How will you vote in the EU referendum?

I'm happy to say that I'm undecided. I can see why some would want to leave and other say we should stay in.

There are some reasons that are being bandied about for leaving which I cannot agree and these tend to be those expressed by the likes of Farage and his followers.

Then there are reasons for leaving being put forward in a more measured manner by respected politicians and business people which may be valid.

The same applies to staying in.

I have always intended to vote to stay in, and see no reason to change my mind, but when I look at the array of 'out' politicians - Nigel Farage, Owen Patterson, George Galloway, Iain Duncan Smith, Leon Brittain to name just a few ( including people who deny global warming, so clearly are well able to analyse evidence in a clear manner) - then I'm even more convinced that staying in is the correct thing to do.

How I agree with that Anya we are only getting biased views and very little unbiased as most politicians and business leaders have vested interests. How the man in the street makes a reasoned decision is hard to imagine, and sadly most people aren't interested. I don't think the importance is getting through.

I think DC worked his socks off to get this agreement and did well considering what he was asking for, which I think was too little and should have been more, but that's not important now.

Personally I don't think the agreement will make a great deal of difference to the referendum. I think in the end a lot of voters will vote with their gut feelings and my main concern is there will be a low turnout.

I will still vote to stay in, but credit due where credit's due for DC.

Having been flicking through news channels for the last few hours, it is interesting to note that even the journalists and news channels are just as confused as to what super deal has been done. Personally, I still do not understand why we are signed up to an unelected, undemocratic, system where we pay 22million gbp plus per day which cannot produce either a bank statement or any form of accounting since its inception. Quite agree annsixty.

Concorde was a French/Brit agreement very different to UK/EU where there are many more skills and facilities available.
I mentioned holidays on my last post - yes we show passports now but if we leave and the Schegen treaty stays in place it is quite possible that we may need to get a visa from the Embassy of the country we wish to visit as those from further away need to now.
There would of course be no need for any European country to try and stop people entering UK from their borders - that would all need to be done at UK ports. And I imagine the EU arrest Warrants would no longer be valid - Spain would again be a haven.
I hope that someone with very deep knowledge will draw up a pros and cons chart showing what we have and are in danger of losing.

There is a European Parliament just as there is a Westminster one -both have elected members - they are both ruled by high ranking Civil Servants who make most of the decisions and tell the ministers what they can and can't do - it is not nearly as different as people seem to think. Remember Sir Humphrey - more lifelike than we care to think.

Celticrose Have you never received voting papers for European MPs, just as you do for your UK ones?

I simply have no idea which way to vote! If this feeling goes on, I shall have to abstain as I can't in all honesty vote for something so important unless I'm certain that I feel convinced my vote is the correct one. Forgive me Badenkate, Leon Brittan is dead, but perhaps you were thinking of someone else?

Absolutely right niggly! I don't know why but I always got him and Nigel Lawson (who I really meant) confused.

We are not in a position to decide, so it is nonsense to ask us. Many people will vote from gut reaction rather than fact, and that is no way as a nation to decide such important issues.

I have looked into the subject online, trying in vain to find impartial analyses of the pros and cons. I do not want to hear one more politician pontificating about how we should vote from their personal perspective - I want facts. And where are they to be found?

They aren't as I said up thread. I cannot make a reasoned judgement so probably will not vote. Then I can't moan afterwards.

ann we will be watching in case you do moan.

I don't imagine the rabbit out of the hat as they are calling it ( more of a stick insect than a rabbit) will influence people either way.

I bought a book called "Europe: In or Out?: Everything You Need to Know" by David Charter, published 1 February 2016, so it is up to date. It desribes all the adpects, and lists the pros and cons. Lots of facts and figures, and it is taking me some time to plough through it, but it does not seem to be written from one point of view or the other. It is on Amazon (paperback £8.99, Kindle £3.59)

The whole thing is so complicated and has so many ramifications that I have no intention of joining the discussion on here about it until I know what I talking about - or never. However the general impression I get is that many many things would be even more difficult to do effectively if we left than if we stayed.

This is the first time I have posted on a political thread Roses so I will keep off them so you won't have to be eagle eyed and check every day.?

We seem to hear a lot about how its important to stay in but less about the actual benefits to this. I'd like to hear more detail. DH is heavily involved in business with EU countries and was entirely pro staying in but can now see that life could go on if we left. We're still undecided.

Welshwife, I think that what you want will be on www.fullfact.org next week.

I am still voting to stay in but if I had been undecided just knowing IDS is supporting out would cause me to vote in

I have an earlier incarnation of the book to which you refer Elegran and to be strictly honest I felt so bogged down by it that I never quite got to the end. I know that sounds like a cop-out, but I do think it demonstrates the complexity fo the issues and the pointlessness of a referendum. Here I am - educated (part of my degree was in economics) and motivated to find out the facts and make the best decision I can, and even I cannot get to the end of this book. I imagine that the vast bulk of voters will not even get as far as reading the book at all - or even want to. This is not being patronising - I simply think that this is a fact.

jackofkent.com/2016/02/being-neutral-about-brexit/

"And so it is difficult to care ultimately about Brexit. Both sides are alarmist, and both can pick out the weak spots in the other side's positions whilst being blind to their own.

This is why this blog is neutral - as long as UK remains part of NATO and the ECHR.

It is not that I don't know or care about UK and EU law and policy - I follow it all carefully and even advise on both domestic and EU law. I just cannot see what real difference the result will be from a liberal perspective. The illiberal - and undemocratic - misuses of public power will remain.

And to those in favour of Brexit who say 'at least it will be "our" politicians who will make the decisions, and we can turn them out', I reluctantly reply that this may be mere sentimentality. One can wish this is true, but sadly it is not.

In practice, policy-making and law-making in Whitehall and Westminster is just as illiberal - and undemocratic - as it is in Brussels and, if you take liberalism seriously, there is nothing to choose between them."

The last few sentences of the jackofkent blog, in case you do not want to read all of it. The rest of it tells you why our politicians have so little say in decision making, and it's not just to do with the EU.

I am undecided and need more information.
I instinctively want to do the opposite to Michael Gove, but realise I can't base it on my dislike of him!!

I can understand your mistake Badenkate!! All these grandees of whatever political persuasion do both look and sound the same!!
I agree that we are not in a position to make such an important decision about the future of this country. I frankly don't think we should be having this referendum, as a lot of people will vote from a position of predjudice, personal and otherwise, most at best will only have a vague idea of the complexities of the EU (me included) leaving a handful of people who really understand and can make an informed decision. Surely we vote for our MP, who presumably does understand these things, to sound out what the majority of their constituents feel, and vote accordingly in parliament on their behalf. I'm sure this idea will be greeted with contempt, but it is only a thought.

A perfectly reasonable thought Niggly if you voted for whoever got in and have confidence in their judgement. Sadly its no to both in the case of our constituency. Just no easy answers.