Quick Poll: EU stay or leave?

[BlueSmarties76]

Would you vote to stay or leave the EU?

Quick poll.

The EU policies have led to wealth distribution issues in the EU area. My family used to be in agriculture and we are still connected to those who are. The German government subsidize this sector heavily giving them an unfair advantage that results in German farmers making much higher profits compared to other EU member states.

As to the financial crisis, it was caused by stupid government policies that required banks to lend to people they didn't historically lend to due to their low income and/or poor credit score. I don't think we are through the worst and expect the next 18 months to be very interesting. The only reason Germany didn't suffer more was because of their policies of subsidizing losses. REITs in Germany fell heavily just as they did in the UK but we're backed by the government hence the limited damage.

I am married to a Dane and from speaking with those from outside of Copenhagen the majority are anti EU as it stands today. If they had a vote today it would be close. If they saw the UK leave with minimal fall out I think they too would vote to leave.

I bet the Danes would consider going too. I worked with Danes for years. They like themselves and doing things their own way; they are free thinking and not encumbered with guilt.

They are not happy with Germany at all. Through EU policies they have seen so many jobs move from Denmark to Germany and Poland because of the wage differential. The Danish companies also find it hard to compete when Germany subsidizes their industry sectors. The subsidies that France and Germany use to support their businesses should not be allowed if all of the EU is supposed to be in this together. If we are going to allow these subsidies they need to be uniform across the EU.

The EU is Germany and Germany acts in it's own interests. I've no problem with that ~ they should ~ so should we and leave, ASAP...

France is at it too the with generous subsidies. SCNF, utility companies, agriculture etc are all heavily subsidized giving them an unfair advantage within the EU.

As to the working time directive, most people in professional roles are working more than 40 hours a week. I work with Swedes, Germans, Belgians, Spaniards and Italians who are all putting in 80+ hour weeks on a regular basis. It is those in lower income brackets who have reduced hours and I don't think that policy is in place for their benefit. It helps create a wealth gap IMO but that is for a different thread.

Out. And not before time.

The democratically elected British government needs to take responsibility back for our sovereignty, our borders and our economics. People voted in the 70s to join the Common Market. They did not vote to join a supra-national entity where technocrats in Brussels have more power over the UK than our own elected politicians. They were wrong about the ERM, they were wrong about the Euro, they were wrong about Schengen: what else are they going to be wrong about, and will your grandchildren ever forgive you?

And no, for those worried about the economic impact, we won't suffer. You really think Ireland is not going to trade with us? Really? The US? Really? You don't think we would benefit from better ties with our Commonwealth partners too? Did you know that every transaction that goes through a European port on its way to the UK, even if it doesn't originate in the EU, is recorded and classed as a European transaction at present? How's that for skewing the figures? But then, of course, the Commission is so lax that the audit hasn't been able to be signed off for umpteen years: a state of affairs that would have the ordinary man in the street doing time.

Remember - when you see pundit from the CBI or BBC telling you how bad it would be to leave: both of those accept money from the EC - so hardly unbiassed advice!

Statistically, Britons tend to vote for the status quo, so it's likely Britain will stay in the EU. Fortunately, I don't have children that will pay the price for my generation's cravenness.

But the core issue is control and accountability. If your rulers are not accountable to the electorate you don't live in a democracy.

^ in the immediate aftermath of the Paris attacks the bigwig in the EU meeting was most concerned about the temporary closing of borders and he would not listen to any arguments for it. He dismissed it all immediately.

That's the reason to leave. Not immigration, not red tape, but the irredeemably anti-democratic nature of the EU

I totally agree.

Leave for political and finacial reasons. The attacks in Cologne just underline my previous thinking.

Someone up thread said not a problem for us etc. once someone has an EU passport they are our problem. I think there will be lot more problems to come from Merkel's policy. However, I was a vote for leave prior to these events.

