Should the UK remain a member of the EU

[Strontium]

How did we ever make it without the EU? I can't imagine how we lasted so long. 

 

Slavery and empire-building.

 

"Good" times indeed. And they ain't coming back.

[Barrington Womble]

Slavery and empire-building.

 

"Good" times indeed. And they ain't coming back.

I would have thought that is exactly the type of UK many in the leave campaign could get on with.

[Jairzinho]

They'd have to buy the slaves back off the companies.

[skend04]

They'd have to buy the slaves back off the companies.

Re-Nationalising doesn't live in this dojo.

[Stu Monty]

How did we ever make it without the EU? I can't imagine how we lasted so long. 

 

I'm looking forward to when Turkey joins so we can have a border with Iraq and Syria. 

 

Good times. 

 

You seem to be "we"-ing all over yourself in your confusion.

[VladimirIlyich]

How did we ever make it without the EU? I can't imagine how we lasted so long. 

 

I'm looking forward to when Turkey joins so we can have a border with Iraq and Syria. 

 

Good times. 

We had two World Wars against its Premier nation in a relative short space of time. If nothing else its helped prevent most of Europe being razed to the ground.Since then its been exported to the Middle East.

[cloggypop]

TTIP is a terrible idea but it belongs in a separate thread.

[Barrington Womble]

Not sure if this is the right thread, but I know there's been a bit on ttip on here

Leaked TTIP documents cast doubt on EU-US trade deal

 

http://gu.com/p/4tn8f?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

Leaked TTIP documents cast doubt on EU-US trade deal

 

Greenpeace says internal documents show US attempts to lower or circumvent EU protection for environment and public health

 



 

 

 

Protesters wear masks of Barack Obama and Angela Merkel as they demonstrate against TTIP free trade agreement. Photograph: Wolfgang Rattay/Reuters

 

Arthur Neslen in Brussels

 

Published:18:00 BST Sun 1 May 2016

 

 Follow Arthur Neslen

 

Talks for a free trade deal between Europe and the US face a serious impasse with “irreconcilable” differences in some areas, according to leaked negotiating texts.

 

The two sides are also at odds over US demands that would require the EU to break promises it has made on environmental protection.

 

President Obama said last week he was confident a deal could be reached. But the leaked negotiating drafts and internal positions, which were obtained by Greenpeace and seen by the Guardian, paint a very different picture.

 

TTIP is a very bad excuse to vote for Brexit | Nick Dearden

 

“Discussions on cosmetics remain very difficult and the scope of common objectives fairly limited,” says one internal note by EU trade negotiators. Because of a European ban on animal testing, “the EU and US approaches remain irreconcilable and EU market access problems will therefore remain,” the note says.

 

AdvertisementHide

 

Talks on engineering were also “characterised by continuous reluctance on the part of the US to engage in this sector,” the confidential briefing says.

 

These problems are not mentioned in a separate report on the state of the talks, also leaked, which the European commission has prepared for scrutiny by the European parliament.

 

These outline the positions exchanged between EU and US negotiators between the 12th and the 13th round of TTIP talks, which took place in New York last week.

 

The public document offers a robust defence of the EU’s right to regulate and create a court-like system for disputes, unlike the internal note, which does not mention them.

 

Jorgo Riss, the director of Greenpeace EU, said: “These leaked documents give us an unparalleled look at the scope of US demands to lower or circumvent EU protections for environment and public health as part of TTIP. The EU position is very bad, and the US position is terrible. The prospect of a TTIP compromising within that range is an awful one. The way is being cleared for a race to the bottom in environmental, consumer protection and public health standards.”

 

US proposals include an obligation on the EU to inform its industries of any planned regulations in advance, and to allow them the same input into EU regulatory processes as European firms.

 

American firms could influence the content of EU laws at several points along the regulatory line, including through a plethora of proposed technical working groups and committees.

 

“Before the EU could even pass a regulation, it would have to go through a gruelling impact assessment process in which the bloc would have to show interested US parties that no voluntary measures, or less exacting regulatory ones, were possible,” Riss said.

 

The US is also proposing new articles on “science and risk” to give firms greater regulatory say. Disputes over pesticides residues and food safety would be dealt with by the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation’s Codex Alimentarius system.

 

Environmentalists say the body has loose rules on corporate influence, allowing employees of companies such as BASF, Nestle and Coca Cola to sit on – and sometimes lead – national delegations. Some 44% of its decisions on pesticides residues have been less stringent than EU ones, with 40% of rough equivalence and 16% being more demanding, according to Greenpeace.

