I happened to catch "Thought For The Day" this morning, something I try and avoid. However, in this case it was relevant as the theme was seeing things through another person's/nation's eyes. Perhaps none of the leaders involved in Brexit negotiations are doing that.

The EU is proposing mandating "congestion charging" and Recycling taxes news Telegraph (no open comments)

The Climate Change Act is purely a self inflicted wound for the UK. Much of the environmental stuff blamed on the EU is a direct result of that and green zealotry building on that base. Ken Livingstone didn't need EU help to implement the world's second congestion charging scheme; so you could say the EU is merely building on the existing schemes and rationalising them across Europe. It's not as if there aren't plans in Greater Manchester and Edinburgh already. Does anyone seriously believe that once it's shown these are money making schemes for councils being out of the EU will prevent their implementation.

As I said on Unthreaded the British Civil Service seem to have a different view of implementing regulations than some other countries. Personally I think it's down to history dating back to the Norman invasion and Plantagenet kings spending a lot of time in France, Tudors, Stewarts and Hanoverians being "foreign" and having to ensure rebellion and sedition were kept in check the Civil Service did most of the work on the kings behalf. After 1603 and 1707 functionaries in Scotland were the effect government. The populace eventually get used to the fact that the last thing public servants are is servants, they are the ruling class. In France when there is a problem the first port of call is the Mairie which more than not leads to a resolution. Contrast the fact that functionaries have been in control of the UK for over 500, and possibly nearer a thousand, years to the age of the nations in the EU, France 1789, Germany 1871, Italy 1870, Spain 1492 (although you could date it to the 1930s), Sweden 1814/1905, Belgium 1830, Holland 1813, Finland 1917, Eire 1920 and most of the Central Europe can date their independence to the late 20th century. So of all the nations in the EU the only ones with a long history of being run by the Civil Service and doing what they, the functionaries, say are the UK and Portugal. As Admiral Cunningham said it takes 300 years to build a tradition most European nations still have a long way to go; in fact some still haven't got used to ruling themselves having come into existence only after the start of The Pause.

That's a long winded way of saying Brexit isn't going to make much of a difference in the way regulations and agreements are implemented in the UK, it will just need a new scapegoat for the press and public to blame all the problems on, when in fact they are nearly all home grown. Case in point flood prevention/protection. Large numbers of the local populations were aware of potential disaster because of action/inaction (fair point tomo) by the "authorities" but none felt able or empowered enough to even raise a petition far less block roads and burn tyres.

"That's a long winded way of saying Brexit isn't going to make much of a difference in the way regulations and agreements are implemented in the UK"

Individuals take the initiative, not organisations, so when there is a discontinuity in responsibility illustrated as profoundly as Westminster being told what to do by the EU Commission, where one has absolute undemocratic power, the other with all the responsibility of carrying out policy and having to be elected, no wonder the elite are in a world of their own and the public are disenfranchised. Individuals don't have a chance and governments are not in control at all, so initiatives are very rare indeed!

A good example are those 'senior politicians' in the US demanding tighter gun control that will reduce the number of licenced gun holders, while having a publicly paid for, gun carrying, security team, always on hand! Another is the publically funded pensions that MPs have. Do they care about the profitability of our industries, the credibility of our energy industry or state schools when their careers and comfort do not depend on them?

It may be why we have fewer 'individuals' in Parliament: why take calculated risks when there is nothing to calculate and so little chance of success!

What is the point of raising an environmental petition if taxpayers money is used to lavishly fund an environment agency that has been led by a bird (brain) fanatic and then a theatre critic and is able to present 'Brussels inspired theology' to defend its actions. And then authority takes away your position of responsibility!

What happened to that sensible Environment Minister, Owen Paterson? He is still there, in Parliament, but his influence is not what it was: he isn't the Environment Minister.

Not even our illustrious PM can 'renegotiate' some common sense into the EU corpse, but at least he can return to No 10, and pretend he is still in charge! :)

I don't blame him for failing so many times. What I find astonishing is that repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome is not a sign of intelligence, especially when everyone else is expected to continue believing the pretence:

Veto? What veto? UK government votes fail to block a single European Union measure
BRITISH government votes failed to block a single European Union measure during David Cameron's first five years in office, new research showed yesterday.
"It also suggests that although Britain seems to pick its fights by formally objecting in only a relatively few cases, its No has now not stopped a measure put to a vote from going through for at least 19 years."
http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/599473/EU-Britain-five-years

Removing Brussels from the political 'power structure' will also help remove the 'unhelpful funding' and the subsidies like EU money for the BBC propaganda machine.

