Reply to: European Union; your thoughts please

[darmstadt]

Out. I'm a paid up member of UKIP.

The EU is bad, bad, bad. Unelected, corrupt, expensive and unaccountable.

We need to regain control of our own destiny, of our own borders and do what's best for the people of this country. Our sovereignty was given away without our consent, in my view a treasonable offence.

Please explain the above statement?

Unelected - I believe that you can vote for MEPs much like you can vote for an MP. Civil servants, whether Euro or UK are not elected
Corrupt - so tell me which government is not corrupt. You only have to look at the scandals that have hit the UK government recently
Expensive - yes it is but so is the UK government, possibly more so in relation.
Unaccountable - not its not, the same as the UK government. They were both elected therefore your vote counts

Admittedly there are some wrongs which need to be righted

[swamp]

Britain should negotiate its exit from the EU. We would still work very closely with the EU, but we just wouldn't be in the actual union.

I think it's lack of confidence, plus politicians' general desire to strut the big stages that has lead to the UK being inside the EU. We've never really wanted political integration with europe, but we've been scared of missing out on the action. Plus we felt we had to be in it else France would run the whole thing.

The UK should leave the EU on good terms and have the vision to forge a new independent future. Euroskepticism is not a dirty word, and it does not imply xenophobia or 'little Englander'. If anything, if the UK left it would actually help the EU.

[shaunbhoy]

Those who end up unemployed as a result of being outsourced to Bob and pals?

Eh? Outsourcing has nothing to do with failing an Entry Points system to another country.

[Sysman]

Besides, what calibre of numpty cannot pass Johnny Foreigners points requirements?

Those who end up unemployed as a result of being outsourced to Bob and pals?

[Paddy]

I say OUT. Nobody is going to stop trading with us just because we have chosen not to slavishly follow rules dreamt up by EU career politicos. Plus we could then apply the same points scoring rules to immigration across the board. And I doubt anyone but the Frogs will get too miffed in light of the problems that some of those tied to the Euro are currently experiencing.

Even non EU countries diverse as Norway and China have to comply with EU rules if they export to the EU. If the UK is in the EU, then at least they can get involved in drafting the rules.

I do however think that the EU has lost its way. It started out with the wellbeing of citizens as its primary concern. These days the primary concern is to protect big businesses and banks.

[cojak]

A nation of jobsworths?

Partly that, but partly a deference to authority and 'doing the right thing'.

[Mich the Tester]

it's not in our psyche to ignore rules and regs that are not in our interests.

A nation of jobsworths?

[cojak]

On balance out.

I've went from being very pro-eu to staunchly anti-eu and I've been getting increasingly frustrated by the fact that eurospecticism is seen as the preserve of the xenophobic eejits.

Britain has never engaged in the eu in the same way as most member states i.e. use it as a platform for furthering national interests. At a national level, most governments understand that this is what it should be used for. One of the major side-effects of this most countries pay lip service to enforcing regulations and have, when it was fashionable, gone along with concepts like federalism when they are not remotely interested in it. In Britain, they apply the rules and waste their time hand-wringing over concepts most others ignore. The net result is that we see it as a regulatory straitjacket but other countries see it as a way of getting ahead. Basically, we are wasting our time and there are other ways to ensure free trade.

WHS.

Britain just doesn't understand the EU, it's not in our psyche to ignore rules and regs that are not in our interests.

[stek]

They DON'T. Since the date quoted.

Was the Tories that stopped exit controls so we don't know who's gone!

[Mich the Tester]

No.

90% of our laws are now dictated by Brussels, and all three main UK parties are fanatical Eurofiliacs, however they try to disguise it (especially the Lib Dems).

So there's very little point in bothering to vote at all in the UK elections today.

I've heard different percentages from all sorts of people, but just saying '90% of laws' means nothing if those laws have little effect on people's lives or there is no priority given to applying them. You could have 1% of laws coming from Europe, but if that 1% is really objectionable then it creates a bigger problem.

Which laws do you see as particularly problematic?

Isn't it a case of the British government applying EU laws in a holier than thou fashion where other countries pick and choose?

[OwlHoot]

Isn't that what's supposed to be happening today?

No.

90% of our laws are now dictated by Brussels, and all three main UK parties are fanatical Eurofiliacs, however they try to disguise it (especially the Lib Dems).

So there's very little point in bothering to vote at all in the UK elections today.

[Mich the Tester]

We can't stop people coming in from EU member states.

Trading is good by the way, as independent soveriegn states. Political and monetary union is a no-no.

I agree with you on political union; that's too far for me. As for monetary union, I support a single currency for the frugal states of Northern Europe, which would not include UK.

No, you can't stop people coming in from EU member states unless they're a threat to security; you can, however, throw them out after 6 months if they have no means to support themselves. The free movement thing is about making sure people are free to ply their trade anywhere in Europe, and not about letting numpties cadge off the state in some part of Europe with more sunshine or more generous social security. If you have free trade for products, it makes sense to allow free trade for services, seeing as they make up most of Europe's economy, and to do that people need to be able to move around. I think on this front the rules are actually quite good, but badly implemented.

[Rantor]

On balance out.

I've went from being very pro-eu to staunchly anti-eu and I've been getting increasingly frustrated by the fact that eurospecticism is seen as the preserve of the xenophobic eejits.

Britain has never engaged in the eu in the same way as most member states i.e. use it as a platform for furthering national interests. At a national level, most governments understand that this is what it should be used for. One of the major side-effects of this most countries pay lip service to enforcing regulations and have, when it was fashionable, gone along with concepts like federalism when they are not remotely interested in it. In Britain, they apply the rules and waste their time hand-wringing over concepts most others ignore. The net result is that we see it as a regulatory straitjacket but other countries see it as a way of getting ahead. Basically, we are wasting our time and there are other ways to ensure free trade.

The second point, is that the British concerns are largely valid. While there is zero appetite for federalism in most eu capitals, they end up drifting along with the eu-project which is not so much undemocratic, as antidemocratic. The piecemeal approach to eroding national sovereignty in a Europe has resulted in a gradual ceding of powers to supra-national bodies that most countries just don't care about because they are busy getting one over their neighbours with some project or initiative. Any attempt to discuss it is simply ignored and anybody that dares vote against it will be brought into line. It is one of the few areas where the tinfoil helmet brigade might have a point.

It is also a sham as Europe is still plagued by the same nationalistic and tribal feuding that has always existed - papering over the cracks is going to end badly and normal business will be resumed at some point.

In the long term, it is very wealthy area that is not capable of defending itself from external or internal threats and I can't really think of any historical precedent for a state/empire surviving solely on paying off their potential enemies.

[Lockhouse]

Do you think that a free trade zone covering all of western Europe is a bad idea? Or is it the political EU that you oppose?

Since when does Britain no longer control its own borders?

We can't stop people coming in from EU member states.

Trading is good by the way, as independent soveriegn states. Political and monetary union is a no-no.

[Mich the Tester]

True,
but at least there will still be the possibility of unelecting them again once all the wheels fall off.

Isn't that what's supposed to be happening today?