz-24-7]

Brexit campaign have said that VAT on domestic fuel will be abolished if we leave the Union. Why ...well because the EU currently regulates that and therefore it must be bad.
Fact: The UK exchequer gathers significant revenue from VAT on domestic fuel. Tax on fuel has an effect of encouraging a more prudent use of energy. So if we remove it. The exchequer loose revenue. Brexit fail to offer any reasoning on how this loss of revenue will be covered. Perhaps they feel the UK can borrow more money. The economics of a Brexit just do not add up. The truth is the UK must earn foreign currency to sustain prosperity. This can only be achieved by selling goods and services to offshore customer base, including the Eurozone. This is what happens right now and it works well.

May be it's a manifesto promise? Of course we've never heard of those being reneged on have we..... oh...

VAT on fuel does raise revenue - that is undeniable - but the old and infirm who feel they can not afford to heat their homes because of the high cost of energy are perhaps the reason to remove it.. Would you support VAT on water? I don't think even you think it's right but it would certainly raise revenue... Taxing a basic human need like domestic fuel is a very easy option but is it right...?

Maybe they should tax those of their cronies who manage to organise their affairs so that they don't pay UK taxes on their income...

Groucho
VAT on fuel is currently in place and as I said. The strategy that I believe the Union governments have taken is that the tax will discourage waste. This is a good thing
You will be aware of the winter energy subsidy that the elderly are awarded. This is also good in my view.
However my point is; Remove VAT from fuel as a brexit promise? How will you cover the loss in revenue that pays for public sector spending which is already excessive and unsustainable based on current revenue collections. Reduce public spend further and perhaps we could subsidise further this tax. Maintain and expand trade and commerce and the revenue pot will get larger. Migrants of value and working also contribute to this pot.

My view is that a BREXIT will result in an additional demand for public finance as new departments of British standards, farming policy makers, fishing policy makers, food labeling policy makers and all the other NEW policies that will need to be made and administered by the UK government.
All these departments and public bodies will cost without doubt.

[Groucho]

Brexit campaign have said that VAT on domestic fuel will be abolished if we leave the Union. Why ...well because the EU currently regulates that and therefore it must be bad.
Fact: The UK exchequer gathers significant revenue from VAT on domestic fuel. Tax on fuel has an effect of encouraging a more prudent use of energy. So if we remove it. The exchequer loose revenue. Brexit fail to offer any reasoning on how this loss of revenue will be covered. Perhaps they feel the UK can borrow more money. The economics of a Brexit just do not add up. The truth is the UK must earn foreign currency to sustain prosperity. This can only be achieved by selling goods and services to offshore customer base, including the Eurozone. This is what happens right now and it works well.

May be it's a manifesto promise? Of course we've never heard of those being reneged on have we..... oh...

VAT on fuel does raise revenue - that is undeniable - but the old and infirm who feel they can not afford to heat their homes because of the high cost of energy are perhaps the reason to remove it.. Would you support VAT on water? I don't think even you think it's right but it would certainly raise revenue... Taxing a basic human need like domestic fuel is a very easy option but is it right...?

Maybe they should tax those of their cronies who manage to organise their affairs so that they don't pay UK taxes on their income...

Groucho
VAT on fuel is currently in place and as I said. The strategy that I believe the Union governments have taken is that the tax will discourage waste. This is a good thing
You will be aware of the winter energy subsidy that the elderly are awarded. This is also good in my view..

The way to encourage less use is not tax on all usage but to have sliding scale so that those who use less are rewarded with lower charges... Then everyone is encouraged...

[waz-24-7]

Quite agree on that Groucho.
However,
The point being made was that a simple removal of VAT from Fuel upon a BREXIT would not pass without cost to the state finances. This shortfall has not been addressed by the BREXIT campaigners.

[turtle]

Waz
Can't really see the rights of working people changing on Brexit ?
How do you base these facts ?

turtle, he didn't attempt to do so.

The TUC did.

Ask them !

The relevant bit of the post reads ".....the TUC trade union have lined up behind the IN campaign, Based upon the rights of working people.....'.

Keith
I don't know if the workers rights will change and neither do the TUC so in my mind this is not relevant ?

[turtle]

Waz
Can't really see the rights of working people changing on Brexit ?
How do you base these facts ?

turtle, he didn't attempt to do so.

The TUC did.

Ask them !

The relevant bit of the post reads ".....the TUC trade union have lined up behind the IN campaign, Based upon the rights of working people.....'.

Keith

[turtle]

Waz
Can't really see the rights of working people changing on Brexit ?
How do you base these facts ?

turtle, he didn't attempt to do so.

The TUC did.

Ask them !

The relevant bit of the post reads ".....the TUC trade union have lined up behind the IN campaign, Based upon the rights of working people.....'.

[turtle]

oops... not sure what happened there ?

[jofra]

Nobody knows what will change - and therefore everything is not relevant......
And so anyone and everyone who attempts to pick and choose as to what is relevant, is doing so just to support their own point of view, and is merely attempting to influence and bend others to their own view.
Peoples' personal experience, tempered by opinion/cynicism/paranoia ( ) is probably the major factor that will decide the eventual outcome - at least, I hope so - because if the majority can be so easily swayed (to and fro) by the rantings of both sides, it will disprove the old proverb about fooling the people some of the time etc....

[kerry 6138]

Seems a strange time for the TUC to gift the EU bearing in mind strikes in France over new laws making it easier to Hire and Fire.

[waz-24-7]

Nobody knows what will change - and therefore everything is not relevant......
And so anyone and everyone who attempts to pick and choose as to what is relevant, is doing so just to support their own point of view, and is merely attempting to influence and bend others to their own view.
Peoples' personal experience, tempered by opinion/cynicism/paranoia ( ) is probably the major factor that will decide the eventual outcome - at least, I hope so - because if the majority can be so easily swayed (to and fro) by the rantings of both sides, it will disprove the old proverb about fooling the people some of the time etc....

Hello Jofra,
The referendum is without doubt the most important decision for the future of the UK, it's people and economy since the last war.
Like any political campaign. Both sides will air views and make promises to win. Nothing new. I believe that people who are un decided will listen carefully to the debate and make a rational and important contribution to the outcome. Many people will follow the recommendation of leaders, some will pay heed to the campaigns and vote as they become convinced. Others will be fearful of either immigration OR the threat to the UK Economy these will vote accordingly. I do not think many will waste their vote on such a life changing matter,

[waz-24-7]

Immigration
Fact:
Immigration into the UK is made up of people from the EU and also from outside the EU. Immigrants from outside the EU are greater in number than those from within the EU. Surprising but true. BREXIT will not be a solution to immigration as a perceived issue that many think is solely an EU generated problem.

[Keithcaley]

Seems a strange time for the TUC to gift the EU bearing in mind strikes in France over new laws making it easier to Hire and Fire.

kerry 6138 - I think that your statement adds more credibility to the TUC statement...

(turtle might like to read this as well...)

After all, who knows more about employment legislation and workers' rights than the TUC?

Given their involvement and commitment to the cause - if they're worried about effect that a BREXIT might have on 'the rights of working people', and are prepared to make a public statement to that effect, isn't it just possible that they stand a chance of being right?

And might that not be the same reason that some wealthy employers are pushing for BREXIT?

I really don't know what would be best for Britain, either in the short term, or in the long term, I simply try to evaluate the arguements coming from both sides, to see if they stand up to logical analysis, and also consider the provenance of those arguements - i.e. the knowledge and experience of the person or organisation from which the arguement originates, and their possible motives for doing so.

As has been said, the outcome of the referendum will not be decided on this forum.

What can be done on this forum is for everyone to to attempt to honestly evaluate the arguements from both sides, regardless of whether or not they happen to agree with your own instinctive stance.