 

GM foods could also find a widening window into Europe, with the US pushing for a working group to adopt a “low level presence initiative”. This would allow the import of cargo containing traces of unauthorised GM strains. The EU currently blocks these because of food safety and cross-pollination concerns.

 

What is TTIP and why should we be angry about it?

 

The EU has not yet accepted the US demands, but they are uncontested in the negotiators’ note, and no counter-proposals have been made in these areas.

 

In January, the EU trade commissioner Cecilia Malmström said [pdf] the precautionary principle, obliging regulatory caution where there is scientific doubt, was a core and non-negotiable EU principle. She said: “We will defend the precautionary approach to regulation in Europe, in TTIP and in all our other agreements.” But the principle is not mentioned in the 248 pages of TTIP negotiating texts.

 

The European commission has also promised to safeguard environmental laws, defend international standards and protect the EU’s right to set high green benchmarks in future.

 

But the new leak will not placate critics of the deal, who have pointed to attempts by fossil fuel firms and others to influence its outcome, as a sign of things to come.

 

The EU negotiators internal note says “the US expressed that it would have to consult with its chemical industry on how to position itself” on issues of market access for non-agricultural goods.

 

Where industry lobbying in regulatory processes is concerned, the US also “insisted” that the EU be “required” to involve US experts in its development of electrotechnical standards.

 

 

[jimmycase]

This £350m claim and what we could do with it has been debunked so I'm not sure why you've bought it up again. If there is a vote to come out it a) doesn't stop money going to the EU as part of any trade deals we may strike (Norway pays close to £700m a year at £135/person whereas we pay less per person to trade currently) and b ) this also is on the proviso our economy doesn't tank which if it did would mean that 'saving' shrinking.

 

This claim as you put it hasnt been debunked, theres been an attempted whitewash of the fact by the stayers but it doesnt hold water . If you actually read my post I said the £350m a month that goes to the EU could be spent on the UK priorities instead. Currently we get some of it back.

 

The current £350m isnt part of any any trade deal, its effectively membership fee. If we're out, we wont be paying £350m or anything like it in trade deals to the EU. Norway doesnt have the infrastructure or industries to trade with the rest of the world like we do or would.

 

Ive got to laugh at the people who think our economy will or may 'tank' whenif we vote to leave when the EU's economy and Euro is already there!

 

In any event, the 'stayers' want to stay in the EU but are quite happy to be second class citizens of the EU due to the numerous opt outs successive UK government have negotiated while the rest of Europe pushes ahead with further integration. Juncker himself has admitted a two speed EU is in place and members who continually opt out cannot and shouldnot hold back the majority of member states who want to push on.

 

The UK will become even more isolate in the EU as majority voting pushes aside and dismisses concerns that the UK and others may have.

 

You might want to be in the Europa league of the EU. I prefer to be outside and conquer world markets again.

 

Edit, sorry I forgot, if we stay we're due to pay another £96 billion over the next 5 years.

[Stu Monty]

What is this infrastructure that Norway doesn't have to trade with the world?

 

If we have the capability to conquer world markets outside the EU then why aren't we doing that now?

 

I'm very much open to hearing how the economy suddenly starts to become energised and takes over the world, it's just that whenever you ask we always seem to a bit shy on the actual details and mechanics of how that happens. Especially with the EU being the biggest trading bloc in the world, and almost certainly looking to make their future actions as painful as possible for a country leaving. 

 

For the record the money we put into the EU, a lot of that is to go to poorer countries so that it lifts them up and they can buy our shit. It's not a freebie; there's an economic logic to it. 

[Barrington Womble]

We have fuck all to sell any more. I can't imagine why anyone thinks we will suddenly be conquering the world. I've seen the benefits of trading in a free trade Europe 1st hand and to lose that will be catastrophic in my opinion. I do believe we will lose it, unless we pay in like Norway, which is multiple times worse than any 2 speed Europe.

[skend04]

This claim as you put it hasnt been debunked, theres been an attempted whitewash of the fact by the stayers but it doesnt hold water . If you actually read my post I said the £350m a month that goes to the EU could be spent on the UK priorities instead. Currently we get some of it back.

 

The current £350m isnt part of any any trade deal, its effectively membership fee. If we're out, we wont be paying £350m or anything like it in trade deals to the EU. Norway doesnt have the infrastructure or industries to trade with the rest of the world like we do or would.

 

Ive got to laugh at the people who think our economy will or may 'tank' whenif we vote to leave when the EU's economy and Euro is already there!