It will, hopefully, also encourage MPs that will consult with their constituents and put pressure on their government, not the other way around as Cameron recently advocated! And leaving would remove that 'extra tier' of political eliteness that failed or little politicians aspire to on leaving office, like Herman van Rompuy or the Kinnocks!

And he thinks he is so good at his job!

It may be so, but his current job is negotiating with the British public to get the Brussels' agenda for the years ahead through Parliament, and not being the British Prime minister, and all that it entails.

The EU is a gang that was designed to suit its most central members. Like any group, it has its leaders and its followers. It has its cool kids and its geeks. Britain is the bad fit. We're rich and tough enough to think we should be one of the gang leaders but we have zero cool so the rest of Europe treat us like the annoying, whiner who is only allowed in the group because we bring cream cakes and have the best computer games.

Individually many countries think our plans are good but when the gang gets together it's as if nobody ever liked any of our suggestions and they always defer to the leader of the pack (Germany) and their inner circle (France, Luxembourg etc). That close coterie see themselves and the pretenders to the throne and should Germany falter, they see themselves stepping up to the role of gang leader. They're not going to let spotty Britain muscle in.

The more we try to make the EU into something we like, the more they resist. Greece and countries like them would rather be bullied by Germany than befriended by Britain. Our connection isn’t a particularly honest or nice one either. We really only stay part of Europe because we’re scared to go it alone.

We have to realise that the bonds between central Europe are too strong to be broken. We need to either settle down as a dutiful member or we need to leave. It might be a bit lonely on the outside but we’d respect ourselves more and be more respected because we would be standing on our own two feet rather than using Europe as a potential crutch.

Robert Christopher
Problem is no-one knows what the repercussions of Brexit actually mean in reality. Will the British shopper be better off as a result of no longer having having to pay into CAP, possibly but not as much as claimed. Will a number of EU workers currently in the UK move back to the EU, who knows, what will the effect be who knows. My son works in the machine tools trade in the Midlands, a large percentage of the people he deals with are EU citizens who have EU citizens working for them, He's not sure they could be replaced by unemployed UK citizens. Would a number of British ex-pats currently in the EU return home who knows, as a high percentage are retired what effect would this have on the NHS, who knows. How would the EU energy market react to shortfalls in the UK because of lack of gas storage and no surplus in electricity generation, who knows. Will UK taxes fall as a result of Brexit, who knows but more than likely not by enough to make any difference to the majority. The list of known unknowns is much longer than this.

There's no doubt with some inspired leadership the UK could become financially better off and be a world financial power, and a more pleasant place outside the EU, who knows if that leadership is currently in UK politics? Equally if the UK had a leader prepared to fight on issues they could win or are worth winning and applied the guidelines as guidelines, then life in the EU would be a lot better too.

Anyone who says definitely x,y and z will result from Brexit or remaining is, in my opinion fooling themselves, anyone who believes all the claims they read coming out from either side is not being a full blooded sceptic and will end up greatly disappointed with the end result.

SandyS on Feb 19, 2016 at 6:21 PM

"Problem is no-one knows what the repercussions of Brexit actually mean in reality."
We effectively have around 7.5% tax costs on our trade, if you work out the volume of trade and the cost of being in the EU, so if our tariffs are less than that we are 'in profit'. I have seen they might be as high as 5%, but likely to be a lot less. People want to trade with us: we just need to sell it with right quality and at the right price. Politicians are NOT needed! WTO has made the future much more predictable.
No political party is demanding legal immigrants are immediately 'sent back home' or that those here on business should be expelled. What Britain needs is to control her own borders, not outsourced to some unelected, arrogant bureaucrats in a foreign country, with a hatred of Britain, and we need to be able to interpret and implement our own laws. Currently we cannot even deport all the criminal aliens that we want. Cameron hasn't been able to influence anything. When he proclaimed our membership fees were going to be reduced, they went up! When Blair was around, our rebate was reduced, so CAP could reformed, CAP didn't change! There is no hope if we stay in.

Many just don't think we are good enough to trade with the rest of the world. Well, they need to step down from their bureaucratic environment and let those who can, do! It will be part of the 'red tape reduction' effort. We used to manage very well, and regaining a WTO seat and being able to make trade agreements will put us in a more favourable position to trade with the rest of the world.

"Would a number of British ex-pats currently in the EU return home"
If they wanted to. I expect there are many Australians, Canadians, Chinese, Mexicans and Argentinians in continental Europe, so why not Brits, if they were paying their way? I cannot see the problem, if they are self supporting.