On Newsnight tonight I was shocked by the language used discussing the Cologne attacks as problems of men from conservative countries coming to liberal countries!! Correct language would be men who were brought up to treat womem as inferior coming to countries where we are equal.

Truly shocking reports of gis in Sweden being attacked due to cultural differences. I fear for our daughters if this is to be modern Europe : too scared to say these are not differences - treating women abhorrently isn't a 'difference' it's a crime -morally too.

The attacks in Cologne are not related to UK EU membershiip, though the poor handling of reporting by the German authorities- mirrored by the Guardian in the UK- has played into the hands of right wing fear mongers.
Large scale, global population movements are related to outside phenomena - particularly war, global warming, poverty. The influx to Europe is a result of geography. Merkel's decision to say that Germany would help was a response to the overwheming pressure on Turkey, Greece and the Balkan states which could have led to much greater civil unrest with a knock on effect to the rest of Europe.
People are going to carry on coming until we resolve the root cause of the problems - in particular rhe conflicts in Syria, Afghanistan and Eritrea.
Uk leaving the Eu will have little impact on non EU migration flows either to UK or the EU. . If anything, flows to the UK may increase if European countries (France)reduce the amount of effort they put into checking attempts to cross the channel.
Nobody should base their vote in this referendum on non EU immigration.

If a vote to stay is achieved, then it will be taken as a British mandate for green light to be closer to EU decisions. It doesn't matter what Cameron says now, if there is a yes vote then succeeding governments will have a British mandate to make decisions to tie us closer.

Therefore Merkel's poorly thought out plan is also relevant to in/out vote - by tying ourselves with Europe we have to accept decisions other country's government make.

It doesn't affect my decision; I was an out prior to Cologne attacks. For undecideds, they can see Europe in action currently.

It is not a far right agenda to say that Belgium, Paris, Sweden, Cologne have been badly affected by open door policy.

Yes the situation needed handling, but certainly not the way Merkel has.

Immigration and EU are relevant: Merkel has ensured that people are focused on implications of other European countries' decisions affecting every other country in the EU too.

I agree immigration is not going to stop ( I wouldn't want it to tbh) however last year's behaviour by Merkel just showed how Germany can override EU to serve its own interests. Shows up the already obvious (but I was trying to ignore it because I like the idea of European cooperation) that the EU reality is too anti democratic.

Not quite sure why you see Merkel's decision as "overriding the Eu to serve German interests". I see her decision as a panic response to an immediate crisis in fragile countries inside and outside the EU. She took the view that Germany was better able to deal with the 100s of thousands of mirants who had already arrived than Greecer/croatia/slovenia or the fragile non Eu Balkan states. In that she was right. I do not think this was ever seen as being in German interests - quite the opposite in fact. It has certainly dented Merkel's standing.
For those who criticise what she did -and it did create a kind of mad dash for Germany - I would be interested to hear what practical alternatives they saw at the time. Keeping everyone out was not an option. Leaving them all in the Balkan states threatened greater instability. An ordered process taking people from camps in Turkey/Lebanon takes time to set up...it is easy to criticise, but much more difficult to come up with a coherent alternative plan. Its a bit like suggesting dredging rivers when the flood waters are up to your knees.
The failure was actually a collective failure of EU foreign policy (UK included) to have addressed the Syrian refugee crisis in an orderly manner in good time.

I agree it stemmed from EU and UN failures. It doesn't make me think being in the EU is in UK interests.

Lots of people have suggested that Germany's low birthrate is part of what prompted Merkel to encourage large numbers of refugees to make their way there. Entirely overriding the wishes of several Eastern European electorates. It was disgraceful as well the way Merkel et al tried to paint Victor Orban as a racist demagogue simply for expressing a desire to enact the will of the people who elected him.

