Government to spend Nine million on leaflets

[alchemist]

But as many people have (and presumably will in the future) point out, this is a democratically elected Government with a mandate. What they do with the tax money is what they were elected for surely ? Just because you happen to disagree with it is irrelevant, vote them out at the next election if you're not happy ?

 

So if at the next election the tory government uses its "democratically" elected mandate to send out vote tory leaflets at the tax payers expense you wont have any problem?

[whiteowl]

So if at the next election the tory government uses its "democratically" elected mandate to send out vote tory leaflets at the tax payers expense you wont have any problem?

 

This is not an election

[alchemist]

This is not an election

 

REALLY???? Blimey!!! And there's all the rest of us thinking that it was Still, its a good job we have you around to correct us isn't it? Bet there's no flies on you

 

Also, a particularly fine way of avoiding answering what you obviously view as an awkward question

[tzijlstra]

REALLY???? Blimey!!! And there's all the rest of us thinking that it was Still, its a good job we have you around to correct us isn't it? Bet there's no flies on you

 

Also, a particularly fine way of avoiding answering what you obviously view as an awkward question

 

He's right, and he answered it, it isn't an election. It is a position the government wants to move on by having the public vote. Which means the government is in its right to elaborate its position in this discussion.

 

I don't know if anybody actually bothered READING the leaflet, but I thought it was very good, a lot of the bile that is slung at it doesn't stick. It does not say 3 million jobs will be lost, it says 3 million people work in jobs that are linked to export to the EU for example. It didn't 'scaremonger' it just stated facts.

 

Voting to leave the EU isn't going to be the magic-bullet a lot of people expect it to be and that is being explained clearly.

[unbeliever]

He's right, and he answered it, it isn't an election. It is a position the government wants to move on by having the public vote. Which means the government is in its right to elaborate its position in this discussion.

 

I don't know if anybody actually bothered READING the leaflet, but I thought it was very good, a lot of the bile that is slung at it doesn't stick. It does not say 3 million jobs will be lost, it says 3 million people work in jobs that are linked to export to the EU for example. It didn't 'scaremonger' it just stated facts.

 

Voting to leave the EU isn't going to be the magic-bullet a lot of people expect it to be and that is being explained clearly.

 

A selective presentation of facts is still campaigning.

[tzijlstra]

A selective presentation of facts is still campaigning.

I genuinely didn't see a lot of selective presentation of facts. Can you tell me which parts of the leaflet you found selective?

 

I am going to pre-empt your answer, bad taste, sorry, with something I hear a lot on here - we can control our immigration. The leaflet explains that even if the UK votes to leave than it is very likely that the EU will still expect free movement of people as part of the deal to remain a member of the market (just as Norway and Switzerland do).

 

That is a fact, the EU has made that clear from the beginning. All it means is the UK would be able to force EU immigrants to register and sign a piece of paper stating who they are. Almost all immigrants already do this, it is called getting a national insurance number and if the UK amended its systems slightly it could easily utilise that system to keep track of immigrants already. Nothing odd about it, it happens in most Schengen countries as far as I know.

[unbeliever]

I genuinely didn't see a lot of selective presentation of facts. Can you tell me which parts of the leaflet you found selective?

 

I am going to pre-empt your answer, bad taste, sorry, with something I hear a lot on here - we can control our immigration. The leaflet explains that even if the UK votes to leave than it is very likely that the EU will still expect free movement of people as part of the deal to remain a member of the market (just as Norway and Switzerland do).

 

That is a fact, the EU has made that clear from the beginning. All it means is the UK would be able to force EU immigrants to register and sign a piece of paper stating who they are. Almost all immigrants already do this, it is called getting a national insurance number and if the UK amended its systems slightly it could easily utilise that system to keep track of immigrants already. Nothing odd about it, it happens in most Schengen countries as far as I know.

 

As we've discussed before. I'm, not really interested in immigration. I'm primarily concerned with political accountability and sovereignty.

[tzijlstra]

As we've discussed before. I'm, not really interested in immigration. I'm primarily concerned with political accountability and sovereignty.

 

Yes, sorry, I am forgetful

 

At which point the question is - staying in the single market means compliance with European law related to that market, how is it better to be out of the EU when all that achieves is that the UK loses its influence on European law related to that market?

[PeteMorris]

Yes, sorry, I am forgetful

 

At which point the question is - staying in the single market means compliance with European law related to that market, how is it better to be out of the EU when all that achieves is that the UK loses its influence on European law related to that market?

 

Loses influence? How can we have influence with 28 other countries arguing and pushing their own agenda? If they ever agree on anything it takes forever to achieve it, and inevitably someone (or several countries) loses out. It's plainly and simply an unseemly rabble.

[unbeliever]

Yes, sorry, I am forgetful

 

At which point the question is - staying in the single market means compliance with European law related to that market, how is it better to be out of the EU when all that achieves is that the UK loses its influence on European law related to that market?

 

Because it means being subject to laws not directly related to that market.

 

A little under 50% of our trade is with the EU.

Being in the EU means being subject to EU law for all our trade, including the >50% not with the EU. It also means being subject to EU laws not directly or not at all related to trade (usually intended to create an economic level playing field within the union).

We'd still have to comply with EU law for trade with the EU. Which is fine. But we would not have to comply with EU law for trade outside the EU, nor would we have to comply in non-trade matters.

 

If the Brexit arrangements following an out vote are such that we're stuck we EU law across the board, then we'll sack the UK government and get one in which makes a less mental deal.