Leaving the EU

[RobF]

'Out' for me, irrespective of Cameron's deal.

Leftie rants by the likes of oldtom just confirm my view.

As regards Cameron going, he said very soon after the last election he is not going for a third term.

By the time we've had the EU referendum, got the result and digested it, Cameron might only be a year or two from quitting anyway.

So in that respect, the result does not matter to him.

 

[flecc]

They would have to rejoin the EU and that would be a lengthy process I imagine. They would presumably have to be part of the eurozone, since all new entrants now have to adopt the euro.

When EU members Greenland and Denmark split in 1979 with home rule for each, neither had to adopt the euro and haven't to this day.

Scotland splitting from the UK is the same circumstance, either remaining in the EU would not be threatened with compulsory adoption of the euro.

Splitting away from an inclusive EU membership union doesn't constitute becoming a new member.
.

 

[Lancslass]

This country desperately needs to be rid of the current, fascist government comprised of inbreds bereft of any humanity.

Tom

Fascist - a dictatorial power which will not allow opposition of any kind and exercises complete control over labour and business - c'mon Tom, the Tories are hardly that. We are a democracy and you should be proud of that.

 

[Lancslass]

When EU members Greenland and Denmark split in 1979 with home rule for each, neither had to adopt the euro and haven't to this day.

Scotland splitting from the UK is the same circumstance, either remaining in the EU would not be threatened with compulsory adoption of the euro.

Splitting away from an inclusive EU membership union doesn't constitute becoming a new member.
.

I don't think that any of what you say has been proven by past experience of that situation Flecc.

Greenland and Denmark happened back in 1979 when the current eurozone rules didn't apply and I haven't read anywhere that splitting away from an inclusive membership union (which, incidentally, we may not be by then), doesn't constitute becoming a new member.

 

[flecc]

it seems important that we have control of our own finances,it seems that the EU is too vast to have one currency to cover all 27 countries.

An even larger European Union that included much of the Middle East and North Africa was a single market with a single currency once before, and the currency didn't cause the parting after 400 years into separate countries. That worked ok so could again

I'm speaking of the Roman Empire and the denarius of course.
.

 

[flecc]

I don't think that any of what you say has been proven by past experience of that situation Flecc.

Greenland and Denmark happened back in 1979 when the current eurozone rules didn't apply and I haven't read anywhere that splitting away from an inclusive membership union (which, incidentally, we may not be by then), doesn't constitute becoming a new member.

But you also haven't read anywhere that splitting away does constitute a new membership. At least I have that prior example in favour of my position.

Long before, Algeria split from France and also left the EU at the same time, while leaving France a member. That separation also caused no problems, indicating once more that countries have considerable autonomy in this matter.

I'm confident that "new membership" means solely that of a first time entrant to the Union. I'm even more confident that the EU will never risk any country leaving the Union for the sake of a rule, especially one that doesn't specifically apply to the circumstance.
.

 

[Lancslass]

But you also haven't read anywhere that splitting away does constitute a new membership. At least I have that prior example in favour of my position.

Long before, Algeria split from France and also left the EU at the same time, while leaving France a member. That separation also caused no problems, indicating once more that countries have considerable autonomy in this matter.


.

But that was back in the early 60's - things have changed so much since then.

Principally though, it's a different set of circumstances. Algeria was already an EU member being part of France. Scotland don't have autonomy and being part of the UK, in the event of brexit, they won't be in the EU anymore by the time they have a referendum,

I don't think that the EU are just going to let them come back in as if they'd never left. There certainly isn't a precedent for the situation. Unfortunate for Scotland but they voted not to become independent and they have to live with all it's advantages and disadvantages.

 

[Kudoscycles]

I never realised that Greenland was part of the EU,doing my homework I now realise it was part of the EEC,the EU predecessor.
Not sure why Greenland left but it appears the groundwork is being laid for them to rejoin. They have from 2014 to 2020 being given €217 million assistance from the EU,the same source advised that Greenland is currently facing economic and political difficulties,why do the EU want them?
KudosDave

 

[Lancslass]

I never realised that Greenland was part of the EU,doing my homework I now realise it was part of the EEC,the EU predecessor.
Not sure why Greenland left but it appears the groundwork is being laid for them to rejoin. They have from 2014 to 2020 being given €217 million assistance from the EU,the same source advised that Greenland is currently facing economic and political difficulties,why do the EU want them?
KudosDave

I was never sure why the EU wanted quite a few of the recent entrants - because they're there maybe

 

[flecc]

Scotland ------------- being part of the UK, in the event of brexit, they won't be in the EU anymore by the time they have a referendum,

I agree and wasn't arguing that hypothetical circumstance of us already having left. But that circumstance won't arise anyway if we vote to leave.

We have to give two years notice to leave, and during that time Scotland will be able to vote for independence and leave the UK since there's no agreement that they have to give notice to do that. As I pointed out before, all the indications are that they would adopt that course if threatened with loss of EU membership.

Personally I believe these hypotheses are probaby irrelevant, since I'm sure that by hook or by crook, the UK will be kept in the EU, regardless of voting intentions.
.

 

[flecc]

I never realised that Greenland was part of the EU,doing my homework I now realise it was part of the EEC,the EU predecessor.
Not sure why Greenland left but it appears the groundwork is being laid for them to rejoin. They have from 2014 to 2020 being given €217 million assistance from the EU,the same source advised that Greenland is currently facing economic and political difficulties,why do the EU want them?
KudosDave

It was on gaining home rule from EU member Denmark that they became part of the EEC by some route or other. When wholely with Denmark, they were de facto EU members in the same way that Wales and Scotland are, no separate agreements, just in by virtue of inclusion in a national union.

