The EU Referendum is nearly upon us.........23rd June.

[Daisyonthegreen]

I have been invited by other posters to start a new EU Referendum Thread as the EU thread "In out shake it all about what to vote in the EU referendum "is now closed.
Anyhow this vote is is pretty crucial for the good of the country and your family.
I make no secret of the fact I feel to vote to Leave is the best option.
On the "In out shake it all about,what to vote in the EU Referendum " Thread I posted many links and gave views on why I feel that way.
I feel we would flourish free of the beaucratic ,undemocratic organisation it has turned into.
A Trading block initially started up with 9 countries in the 1970s has become out of control,mammoth and unwieldy and frankly rather dangerous.
We need to wrest back control of our own country,our borders and our ability to broker our own Trade deals which the EU insists on doing for us.
Plus our own Judicial decisions.
We on leaving would still Trade with the EU,they need us more than we need them actually but the beauty of it we could be free to broker our own deals with the rest of the world on our terms.
In short we would flourish.
We can love/ like Europe but not be in the EU.

We have a serious housing crisis. Mass immigration is the main reason for the additional demand. In order to accommodate new migrants, we need to build an new home every 6 minutes for the next 20 years. One in four children born in England and Wales is born to a foreign born mother. This has put huge pressure on our maternity wards.

"EU immigrants are found by a number of studies to be net tax contributors. There may be some who come in and claim benefits yes, but the overwhelming majority have jobs and contribute."

I dont believe it is as straightforward as that.

DWP statistics show that although migrants are less likely to claim out-of-work benefits they are more likely to be claiming tax credits and housing benefit whilst in work. Eastern European migrants have lower wages and higher rates of benefit claim than those born in the UK.

Overall rates of claim for Housing benefit, tax credits and Child benefit among the migrant population are considerably higher than among the UK-born.

Specifically looking at housing benefit, at 25 years old, migrants catch up and then overtake UK born rates of claim. For people in their forties, rates of claim are nearly 50% higher.

So please stop trotting out the myth that migrants put more in than they take out of the system, it is simply not true.

It is true Anna, sorry. Several studies have confirmed it not just the UCL one.

"Overall rates of claim for Housing benefit, tax credits and Child benefit among the migrant population are considerably higher than among the UK-born. "

This is true, 15% of EU immigrants recieved tax credits where as 11% of UK born workers recieve tax credits. However, 15% of EU immigrants means 200, 000 people which is a very small percentage of the population. Remember British people claim benefits abroad too.

DWP data shows that only 14% of people from EU countries claim tax credits.

The UCL data and others discusses net fiscal contribution which is all spending not just benefits.

The OUMO also suggests that the foreign born are underrepresented among out-of-work benefits recipients.They make up 16.2% of the working-age population, but about 7.7% of those who are claiming out of work benefits.

@Chalalala
Sorry for the late response…

-> there may be issues cutting trade deals that allow full control

Hmm. I've read Open Europe's report in full now. What I took from it was that as part of the post-Brexit landscape it may be necessary to accept some Norway-style EU trade agreement and that this would involve accepting free movement. I suspect that is likely because that would be the default 'business as usual' arrangement. However I think that in the event of a Brexit vote it would be political suicide for any party to accept such an arrangement on a permanent basis because this would not satisfy the wishes of the Brexit majority (and with ukip waiting in the wings). My assumption is that in the medium term we would try to emulate nations like Canada or Australia and walk away from a EEA deal. That being the case I'm not sure where the migration control issue would arise. I believe most trade treaties do not stipulate absolute freedom of movement.

If you think I've misunderstood this then I'd welcome your take on it.

->As long as the UK has relatively low unemployment, governments will want to import large amounts of cheap labour to help growth.

