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.

A momentous decision can't be based on access to cheap flights. Seriously??

It is not to shut down debate. It is to open a debate, in fact. If is because I deeply believe for a variety of reasons that this referendum is based on deeply racist motivations. If is not 'convenient' and doesn't close down anything. It is my view and please feel free to disagree. I would be interested in knowing how it is not racist to wish for people of different nations to leave your country en masse or to be voting for a closed doors policy. Do tell.

TTIP hasn't been ratified or agreed by the EU as yet.

One of the reasons it is taking so long is because the has far more bargaining power than the countries given as examples. TTIP is a worry, but if negotiated well it could be beneficial to EU business and have minimised risks.

Investor State Dispute Settlements (ISDS) are a complicated trade agreement tool. For example UK firms have brough ISDS cases against countries to protect their investments in the past. In its current form it is being consulted upon by the EU and it is likely that because of the EU's strong position provisions will be put in that allow governments to regulate and rule whilst also protecting investments.

It is a concern if it is implemented in the wrong way, but then so are all trade agreements.

I'd also like to point out that is ironic that remain campaigners are being told they are "project fear" when the Brexit campaign is all about scaring people with TTIP, immigration and a percieved loss of soveriegnty to people we haven't elected. What is that? Spreading the good news?

Daisy

Democracy doesn't exist. FPTP ensures that the current government doesn't have majority support of the electorate (43%). The European Parliament at least uses a list system in elections to try and ensure some sort of proportionality.

I wouldn't say democracy doesn't exist, but in practice it is always a tricky thing. Brexiters complain that EU votes don't always go Britain's way, but then if you're a British green voter (say), it's very possible that you'll live all your life in a democratic country and never see a government that represents your views.

I think there are ways to make the EU more democratic that don't necessarily involve major institutional changes. If people actually voted in mass for their MEPs, and if the media reported on EU politics the way they report on domestic politics, there would be a lot more public scrutiny on what happens in Brussels, and a lot more accountability.

Anna, I don't know whether you chose to deliberately misinterpret my post or you just stopped reading half-way through.

I mentioned cheap flights as an example of an EU policy which has benefited masses of people across Europe.

It is also one of many examples of the EU improving the lot of British consumers (together with the abolition of roaming charges, the EU passenger right charter, the rule that entitles you to 2-year free of charge guarantee on any good bought in the EU).

EU law also protect workers right and some may be at risk if we leave.

Democracy having been mentioned:
Between 2009-2014 1,936 motions were put before the European Union(EU) Parliament .
576 of these can be catergorised as being AGAINST United Kingdom interests .
However out of these 576 motions 485 were passed.!!!
Passed although they were AGAINST UK interests.!
That is a FAILURE rate of 84%.
We have no influence in the EU.
The argument that to stay in the EU to Influence holds no water.

It didn't take long for the accusations of racism did it? What a convenient way to try and shut down debate.

I agree.

Coolforkittycats discussing racism is very much part of a debate. Who closes down debate?! I certainly didn't. Maybe you did. If you have views that this referendum is not relevant to issues of immigration and racism, please discuss, happy to hear them. (See: opening up debate which I never closed anyway and couldn't have done so)

Stillovingmysleep
You are trying to derail a debate on whether we should exit the EU.
You to my mind are part of a team employed by the In Campaign to derail this democratic debate.
You do not want a variety concerns debated on here because it's not your agenda.

YokoOhHo
Democracy is fragile,we should all strive to preserve it.

I don't agree with Stillovingmysleep that the topic is fundamentally racist, but given that a large part of the "out" case rests on immigration, she certainly has a right to raise the question. Especially since she is clearly not using it as an excuse to refuse dialogue, in fact other posters are the ones who point-blank refuse to engage with her arguments and are the ones closing the debate here.

You to my mind are part of a team employed by the In Campaign to derail this democratic debate.
You do not want a variety concerns debated on here

Daisy it is ironic that you accuse her of "not wanting a variety of concerns" debated here when you are the one refusing to engage with her concerns and trying to shut down the debate by randomly accusing her of being an employee of the "in" campaign.