You didn't wonder about the possible rapid rises in sea level or global temperatures. :) The future has always been full of unknowns, but free of the EU, we would be free to govern ourselves and create better conditions for wealth creativity. Look at how the entrepreneurial French have flocked to London. We would only need to conform to EU regulations when exporting to the EU: this is NO DIFFERENT when exporting to ANY OTHER country! And the EU is taking a smaller and smaller fraction of world trade, so it is becoming more 'corpse like' as time passes. It is doomed!

"Anyone who says definitely x,y and z will result from Brexit or remaining is, in my opinion fooling themselves ..."
That is true for most things in life, from agreeing business contracts, getting married, buying a house to deciding on a career: the future isn't certain. Fortunately, people get experience in these things by consolidating different experiences and learning from others, it makes success occur more likely! That is why Britain has been so successful for over 300 years!

If Cameron cannot get nowhere near what he said was needed now from the renegotiations, what chance does anyone have in making any sensible changes. Those advocating staying in a reformed EU have been shown how impossible their dream is: it cannot be reformed until it has self-destructed! The solution is always 'More Europe'. We need to be outside the sphere of destruction asap!

We were lied to by the politicians in the 1970s, and weren't told about the fishing deal, so we mustn't let it happen again. Mrs Boris J, QC, has said any agreement can be changed with ease by Brussels, so it is a whole charade to fool the British public! When we are out, we will be able to throw out those who govern us once again. At the moment we cannot!

The whole point of living is to live, strive and have fun and excitement. It is not to obey aliens with alien cultures devoid of what is important in life.

Having stopped reading Richard North's blog some months ago, I had a look again this morning. Here's a good start at unravelling the small print of the so-called EU renegotiation agreement.

http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=85933

Robert Christopher
You don't actually know for certain what the future holds is all I'm saying in that you don't know what the future holds and how people will react to the new situation caused by Brexit you certainly cannot pretend to know for example how many legally resident EU citizens will choose to move elsewhere in the EU of their own volition, you cannot know that after David Cameron loses the referendum what will happen to the UK political parties far less what the result of a general election will be.

I have seen they might be as high as

So you don't actually know, agreed you don't.

with a hatred of Britain

You know that for sure? Odd seeing as how their citizens seem to like working in the UK, are you sure it's not your prejudiced view of French, Germans and Slavs?

If these haters of Britain are in control would they let this

Would a number of British ex-pats currently in the EU return home"
If they wanted to. I expect there are many Australians, Canadians, Chinese, Mexicans and Argentinians in continental Europe, so why not Brits, if they were paying their way? I cannot see the problem, if they are self supporting.

continue?

To say this

It is not to obey aliens with alien cultures devoid of what is important in life.

Shows a very blinkered Little Englander attitude. What people regard as important in life varies across the (current) UK both regionally and by age and not just Europe, claiming that because it is different it is not worth a light is a very arrogant and potentially dangerous outlook on the world.

Most people I know, both in the UK and France appear to being doing Ok in

the sphere of destruction asap!

It's arguments like these that make me concerned about an inward looking isolationist Brexit party taking over UK politics are Brexit. The whole of your argument is based on emotion with precious little logic, a risky way of making a decision, and leaves no room to argue in favour of a United Kingdom, or you keen for England to go it alone?

For me I'm not sure what the future holds in or out but I'll make the best of it, but it does concern me that functionaries with a hatred of Britain will take control and make life difficult for me, especially if Farage takes control and sits in Downing Street saying Ya boo sucks to you across the channel. As no-one has left the EU before we've no way of knowing that there won't be a reaction based on emotion by Europeans as a result, it seems little logic comes into these things.

It is unlikely to make much difference to sea-levels either way.

Messenger
An interesting article, having watched BFMTV this morning I think, but could be wrong, that the general view was the UK had got a special deal. Trying to look at things from both sides, what parliament would go through existing legislation rewriting it all as the result of an agreement like this? It's a pretty big task.Whatever the result of the UK referendum the deal negotiated by David Cameron will have an effect for a number of years, just as the Greek financial crisis and the Sea Peoples have had a lasting effect on how the EU works. No politician at whatever level can guarantee that those who follow them won't change the rules, including legally binding treaties, abrogation of treaties was all the rage before WW2.

Always remember that the way to tell if a politician is being economical with the truth is to watch their lips, if they are moving then they're lying. It doesn't matter if they're on your side or not - they're lying.

Am I the only cynic/realist/sceptic commenting here?
I don't believe anything any of them says about the future, even if they believe it themselves.

The UK is the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world, why would that change?

Some say we would be alone in the world, what does that mean? The same as all of the other independent countries in the world?

Some worry about trade deals, we would be able to negotiate our own deal with every country to suite our best interests, currently we do not negotiate AT ALL.