There is no point in having a debate (in fact it isn't a debate) where each side simply dismisses any and all points of view put forward by the 'other side' out of hand.

We can only hope to arrive at a balanced view if we seriously consider and investigate ALL points of view.

Just my opinion

[waz-24-7]

Keithcaley,
Good points thank you.
As an employer. A BREXIT would release our business from EU enforced employment law.
Immigration, provides the UK economy with, to a large extent, a willing and able pool of additional resource. If this resource pool is not made up of Europeans then other nationalities will fill the void. This happened in the 50's when the UK encouraged immigration for the same purpose.
It is the economic card that in my view remains the most important consideration simply because it is the UK economy that has the most influence and effects directly peoples lives, expectations , welfare , prospects, and standard of living. To put even a slight risk of decline will have a profound effect. The markets, currencies , and interest rates are the indicators of performance and risk.
Who was not effected by the last recession of 2008 ? Watch the markets and the future will follow

[kerry 6138]

Seems a strange time for the TUC to gift the EU bearing in mind strikes in France over new laws making it easier to Hire and Fire.

kerry 6138 - I think that your statement adds more credibility to the TUC statement...

(turtle might like to read this as well...)

After all, who knows more about employment legislation and workers' rights than the TUC?

Given their involvement and commitment to the cause - if they're worried about effect that a BREXIT might have on 'the rights of working people', and are prepared to make a public statement to that effect, isn't it just possible that they stand a chance of being right?

And might that not be the same reason that some wealthy employers are pushing for BREXIT?

I really don't know what would be best for Britain, either in the short term, or in the long term, I simply try to evaluate the arguements coming from both sides, to see if they stand up to logical analysis, and also consider the provenance of those arguements - i.e. the knowledge and experience of the person or organisation from which the arguement originates, and their possible motives for doing so.

As has been said, the outcome of the referendum will not be decided on this forum.

What can be done on this forum is for everyone to to attempt to honestly evaluate the arguements from both sides, regardless of whether or not they happen to agree with your own instinctive stance.

There is no point in having a debate (in fact it isn't a debate) where each side simply dismisses any and all points of view put forward by the 'other side' out of hand.

We can only hope to arrive at a balanced view if we seriously consider and investigate ALL points of view.

Just my opinion

Thanks Keith but not sure the TUC need any endorsement from me, just find it strange that a organisation has old has the unions who's very existance is to improve and protect workers rights would give such a ringing endorsement to the EU (hence the word gift) at a time when their colleagues in France are striking over these very rights.
I could have saved a fortune in Union subs if I'd known!

[Keithcaley]

...not sure the TUC need any endorsement from me...

I never suggested that you endorse the TUC or its statement.

You say that you don't understand why the TUC should support the EU.

Perhaps that is a good reason to investigate their reasons for doing this, rather than professing 'bewilderment'

You might find that there are factors that you haven't considered, and that those factors, on balance, outweigh all of your (no doubt valid) reasons for wanting to leave.

You might find that they do not outweigh your reasons, but if you do not understand their motives, then you will never know.

You can either have an open mind, and be prepared to consider the validity of all points of view, or keep on promoting BREXIT regardless of the fact that you do not understand the opposing arguements.

Just my opinion

[waz-24-7]

I think the TUC have come forth to support the IN campaign because they acknowledge the real risk to UK jobs and prosperity. Both IN and OUT campaigns have lined up the key issues that people appear to relate to.
IN The economic decline of the UK upon BREXIT is clear. Absence from the FREE Market economy and not to sit at the table will definitely cause hardship.
OUT. Take our country back, restrict immigration. legislate the country like we did before.
These appear to be the 2 tickets available.
Both have Pros and Cons. My own view is vote IN because OUT will not show much real change that people will actually identify. The damage to the UK economy if we go OUT will definitely hit everyone. Recession is no fun and hits all walks of life. I cannot envisage a quick recovery if at all once the biggest FREE market on the planet has been pushed aside.

[kerry 6138]

Thanks Keith thats 1/2 hour of my life I wont get back

https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-b ... -PMs-talks

Sept 15 TUC Congress
In the debate, GMB general secretary Paul Kenny stormed: "Whatever the great vision of a democratic European Union was, what we have now is not it ."

“The Prime Minister has been poncing around Europe seeking an agreement to cut the rights of working people in Britain.

“It is shameful that a British Prime Minister should be prostituting himself for the pimps at the CBI begging other European heads of government to make British workers the second-class citizens of the European world of work.”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -warns-tuc
February 2016 TUC secretary general.
Workers’ rights enshrined in European Union law could come under attack following a Brexit vote, the Trades Union Congress has warned, as it sought to shore up support among union members for staying inside the 28-country bloc.

Many rights accumulated over decades, including paid annual leave, time off for antenatal appointments and fair treatment for part-time workers, are “used every day by millions of workers”, the TUC said. But if the UK votes to leave the EU,"no one can say what will happen to these right".

The TUC highlights concern that a Conservative government could start to roll back rights and protections endorsed by Brussels in a report - UK Employment Rights and the EU.

The report says there has been some recent concern among union members that Brussels has increasingly restricted the scope of EU social policy by placing limits on the ability of unions to organise industrial action in cross-border disputes. It says that, in some eurozone countries, the European commission has undermined collective bargaining agreements that cover whole industries.

Not changed my mind and still surprised , half hearted endorsement from a organisation which seems to fear the dreaded Tories more than EU , and again over use of COULD.
imo Labour lost the last election because of Corbyn and the Tories offer of a referendum , zero hour contracts cuts to disability benefits would have had a bigger impact had it not been for Brexit.

[Keithcaley]

Thanks Keith thats 1/2 hour of my life I wont get back ...

Never mind, what would you have done with that time anyway?

At least you now know why and how they arrived at their viewpoint!

...And I'm not having a go at you, here, but...

What concerns me about this debate is that both sides appear to be so firmly entrenched, and to be incapable of accepting that any point made by the other side could possibly have the slightest relevance.

Both sides appear to possess a Crystal Ball, which allows them to say, with absolute conviction "This will happen" or "This will not happen" - and on the rare occassions when someone says something like "Well, such-and-such could/might happen" or "In my opinion", they are immediately attacked for promoting vague possibilities.

This isn't a debate, as I understand the concept, it's more like a slugging match, with both sides hurling their points of view (and, occasionally, thinly veiled insults ) at each other.

I don't expect that any of the protagonists have changed their minds, or are likely to do so, at least not until a couple of years down the line, when they realise that they were wrong!

[waz-24-7]

Kerry 6138
I believe the LEFT/RIGHT political field that we see in UK politics should not be a consideration in this referendum. Clearly both political ends of the political pitch have come forth and support the IN campaign. Why ?
The two basic elements that will decide this as I have expressed. Immigration and the Economy, Which ever way the UK goes a level of, tolerance or recession are the finite choices. The people must decide and they must decide, more importantly , for the next generation that will take the reins of the nation.

[kerry 6138]

Came across found it interesting

In 2007 the Peugeot factory in Ryton, Coventry closed down (2,300 job losses) and moved to Slovakia with the help of £78m EU funding.

Britain's remaining ferry service to Scandinavia (DFDS Harwich to Esbjerg) ended in 2014 after 140 years service because of an EU Directive.

'3000 police cars foreign made'. Police say they are powerless to offer contracts to British car factories because of EU procurement rules.

Before the UK entered the EEC/EU, unemployment stood at 2.6%. It is now 5.6% (1.85 million - May, 2015).

Norway, Iceland and Switzerland are thriving because they are not encumbered by Euro bailout costs and extortionate EU membership fees.

There were 25 EU Free Trade Agreements in force in 2012 while the Swiss (non-EU) had independently negotiated 26.

The EU's Landfill Directive has been responsible for some councils ending their weekly bin collections.