Stillovingmysleep I think accusations of racism are not helpful because it's highly emotive language that raises people's hackles. And more importantly, it's not accurate either, in my view. I think that for the less-than-savoury fringe of the debate, xenophobia would be the more appropriate word.

sorry I keep mispelling your name stilllovingmysleep...

Chalalala
You invited me to start this thread.But you also want to derail it
Are you part of the team too?

YokoUh Ho
Democracy when seen to be being abused is challenged thankfully.
www.ibtimes.co.uk/eu-referendum-cameron-faces-pro-eu-leaflets-backlash-mps-threaten-grind-government-halt-1553761
Democracy is indeed precious.

Are you part of the team too?

No, are you part of the "out" campaign team?

Yes I invited you to start this thread, but you don't get to dictate what is discussed here. It's not just your concerns that have a right to be voiced.

If you think stilllovingmysleep's concerns are way off the mark, you tell her that, you give your reasons and you move on. But you don't tell her that she doesn't have a right to voice her concerns.

Coolforkittycats discussing racism is very much part of a debate. Who closes down debate?! I certainly didn't. Maybe you did.

Eh? All I said was I agreed with someone else's post.

I am likely to vote stay, for what it's worth, but in my personal opinion, saying it is all about racism will get people's hackles up.

I am a mum on mumsnet asked by you to start a thread.
I m not a politian I have said so,therefore I cannot address the concerns of the poster stillovingmysleep.
I have said so in a post to her already.
Any concerns should be voiced to an MP ,I am not an MP.

alright, we're all good then Daisy, let's move on

I know how you love a good link, so have you seen this new report by an independent think tank? reported on here www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/13/brexit-unlikely-fall-immigration-report

a couple of interesting points - they think levels of immigration would not significantly differ with or without Brexit, and also to go back to a previous point about left-wing argument, they think that Brexit would force Britain towards a more economically liberal model

the economic benefits of cutting loose from Brussels and slashing regulation could only be achieved by a government that was willing to sacrifice the rights of workers, enshrined in legislation such as the Agency Workers Directive; and to unleash the “creative destruction” that would come with tougher competition.

“If you left the EU, the trend would be further liberalisation, further globalisation, if you want to make it a success,”

Some Brexiters may be very happy with this, but it certainly undermines the left-wing argument for Brexit.

I think the lady doth protest too much with the "i am a mum" thing, you seem to refer to it all the time as a defense mechanism. If you are going to use that as a defence and not engage with any point of view which counters yours then don't start political debates on this site.

On your democracy thing, can you give examples of what these motions are for? Motions are different to passing legislation, you are aware of that aren't you?

You are also aware that any trade agreement with the EU would involve the UK having to adopt EU regulations ( of which many of these motions are).

Also on the law making front, many of the "laws" follow stuff like employment laws (holidays, maternity pay, paternity pay, sick pay etc) and again would have to be adhered to in order for the UK to get a good deal with the EU. If the UK opts out of this is gives UK firms a competitive advantage over EU firms which they will seek to equal out with tariffs. Also many of the "laws" that have passed over time are actually minor modifications to the text of an original law, passed years ago which needs modifying in technical terms. It is disingenuous to portray it the way that you do.

A more effective way of putting it would be that the UK loses more votes than any other country, but is still on the winning side 90% of the time!

Daisy gets asked to start a new thread and then gets piled into. No change there then.

Not one member of the European Commission were elected by any voters. They propose the laws we are expected to abide by.

Unelected bureaucrats. Might as well just get rid of Westminster and have done with it.

Asking for a new thread so we can continue the debate does not imply that we agree. In fact I very clearly stated in my "invitation" to Daisy that I still disagree with her on almost everything (in so many words )

Chalalala
To be honest you should have started your own Thread.
If you disagree with everything.