If you want other instances of Germany overriding other EU states to suit their interests, look no further than the Greek crisis last year. Essentially what happened there was that a nation that never should have joined the euro joined, and was then lent money it couldn't afford to repay largely by French and German banks who should have done better due diligence. Rather than allow these chickens to come home to roost where they should, namely in the French and German financial services industry, the Troika forced the Greek government to implement austerity measures his people had elected him to oppose - in other words to go directly against the democratic will of the Greek people.

Whatever else you may make of Peter Hitchens, he's pretty well-informed on European geopolitics and gives a very clear (and pretty funny) talk on the EU as 'a continuation of Germany by other means'.

Leave

OTthe huge: good point re, Greece. I can't believe anyone thought it was in their interest to join. Massive debt and personal borrowing took place.

However, Germany said it was good idea so it went ahead.

I think people that are unsure should really consider the point that a vote to stay will be seen by future generations as the green light for more integration - forget what Cameron says - the Germans will run the show and we won't have the option of being sceptics any longer - will be told British choice was to be part of EU.

drinkstoomuchcoffee
The world has changed hugely, but what we signed up for e.g a trade deal is not what we have now and that's my issue.
Why did we let them have more power? It's not what we wanted. We didn't vote for that.
Clue was in the name 'common market' not 'common rule'

Manatee: "lots of people" may have attributed that motivation to Merkel, but that does not make them right. If Germany had wanted to increase non EU immigration they would have launched an orderly process to allow in those people with skills in sectors where there was a labour shortage. What happened this year was a crisis response. Again, I would be interested to hear alternative, workable, solutions that could have been implemented to deal with the 100s of thousands of refugees in the Balkans this summer.

The Euro Troika is not Germany. The Troika consists of a representative from the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund. If anything Germany has opposed ECB handling of the Greek debt crisis, particularly the buying up of Greek bonds. Their Finance Minister even suggested Greece should leave the Eurozone last year. But as they are one voice on the ECB - no weighted voting - they have to abide by the majority decision. So EU handling of the Greek crisis illustrates exactly the opposite of what you contend.

Since the UK does not take part in the immigration aspects of Schengen, and is not part of the Eurozone - it make more sense to base your referendum decision on those aspects of The EU which directly affect us.

Catphrase: actually the elected UK governement has voted for every EU treaty change implemented since 1973. All treaty change has to be approved with unanimity by all Member States. Where the elected UK governement has not wanted to agree to something eg Joining the Schengen immigration zone, or the Eurozone we have negotiated an opt out.
I am not an EU expert, but this thread really illustrates how little UK voters understand about the EU. It is doubly worrying because most MNers are probably among the more interested, better informed members of the electorate. There should never have been an agreement to hold a referendum on this issue. It was all about Cameron papering over cracks in the conservative party.

Immigration aspects of Schengen? Not sure what you mean as Schengen is open borders in Europe.

Once any other European county grants citizenship to someone then they have access to live in Britain - via a passport.

Just because we have border controls doesn't affect what other EU countries do as regards their immigration policy- ultimately if those people decide Britain is the place for them once they are deemed German citizen, then their policies are affecting us.

Most of the cologne attackers are of North Africam origin - fact, not right wing propaganda. Why are there all these Morrocan and Algerians in Sweden and Germany currently seeking asylum? The crisis response you referred to? What Moroccan crisis?

Mismanagement isn't excused because there is a crisis I'm afraid.

Merkel said survival of the fittest - if you can get here you're in. Merkel created a free for all where no one has any idea who has arrived what with being able to say 'papers are lost, honest I'm Shrian'. Fact again, not right wing propaganda.

Native Arab speakers are required to try to pick out genuine refugees.

Why would anyone tie themselves to such incompetent leadership. So yes Merkel has made this a relevant issue for the EU referendum.

Leave voters had decided prior to these events that our final autonomy will be voted away if we stay. Undecideds are seeing it in action now, maybe they hadn't understood impact of being tied 'ever closer'.

Our votes will shape our children's and grandchildren's future - so you really want them looking back saying in 2016 we gave Europe the right to say 'your country voted to be part of EU so time to STFU'' and tow the line '?