EU specified light bulbs cost 500% more than filament bulbs. Some people complain that the EU specified light bulbs produce a lesser quality of light and cfl's contain mercury, a poisonous neurotoxin and phosphors. Health issues affecting those that suffer from light sensitivity.

It's been suggested that VAT on domestic fuels should be cut from 5% to zero. But 5% is the minimum allowed under EU law.

Less than 10% of Britain's GDP represents trade with the EU yet Brussels regulations afflict 100% of the UK economy.

Britain will pay £100 million a year more to the European budget over the next five years. (Telegraph: 03/12/2014)

Article 42 3. gives the EU the power to begin the process of standardising the military forces of the member states via the EDA.

Britain receives just 49p of every £1 paid to the European Union. (Sunday Express & Business for Britain, 12/07/2015)

TTIP will undermine data privacy by making it easier for companies to gain access to individuals’ personal details for commercial purposes.

EU Commission will block public access to all documents related to TTIP negotiations for 30 years. (EU/US negotiator Ignacio Garcia Bercero)

TTIP will downgrade food safety rules (including restrictions on GMOs), regulations on the use of toxic chemicals and data protection laws.

TTIP will allow corporations to sue the UK under the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clause.

European crime gangs are operating here with impunity due to EU open borders. Gov't estimates there are 13k trafficking victims in the UK.

The UK may withdraw from the obligations of any (EU) treaty under Articles 56,65,66,67 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

The EU isn't in the top five issues people are most concerned about. But those five issues are affected by the EU - like immigration.

HoC library's 13% UK laws made in Brussels figure doesn't include EU reg's which are transposed into law without passing through parliament.

The House of Commons library say 13.3% of UK laws now come from Brussels. European Commissioner Viviane Reding says it's 70%.

Our future does not depend on our membership of the European Union, it rests on our abilities to progress in the world outside of it.

Net EU contributions together with the adverse impact on business here of EU regulations will cost the UK more than £20billion in 2015.

There's no economic benefit in the UK remaining in the EU. EU regulations cost our businesses alone over £9.4bn, according to the BIS.

There was NO 'free movement' for Brits to the EU (EEC) before we joined in '73. Yet we lived, studied, worked, holidayed and retired there.

The EU is NOT "Europe". It's 56% of Europe's countries, 68% of the continent's population and just 43% of its land mass.

UK membership of EU: "Perhaps surprisingly, it's virtually impossible to find hard proof of any net benefit" — Carsten Volkery, Der Spiegel

UK has LOWER GDP ppp per head than:

Australia
Canada
HK
Iceland
Norway
Singapore
Switzerland
Taiwan
USA

Countries THRIVE outside the EU!

Britain’s future outside is bright, while the #EU is anti-democratic, anti-growth, and holding Britain back | via E21 http://t.co/fuFrsSuDHs

EU commits €267.6m for Denmark, €129.6m Estonia, €284.6m Germany, €172.9m for Sweden to boost fisheries & aquaculture. Nothing for the UK.

Top importers into the EU, by proportion of total EU imports:

18% China
12% USA
11% Russia

None have Free Trade Agreements with the EU!

'Britain had regular manufacturing & service trade surpluses with the rest of W Europe before joining the EEC (EU) in 1973' — Lewis Abbott

Well over a third of EU citizens reaching the UK in the year to March 2015 (39%) had no job arranged prior to their arrival here. ONS

In the past four quarters the EU exported £84.935bn more goods to the UK than we did to it. The EU cannot afford to stop trading with us!

The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 7th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th and 13th biggest economies can survive and prosper outside the EU. So can the 5th: the UK.

Switzerland, Canada, South Africa, Chile, Mexico and South Korea have free trade agreements with the EU. So would the UK when we leave it.

UK Net Contributions to the EU budget:

£11.3bn 2015 (OBR estimate)
£11.0bn 2014
£ 8.6bn 2013
£ 8.5bn 2012
£ 8.1bn 2011
£ 7.4bn 2010

Elected MEPs cannot initiate legislation, propose legislation or even repeal legislation. All that is done by the unelected EU Commission.

[Joe Soap]

Kerry - what an interesting article. It certainly opened my eyes.

Not wishing to denigrate your excellent submission, I expect however someone will submit comments to say there have been substantial gains by being in the EU. However that is not my point.

My point is that we do not know whether financially, economically, securitywise etc. etc., the UK will be better in or out of the EU. You have businessmen, economists, politicians et al with conflicting opinions all based on a mix of the same historical data extrapolated with different assumptions to prove their views.

One impact that they all accept is that immigrant numbers will increase if the UK stays in the EU. Pure and simple. That to me that is critical.

One can argue about the benefits of further increases of refugees, but the current state of the NHS, schools, housing makes me wonder.

[pc4854]

I received this this morning from my brother in UK and thought it well worth the read

Subject: Frederick Forsyth's analysis of the EU



A long time ago a very wise old man advised me thus: “If ever you are confronted by a highly complex situation and a decision cannot be avoided, never rush to an early emotional judgment. Subject the subject to the four-pronged ARID. It stands for Analyse, Research, Identify and then Decide.



Analyse



We all now face the decision: should we continue as obedient members of the EU or should we sever the link? Let me try to apply the old man’s advice.



Any country other than a shambolic anarchy must have a government.



That said, most governmental systems end with the five-letter “cracy” derived from the Greek for “rule”.



There are about 10.



We know about autocracy, rule by a single tyrant. There is theocracy, rule by the priestly caste, such as Iran.



Add stratocracy, rule by the army (Egypt) and plutocracy (by the very rich). We have seen gerontocracy, with the reins of power in the hands of the extremely old - the Soviet politburo in its last days. And aristocracy, rule by the nobles, long gone.



But two are with us and visible.



One is bureaucracy, government by the officials, the constant competitor for power with rule by the “demos”: the people. Democracy. It is by far the hardest to establish. It is the most fragile, the easiest to fake with rigged elections, meaningless ceremonies and elaborate charades.



I estimate about 100 phony democracies worldwide.



But ours is parliamentary democracy so let’s give it a glance. Of course it is indirect. We cannot expect the electorate to go to the polls for every tiny decision. So we divide the country into 650 constituencies with one MP for each. The party with the most MPs in Westminster governs for five years. At the pinnacle is the Cabinet and, with encircling junior ministers, forms the Government, which I will call the power. But there is more.



The power is held to account, not five-yearly, not annually or monthly but every day. Doing this is the official Opposition but also the backbench MPs even of the government party. This “holding to account” is vital.



Assisting these critics is hopefully a free and unafraid press. I have travelled very widely, seen the good, the bad and the very ugly and have come firmly to the view that with all its flaws the British parliamentary form of democracy is the best in the world. Not for those in power but for the people who between elections still have a voice. It is against this template that we can judge the system of the EU.



Research



After the war a group of men, politicians, thinkers, intellectuals and theorists, formed around Frenchman Jean Monnet, became convinced that what they had witnessed at close quarters - the utter destruction of their continent in a vicious war - must never, ever, happen again.



It was not a bad view-point, indeed it was a noble one.



They then analysed the problem and came up with two solutions.



The first was that the various and disparate nations of Europe west of the Iron Curtain must somehow be unified into one under a single government. They accepted that this might take two, even three generations but must be done. This was not an ignoble vision.

It was their second conclusion to which I take exception.



The whole group was mesmerised by one fact. In 1933 the Germans, seized by rabid nationalism, voted Adolf Hitler into power.



Their conclusion: the people, any people, were too obtuse, too gullible, and too dim ever to be safely entrusted with the power to elect their government. People’s democracy was flawed and should never be permitted to decide government again if war was to be avoided. Real power would have to be confined to a non-elective body of enlightened minds like theirs.