As you say, there are strong indications that they wish to rejoin now, possibly a relevant warning to us.

Why do the EU want them? Politics is about power and power is about size. There's not many Greenlanders but the country is vast, with many mineral assets and strategically important.
.

 

[oldtom]

When EU members Greenland and Denmark split in 1979 with home rule for each, neither had to adopt the euro and haven't to this day.

Scotland splitting from the UK is the same circumstance, either remaining in the EU would not be threatened with compulsory adoption of the euro.

Splitting away from an inclusive EU membership union doesn't constitute becoming a new member.
.

There is little doubt Flecc that the EU would almost certainly give credence to precedent should the UK be divided by Scotland's secession. Whether or not the Scots were to adopt the Euro or retain Sterling would probably depend on the demeanour of the Westminster elite and/or the Bank of England. Comparisons with smaller nations such as Ireland and Malta might be drawn which might suggest Euro rather than Sterling.

It is sometimes very difficult for me to respect opinions of people who simply regurgitate the headline stories from the tory media wing and seem incapable of interpreting what is really going on, both at home and abroad. How does one actually get through to someone so utterly brainwashed that they have lost the capacity for independent thought?

Adages and worthy quotations help my understanding and a couple spring to mind which fit appropriately with some of the blinkered stupidity I come across in the field of politics and world affairs:


'There's none so blind as those who will not see.' - This has its roots in the bible but has been used frequently in literature throughout the ages.


This is from one of Britain's greatest literary talents, Burns:

O, wad some Power the giftie gie us

To see oursels as others see us!

It wad frae monie a blunder free us,

An' foolish notion.”

Tom

 

[Kudoscycles]

Old Tom....at risk of spears thrown in my direction,can I point out that the Tories won the last election,by a strong margin.
But I voted for Tony Blair when Labour got back in so I am no judge of character or manifesto?
By the way where is Tony Blair? Isn't he our Middle East peace envoy? With all that's happening in Syria shouldn't he be a high profile guy at the moment?
KudosDave

 

[Lancslass]

The left wing don't have a monopoly on independent thought! It's very easy and even a bit lazy to say that people who don't agree with you have not thought it through or are brainwashed in some way.

We all take thoughts and ideas from outside influences and we all have a tendency to read the press that our ideas are closest to. I am no more likely to spend the morning reading the New Statesmen as you, Tom are going to immerse yourself in the Telegraph. But just reading forums such as this, and watching the likes of Question Time opens us all up to others opinions.

 

[RobF]

,the same source advised that Greenland is currently facing economic and political difficulties,why do the EU want them?
KudosDave

Because the longer the (gravy) train, the harder it is to stop.

 

[JohnCade]

Old Tom....at risk of spears thrown in my direction,can I point out that the Tories won the last election,by a strong margin.
But I voted for Tony Blair when Labour got back in so I am no judge of character or manifesto?
By the way where is Tony Blair? Isn't he our Middle East peace envoy? With all that's happening in Syria shouldn't he be a high profile guy at the moment?
KudosDave

Not sure what Blair has to do with anything. He was never a Labour figure and was actually some sort of American Democrat/European Christian Democrat cross.

As to where he is? He’s hanging out with his billionaire chums and dipping energetically into the money river, where they found him a good spot after all the good work he did for them. Dave was wealthier then Blair at birth. But he’s still got a good place by the river set aside for him too; and he’s doing his best to carry on the good work of allowing the one percenters to get even richer and keep even more of their money away from the tax man.

 

[JohnCade]

The left wing don't have a monopoly on independent thought! It's very easy and even a bit lazy to say that people who don't agree with you have not thought it through or are brainwashed in some way.

We all take thoughts and ideas from outside influences and we all have a tendency to read the press that our ideas are closest to. I am no more likely to spend the morning reading the New Statesmen as you, Tom are going to immerse yourself in the Telegraph. But just reading forums such as this, and watching the likes of Question Time opens us all up to others opinions.

I used to read the Torygraph for years. It was a good paper once and the news and opinion pages were kept well apart. But when Black took it over it turned into a propaganda sheet echoing his own viewpoint. Under the Barclays it’s just a run of the mill right wing paper supporting right wing causes close to the hearts of billionaire tax avoiders. Funny how it’s rich people like that who own most of the print media and who are so anti EU though isn’t it?

 

[oldtom]

Funny how it’s rich people like that who own most of the print media and who are so anti EU though isn’t it?

Well done John! You said all that without mentioning the Chancellor of the Exchequer....it's still one of the Rothschilds isn't it?

Tom

 

[oldtom]

Not sure what Blair has to do with anything. He was never a Labour figure and was actually some sort of American Democrat/European Christian Democrat cross.

As to where he is? He’s hanging

That's what should be happening. It's not too late for him to be placed in the dock at the Hague for war crimes and I'd sincerely like that to happen. John, you're absolutely correct; Blair was and remains just a pink tory. We certainly did not get a socialist government in 1997 and instead of reversing the damage done by the Thatcher government, we simply continued with the same useless strategies, loved by the powerful media moguls, the bankers, tax-avoiding celebs and our real owners in Tel Aviv, New York and Jerusalem.

Going off at a tangent but nevertheless interestingly, we never did get all the fines and financial penalties from Shirley Porter; just a settlement falling far short of what she owed. Curiously, she has never been stripped of her Damehood which I find appalling but no more appalling than the engineered delays in prosecuting Leon Britton, Greville Janner or Cyril Smith. Jimmy Saville had nothing on those people!

Tom

 

[shemozzle999]

Although not in the Euro we still have to follow the economic recommendations of the Commission just to keep them sweet, although they are disguised as new Conservative policies - see the 3 points raised at the bottom of the annual report:

http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/csr2015/csr2015_council_uk_en.pdf