I'm sure they'd say it more politely, but that would be be jist.

Oldzebra: There are two parts to Schengen. immigration (from which UK has an opt out) and law enforcement. UK participates in the law enforcement aspects - police co-operation and legal mutual assistance, sharing of data managed by the Schengen information system etc. from which the UK benefitsnconsiderably. See my point above about the need for people to understand what they are voting about.
You criticise what Merkel did this summer - but once again, I have yet to hear a coherent alternative plan. There were 100s of thousands of people already in the Balkans when she said they could come to Germany. Would you have kept them all in Greece? Serbia? Austria? How exactly would you have done that?
I think the Cologne police are still trying to establish who was behind the Cologne attacks. Some perpetrators seem to have been recently arrived Syrian asylum seekers. Others as you say appear to North Africans who are in Europe legally or illegally. The main reason these attacks occurred - and with such impunity -was a lamentable failure in policing on the part of the Cologne authorities.
Do you think that migration to Europe and UK will stop if UK votes to leave the EU? Most asylum applications are based on member state obligations under UN and ECHR (non EU) obligations. The only real EU bit is that asylum seekers can theoretically be returned to the first EU country in which they sought refuge. So currently UK can return asylum seekers who have arrived here via another EU country. I suspect that right would be one of the first things to go if we leave the EU.

Drinks

I think Merkel created a "pull" factor. It wasn't all push. And, in fact, we have seen that the majority of the migrants are just that economic migrants.

I think David Cameron did provide an alternate credible plan: provide significant aid and camps closer to home. Allow in the most vulnerable refugees in an orderly fashion. I have no idea why Merkel thought that a modern day "gold rush" with young men rushing across a continent to get to the border first was such a good idea.

In the end, this has been bad for women in Europe and bad for the most vulnerable refugees left behind.

I don't want to be yoked to these governments. I am discussed by the Swedish and German cover-ups. It shows so little regards for women and female children (because many were under 18). And finally, I am chilled by response to criticism which is censorship of their citizenry under the guise of stopping "hate speech." Who defines that? I don't trust them to do it honestly. They have form.

2016: I agree there was a pull aspect after Merkel's announcement. But the push aspect was greater. if you look at the chronology she made the announcement after the numbers in Europe had surged and Greece, Balkans, Slovenia, Croatia, Austria were already overwhelmed. I think the numbers surged when the Russians and Turks got more involved in bombing Syria - and thousands both inside and outside Syria gave up hope and moved. It was a crisis response in a crisis situation.
A more orderly response would have been better. That is the approach the Eu and UN are now trying to broach with Turkey, Lebanon and the other larfe receiver states. But Cameron's plan of 20,000 over 5 years is frankly laughable against a background of several million Syrian migrants alone. It was totally irrelevant to the crisis faced by Europe this year. But I think my main point is that this migration crisis will go on regardless of the UKs decision on the Eu.
I agree that this crisis has had and will continue to have an impact on women throughout Europe. I also agree that German handling has been dire. By instantly accusing anyone who suggested that that might be problem with migration of being a fascist, reactionary neo Nazi they silenced moderate, constructive, opposition and left the field wide open to the extreme right. I think that they realise this was an error - And are rowing back. Like the Guardian in UK.
But we should all be clear that we will continue to face massive challenges over global migration in the years to come. Britain exiting the EU - and all that will do to weaken the EU - will make them worse not better as it will weaken the EUs ability to negotiate agreements with other countries. Staying will not help solve it either.

drinks your right, I'm an engaged voter, I have what I think is a vague idea of what's going on.
When I say 'it's not what WE voted for' I mean us as the public. We voted the trade deal not the subsequent deals. We didn't vote for Europe to have this power, it was slowly given away by our governments. It seems to have all slowly been slipped by without much notice.

But if I'm honest I don't know enough about how it works to vote yes or no, and like I say I have a vague idea about what's going on. Theres been nothing to help us understand it