The last week

I agree that this decision is so momentous, so permanent,and it scares me that my future, and that of my children could be decided by ignorant people who have been misled and lied to. I do not mean those whose view is different to mine necessarily, but I mean those who have not thought it out properly, those who have little knowledge of economics ( and I include myself in this, although I have done my very best by reading all that I can, watching the debates etc). I think this is so important that the vote should be invalid unless a certain percentage of the electorate turn out to vote. Otherwise,we could have the potential result of say 51% of a 40% turnout deciding our future. Terrifying prospect to my mind.

mamie I could weep.Truth has been a terrible victim in this referendum. How can we accept a result as having any integrity when it built on sand?

Personally I have no idea who the journalist in the link is. Does anyone else?

Just to say I dont agree with the sentiments of the last two posters.

I've been thinking that too, Gill. Even more so when they say it could be closer. I've never swayed from the way I intended to vote but have read and listened as much as I can to both sides of the argument.In fact, I've all but lost my voice from discussing it with the S.O. But, even so I don't think that I know enough to decide something so important that is so permanent.

In the original Facebook page, the Martin Fletcher article was followed by comments from other journalists saying their editors wanted similar stories, but they couldn't produce them because they weren't true.

According to his Facebook page, Martin Fletcher was the Foreign Editor of The Times from 1984-2012.

From Wiki:

Martin Fletcher (born 7 July 1956) is former associate editor[1] and former foreign editor of The Times,[2] a British newspaper. He was named feature writer of the year in the 2015 British Press Awards.

He has also worked for The Times as a political journalist, as Washington Bureau Chief,[3] as Belfast correspondent,[4] and as Europe correspondent based in Brussels.[5] He was foreign editor from 2002 and 2006.[6] Since then he has worked as a roving correspondent specialising mostly in foreign affairs, reporting from many countries including Syria, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Haiti, Zimbabwe, Somalia, China and the Democratic Republic of Congo.[7] He was shortlisted for foreign journalist of the year in the British Press Awards of 2007 and 2010,[8] best travel article in the Foreign Press Association Awards of 2008,[9] best print journalist in the Foreign Press Association awards of 2009 and best environment story in the Foreign Press Association Awards of 2014.[10] He now writes articles for publications including Prospect, The Times magazine, the Daily Telegraph magazine, Radio Times, GQ, the Financial Times, The Mail on Sunday, Wanderlust and Conde Nast Traveller. He is also the author of The Good Caff Guide (Wildwood House), Almost Heaven: Travels Through the Backwoods of America (Little Brown) and Silver Linings: Travels around Northern Ireland (Little Brown). 'Almost Heaven' was shortlisted for the Thomas Cook Travel Cook Award 2000 .

Getting a bit difficult to know which thread to post on for the EU Referendum vote but I have decided to use this one as we are in the 'end days' so to speak. I heard DC tonight and thought it was a much more sober delivery than we have heard of late. Let's hope that is the tone for the rest of the run up.
There is an interesting article by Fintan O'Toole in the Observer today entitled 'Brexit is being driven by English Nationalism. And it will end in self-rule'. The main thrust of his argument is that Brexit, if that is the decision, will not end in a Great Britain but a standalone England. There is a distinct possibility if different parts of the UK come out for opposing camps that that will lead to the break up of the Union. Scotland will go for independence. Northern Ireland has been divided for less than 100 years - a very short time in a country's history. Will the majority Protestant people of the North suddenly decide they are better off with their southern neighbours and in the EU? Or indeed in a Federation with Scotland from whence many of them came? The fight for independence in running your affairs has always been strong in the Protestant community throughout history, albeit connected to the rest of the UK. The stumbling block for them of Catholic Church no longer holds sway in the south as it did in 1921. If they stay with England they could end up with borders to the south (Ireland) and to the West (Scotland). If Scotland and Northern Ireland go will Wales be far behind?
Fintan's argument is that the referendum could deliver the creation of a new nation state which we haven't actually prepared ourselves for. Well worth a read and a pause for reflection.

Gibraltar's membership also depends on the referendum. The overwhelming majority want to stay.

A couple of points listening to Farage this morning on radio 4 - worm springs immediately to mind.