I don't understand this. I doubt that the UK benefits from imported cheap labour. The reports I've read suggest that there is no evidence that cheap EU labour disadvantages native cheap labour, and that the workers themselves aren't big users of our services. Fine. Does that mean this migration actually benefits us? I suspect much of this work is done cash in hand and possibly for less than minimum wage and that none of this therefore shows as evidence. The workers must use our infrastructure to some extent and at some cost and the cash moves offshore. Meanwhile (as we've seen today) people get very irate about this sort of thing and now here we are having a EU referendum because these irate people support ukip and ukip threaten the Tories. I bet hardly any ukip supporters object to skilled scientists, engineers, GPs, university lecturers etc migrating to the UK to pay lots of income tax.

-> So Brexit would be a very high price to pay, to get pretty much the same result in the end.

I've been quite upfront about the likely price of Brexit. It scares me and I might well hold my nose and vote remain. However if we do leave I don't think the result would be the same.

PS it makes no difference if you're French. Please keep up your excellent posts here.

I keep seeing the notion that not trusting Cameron is a reason to remain in the EU.

But do you trust Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission?

Some of his statements:

"When it becomes serious, you have to lie."

"We decide on something, leave it lying around, and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back."

"Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to bring attention to that?"

"I am for secret, dark debates."

(From Meet the Next President of the European Commission)

"My assumption is that in the medium term we would try to emulate nations like Canada or Australia and walk away from a EEA deal."

The UK is in a very different position to Canada or Australia when negotiating a deal. Oh and btw the Canadian deal hasn't been signed so I wish people would stop selling it up. Also these deals don't include anything on services which as one of our important exports to the EU we would want, they aren't achievable. There's a good leaflet on it here.

www.politico.eu/article/5-options-for-post-brexit-trade-with-europe-ukip-efta-single-market/

The French, Germans and others have already said that we won't get the deal that Brexiters are talking about.

@lurked101

Are you saying you think Brexit is impossible?

Also Anna, the stuff you have posted is relevant, thanks for that :), but the figures refer to all immigration, not EU immigration.

The data on non-EU immigration is that they too (like the British born) are in net tax deficit and more likely to be in reciept of all types of beneifts. However the data on EU immigration from more than one source shows the net fiscal contribution points, one even digs a bit deeper and shows that EU8 immigrants contribute about £1.12 for every £1 they recieve in spending, where as EU14 contribute 1.64.

No I think it is entirely possible, but I don't think the trade deal that people are discussing will happen, if all the "good" things that brexiters were discussing were actually possible we'd go for it and Cameron et al would be saying to leave (and would have done it earlier).

The EU won't grant us that deal, it would weaken their position when negotiating other deals for one, and it has the upper hand when negotiating with the UK.

Agreed.

The default business as usual deal would seem to be something like the Norway deal which would leave UK with no say in the EU, bound by most of its directives, paying in, but would allow current business to proceed. Money talks and that would suit most of the big boys and the EU, surely?

But not an actual brexit and political suicide for the UK government charged with implementing brexit if accepted permanently.

Thus my assumption is that in the medium term we would try to emulate nations like Canada or Australia and walk away from a EEA deal. We'd sign ad-hoc trade deals like Canada. BMW would still want to sell cars here so no doubt at some point we'd end up with a trade deal on some terms with the EU.

How do you think it would pan out?

An EEA style deal would be completely useless, it suits neither the Brexit camp or the remainers as it would mean losing the chance to influence policy, whilst paying in and accepting freedom of movement.

"emulate nations like Canada or Australia"

These deals need to stop being held up as examples, neither of these countries do as much trade with the EU as we do ( 44% of exports) and whilst the EU bloc is the 2nd largest trade partenr with Canada it is 8 times smaller than the US. They also don't share borders with the EU.

It also worries me that the Canadian deal is held up as an example by Brexiters, do you know the reason it hasn't been signed? The same thing as the TTIP deal that they are so scared about if we remain in the EU the ISDS issue.