In the 70 years since, the theory has never changed. It remains exactly the same today.



The British Cabinet has power and may delegate that power to a wide range of civil servants: police chiefs, generals, bureaucrats. But it itself remains elective. The people can change it via the polling booth.



Not so in the EU. The difference is absolutely fundamental.



They realised, those founders, that there would have to be façades erected to persuade the gullible that democracy had not been abolished in the new utopia.



There is indeed a European Parliament - but with a difference. In London it is the Commons that is the law-giver; the Upper House is the vetting and endorsing chamber. In Brussels the EU Parliament has no lower house, it is the endorsing chamber. It ratifies what the real power, the non-elective European Commission, has decided.



The broad masses would also have to be convinced that the purpose of the Monnet utopia was economic and thus about prosperity. This untruth has prevailed to this day and is the main plank of the establishment propaganda in our present British decision-making.



In fact the final destination of the EU is entirely political. It is the complete political, legal and constitutional unification of the continent of Europe into a single entity: the State of Europe.



This clearly cannot make war against itself, thus guaranteeing peace. Albeit without democracy.



It is amazing how many intelligent people have fallen for this fiction. Thus David Cameron can tell us with a straight face that he repudiates the three pillars of the EU - the doctrine of even closer union, a single external border but no internal ones (Schengen) and a single currency (Eurozone) - but still thinks we will sit at the top table.



He believes the EU is about trade and tariffs. No, that’s what we thought we joined.



Identify



Back in the 1960s one British premier (Macmillan) after another (Heath) came to the view that with the empire departing into independence and the USA becoming more protectionist our economic days were numbered. If the world beyond the oceans was not Communist it was Third World, meaning impoverished. Both premiers became convinced the future lay east across the Channel.



Back then the union was six countries: Germany, France, Italy, plus minnows Holland, Belgium and Luxembourg.



Wealthy, especially Germany, booming. Just the trading partners we needed.



So under Heath we joined the Common Market. As a trading nation for centuries we were delighted to do so.



Then the lies began. It would never go further, we were told. The Six became the Nine but all in Western Europe.



Heath lied to us. He said there would never be any question of “transfer of significant sovereignty”. He had read the whole Treaty of Rome. No one else had. He knew this was just the tip of the iceberg.











Then in 1992 came the Maastricht Treaty. We were told it was just tidying up loose ends. More lies. It was transformational. It created the European Union. Slowly, decree by decree, rule by rule, law by law, our ancient right to govern ourselves the way we wanted to be governed and by whom was transferred from London to Brussels. Today 60% of all laws are framed in Brussels, not London.



The lies multiplied. The entire establishment, much espoused of power without accountability, has become hugely enamoured of the new governmental system. Less and less need to consult those wretched people, the voters.



It is no coincidence that the five professions that worship power - politicians, bureaucrats, diplomats, quangocrats and lawyers, plus the two that lust for money, bankers/financiers and tycoons - today constitute almost the whole of the stay-in campaign. Almost to a man.



And the lies proliferate. “There is no intention to proceed to a superstate.” Really? Read the Treaty of Rome.





That is the whole point of the EU. What is not said is that in a unified continent there can be no place for the independent, autonomous, self-governing sovereign nation/state. The two are a contradiction in terms. Only here in the UK is that denied. In Brussels it is accepted as wholly obvious. “The end of nation” is regarded as a work in progress. Endgame is foreseen as a decade, maybe two.



Decide



The referendum decision of June 23 will be the last ever, the decision permanent.



So this is your choice.

This is about the country in which we will spend the rest of our lives, the land we will pass on to our children and grandchildren.



What kind of a country, what kind of governmental system? People’s democracy or officialdom’s empire?



Our right to hold power to account or just two duties: to pay and obey?







For me it is simple and takes just five words. I want my country back.







Frederick Forsyth.

[waz-24-7]

Came across found it interesting

In 2007 the Peugeot factory in Ryton, Coventry closed down (2,300 job losses) and moved to Slovakia with the help of £78m EU funding.

Britain's remaining ferry service to Scandinavia (DFDS Harwich to Esbjerg) ended in 2014 after 140 years service because of an EU Directive.

'3000 police cars foreign made'. Police say they are powerless to offer contracts to British car factories because of EU procurement rules.

Before the UK entered the EEC/EU, unemployment stood at 2.6%. It is now 5.6% (1.85 million - May, 2015).

Norway, Iceland and Switzerland are thriving because they are not encumbered by Euro bailout costs and extortionate EU membership fees.

There were 25 EU Free Trade Agreements in force in 2012 while the Swiss (non-EU) had independently negotiated 26.

The EU's Landfill Directive has been responsible for some councils ending their weekly bin collections.

EU specified light bulbs cost 500% more than filament bulbs. Some people complain that the EU specified light bulbs produce a lesser quality of light and cfl's contain mercury, a poisonous neurotoxin and phosphors. Health issues affecting those that suffer from light sensitivity.

It's been suggested that VAT on domestic fuels should be cut from 5% to zero. But 5% is the minimum allowed under EU law.

Less than 10% of Britain's GDP represents trade with the EU yet Brussels regulations afflict 100% of the UK economy.

Britain will pay £100 million a year more to the European budget over the next five years. (Telegraph: 03/12/2014)

Article 42 3. gives the EU the power to begin the process of standardising the military forces of the member states via the EDA.

Britain receives just 49p of every £1 paid to the European Union. (Sunday Express & Business for Britain, 12/07/2015)

TTIP will undermine data privacy by making it easier for companies to gain access to individuals’ personal details for commercial purposes.

EU Commission will block public access to all documents related to TTIP negotiations for 30 years. (EU/US negotiator Ignacio Garcia Bercero)

TTIP will downgrade food safety rules (including restrictions on GMOs), regulations on the use of toxic chemicals and data protection laws.

TTIP will allow corporations to sue the UK under the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clause.

European crime gangs are operating here with impunity due to EU open borders. Gov't estimates there are 13k trafficking victims in the UK.

The UK may withdraw from the obligations of any (EU) treaty under Articles 56,65,66,67 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

The EU isn't in the top five issues people are most concerned about. But those five issues are affected by the EU - like immigration.

HoC library's 13% UK laws made in Brussels figure doesn't include EU reg's which are transposed into law without passing through parliament.

The House of Commons library say 13.3% of UK laws now come from Brussels. European Commissioner Viviane Reding says it's 70%.

Our future does not depend on our membership of the European Union, it rests on our abilities to progress in the world outside of it.

Net EU contributions together with the adverse impact on business here of EU regulations will cost the UK more than £20billion in 2015.

There's no economic benefit in the UK remaining in the EU. EU regulations cost our businesses alone over £9.4bn, according to the BIS.

There was NO 'free movement' for Brits to the EU (EEC) before we joined in '73. Yet we lived, studied, worked, holidayed and retired there.

The EU is NOT "Europe". It's 56% of Europe's countries, 68% of the continent's population and just 43% of its land mass.

UK membership of EU: "Perhaps surprisingly, it's virtually impossible to find hard proof of any net benefit" — Carsten Volkery, Der Spiegel

UK has LOWER GDP ppp per head than:

Australia
Canada
HK
Iceland
Norway
Singapore
Switzerland
Taiwan
USA

Countries THRIVE outside the EU!

Britain’s future outside is bright, while the #EU is anti-democratic, anti-growth, and holding Britain back | via E21 http://t.co/fuFrsSuDHs

EU commits €267.6m for Denmark, €129.6m Estonia, €284.6m Germany, €172.9m for Sweden to boost fisheries & aquaculture. Nothing for the UK.

Top importers into the EU, by proportion of total EU imports:

18% China
12% USA
11% Russia

None have Free Trade Agreements with the EU!