 

In any event, the 'stayers' want to stay in the EU but are quite happy to be second class citizens of the EU due to the numerous opt outs successive UK government have negotiated while the rest of Europe pushes ahead with further integration. Juncker himself has admitted a two speed EU is in place and members who continually opt out cannot and shouldnot hold back the majority of member states who want to push on.

 

The UK will become even more isolate in the EU as majority voting pushes aside and dismisses concerns that the UK and others may have.

 

You might want to be in the Europa league of the EU. I prefer to be outside and conquer world markets again.

 

Edit, sorry I forgot, if we stay we're due to pay another £96 billion over the next 5 years.

Okay, I'll indulge you. What are the priorities for the money and what will see funds cut? Also, which countries are lining up to trade with us? I think if we are being asked to change our current status we should be told what it'll change to. Otherwise what you've posted is just empty rhetoric.

[Gnasher]

Slavery and empire-building.

 

"Good" times indeed. And they ain't coming back.

From 1945 to 1974?

[Spy Bee]

Not sure if this is the right thread, but I know there's been a bit on ttip on here

Leaked TTIP documents cast doubt on EU-US trade deal

 

http://gu.com/p/4tn8f?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

Leaked TTIP documents cast doubt on EU-US trade deal

 

Greenpeace says internal documents show US attempts to lower or circumvent EU protection for environment and public health

 



 

 

 

Protesters wear masks of Barack Obama and Angela Merkel as they demonstrate against TTIP free trade agreement. Photograph: Wolfgang Rattay/Reuters

 

Arthur Neslen in Brussels

 

Published:18:00 BST Sun 1 May 2016

 

 Follow Arthur Neslen

 

Talks for a free trade deal between Europe and the US face a serious impasse with “irreconcilable” differences in some areas, according to leaked negotiating texts.

 

The two sides are also at odds over US demands that would require the EU to break promises it has made on environmental protection.

 

President Obama said last week he was confident a deal could be reached. But the leaked negotiating drafts and internal positions, which were obtained by Greenpeace and seen by the Guardian, paint a very different picture.

 

TTIP is a very bad excuse to vote for Brexit | Nick Dearden

 

“Discussions on cosmetics remain very difficult and the scope of common objectives fairly limited,” says one internal note by EU trade negotiators. Because of a European ban on animal testing, “the EU and US approaches remain irreconcilable and EU market access problems will therefore remain,” the note says.

 

AdvertisementHide

 

Talks on engineering were also “characterised by continuous reluctance on the part of the US to engage in this sector,” the confidential briefing says.

 

These problems are not mentioned in a separate report on the state of the talks, also leaked, which the European commission has prepared for scrutiny by the European parliament.

 

These outline the positions exchanged between EU and US negotiators between the 12th and the 13th round of TTIP talks, which took place in New York last week.

 

The public document offers a robust defence of the EU’s right to regulate and create a court-like system for disputes, unlike the internal note, which does not mention them.

 

Jorgo Riss, the director of Greenpeace EU, said: “These leaked documents give us an unparalleled look at the scope of US demands to lower or circumvent EU protections for environment and public health as part of TTIP. The EU position is very bad, and the US position is terrible. The prospect of a TTIP compromising within that range is an awful one. The way is being cleared for a race to the bottom in environmental, consumer protection and public health standards.”

 

US proposals include an obligation on the EU to inform its industries of any planned regulations in advance, and to allow them the same input into EU regulatory processes as European firms.

 

American firms could influence the content of EU laws at several points along the regulatory line, including through a plethora of proposed technical working groups and committees.

 

“Before the EU could even pass a regulation, it would have to go through a gruelling impact assessment process in which the bloc would have to show interested US parties that no voluntary measures, or less exacting regulatory ones, were possible,” Riss said.

 

The US is also proposing new articles on “science and risk” to give firms greater regulatory say. Disputes over pesticides residues and food safety would be dealt with by the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation’s Codex Alimentarius system.

 

Environmentalists say the body has loose rules on corporate influence, allowing employees of companies such as BASF, Nestle and Coca Cola to sit on – and sometimes lead – national delegations. Some 44% of its decisions on pesticides residues have been less stringent than EU ones, with 40% of rough equivalence and 16% being more demanding, according to Greenpeace.

 

GM foods could also find a widening window into Europe, with the US pushing for a working group to adopt a “low level presence initiative”. This would allow the import of cargo containing traces of unauthorised GM strains. The EU currently blocks these because of food safety and cross-pollination concerns.