BMW et al will still want to do business here, but are likely to be far more unhappy with their governments for signing a deal which benefits UK businesses at whilst they have to stay within the EU regulations and contribute in terms of tax, this is likely to lead to political pressure not to give this trade deal.

Chlalala

"I think it's the other way round. The EU is a relatively protected zone for workers, in terms of rights and in terms of pay even for the poorer country (compared to the rest of the world). If the UK leaves this protected zone it it will have to "liberalise" to be competitive globally, and we all know what that means: lower pay and fewer rights for workers"

Workers rights won't get you a job if you are in a queue with 100 other people competing for a job. You are missing the point.

The EU must offer us something. An EEA deal is not useless its an acceptable mid term compromise.

I'm not holding up the EU/Canada deal as an example for us. I'm suggesting Canada is an example to a post-brexit UK us as a mid-sized developed economy with no links the the EU.

BMW want to sell cars. At some point we might have the money to buy them again. A deal on some terms will be acceptable. Those terms might be worse than we have now.

I'm speculating. How do you think it would pan out?

How do I think it will pan out? Do you want the full economic analysis or the highlights?

Lurked101

"So basically your argument is that the UK will negotiate a deal that means it totally benefits from the single market without any of the costs? "

No. I am suggesting we can cut a deal more akin to the USA and Canada. They have access to the EU without the need to have political union nor freedom of movement of people. Can you see the USA handing its "sovereignty" to the EU?

I'm obviously quite bored here. Spill.

Chalalala

"Numbers mean little if you don't take into account the respective sizes of the economies."

True. We buy more from the EU than they buy from us. So in absolute numerical terms, they'd lose more business than we would. No country will win which is why they will continue to trade.

"what your figures actually mean is that the EU has 2% of its jobs relying on exports to the UK, while the UK has 10% of its jobs relying on exports to the EU. So there's a good argument to be made that it is in fact the EU holding the (much) stronger card"

Okay. Do you think the other 27 members would be happy at the EU causing the loss of 5m jobs? As I keep saying, nobody is a winner if trade stops. The insinuation is that if the EU stops trading with the UK, we will be the only losers which is nonsense.

Chalalala

"to go back to the 9.7% point, actually I take it back - of course it's possible for a smaller contingent to sway votes. In fact it's a well-recognised issue with Proportional Representation, the fact that:

"very small parties can act as "king-makers", holding larger parties to ransom during coalition discussions" (that's right, I'm quoting Wikipedia"

These are two different aspects.

You are right. Among a million voters who vote equally 50/50, the 1 millionth and first voter will have the casting vote. The point I am makig is one vote in 1 million and one gives insignificant representation.

Lurked101

"BMW et al will still want to do business here, but are likely to be far more unhappy with their governments for signing a deal which benefits UK businesses at whilst they have to stay within the EU regulations and contribute in terms of tax, this is likely to lead to political pressure not to give this trade deal"

We will still abide by EU trade regulations. We just won't be in political union (read ruled by) the EU.

I get tried of these two completely different aspects of the subject being mixed into the same pot. We don't need to be ruled by the EU to trade with the EU.

Can someone here please explain why we need to be ruled by the EU commission to trade with them?

It is on that one item alone I am voting out. I do not want to be ruled by unelected Eurocrats. Period.

I'll keep it brief.

Leave, exchange rates fall because of the fact that we import 54% of our goods from the EU inflation goes up, interest rates go up to combat this and as consumer incomes fall a recession ensues. This combinded with the ecomic uncertainty means that UK firms hold back on investing, FDI falls too, and the recession will be quite deep and painful.

Now thats short term. Long term it depends on the trade deal struck. If we strike an EEA style deal then it will be almost business as usual, with less say and still contributing.

The ideal trade agreement would be to get complete access to the single market but not have to pay any of the costs. However, to address Bronze's point about trade, EU businesses/states will not accept having to follow regulations, contribute in tax form etc and UK firms getting to be more competitive through not having this. Yes both will lose out, but when you work out that 3million jobs here rely on EU trade and the 5m across the other 27 member states the impact will be felt in a far smaller way.