'Britain had regular manufacturing & service trade surpluses with the rest of W Europe before joining the EEC (EU) in 1973' — Lewis Abbott

Well over a third of EU citizens reaching the UK in the year to March 2015 (39%) had no job arranged prior to their arrival here. ONS

In the past four quarters the EU exported £84.935bn more goods to the UK than we did to it. The EU cannot afford to stop trading with us!

The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 7th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th and 13th biggest economies can survive and prosper outside the EU. So can the 5th: the UK.

Switzerland, Canada, South Africa, Chile, Mexico and South Korea have free trade agreements with the EU. So would the UK when we leave it.

UK Net Contributions to the EU budget:

£11.3bn 2015 (OBR estimate)
£11.0bn 2014
£ 8.6bn 2013
£ 8.5bn 2012
£ 8.1bn 2011
£ 7.4bn 2010

Elected MEPs cannot initiate legislation, propose legislation or even repeal legislation. All that is done by the unelected EU Commission.

Kerry Thank you for this submission.
This catalogue of information is a list of events and figures. What then is your reasoning that the UK should Leave? Are you suggesting that Peugeot will come running back to UK production should we leave the Union? The article is clearly written by a BREXIT supporter and offers NO real alternatives to a critical list of dissatisfactions and grumbles. A list of grumbles is very easy to construct. Fact is rather less debatable. Let the current clear facts prevail.

The UK is currently IN the EU. The UK has the 2nd strongest economy in Europe and 5th largest in the World. The UK is a competitive and successful trading nation. The UK is an excellent and successful democracy. UK Law is renowned. The case is that currently, membership of the EU can only be described as a success based on present economic data. Your list of grumbles and attacks paints a picture of a failing nation with no future. Fact is the UK is not a failure. Being part of the European Union is an integral part in the UKs success.

[waz-24-7]

Kerry - what an interesting article. It certainly opened my eyes.

Not wishing to denigrate your excellent submission, I expect however someone will submit comments to say there have been substantial gains by being in the EU. However that is not my point.

My point is that we do not know whether financially, economically, securitywise etc. etc., the UK will be better in or out of the EU. You have businessmen, economists, politicians et al with conflicting opinions all based on a mix of the same historical data extrapolated with different assumptions to prove their views.

One impact that they all accept is that immigrant numbers will increase if the UK stays in the EU. Pure and simple. That to me that is critical.

One can argue about the benefits of further increases of refugees, but the current state of the NHS, schools, housing makes me wonder.

Joe Soap,
Certainly it is the case that just about every political party, trade union, financial officer of substance, international world leaders have supported an IN vote.
There should certainly be some level of credence in this support.

You have indicated that immigration into the UK will increase if the UK remains IN.
One should consider why indeed world wide populous migration is now a world wide issue. The Uk is an attractive destination simply because of its success as a wealthy and successful economy. Migrants into the UK are not just from the EU. Fact is that more immigrants are from outside the EU than those from within. EU Immigrants will not come to the UK if by enlarge they cannot improve their prospects. The vast majority of EU migrants are working and contributing to the UK economy. Migrants from outside the EU who flee famine , poverty, strife, war, terrorism are more problematic as they seek only to survive. There is a distinct difference in these groups. A BREXIT will result in a slow down of productive , ambitious migrants with an honourable desire to succeed and prosper. I see an increase in the more problematic migrant who is fleeing areas of the world where their lives are at risk. This type of migrant is more likely to need support and welfare from the UK state.
A Brexit is NOT an answer to your perceived point of critical importance,

[WotNoDeeds]

[kerry 6138]

Was 24 7-The UK is currently IN the EU. The UK has the 2nd strongest economy in Europe and 5th largest in the World. The UK is a competitive and successful trading nation. The UK is an excellent and successful democracy. UK Law is renowned. The case is that currently, membership of the EU can only be described as a success based on present economic data. Your list of grumbles and attacks paints a picture of a failing nation with no future. Fact is the UK is not a failure. Being part of the European Union is an integral part in the UKs success.

if the EU is such a succesfull organisation why do only 4 of its countries appear in this list you like to mention and how do you explain the top 3 nations are from outside the EU and includes Japan a small island nation not unlike our own.
indeed we are a great trading nation, outside the EU we can use this to trade with world including the EU who export more into the UK than we export to them
For every EU migrant that comes to work there is possibly a family members involved, increasing pressure on our services and a UK national unemployed taking benefits. No one in the Brexit campaign say they dont want migration only controlled migration.
You say the UK is a successful democracy would say the same for the EU?
I like to think my" list of grumbles" paints a picture of a nation being failed with a future outside the EU.

[WotNoDeeds]

Yet more threats from Germany - GET ENGLAND OUT OF THE E.U.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... nyway.html

[elizabeth]

Here is a man who knows what he's talking about., a far cry from Eddie Izzard

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... emoth.html

[Groucho]

Vacuum cleaner tycoon Sir James impresses on Allison Pearson that a clean break from Europe would bring Britain ‘more wealth, more jobs and more control’ ‘The Remain campaign tells us no one will trade with us if we leave the EU. That’s absolute cobblers’

Our trade imbalance with Europe is running at £9 billion a month and rising. If this trend continues, that is £100 billion a year. If, as David Cameron suggested, they imposed a tariff of 10 per cent on us, we will do the same in return. We buy more from Europe than they buy from us, so we would be the net beneficiary and based on these numbers it would bring £10 billion into the UK annually. Added to our net EU contribution, it would make us around £18.5 billion better off each year if we left the EU.”

To a non-billionaire, that sounds quite a good deal.
“The EU would be committing commercial suicide to impose a tariff because we import £100 billion [of goods] and we only send £10 billion there – I didn’t want to get too graphy, but here are a few graphs.” The man is nothing if not meticulous.
Dyson exports far more to the rest of the world (81 per cent) than to Europe (19 per cent). “We’re very pleased with the European market – we’re number one in Germany and France – but it’s small and the real growing and exciting markets are outside Europe.” He says the much-trumpeted single market isn’t a single market at all. “They have different languages which, for an exporter, means that everything from the box to the instruction manual has to be in a different language. Plugs are different. The laws are different. The only communality is that there’s no tariff, but the pound going up against the euro is far more damaging than any tariff. If the pound rises, £100 million is quickly wiped off.”

The problem with the EU’s free movement of people is that it doesn’t bring Dyson the talent he needs. “We’re not allowed to employ them, unless they’re from the EU. At the moment, if we want to hire a foreign engineer it takes four and a half months to go through the Home Office procedure. It’s crazy. Sixty per cent of engineering undergraduates at British universities are from outside the EU and 90 per cent of people doing research in science and engineering at British universities are from outside the EU. And we chuck them out!” So hiring a low-paid barista from Bratislava is no problem but plucking a prized physicist from Taiwan is a nightmare. “Why on earth would you chuck out researchers with that valuable technology which they then take back to China or Singapore and use it against us?”

Dyson’s Received Pronunciation becomes incensed when he talks about Commonwealth countries: “They fought for us in two world wars. We’re missing out on all those people who have helped us. We’re not only excluding them from our country, we’re charging them import duty because we’re forced to by the EU.” His views on Brussels were shaped by bitter experience.
Dyson sits on several European committees. “These sessions are dominated by very large companies who agree on their approach before the meeting and so vote together as a bloc.” Several times he has battled the European Court, arguing that vacuum cleaners should be tested in real homes, as consumers would use them. His rivals insisted tests should take place in labs with new bags and filters. And no dust. Guess who won? “It’s a politically motivated court of justice ... to protect vested interests.”
Dyson’s slight hesitation in speaking out is that he thinks that David Cameron and George Osborne are good at their jobs: “It’s just that on this issue I think they’re fundamentally wrong. I don’t just mean from the business point of view, I mean from the point of view of sovereignty. We will create more wealth and more jobs by being outside the EU. We will be in control of our destiny. And control, I think, is the most important thing in life and business. The last thing I would ever want to do is to put myself in somebody else’s hands. Not just the other countries, but the Brussels bureaucrats.” The Brussels he describes sounds like Franz Kafka adapted by Monty Python. “Really, you wouldn’t believe it.”
Oh, I would if James Dyson told me. One of our greatest living Britons, his vision and hopefulness are huge assets to Brexit. After all, he’s the inventor of a cleaner that made men fight their wives in order to do the vacuuming.
He’s a genius. And the nicest billionaire I’ve ever met. If Dyson designed a country, you would want to live in it because it would be beautiful and fun.

