AIBU to ask if Lord Owen is right about TTIP?

[SpringingIntoAction]

Is former Labour Minister and SDP politician, Lord David Owen right to think that TTIP will be detrimental to the NHS?

www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/06/brexit-is-necessary-to-protect-nhs-from-ttip-says-david-owen

Well done the Dutch. They'll be hammering on the Brexit (Nlexit?) door right after we go through. Closely followed by the Danes. This is the beginning of the end.

Outrageous use of £9M by the government.

I don't have to back my posts up with research It's quite possible for people to form their own opinions

Well, quite. I would hop that people of either side will do some of their own research before making such a important decision.

Change.org have been doing a lot of work on Ttip. But it does seem to be slipping through, like so much I think is wrong the government just rail road it through as "they know best".

Only I don't think they do and I feel so sad that actually even if the majority don't want something, they do it anyway.

I don't think the government should be spending 9m on the eu referendum adverts. I think there should be two parties in or out with the big labelled 'government' impartial.

Conflicted about the leaflets, to be honest.

On the one hand, the government can spend £9m on anything it likes. It has taken an official position in relation to the referendum, which is to remain. It doesn't have to be impartial.

But these leaflets will be like pissing in the wind compared to the ridiculously biased pro-Brexit media (who are promoting Brexit for their own interests, not yours or mine), and so I think they will have very little impact. £9m spent on leaflets which are unlikely to make any difference is £9m which can't be spent on something else.

Receiving this leaflet will cost your household 34p. You don't have to read it. You can make an origami swan out of it, or wipe your bum on it if you prefer. If you're really upset about it, I will give you 34p.

I'd give a lot more than 34p to anyone who could stop all my social media feeds from being constantly spammed with factually inaccurate pro-Brexit propaganda.

MyHovercraftIsFullOfEels

The problem is, an ignorant person's vote is just as good as a properly informed person's vote.

Buttered

As hard as it is for the left to comprehend, that is the principle tenet of democracy.

Or are you of the persuasion that 'all people are equal but some people are more equal than others' ?

Blairism at its very best.

I love the fact that the Stayers want to remove the vote from people they deem ignorant. Talk about entitled.

HelpfulChap

We are having a referendum on the most important constitutional change in a generation. The political, legal and economic consequences of our decision are huge. Since we have been given the privilege and the responsibility of making such an important decision, I consider it to be the civic duty of each and every individual voter to ensure that they are as well informed as possible prior to election day.

And yet, the most cursory glance at any of today's papers will tell you that people are literally objecting to being given more information.

That tells me that an awful lot of people are not taking their civic duty seriously, and we probably shouldn't be having a referendum.

If you think that makes me anti-democratic and "Blairite" (I have never voted for the Labour Party), then bite me.

And yet, the most cursory glance at any of today's papers will tell you that people are literally objecting to being given more information.

I think people are objecting to not being given balanced information, if 9m is being spent on the in campaign, it should also be spent on Brexit. IMO

"I think people are objecting to not being given balanced information, if 9m is being spent on the in campaign, it should also be spent on Brexit. IMO"

You're entitled to your opinion. But the government has taken an official stance on the issue and is recommending that we remain. It makes no sense to say that they should give equal weight to their opponents' side of the argument. The government can spend taxpayers' money pursuing any policy they choose. If we don't like it, we can vote them out at the next election.

Anyway, if people are objecting to not being given balanced information, then they should be far more concerned about what the media is doing than what the government is doing. I've never seen anything so one-sided in all my life.

This quote from Anthony Hilton writing for the Evening Standard has been doing the rounds:

I once asked Rupert Murdoch why he was so opposed to the European Union. “That’s easy,” he replied. “When I go into Downing Street they do what I say; when I go to Brussels they take no notice.”

We can't expect balanced coverage from any newspapers or media outlets owned or controlled by Rupert Murdoch. The media is a dangerous business. Freedom of the press is important, but never forget that the people who control the media have enormous power to make consumers believe what they want them to believe, because it is in their own business interests, not because it is in the interests of those consumers to be better informed.

If you are concerned about not being given balanced information, this is what you should be worried about, not the government spending a piffling amount of money on a leaflet no one will read.

The Anthony Hilton article is actually very good. Link below:

www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/anthony-hilton-stay-or-go-the-lack-of-solid-facts-means-it-s-all-a-leap-of-faith-a3189151.html

The Government's leaflet will sway very few people. It's too large for the average person to open and even more so to digest.

The size of the leaflet will just reinforce the views of some people that it's all too complicated so they won't vote. I hear that view a lot.

It also goes a bit OTT to the point where it's not consistent with Cameron's own assertion in the House of Commons that the UK will survive outside the EU. People have seen through Project Fear and just find it laughable now.

If this EU referendum decision were really that important to the future of the UK there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY the decision would be left to the British public.

The possibility that the Government's recommendation could be rejected on what the Government now maintains is such a critically important issue, would be a total abrogation of the Government's duty to govern that country in the interests of its people

It would be like asking people to vote for war or not. It doesn't happen. It's too important.

The REALLY important decisions are taken by the Government alone. The EU referendum is an attempt to coerece the public into rubber-stamping the Government's own preferred solution that the UK stays within the EU.

Regarding the funding of the leaflet.

There is now a rush to produce and distribute as much referendum resource as possible before al referendum expenses must be accounted for and declared. That period of accountability does not start until mid April.