To reiterate 15 % of EU exports come to the UK, 44% of UK exports go to the EU. The importance of EU trade to the UK is far higher than that of the USA or Canada, they also don't share borders, or import as much from the EU as we do. Its not a comparable situation.

So that trade deal isn't forthcoming, we'd have to accept some form of freedom of movement and contrubuting in some way. We may get better terms than Norway or Switzerland but not massively different. Why? Because to get the deal brexiters want would be to destroy the EU and its bargaining power at any trade negotiation.

We'd also have to organise new trade deals with South Korea, China and other countries which would take time. With a smaller market to offer them we would have to accept less beneficial deals.

The effect on the UK would be massively detrimental, job losses, higher costs of living, lower tax take, poorer services.

Long term this is very detrimental to the UK economy, because we will have less to invest into education, health and infrastructure effecting the long term capacity of the economy. On top of this we will be less attractive to FDI also effecting our Long run prosperity. Firms may also decide to leave the UK, HSBC is seriously considering it.

A hope is that the lower level of the pound encourages more exports, however it depends on the Marshal Learner condition being met, and as a large number of our exports are high end goods they tend to be price inleastic!

The is a possibility that Scotland will sceede from the Union if a majority of Scots vote to remain too.

Of course this is hypothetical, but I've read the independent PWC report, and other analysis from economists and banks etc. There are none that are too hopeful.

"It is on that one item alone I am voting out. I do not want to be ruled by unelected Eurocrats. Period."

Then I feel you misunderstand the way the EU works. The commision do not set laws. EU laws are developed by teams of civil servants from each of the members states, they are then sent to the Council (made up of elected ministers from member states) or to the Parliament for ratification or ammendment.

Its the same way many new laws and bills are developed in this country, proposed by civil servants ( in white papers etc) and then ratified by parliament or sent back for ammendment.

BronzeBust

As I keep saying, nobody is a winner if trade stops. The insinuation is that if the EU stops trading with the UK, we will be the only losers which is nonsense.

Yes you're absolutely right, everyone would lose - that's why other EU governments really don't want the UK to leave. But the UK would likely lose more than the EU, simply because the EU is very large and will absorb the impact more easily.

Size really does matter a lot here - in negotiations, the bigger guy has the better hand. That's what would happen with UK-EU negotiations post Brexit. That's why the US were able to impose a horrible TPP to Australia and NZ. If our TTIP negotiations are taking so long it's because the EU is such a powerful economic force, it's the first time the US have actually come across a negotiating partner they can't just bully to their terms. TTIP will still likely suck, but the EU is our best shot at getting significant concessions. If Brexit happens and Britain has to negotiate on its own with the US, our cards will be much less good. It'll be the real-life equivalent of that Billy Bob Thornton scene in Love Actually.

AnnaForbes
Your post on here on Sat16thApril1623:51:42 for fererence for mums.
You are correct and the voice of female reason.
Plus here is an article from Suzanne Moore on her female intuition that the best course of action is to LEAVE the EU when we vote on the Referendum on the 23rd of June this year.
Article from a female perspective for a change!
Well worth reading.
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/22/my-instinct-brexit-boris-anti-eu-not-anti-europe

Jeffreyneedsahobby
I have seen your post
I have posted numerous links re Trade etcetera on the
"In out shake it all about,what to vote in the EU Referendum "Thread
which may be of use to you.
The Thread is still accessible.
Believe me we would flourish out of the EU,a Businessman friend of mine can't wait to vote Leave.
It's all in the Thread anyway
Good luck!

Chalalala
You are scaremongering again:

Mums;
There are numerous posts by me on the "In out shake it all about,what to vote in the EU Referendum " Thread to view.
They show we would thrive out of the dead hand of the EU,also it's not just about money ,look on the links dealing with social issues.
Mums have a look.