 

What is TTIP and why should we be angry about it?

 

The EU has not yet accepted the US demands, but they are uncontested in the negotiators’ note, and no counter-proposals have been made in these areas.

 

In January, the EU trade commissioner Cecilia Malmström said [pdf] the precautionary principle, obliging regulatory caution where there is scientific doubt, was a core and non-negotiable EU principle. She said: “We will defend the precautionary approach to regulation in Europe, in TTIP and in all our other agreements.” But the principle is not mentioned in the 248 pages of TTIP negotiating texts.

 

The European commission has also promised to safeguard environmental laws, defend international standards and protect the EU’s right to set high green benchmarks in future.

 

But the new leak will not placate critics of the deal, who have pointed to attempts by fossil fuel firms and others to influence its outcome, as a sign of things to come.

 

The EU negotiators internal note says “the US expressed that it would have to consult with its chemical industry on how to position itself” on issues of market access for non-agricultural goods.

 

Where industry lobbying in regulatory processes is concerned, the US also “insisted” that the EU be “required” to involve US experts in its development of electrotechnical standards.

TTIP Leaks showing TTIP up for what most people have known it has been all along!

[Rico1304]

So if we come out we'll have to negotiate our own version of TTIP? What makes you think we'll be able to do a better job?

[Spy Bee]

So if we come out we'll have to negotiate our own version of TTIP? What makes you think we'll be able to do a better job?

I'm not suggesting that. The comment wasn't in really relating to the EU, just to TTIP in principle.

[cloggypop]

TTIP Leaks showing TTIP up for what most people have known it has been all along!

I don't think TTIP should be in this thread really, it deserves a separate one.

 

If you haven't been invited in and been allotted 2 hours to read over 200 pages you can download the leaked documents from Greenpeace here

 

http://ttip-leaks.org

 

It's a cunt of a thing but would no doubt be a lot worse if trying to oppose it alone while trying to sort trade deals with the US.

 

[Strontium]

From 1945 to 1974?

 

1945 to 1974 we imported a load of labour from former colonies.

 

I dare say we could go back to that, and substitute immigration from other EU countries with immigration from South Asia and the West Indies, but I don't think the anti-EU mob would be very happy about it.

[Bobby Hundreds]

I actually seen this on Rawk. It's a ttip comic strip thingy.

 

http://economixcomix.com/home/tpp/

 

I think the best thing for fighting TTIP is staying in the EU where a larger group of people may actually give a fuck what happens beyond the end of their facebook status.

[njackets]

1945 to 1974 we imported a load of labour from former colonies.

 

I dare say we could go back to that, and substitute immigration from other EU countries with immigration from South Asia and the West Indies, but I don't think the anti-EU mob would be very happy about it.

So im in a 'mob' now as im against the UK being a member of the European parliament?

[Strontium]

So im in a 'mob' now as im against the UK being a member of the European parliament?

 

Probably not literally, but I'm not sure what the appropriate collective noun should be (answers on a postcard, please), and I figured mob was less provocative a term than "gaggle" or "swarm".

[Gnasher]

1945 to 1974 we imported a load of labour from former colonies.

 

I dare say we could go back to that, and substitute immigration from other EU countries with immigration from South Asia and the West Indies, but I don't think the anti-EU mob would be very happy about it.

Ah so we were not part of a European union between them years, and we didn't implode.

 

As for the import of labour, we needed them to rebuild the economy after the war and beyond and it proved successful.

 

The EU free movement is just an easy way for fat cat capitalists and European beurocats to enjoy a ready supply of cheap labour to increase profits.

[Gnasher]

http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/7888020

 

This is what the former head of the Royal College of nursing thinks of our policy of importing cheap overseas nurses instead of training our own. In short it's a false economy and a bit of a cunts trick.

 

You can easily substitute nurses with other proffesions. Just call British workers lazy wasters and fill your boots.

[Gnasher]

http://leftagainsttheeu.com/index.html

 

the left against the EU.

[Stu Monty]

http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/7888020

 

This is what the former head of the Royal College of nursing thinks of our policy of importing cheap overseas nurses instead of training our own. In short it's a false economy and a bit of a cunts trick.

 

You can easily substitute nurses with other proffesions. Just call British workers lazy wasters and fill your boots.

 

I think we all know that.

 

Are we imagining some fairytale ending of us leaving the EU and the Tories suddenly investing in the health service properly?

 

Or is it more likely that we'll stop some immigrant doctors and nurses from coming in and it will just leave a bigger shortfall?