EU Referendum - How will you vote?

[fuddyduddy4]

Europe is playing with Cameron with his renegotiations ,why doesn't he limit EU immigration down to a more acceptable level and non EU immigration to be controlled like Australia(ie what have you got to offer us),beef up our border controls,take our lawmaking away from Brussels?Its a bit like lighting the blue touch paper but it puts the ball in their court,will they fine us heavily ,kick us out or accept our demands.The trouble is with our country is that we have to always play by the rules to the letter .

[L00b]

Sounds unlikely.

The issue is, once the right to reside unimpeded is removed (by Brexit in the case of expat UK citizens residing anywhere in the EU), you simply don't know, any more than I1L2T3 or I do, what could or will happen as a result of political opportunism and/or expediency in each and every EU member state. In that context, I see that populists-nationalists do a roaring trade over there, same as UKIP here.

 

The one thing we do know, is that immediately following a Brexit , expat UK citizens would be classed as non-EU immigrants. Same legal status as Aussies, Kiwis, Yanks...Syrians, Eritreans <etc.>. And in need of a residency visa in one big hurry. After that, each country has its own requirements, harmonised as they may be through supranational EU legislation. That's simple logic and common sense, nothing partisan about it.

 

I should know: I'll be in the exact same position here (in reverse).

Are they turfing out loads of other non- EU residents as well or is it just the Brits loaded onto trains?

Oh yeah, can we put a muffler on the rethoric and sensationalism? Please.

[unbeliever]

The issue is, once the right to reside unimpeded is removed (by Brexit in the case of expat UK citizens residing anywhere in the EU), you simply don't know, any more than I1L2T3 or I do, what could or will happen as a result of political opportunism and/or expediency in each and every EU member state. I hear populists-nationalists do a roaring trade over there, same as UKIP here.

 

The one thing we do know, is that immediately following a Brexit , expat UK citizens would be classed as non-EU immigrants. Same legal status as Aussies, Kiwis, Yanks...Syrians, Eritreans <etc.>. And in need of a residency visa in one big hurry. After that, each country has its own requirements, harmonised as they may be through supranational EU legislation. That's simple logic and common sense, nothing partisan about it.

 

I should know: I'll be in the exact same position here (in reverse).

Oh yeah, can we put a muffler on the rethoric and sensationalism? Please.

 

A withdrawal through article 50 takes place over 2 years, specifically to allow arrangements to be made on these matters.

[L00b]

A withdrawal through article 50 takes place over 2 years, specifically to allow arrangements to be made on these matters.

I'm very familiar with Article 50(2) TEU, thanks.

 

I'll quote it, just to be sure we're on the same page:

Article 50

 

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

 

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

 

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

 

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

 

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

 

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.

It's a nice, woolly-comfy, generically-phrased catch-all of a provision, highly unspecific as are most top-level Statutes (to allow plenty of elbow-room for interpretation and implementation nuances in by 'lower order' Statutes and regulations).

 

Nowhere in it does it specify what the arrangements have to be, whether they should safeguard rights, privileges and/or property of 'exiting' citizens or not, and such-like. It's entirely non-prescriptive, save as to guarantee exiting negotiations, and that's about the sum total of it.

 

So, negotiations. In the red corner, the UK. Economy nicely going, 60 or 70-odd million souls, 6th global economy. In the blue corner, the EU. Economy going-ish, 300 million souls, led by the 5th and 7th global economies (Germany, France) and trailed by the 9th (Italy). Who do you figure can do the most blanket-pulling at the table?

Edited June 11, 2015 by L00b

[I1L2T3]

As someone involved in employment and debt counselling on a voluntary basis I feel confident in stating that any Brit who wants a job can get one.

 

There is no doubt in my mind that the attraction to this country by the displaced and workshy of other nations is our over generous welfare system.

 

Making work worth it whilst driving down welfare benefits will make this country less attractive to foreign interlopers and will increase the standard of self esteem, physical fitness and positive outlook of those currently trapped in welfare dependency.

 

We should stay in Europe, we should also insist on change. They need us more than we need them. Cameron is the man to sort this out.

 

I think we're beginning to touch on what the real problem is here and it isn't unemployment - it's underemployment. The problem is that discussing it doesn't really chime too well with headlines about 2 million extra jobs etc...