Daily Telegraph

[jofra]

I just searched "Dyson moves abroad" on Google, and the first four results.....
Has he moved his industry back to the UK....?

Dyson production moves to Malaysia - Telegraph
21 Aug 2003 - The decision means the end of manufacturing for Dyson in Britain after last year's decision to move vacuum cleaner production to Malaysia, ...

BBC News | BUSINESS | Dyson to move to Far East
5 Feb 2002 - Dyson, the UK company which pioneered the "bagless" vacuum ... and has previously threatened to shift manufacturing overseas if the UK ...

800 jobs axed as Dyson moves to Far East | Daily Mail Online
The move to the Far East comes two years after Dyson set up a production facility ... them goodbye from the steps of a plane taking his and their jobs to Malaysia.

Dyson profits from Malaysian move | Business | The Guardian]
Dyson, the domestic appliance maker, is on course to double its profits ... The decision to shift production to Malaysia was not good for Britain in ...

[waz-24-7]

Was 24 7-The UK is currently IN the EU. The UK has the 2nd strongest economy in Europe and 5th largest in the World. The UK is a competitive and successful trading nation. The UK is an excellent and successful democracy. UK Law is renowned. The case is that currently, membership of the EU can only be described as a success based on present economic data. Your list of grumbles and attacks paints a picture of a failing nation with no future. Fact is the UK is not a failure. Being part of the European Union is an integral part in the UKs success.

if the EU is such a succesfull organisation why do only 4 of its countries appear in this list you like to mention and how do you explain the top 3 nations are from outside the EU and includes Japan a small island nation not unlike our own.
indeed we are a great trading nation, outside the EU we can use this to trade with world including the EU who export more into the UK than we export to them
For every EU migrant that comes to work there is possibly a family members involved, increasing pressure on our services and a UK national unemployed taking benefits. No one in the Brexit campaign say they dont want migration only controlled migration.
You say the UK is a successful democracy would say the same for the EU?
I like to think my" list of grumbles" paints a picture of a nation being failed with a future outside the EU.

Kerry,
I have not said that the EU is a successful organisation. The UK is the success within the Union and it would be very foolish to relinquish its position based on its successful trade with same.
Japan is not a Union member and is not considering a BREXIT from any markets. Please remember that you are proposing a divorce from the largest trading Union on the planet.
Migration and immigration in the UK like the USA and most successful economies is an asset to their economies. NOT a pressure on resources and services Services must be paid for by every working person within an economy. Your notion that immigrants simply add pressure to resources and services is a flawed and negative viewpoint.

[waz-24-7]

Vacuum cleaner tycoon Sir James impresses on Allison Pearson that a clean break from Europe would bring Britain ‘more wealth, more jobs and more control’ ‘The Remain campaign tells us no one will trade with us if we leave the EU. That’s absolute cobblers’

Our trade imbalance with Europe is running at £9 billion a month and rising. If this trend continues, that is £100 billion a year. If, as David Cameron suggested, they imposed a tariff of 10 per cent on us, we will do the same in return. We buy more from Europe than they buy from us, so we would be the net beneficiary and based on these numbers it would bring £10 billion into the UK annually. Added to our net EU contribution, it would make us around £18.5 billion better off each year if we left the EU.”

To a non-billionaire, that sounds quite a good deal.
“The EU would be committing commercial suicide to impose a tariff because we import £100 billion [of goods] and we only send £10 billion there – I didn’t want to get too graphy, but here are a few graphs.” The man is nothing if not meticulous.
Dyson exports far more to the rest of the world (81 per cent) than to Europe (19 per cent). “We’re very pleased with the European market – we’re number one in Germany and France – but it’s small and the real growing and exciting markets are outside Europe.” He says the much-trumpeted single market isn’t a single market at all. “They have different languages which, for an exporter, means that everything from the box to the instruction manual has to be in a different language. Plugs are different. The laws are different. The only communality is that there’s no tariff, but the pound going up against the euro is far more damaging than any tariff. If the pound rises, £100 million is quickly wiped off.”

The problem with the EU’s free movement of people is that it doesn’t bring Dyson the talent he needs. “We’re not allowed to employ them, unless they’re from the EU. At the moment, if we want to hire a foreign engineer it takes four and a half months to go through the Home Office procedure. It’s crazy. Sixty per cent of engineering undergraduates at British universities are from outside the EU and 90 per cent of people doing research in science and engineering at British universities are from outside the EU. And we chuck them out!” So hiring a low-paid barista from Bratislava is no problem but plucking a prized physicist from Taiwan is a nightmare. “Why on earth would you chuck out researchers with that valuable technology which they then take back to China or Singapore and use it against us?”

Dyson’s Received Pronunciation becomes incensed when he talks about Commonwealth countries: “They fought for us in two world wars. We’re missing out on all those people who have helped us. We’re not only excluding them from our country, we’re charging them import duty because we’re forced to by the EU.” His views on Brussels were shaped by bitter experience.
Dyson sits on several European committees. “These sessions are dominated by very large companies who agree on their approach before the meeting and so vote together as a bloc.” Several times he has battled the European Court, arguing that vacuum cleaners should be tested in real homes, as consumers would use them. His rivals insisted tests should take place in labs with new bags and filters. And no dust. Guess who won? “It’s a politically motivated court of justice ... to protect vested interests.”
Dyson’s slight hesitation in speaking out is that he thinks that David Cameron and George Osborne are good at their jobs: “It’s just that on this issue I think they’re fundamentally wrong. I don’t just mean from the business point of view, I mean from the point of view of sovereignty. We will create more wealth and more jobs by being outside the EU. We will be in control of our destiny. And control, I think, is the most important thing in life and business. The last thing I would ever want to do is to put myself in somebody else’s hands. Not just the other countries, but the Brussels bureaucrats.” The Brussels he describes sounds like Franz Kafka adapted by Monty Python. “Really, you wouldn’t believe it.”
Oh, I would if James Dyson told me. One of our greatest living Britons, his vision and hopefulness are huge assets to Brexit. After all, he’s the inventor of a cleaner that made men fight their wives in order to do the vacuuming.
He’s a genius. And the nicest billionaire I’ve ever met. If Dyson designed a country, you would want to live in it because it would be beautiful and fun.

Daily Telegraph

Groucho,
Your notion of a trade battle ( tariffs) with the EU is hardly going to improve or benefit the UK in anyway. The BREXIT divorce from the EU market of 500 million consumers will likewise, most certainly not be advantageous. Do you expect and want survival OR prosperity that is the simple choice with regard to FREE MARKET access and membership.

Dyson is a successful UK business. Whilst I cannot comment upon reasons on a change of manufacturing base. What is certain is that the business considers a move presents commercial and business advantage. Mr Dyson has views upon BREXIT as many people do. The vast majority of world leaders and people of influence are for remain IN.

[kerry 6138]

Was 24 7 I - have not said that the EU is a successful organisation. The UK is the success within the Union and it would be very foolish to relinquish its position based on its successful trade with same.
Japan is not a Union member and is not considering a BREXIT from any markets. Please remember that you are proposing a divorce from the largest trading Union on the planet.
Migration and immigration in the UK like the USA and most successful economies is an asset to their economies. NOT a pressure on resources and services Services must be paid for by every working person within an economy. Your notion that immigrants simply add pressure to resources and services is a flawed and negative viewpoint.

