EU - in or out?

I got that wrong. (diet brain plus too early).

I meant the ones who didn't bother to vote in the EU election would turn out for lthis.

jendurham, you say "Wasn't it only 36% turnout for the EU vote? Most people do not care"

True. But you can bet your life that that 36% - who can't be bothered to try to understand anything about it - will be quick to turn out and vote to leave. That is the the nature of the beast.

We need to stay in a David Cameron version of the EU. Or as close as possible to it. Give DC a chance. He has already shown he can shake 'em up.

I'm undecided.

I like the idea of closer links with, and more co-operation between, countries - but in some ways I think the whole concept is rather like a "rich boys club" in that it excludes and disadvantages large parts of the developing world.

I think there are many benefits, including more regulation of various safety and quality standards and workers' rights. The thought of a government like our present one having a completely free rein over such matters worries me.

But I do feel that it's an uphill task to even get people interested in domestic politics and to keep track of what's happening here. Most of what happens in the EU is a complete mystery to a large proportion of the population (including myself). It seems that talks are held (such as the TTIP talks) and decisions made without the general population of any of the EU countries being made aware of what is going on. Also, it's such a huge organisation that it seems to me that, unless constantly scrutinised, there is greater potential for money-wasting and corruption.

Although there is more of a tendency for right wingers to favour leaving the EU, there are also many left wingers who want to get out. Tony Benn - who was very committed to improving conditions for people everywhere and who could certainly never have been described as a "Little Englander" - was not in favour of our membership of the EU, seeing it as yet another layer of largely unaccountable and undemocratic control.

What I said, rose, is that most people do not care.
Cameron could make it dependent on a certain turnout. After all, that's what unions do.

So what if say 35% turn out and 18% of them vote out? Is a clause proposed about minimum turnout?

A bit like the Welsh Assembly vote then.

Tired now, can't think

Wasn't it only 36% turnout for the EU vote, rosequartz?
Most people do not care.

Does it mention Farage in the section on corruption and vanishing funds?

Unless there is reform and a tighter control on spending, then there will be a lot of people who will vote out.

The chapter on the voting system and the absence of a veto in many areas is interesting.

The cost of the whole EU parliament traipsing to Strasbourg once a month for its sessions is staggering. For some reason one of the many treaties agreed to this and the process for reversing it is complex - it cannot be voted on; it would need a whole new treaty. All the hundreds of MEPs have to travel from Brussels to Strasbourg; 100 lorries carry the paperwork; permanent staff and buildings have to be funded in both venues. The cost runs into billions of euros. But it stays, as everyone knows that France would veto its removal. Now that is truly barmy; and a huge waste of money.

There are also several new buildings going up to accommodate the parliament, and a museum and much more. All flashy highly expensive buildings.

The section on corruption and "vanishing" funds is a bit scary too - there is a huge department that does nothing but chase up these frauds - particularly prevalent in Sicily it seems - now, I wonder where that money is going!!?

Even if there are cogent reasons for staying in, some of this expensive nonsense has to be re-negotiated and sorted out.

Second that, Gilly

It would be a disaster for the North East if we pulled out of the EU as there are so many people here who rely on Nissan (who have made their position very plain) for direct and indirect employment. Many of the small businesses in the area are first/second/third tier suppliers to Nissan and the knock on effect of them pulling out of the UK would be devastating.

Having said that I do believe that DC's intentions are not that we leave the EU but that we fight to regain/retain control of our country and not live and work under the thumb of the rest of Europe.

Meanwhile, I've got a book to read and a bed that is calling.

Your turn Ana. #bossyboots

Mr Nissan said so Ana.

You 'understand' that, feetlebaum? Why? Who told you?

Thank you for your response, jingl - over to you HollyDaze! (and anyone else, of course, of either persuasion).

I understand three million jobs here depend on the EU...

Ana We wouldn't have access to EU markets as they'd impose import tarrifs on our exports. Small businesses would suffer.

Factories would close as foreign investors would shove off to Europe.

We would lose a huge amount of revenue from the big investment banks leaving London. Finance is our main lucrative-via-taxes industry.

That's just some of it.

It may be that as Scotland is not an independent country already, it would have to go through sorting everything out and be ready to stand on its own two feet (so to speak) quite quckly and with nothing to fall back on. Britain already stood on its own two feet and was a country in its own right. Many believe that the UK has given up that right and Cameron is paying lip service to the voters by stating he wants out of the EU - he is, apparently, a confirmed pro-Europe politician. He is unlikely to be Party leader again (if back benchers complaints are anything to go by) so I'm not sure how likely it is that he would be PM again - and the offer all hinged on that proviso didn't it!

The strange thing is that people are saying the opposite for Scotland.
They say that it will be disastrous for Scotland's trade if they came out of the UK, yet it wouldn't be disastrous for the UK if it came out of Europe.
It doesn't make sense.

I have often thought that the US is a bit like the Eurozone. All states have the same currency, but they can make up many of their laws.

For anyone interested, this is an American take on 'Why has Europe's economy done worse than the US?'

'The eurozone experience shows what can happen when people lose control over their government's economic policies'

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/16/why-the-european-economy-is-worse

It wouldn't be disastrous for trading if the UK left the EU - I am amazed that people actually believe this; it's as if they believe that the rest of the world will refuse to trade which, of course, is an absolute nonsense. It is nothing more than propaganda from people who have a personal, vested interest in staying in that would harm them, personally, if the UK were to leave. It doesn't equate that it would be negative for everyone else. Makes you wonder how Britain managed to trade before the birth of the EU doesn't it

I don't claim to have evidence to prove the opposite, durhamjen.

I was asking jingl why she was so adamant that an OUT vote would be disastrous for trading.

What evidence can you produce for the opposite, Ana?
I do not live in the south of England. I want us to stay in.

Rubbish jingl! As rosequartz says, we don't all live in England (at least not in the south!) and it's a patronising expression. How do you know it would be disastrous for trading if we came out? What evidence can you produce to prove that?