[unbeliever]

I'm very familiar with Article 50(2) TEU, thanks.

 

I'll quote it, just to be sure we're on the same page:

 

 

 

It's a nice, woolly-comfy, generically-phrased catch-all of a provision, highly unspecific as are most top-level Statutes (to allow plenty of elbow-room for interpretation and implementation nuances in by 'lower order' Statutes and regulations).

 

Nowhere in it does it specify what the arrangements have to be, whether they should safeguard rights, privileges and/or property of 'exiting' citizens or not, and such-like. It's entirely non-prescriptive, save as to guarantee exiting negotiations, and that's about the sum total of it.

 

They need us more than we need them.

They'd be mad to try anything like what you're hinting at.

Not to mention that the WTO would never let them, or us, get away with any such thing.

Edited June 11, 2015 by unbeliever

[I1L2T3]

Europe is playing with Cameron with his renegotiations ,why doesn't he limit EU immigration down to a more acceptable level and non EU immigration to be controlled like Australia(ie what have you got to offer us),beef up our border controls,take our lawmaking away from Brussels?Its a bit like lighting the blue touch paper but it puts the ball in their court,will they fine us heavily ,kick us out or accept our demands.The trouble is with our country is that we have to always play by the rules to the letter .

 

The only game going on is in the news. Behind the scenes this will all be getting sorted to give the UK solid options for staying in. How do you think Obama can confidently state he is looking forward to the UK staying in? Likewise how do you think Labour can make such a massive policy u-turn and start agreeing to a referendum?

 

We'll be part of a two speed Europe that allows us to detach from the tighter elements of fiscal and political union. It's already clear that we'll never join the Eurozone which underpins much of what the core countries are trying to achieve. Europe will move on and accept this reality and we'll all be better for it.

[L00b]

They need us more than we need them.

That's true so long as we stay in. If we don't, we become the next-door competition.

Not to mention that the WTO would never let them, or us, get away with any such thing.

LOL. That the same WTO that 'stopped' tariffs on Chinese goods and services for the last 13 years China has been a member of it? You are aware the WTO has zero executive power, right? Bless.

 

I'll just repost in case you missed the edit: So, Article 50 negotiations.

 

In the red corner, the UK. Economy nicely going, 60 or 70-odd million souls, 6th global economy.

 

In the blue corner, the EU. Economy going-ish, 300 million souls, led by the 5th and 7th global economies (Germany, France) and trailed by the 9th (Italy).

 

Who do you figure can do the most blanket-pulling at the table?

[unbeliever]

That's true so long as we stay in. If we don't, we become the next-door competition.

LOL. That the same WTO that 'stopped' tariffs on Chinese goods and services for the last 13 years China has been a member of it? You are aware the WTO has zero executive power, right? Bless.

 

I'll just repost in case you missed the edit: So, Article 50 negotiations.

 

In the red corner, the UK. Economy nicely going, 60 or 70-odd million souls, 6th global economy.

 

In the blue corner, the EU. Economy going-ish, 300 million souls, led by the 5th and 7th global economies (Germany, France) and trailed by the 9th (Italy).

 

Who do you figure can do the most blanket-pulling at the table?

 

 

You're talking about a trade war. It's not theoretically impossible. That's not in anybody's interests and all sounds rather implausible.

 

You're also warning of a threat to property rights? That's extraordinarily unlikely as these countries respect the property rights of every other country outside the EU.

 

Fears of short term difficulties are valid, but pale in comparison to the greater issues. Do we want to be part of the emerging European super-state?

I don't. I strongly suspect that this is our last chance to avoid it.

Edited June 11, 2015 by unbeliever

[I1L2T3]

They need us more than we need them.

They'd be mad to try anything like what you're hinting at.

Not to mention that the WTO would never let them, or us, get away with any such thing.

 

I think you have to get out of that mindset because as Loob has pointed out the numbers game simply isn't stacking up in the UK's favour.

 

---------- Post added 11-06-2015 at 12:15 ----------

 

Do we want to be part of the emerging European super-state?

 

There's no appetite for that in the UK as we know. There's no need for us to be part of that and he reality is that the EU is going to have to mean different things to different countries. There have been enough warnings that a one size fits all approach simply won't work.