However another puzzle - Farage believes in neo-liberal economics. Neo- liberal economics believes in the primacy of the market - can you see where I'm going with this?

Neo-liberals strongly argue that the market regulates the supply of goods and labour extremely efficiently without the interference of government- indeed the interference of the state inhibits the market. So

WHY OH WHY pick on the free movement of labour? Because he is a xenophobe that's why.

FACTS

Just completed a short lecture on migration with regard to the EU given bu a professor of Edinburgh University.

44% of voters put migration as a concern.
Leave has recognised this and as a result has mobilised these Concerns throughout the referendum debate.

How does immigration affect the UK.

Salary and employment - as in having a downward pressure on wages and upward pressure on unemployment - reports show that the impact is negligible.

Fiscal- as in payment of taxes and taking out of the welfare system in the form of medical services and benefits and education. Overall the immigrant takes less out of the system than the UK national. There is a NET POSITIVE impact.

Profile of migrants.
The fear that migrants from the poor eastern block has not materialised. Overall 27% of migrants come from these countries. The rest come from the "old" EU states.

What happens to immigration if the vote is leave?

Half of all immigrants come from outside of the EU. The government throughout the past 6-7 years has tried everything in its power to reduce these numbers, but because of commonwealth rules etc. have found it impossible.

EU migrants.
So withdrawal from the single market will have immediate impact. But this will have the effect of fuelling severe shortages in the labour market and as a consequence there will be enormous pressure from business for the government to sort the issue asap.

So migrants will be encouraged to fill these jobs.

Effect on current immigration figures? NEGLIBLE

Refugees - the EUs cooperation directly benefits the UK.

Brexits claim that by allowing the refugees to come to the EU means that they will find their way to the UK.

So Germany has taken in Syrian refugees. They have no status with regard to the EU single market. They will gain EU status in about 8 years, once they have learned German have settled and proved to be good citizens. How likely is it then that they will up sticks and flock to the UK?
The Brexit argument is totally misleading according to the professor.

It now begs the question as to why so many people choose to believe it?

I am really worried that we will leave, doesn't matter what Scotland, N I, and Wales want, if the majority in England want out we are all out, so back to a rule by England

I think that apart from a Brexit vote which will put our economy into recession, do nothing to reduce immigration and reduce workers protection, protection to the environment and reduce unmanned rights, our political system is seriously broken.

Who can doubt the attitude of the voter to MPs when you listen to the way the voters question the various protagonists In the debates. No one seems to believe anything they say, they constantly repeat "we haven't been told the truth"

Whatever the result on Friday, our parliamentary democracy has suffered a serious setback. There is nothing to suggest that anything will change.

Daphnedill, I had forgotten Gibraltar but that is an added factor.
Anniebach, yes, an OUT vote means we are all out but Scotland and Northern Ireland can still decide to go their own way with a little help from our Parliament. I somehow think they will be only too happy to lose the North. I ponder whether the North, if reunited with the South, will have to negotiate its own terms or go in on the Irish settlement as it stands. The UK will be less happy to lose Scotland. I fully expect a break up of the UK in my lifetime.
I also ponder the position of the Commonwealth once the Queen dies. I do think many of those countries keep it going out of respect for her. Will they have the same allegiance to the next monarch or the next? I doubt it. It was formed to ditch the 'Empire' connotation and invent a safer context all could adhere to. A large part of me thinks that if you want your independence as a separate country/entity that is what you should go for. That doesn't rule out friendly trade and relationships but such a widespread 'family' of countries should not rely on a hereditary monarchical system to hold them together.
Whitewave, I really must get back to that Brexit course on Futurelearn.
BTW do any IT experts out there know why every time I type a double L it comes up in a different colour for no obvious reason?

I feel that a lot of people are using this as a protest vote of some kind. Which puzzles me because things have happened such as austerity cuts,u turns on things in the manifesto etc but they didn't protest about that. They say they don't trust what politicians say, but believe a lot of the lies and misinformation that has been thrown around during this referendum. And I still believe that the whole thing came about as a power struggle within the government which is no reason to throw the country into turmoil. I bet, when the campaign first started all most of us knew about the EU was it's stance on the shape of bananas [I hold up my hands and admit that I was one of them].We've all learned a lot since then, and realised that the EU does far more than that and, if we want to exercise our democratic power in the future we should take more of an interest in what happens at Brussels. That's where the future of our democracy lies. Either way, I don't think British politics will ever be the same again. It will be more open; more honest. People will see the things that unite us rather than the things that divide us and work together to achieve that. I hope we do that as Europeans not as a little island that still thinks of itself as empire builders.