The Leave campaign does not have a leader, not because it has chosen not to have one, but it is still waiting for the Electoral Commission to formally decide who should lead the Leave campaign.

When the Electoral Commission has made that decision, the Leave campaign will be able to access public funding to promote the vote Leave cause - just as the remain vote side will. Both sides will be constrained in their spending.

But until then the Government will use tax-payers money to fund Remain leaflet drops and the Leave campaign will rely on voluntary donations.

So it's incorrect for commentators to attempt to portray the Leave campaign as in some kind of disarray because it has no formal leader - it has no formal leader because it is still waiting for the Electoral Commission to appoint that formal leader.

In the meantime we all carry on fighting this campaign under various banners and with donated money.

Have you suggested to MN that they should install an 'Ignorance-o-meter' for posters?

Perhaps you can set the parameters so we know who is deemed worthy of posting (and voting for that matter).

The elected Govt that is supposed to represent the whole electorate are only going to use public funds to support the Remain campaign.

• that was to Buttered obviously.

"If this EU referendum decision were really that important to the future of the UK there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY the decision would be left to the British public."

If only that were true.

David Cameron promised us a referendum because he didn't think for one moment that he would actually win the election and now he is absolutely cacking himself. He knows that the consequences of a Brexit vote could result in him going down in history as the prime minister who caused the UK to self-destruct.

Springing, this is a momentous decision, and everybody should care about the outcome, make a genuineeffort to inform themselves, and get out there and vote.

Thanks for that Springing, good info on the leadership/funding issue.

"The elected Govt that is supposed to represent the whole electorate are only going to use public funds to support the Remain campaign."

Sorry, but your understanding of democracy is back to front. The government doesn't represent the whole electorate. The party who wins the election and forms a government has a mandate to pursue its own policies for the duration of its term. We, the electorate, get to vote for whoever we like best (or hate least), and the party that gets the most votes wins.

If you think the government are supposed to be representing the average Labour or Green voter out there, then you need a wake up call.

David Cameron promised us a referendum because he didn't think for one moment that he would actually win the election and now he is absolutely cacking himself. He knows that the consequences of a Brexit vote could result in him going down in history as the prime minister who caused the UK to self-destruct.

If you believe that then that's ever more of a reason not to back Cameron's recommendation to stay in the EU, as it shows his own judgement to be very poor and it also shows that he is prepared to risk the UK's stability.

Springing, this is a momentous decision, and everybody should care about the outcome, make a genuine effort to inform themselves, and get out there and vote

i agree, however you cannot force people into taking an interest in something that they have absolutely no interest in.

Many will have no interest in actually listening to any argument at all. Cameron is doing himself no favours at all in the way he is running this referendum.

There is a huge mountain of resentment out there at Cameron and the way he has behaved over this. A lot of people have told me that has made them decide to vote Leave. They will not change their minds because they wish to punish Cameron. Wrong reason to vote but that's what they want to do.

Then there are those who voted in 1975 and believe they were conned. It doesn't matter whether they are right or wrong, they firmly hold this belief and they will vote LEAVE to try to make amends for that. I've heard that view expressed many times.

There is nothing that Cameron could put in any leaflet to change their minds.

"If you believe that then that's ever more of a reason not to back Cameron's recommendation to stay in the EU, as it shows his own judgement to be very poor and it also shows that he is prepared to risk the UK's stability."

For chrissakes, Springing. This is not about David Cameron. This is much bigger than David Cameron.

Anyone voting Brexit to stick two fingers up at David Cameron should have a lobotomy, not a vote.

If you think the government are supposed to be representing the average Labour or Green voter out there, then you need a wake up call.

In a democracy the Government is chosen by the people to represent the people.

No, Springing.

In our own particular version of democracy, the government is chosen by a relatively small percentage of voters, to represent those particular voters.

Advocating that we remain in the European Union is just one of the current government's policies, which they are going to promote as much as they - in their cack-handed way - can, because that is what governments do. That is literally their job.

Remember Theresa May's "go home" vans? The government spent a huge amount of money advertising their crackdown on illegal immigrants. Do you also believe, in the interests of fairness and representing the entire electorate, that they should have spent an equal amount of money funding a campaign for all illegal immigrants to be given indefinite leave to remain in the UK?

What about the much-maligned "bedroom tax"? Do you believe the Department for Work and Pensions should have put forwards both in favour of and against their own policy?

What about the junior doctor's strike? Do you think Jeremy Hunt should be saying, "on the one hand, junior doctors are lazy little gobshites who don't want to work weekends and don't care if people die as a result, but on the other hand, I am a duplicitous arsehole who has deliberately twisted the facts to mislead the public, oh and by the way, I want to privatise the NHS"?

Don't be absurd.

Your faith in democracy is touching, but misplaced. The best that can be said for democracy is that it is better than the alternatives.

For chrissakes, Springing. This is not about David Cameron. This is much bigger than David Cameron.

Anyone voting Brexit to stick two fingers up at David Cameron should have a lobotomy, not a vote.

Whoa! Do not shoot the messenger!

The electorate covers a very broad spectrum of ability and education.

You cannot deny a person a vote unless they have been certified as not having the capacity to do so. Determining the capacity to vote would lead us down a very slippery slope.

People with those views are out there. Unless you start disenfranchising people whose views you ridicule and state that only an elite intelligentsia can vote,, those people will rightly continue to have an equal opportunity to express their views.

I find it more bizarre that people who hate and do not trust Cameron are going to vote for Cameron's recommendation to stay in the EU.