European Union in or out

I haven't made an assumption, ww. I have disputed the assumption others made, because it was an assumption. There is no way of knowing one way or the other. I think one thing is possible or even likely; others disagree. That's all there is to it.

You can't make that assumption bags

Gove and cronies believe in a light touch and the environmental legislation will definitely be loosened along with human rights, employment legislation and more.

"Just last week we found out the results of the government’s only official review of the EU-US trade deal TTIP* through the Freedom of Information Act. Its conclusion? TTIP’s secret court system would have,

“Few or no benefits to the UK, while having meaningful economic and political costs.”

This isn’t news to us. We already know these courts would allow corporations to sue governments for huge sums of public money, just for making policy decisions that might harm their profits. But it does seriously wrong-foot pro-TTIP governments like ours, making it harder for them to ignore public opposition to TTIP. "

From www.globaljustice.org.uk

A reason for voting to stay in.
Why did we need to use an FOI request to see what the government's only official review of the EU-US TTIP claims about the costs of the deal to us?

No Bags I think we will have more staffing problems if the vote goes to leave the EU as many of the staff are from the EU now and could well find themselves in the position of no longer being able to work in the NHS/UK.
I think the EU made the UK take the clean beaches a lot more seriously than they had been doing and certainly it spurred them into action. I am not sure at all that every country has the same standards but I think that could be one of the things they need to get right before being able to join. Many of the roads and open spaces are cleaner in France than in the UK - they have.teams of workmen out at least twice a year in the quieter seasons - motorway carriages are cordoned off to allow them to work.
Have you found out anywhere what the 'red tape' MichaelGove wants to be rid of is? I would really like to know that - I suspect it could be regulations which we would need to keep if we were to continue trading with EU. I have found the specifics of what the Brexiters camp wish to do difficult to find.

If I were drowning and somebody came to save me, I wouldn't ask if he was a convicted murderer, either before or after. I'd just say thanks, and be eternally grateful.

I don't disagree with the statement about there being good legislation that has come out of the EU. What I dispute is the assumption that similar legislation wouldn't have happened in Britain had we never been a member of the EU. Do European countries who have never been members of the EU not have similar laws for environmental protection (beaches, clean rivers, etc)? I think they do have similar laws and I think the UK would have done too, EU or no EU.

There's already a shortage of staff in the NHS, welshwife. We can't start blaming that on the EU only if the Brexit vote wins.

There are all sorts of examples of good legislation we get via the EU ww but although we hear about it when it is new legislation it is easy to forget later. This is why I think it would be good for more to be republicised as it were to remind people. I know that it is EU rules which have cleaned so many of our beaches - and as you mention the rivers - I find it just so awful that people would want to be rid of so much good legislation - but I suppose it will be the bulk of the working population who will be most affected and not they themselves!!

welshwife I am very aware of the good the EU has done. My son works for the environment agency and it is astounding the difference EU legislation has made to our rivers etc.

This week a beaver was spotted in Kent. This would simply not have happened if EU legislation had not ensured the clean up of so much of our environment. The rivers are now teaming and sparkling with life.

Brexiters are keen to relax this legislation to allow businesses including farmers the ability to once more pollute both rivers and environment as they used to do. They do this under the banner of less bureaucracy.

This morning I have read a report on a survey of the impact of the EU on the public sector - the conclusion was that it would impact on services such as the NHS which would be likely to see a shortage of staff. Many people it seems have no idea of the impact leaving the EU would have on this and other services. It was far more than I had realised and I am very surprised that the remain brigade have not got their act together to get this sort of information out for the public to see.
Some areas are so entwined with the EU that untangling things will be difficult but no doubt some method of cutting ties will be found. I have always believed we were better remaining but I have been very surprised to see just how much better the UK has done with the help of the EU.
What I am afraid of is that if we leave and after a year or so the real cost in terms of how things will change for the working population and safety precautions for working practises become apparent it will be too late to reverse the situation and the whole of the UK, whichever way they voted, will be sorry. The money we would save would be far less than is being talked about and the loss of jobs and trade will have much more of an impact than the Brexiters will concede.

Apologies. It was Day6. I still don't know what he/she was going on about.

PS. I don't think the personalities are important. I think what they have said and written is important. It would be stupidly naive to think that if the UK leaves the EU that these ideas won't be put into practice and some of these people won't become more prominent. That's how politics works.

Anyway, work calls.

dusts

Dists hands and buggers off thread to do something useful. Thanks for all the fish.

And the point I've been arguing re personalities/credentials versus issues remains the same and always will.

Ah. Found it. It wasn't me. No wonder I was confused by the accusation.

Nothing I have posted is or was about or in direct relation to Dave Nellist. Ever.

Are you sure it was me, dd, who mentioned Nellist? I've just googled him and confirmed that I've never heard of him before. If I mentioned him it must have been when I was dreaming or hallucinating. I ran down the thread too to find where I mentioned him on this thread. No luck so far. Could you tell me when the post was, please?

I'd forgotten my post about Dave Nellis, whoever he is. Was it about him or about something he said? I'll go and check.

The point in my second para there should be obvious because there are people from all parts of the political spectrum on both sides of the EU referendum issue.

So what?

There isn't a political party in the UK which reflects all my views. Left and Right are just labels.

I'm not drowning, either physically or metaphorically.

thatbags, I still don't know what you're going on about or why you mentioned Dave Nellist in a post addressed to me. You obviously do, so I'll leave it at that.

The result of the EU referendum will affect at least a generation, when many of us won't be here. I really wonder what future historians will make of it as they scratch their heads.

No, they're not, dj, although you wouldn't know it sometimes.

I don't believe I ever wrote anything about personalities. I don't know any of these people personally. I don't believe politicians should be 'personalities' - I'll leave that to 'Big Brother'. I'm interested in politicians' values, their competency and the way their values are reflected in what they do. I am pragmatic enough to know that politicians often have to accept the 'best option'.

When people, such as Gove, Farage, Carswell and other BREXIT politicians, are on record as saying that one of the reasons they think the UK should leave the EU is because they want to abolish 'red tape' such as workers' rights, I have every right to say that I don't want to live in a country without such social protection.

The point in my second para there should be obvious because there are people from all parts of the political spectrum on both sides of the EU referendum issue.

If you were drowning and a convicted murderer could rescue you, would you refuse because of either his credentials or his personality?

Good question. No, I don't think it is. This does not change the fact that one can have reasons for wanting to vote a particular way on a complex issue without personalities or a person's 'credentials', political or otherwise, playing a part in one's thinking.

I am certain, absolutely certain because I am such a person, that one can disagree with or dislike many things that a politician 'stands for', or appears to stand for, and still agree on an issue. The fact that one thinks a person's stance right (or wrong) on one issue, or even lots of issues, doesn't mean they are right (or wrong) about everything.

Anyway, the point was about bringing credentials into the picture and the point still remains that if you bring people's credentials (whatever they are) into an argument, you can't complain when someone else does too. That's what I was saying.

Is credentials the same as personality?