I am not sure about the predictions in some posts above, as I believe there is more likely to be a north/south divide in England in the way the vote will go.

Wales, more than anywhere could vote OUT - after, it is Wales which returned seven UKIP members very recently to the Welsh Assembly! Leader Neil Hamilton (no friend of Nigel Farage either from what I have read).

As for the Commonwealth, it is no longer a lingering vestige of Empire - more countries have joined and more wish to join.

Perhaps people have spent so long looking inwards towards Europe they have not noticed what is happening with other organisations worldwide.

Ham ilton is UKIP Leader in the Seneydd not UKIP Wales. I wouldn't be surprised if Wales vote out , we have been targeted by UKIP , the poverty stricken South Wales valleys and the Farmers in Mid Wales .

Surely membership or leadership of one group does not preclude us from belonging to another?

We can belong to several groups, each with their own aims and ideals and therefore bring a new perspective to each.

Yes I should have specfied that Anniebach

So if England vote in and Wales vote out will the UKIP Wales accept the result gracefully? Can't see Wales going it alone.

I amgoing to have to log off, tablet is on a go-slow and misbehaving

It seems to me that on Thursday you can choose between

1. Leaving because you are worried about migration - which is a worry that can with political will be addressed.

2. Leaving because you want our sovereignty back - which of course leaving the single market and the legislation attached to it will achieve your desire - but at what cost?

3 Leaving because we pay far too much money into the EU - not of course as Brexit claim but yes there is a net cost.

Or you can vote to remain

1. Because you understand the myth that surrounds the immigration issue, and that leaving will have no substantial effect on the level of immigrants.

2. Vote remain because you understand that when we speak of sovereignty and the EU you understand that laws relating to the single market can only possibly work at supranational level in order for our traders to operate under a fair regime. That laws relating to our internal domestic affairs are simply not within the EUs remit.

3. You understand that the vexed question of our payment to the EU is far more complicated than the media like to suggest it is. That the hidden value of our payment includes things like developing markets in other poorer EU states in order that our businesses can benefit from increased trade. That our people can benefit from increased employment.

You understand that playing fast and loose with our fragile economy is not as some suggest a price worth paying. That playing fast and loose with our environment is not as some suggest a price worth paying. That playing fast and loose with the Union of GB is not a price worth paying.

That to contract in on ourselves is neither desirable nor feasible.

That the issues that concern the leavers can with political will be resolved.

VOTE REMAIN and feel proud of your decision.

1. Glad that you acknowledge that it is a concern.
2. So worth it in so many ways.
3. Glad that is acknowledged too.

1. I think it will have to now. People will have spoken. #rollonfriday adn we shall see what the numbers of votes are.

2. Can't say that I understand all of that,especially the second part.
But the first part, no way. See the list of wealthy countries that are not in the EU that I have now posted twice. They manage perfectly well.

3.Loose answer at best. And no reason we cant do it when OUT. Probably a whole lot easier without all the rules and red tape and bureacracy of the EU.

There may be short term part where things have to be sorted out , but medium and long term, I really think we will be better off financially out by quite some way.

The political will has not been there before. What is going to change? It will be worse afterwards with Remain, rather than better. Which is rather obvious really.

Wakes couldn't go it alone, we are a small, very poor country . We are not dominated by UKIP, yes seven are in the Senydd but they got in on the second ballot , where I live we have three labour and one kipper, and he is considered a joke by many,

Mamie put a media page up about a veterans view so I put an opposite veterans view just to show it all depends which paper you read
www.express.co.uk/news/uk/681721/World-War-II-veterans-Brexit-save-democracy
Mr Williams said that “too many people” had died for democracy in this country to lose it to the EU now.
This octopus of an EU has got bigger and bigger and we have got smaller and smaller
Mr Williams