So are you proposing we vote to stay in a unsuccessful organisation and Japan has more successful economy than the UK even though its not a EU member
population increase year on year, not matched by building schools ,hospitals housing stock must add pressure to resources and services so which part is flawed?

[waz-24-7]

Kerry,
The success of Japan or even Switzerland or the other countries being banded about is not a comparative situation because none are members of the Union. Neither are any of them considering a divorce from one of their largest trading Partners. The UK BREXIT represents a massive change to the way the UK Trades in the EU and World market. The risk to the UK economy has been very well narrated and predicted. The threat to peoples jobs and prosperity is very real. BREXIT offers no counter measures or clear strategy to even maintain the current level of economic success. Sure, many retired people are not to bothered as the effect will be less of a hit. Youngsters and working people are in line to deal with the aftermath of a BREXIT economic decline.
Houses, hospitals , schools, the very infrastructure you refer to is taking place and is financed by the private sector selling goods and services to amongst other the EU. To suggest the UK closes it doors to EU immigration will negatively effect the Uk economy and consequently severely reduce revenue to maintain even current levels of investment.

[Geoff1131]

waz, your arguments are beginning to sound like you are flogging a dead horse. But at least you seem to now accept that countries outside of the eu are more successful than countries inside this insane union.

[mickhm]

My concern is that should there be a brexit vote, the peopkle on the remain campaign will be in charge of sorting out the arrangements. I can see the doing a deal with the EU that keps their gravy train rolling and us the public a bad deal. Should there be a brexit vote I feel there should be either a general election or pressure applied so the majority of negotiators are brexit supporters. Just my thoughts

[Cally]

I read that report Elizabeth & found it very interesting, not sure "Bill's" surname is appropriate under the circumstances

[WotNoDeeds]

What else is the EU elite hiding from us?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... ng-us.html



GET ENGLAND OUT.

[Groucho]

Vacuum cleaner tycoon Sir James impresses on Allison Pearson that a clean break from Europe would bring Britain ‘more wealth, more jobs and more control’ ‘The Remain campaign tells us no one will trade with us if we leave the EU. That’s absolute cobblers’

Our trade imbalance with Europe is running at £9 billion a month and rising. If this trend continues, that is £100 billion a year. If, as David Cameron suggested, they imposed a tariff of 10 per cent on us, we will do the same in return. We buy more from Europe than they buy from us, so we would be the net beneficiary and based on these numbers it would bring £10 billion into the UK annually. Added to our net EU contribution, it would make us around £18.5 billion better off each year if we left the EU.”

To a non-billionaire, that sounds quite a good deal.
“The EU would be committing commercial suicide to impose a tariff because we import £100 billion [of goods] and we only send £10 billion there – I didn’t want to get too graphy, but here are a few graphs.” The man is nothing if not meticulous.
Dyson exports far more to the rest of the world (81 per cent) than to Europe (19 per cent). “We’re very pleased with the European market – we’re number one in Germany and France – but it’s small and the real growing and exciting markets are outside Europe.” He says the much-trumpeted single market isn’t a single market at all. “They have different languages which, for an exporter, means that everything from the box to the instruction manual has to be in a different language. Plugs are different. The laws are different. The only communality is that there’s no tariff, but the pound going up against the euro is far more damaging than any tariff. If the pound rises, £100 million is quickly wiped off.”

The problem with the EU’s free movement of people is that it doesn’t bring Dyson the talent he needs. “We’re not allowed to employ them, unless they’re from the EU. At the moment, if we want to hire a foreign engineer it takes four and a half months to go through the Home Office procedure. It’s crazy. Sixty per cent of engineering undergraduates at British universities are from outside the EU and 90 per cent of people doing research in science and engineering at British universities are from outside the EU. And we chuck them out!” So hiring a low-paid barista from Bratislava is no problem but plucking a prized physicist from Taiwan is a nightmare. “Why on earth would you chuck out researchers with that valuable technology which they then take back to China or Singapore and use it against us?”

Dyson’s Received Pronunciation becomes incensed when he talks about Commonwealth countries: “They fought for us in two world wars. We’re missing out on all those people who have helped us. We’re not only excluding them from our country, we’re charging them import duty because we’re forced to by the EU.” His views on Brussels were shaped by bitter experience.
Dyson sits on several European committees. “These sessions are dominated by very large companies who agree on their approach before the meeting and so vote together as a bloc.” Several times he has battled the European Court, arguing that vacuum cleaners should be tested in real homes, as consumers would use them. His rivals insisted tests should take place in labs with new bags and filters. And no dust. Guess who won? “It’s a politically motivated court of justice ... to protect vested interests.”
Dyson’s slight hesitation in speaking out is that he thinks that David Cameron and George Osborne are good at their jobs: “It’s just that on this issue I think they’re fundamentally wrong. I don’t just mean from the business point of view, I mean from the point of view of sovereignty. We will create more wealth and more jobs by being outside the EU. We will be in control of our destiny. And control, I think, is the most important thing in life and business. The last thing I would ever want to do is to put myself in somebody else’s hands. Not just the other countries, but the Brussels bureaucrats.” The Brussels he describes sounds like Franz Kafka adapted by Monty Python. “Really, you wouldn’t believe it.”
Oh, I would if James Dyson told me. One of our greatest living Britons, his vision and hopefulness are huge assets to Brexit. After all, he’s the inventor of a cleaner that made men fight their wives in order to do the vacuuming.
He’s a genius. And the nicest billionaire I’ve ever met. If Dyson designed a country, you would want to live in it because it would be beautiful and fun.

Daily Telegraph

Groucho,
Your notion of a trade battle ( tariffs) with the EU is hardly going to improve or benefit the UK in anyway. The BREXIT divorce from the EU market of 500 million consumers will likewise, most certainly not be advantageous. Do you expect and want survival OR prosperity that is the simple choice with regard to FREE MARKET access and membership.

Dyson is a successful UK business. Whilst I cannot comment upon reasons on a change of manufacturing base. What is certain is that the business considers a move presents commercial and business advantage. Mr Dyson has views upon BREXIT as many people do. The vast majority of world leaders and people of influence are for remain IN.

My notion? You did read this did you not....? no I don't think so...

"The vast majority of world leaders and people of influence are for remain IN."

Oh we should all be in awe of 'people of influence' yet again... those very people whose very privileged position is propped up by their influence... er.. hmm I don't think so.. Warren, I have no faith in them, they may think they know best or think we should think they know best but really... is there anything in what they have demonstrated or proven so far in their self-aggrandisement that gives you the impression that they really know best... is there? is there? If so you are undoubtedly...

Easily led and
Easily fooled

[turtle]

Whenever have world leaders and big business fatcats ever put the interests of joe public first ?
Tony Bamford is spot on we can thrive out and he should know.

[waz-24-7]

Groucho and Turtle,
Your lack of confidence in leaders and people of influence is very clear. Whilst that is your prerogative; I have seen no offering from you as to an alternative to these leaders. JCB is certainly a well respected world leader in construction machinery. Offshore production in India and Mexico mean that the EU influence upon that business is rather minimal. Some businesses will indeed take advantage from a BREXIT. These types of businesses are few. JCB is one such business . It enjoys real worldwide trade and has strengths that many less fortunate businesses cannot fall back on.

I reiterate that the most critical outcome of a BREXIT is generally the economic risk and decline. The markets have reacted again today to the risk of a successful BREXIT. Sterling has fallen and the FTSE has fallen daily for the past week or so. The Markets reflect the true confidence in any economy. This is massively clear in the fast moving and instant world of financial, investment, risk and confidence.
That confidence is evaporating on the basis of a foolhardy exit from Europe. This is not scaremongering this is happening right now. The signals are clear and real and anyone that questions market forces is destined to failure.
Gentlemen, Your attitude towards "fat cats" and "world leaders" as opposed to joe public is hardly the basis of a strong democratic UK. The United Kingdom is for all its people without exception.
Please do re consider the economic case to remain and also contemplate your strategy to maintain current economic success and how the UK can build on its current success. within Europe.

[waz-24-7]

My concern is that should there be a brexit vote, the peopkle on the remain campaign will be in charge of sorting out the arrangements. I can see the doing a deal with the EU that keps their gravy train rolling and us the public a bad deal. Should there be a brexit vote I feel there should be either a general election or pressure applied so the majority of negotiators are brexit supporters. Just my thoughts

Given the fact that Mr Cameron, Clegg, and Corbin are remain IN campaigners. I suppose a general election may well see Mr Farage as our PM. Right wing or even Ultra right wing politics to the forefront. Joe public will look rather out of place in that political landscape.
I see increasingly in posts ,left wing views and ideals being overshadowed by a rather rightwing view upon immigration and xenophobia.

[WotNoDeeds]

[waz-24-7]

waz, your arguments are beginning to sound like you are flogging a dead horse. But at least you seem to now accept that countries outside of the eu are more successful than countries inside this insane union.

Geoff1131,
No certainly not flogging a dead horse. The evidence of economic decline upon BREXIT is now abundantly clear as illustrated by the decline in sterling and the FTSE over past few days. Uncertainty has taken billions from the UK economy literally overnight and the vote is till 2 weeks away.

Countries outside the EU are indeed successful, Switzerland and Norway are often quoted. Not because they are outside but because they are not in a referendum to exit from the worlds biggest single market. It is ONLY the UK that is proposing this divorce and clearly exposed to the risk that this entails. If any other country exposed their economy to such risk as a BREXIT is for the UK. Then the markets will judge, assess the risk and act accordingly

[jofra]

To say "Whenever have world leaders and big business fatcats ever put the interests of joe public first ?" to support either point of view is at best naive, and at worst hypocritical - there are "world leaders" and "big business fatcats" that support both the Stay and Leave factions - the only part of that statement that is correct is the end - both groups do and will support what suits their purpose, without regard for the common man and woman - who in turn will believe what they have almost certainly already decided - and then quote the appropriate "world leader..."
The only option is to choose whom you believe and vote accordingly - and God help us all....

As to Switzerland - they have an "infamous" (profitable) banking system, while Norway has a carefully managed (not frittered away like UK) oil and gas supply, together with extensive renewable energy resources (hydro-electric etc)....

Several years ago, I read (semi)humourous descriptions of various forms of rule and government - democracy was described as ..."God! How did we get in this mess?"

[WotNoDeeds]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... perks.html

[kibsolar1999]

Waz and jofra, thanks very much for your comments,
I would like to add: japan is an overaged and heavily indebted country, also quite isolated and nearly without immigrants. Result is that the youth works underpayed for the industry ( to be competitive on the world market) and the old (pensions) and has one of the highest suicide rates in the world. If japan does not change, it will end in a disaster.. they must learn to.. share.
What other countires have been named here? Other tax havens or robbers, “one party states” or authoritarianiers. Even china was named, complete forgetting that china is the 2nd biggest economy, but in the list of countries with highest GDP per head, they just make it to rank 83 with 7.617 dollar, uk: 46.500. (biggest discrepancy is india, rank 7 and 150 )
We all want to forget that not only the UK or Europe have to master a “japan case”, no, all of the world has to master the problems of over aged societies incl a decreasing population and maybe also decreasing GDPs (actually most probably the end of capitalism) from approx 2030-2050 onwards.
It started already! Its just 15 to 30 years ahead! The world has to pull one string! The so called “share community” is going to be soon in full swing, you (elderly??) may not have realized! Internet, parallel communities (see greece) and currencies as bitcoins, friends all over the world, all that stuff… all a bit too much for you, häh?
And if not, you will see exactly the problems coming up mentioned from the so much hated politicians (preferably from EU or germans, instead taking your chance and just vote for others at home..): rising conflicts, even war! See Falkland, see the Balkan, old Yugoslavia, the near east and its oil wars, see Afghanistan, see Lybia, Africa, Pakistan-india… whats next? Spratly islands? or an upcoming sort of civil war, Birmingham vs the super rich or vs Farange? You believe you can “escape it” with a brexit, you can not!
Merkel is in china. what they mentioned yesterday in the news? nobody wants a trade war! oh.. so, we are close to it?
yes, we are close to it since years.

Brexit supporters are well above average either male, elderly, low educated, country men or hidden or open right wingers, or all of it.
Thats not my opinion, that’s statistics.
Ask a well educated female or young or urban or all of it: all IN, THEY see the big picture, they are not cherry pickers with an tendency for revanche for anything. Borders means nothing for them, or not a lot. They give a s*** about the control of “our own waters” because they know that not the EU, it was the fishing industry which f***** up the north atlantic. You want the agriculture reformed, maybe change to sustainable ecofood? Do it! you will get an open ear with many many EU parlamentarians! and: The EU influences 60% of your laws, not 100. The UK could do so much, instead they do.. nothing or not a lot… and argue instead. Why? Because they can see that the resources are going down, "the wealth" is in danger and the distribution battle is in full swing.

As brexit supporters do not want immigrants (accepting immigrants means “sharing”, do you understand that?) your products will become more expensive (or you end up like japan, but with the british “hooligans” you will end up in a civil war) and your businesses will be taken over by others, eg Romania, Bulgaria… (also here: the EU support for poorer (EU) countries and its higher subsidies (or direct payments to EU) is “sharing” (also to avoid migration), do you understand that?)

Anyway, the cancellation of EU contracts will take two years, five years the new negotiations with the EU, comes to a total of approx 7 years till a brexit. Sufficient time for all of us to see how Britain will do and you can be sure that during this time the other EU countries will make sure that the UK will not do better as they would be IN.

One thing is sure and that’s the only good thing about this referendum: after the 23rd of june the EU will be not the same any more.

A good week to go.

[kerry 6138]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... try_donors

Dear o dear kibsolar sit back have a efes read a book, Robin Hood's my recomendation or google international aid find out which countries met the requirement to spend 0.7% gdp on international aid (thats sharing around the world not just the EU)

[kibsolar1999]

oh kerry, 0,7one %.. thats a euro per day per british head. you can be proud of it.

i wrote my government a letter: why we pay less as the british?
the answer: well, the british demanded a typical EU compromise and thats why we pay more for the EU, they pay more on international aid. they said it just looks better on the domestic front.

btw, i can not read robin hood agian. that was part of my youth.
thanks for your advice to increase my alcohol consumption, but i was told it does not help, no matter what kind of problems you have.

skol.

[waz-24-7]

I am please to to see today that the labour party and trade unions have finally put some much needed effort in to setting out their case for remaining IN. Perhaps the clear right wing landscape that is becoming apparent from BREXIT campaigners is deemed a threat to the common man.
I am less pleased that the markets have spoken again today. Sterling has today fallen to a five year low against other major currencies. The FTSE has fallen 2%. These are clear signals of the effect of a BREXIT as investors move their money out from the UK currency and economy into safer less risky institutions like Japan. The cost to the UK economy is measured in £ billions. Savings from EU subscriptions fade into insignificance.
This is hard fact and cannot be disputed. Anyone who cannot, even now, see the writing on the wall deserves the looming recession and financial despair that a BREXIT, based on todays market reports, will certainly create.
People, please be wise, be sensible Vote IN to safeguard your pensions, your savings and your children's prospects for prosperity.