Some worry about EU workers here and Brits in the EU, why, would anything change? I see no reason for any change.

I think this article by Andrew Lilico is a good point of view

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12163352/Britains-work-in-the-EU-is-done-our-next-chapter-awaits-us-outside.html

The 'deal' is the worst of both worlds. In but not in, to an unchanged plan for ever closer union. The Eurozone of 19 countries will ALWAYS suit itself and outside it, the UK will be unable to change that. Fairness doesn't enter into it when it's 19 to 1

It's worth noting that it's not the Europeans we hate at all but the EU paper pushing, corrupt monster. That's not to say we haven't got our own monster but voting for two monsters is madness.

Robert Christopher
Have you any evidence that factory closures wouldn't have taken place if the UK weren't in the EU? Have you evidence that these factory closures only take place in the UK and the rest of the world remains untouched? Have you any evidence that the flood of migrants from the Levant and North Africa wouldn't have arrived in Europe if there was no EU? Have you evidence that Greece wouldn't have screwed up its economy outside the Euro? Have you evidence that Spain's problems are solely as a result of being in the Euro and not down to mismanagement and investing in the wrong things?

The world has moved on in the 40 years that the UK has been in the EU, what makes Alex Brummer's change of heart and opinion anything other than a personal view? He's casting an opinion just like everyone else. He may well be right, but he can't guarantee a glorious future any more than anyone else.

What evidence is there that the EU, rather than the UK application of rules has stifled innovation? French startups you may not have heard of BlaBlaCar, Dailymotion, devialet, Scandinavia seems to be innovating too: Spotify, King, Mojang, then there's Cambridge ARM Holdings and outposts for Apple and Amazon, Germany SoundCloud, Delivery Hero and one whose products you may have used Eyeo. Now these may all fail or become as big as Facebook who knows?

My opinion is that being in or out will make precious little difference in the scheme of things, but Brexit may prove to be one step backward in my own progress through life.

I also think that the EU will remain a scapegoat for the UK's perceived problems for a few decades whatever the result of the referendum.

SandyS, what relationship would the UK have with an EU superstate (which is its stated plan)? What if we were the only remaining country still on the outside? In but not in means we have to follow rules that might damage us and can't move in such a way that would benefit us while damaging the EU. That's win win for the EU and only win for the UK when our goals co-incide.

SandyS on Feb 20, 2016 at 12:14 PM

I remember Grimsby was a very busy fishing port in the 1950s. I didn't know E. Heath had condemned them to oblivion in 1974: the public didn't know what Heath had done. I remember CAP was there to help the French farmers because their farms were still in the 19th century while England's farms only needed 4% (from memory) of the workforce to feed the nation. I expected that as circumstances changed, so would CAP, but it didn't, even after Blair handing back a chunk of our rebate! I was led to believe at the time that German industry was much more innovative and profitable, French state enterprises were run better, and Britain had few long term customers. This was spin, untruths to deliver the Euro-plan.
I think Britain did get more Marshal Aid than Germany (or France), but Labour spent it on building the NHS, social services and other state infrastructure. Britain's factories were old and damaged that could mended, while Germany's were beyond repair, so the 1960's ended with Germany having modern factories with new structures for trade union participation. Britain had Red Robbo and the Leyland disaster, while still repaying the USA for war supplies !
We had saved a continent from evil; fathers, uncles and grandparents had given their lives to set the people of Europe free, for a second time within living memory, so no wonder many wanted to collaborate with neighbours after 1945. But how has that worked out? Not very well.

If Britain could remove policies that have artificially increased fuel prices (which were its own fault) the steel industry might have weathered the storm better, but EU energy policy and the political pressure does not allow it. Again, no method to backtrack on a theological matter.

While many people on the Continent have shown gratitude, the EEC/EC/EU elite have totally ignored the different History that Britain had, compared to themselves. We were hoping for free trade in services within Europe, free trade outside Europe, not a customs union, and cooperation. It was early days and we thought, with our centuries of experience in trade, that the Common Market would evolve as an enlarging common market. Instead it has become a cul de sac, with nowhere to go.

If Merkel hadn't invited all and sundry, without any checks, into her country; if the EU had returned economic migrants, like Australia, and used a points system; if the EU hadn't invited a weak Greece into the EuroZone or interfered in the Ukraine; if the EU had put financial convergence after political convergence things might not be so bad. And often it isn't the EU, it is Germany, or Merkel, with everyone else following, meekly. Not only were they mistakes, they ignored the views of the other EU 'nations'.

Many of the points you raise can be answered by reading a few of the many articles that are publically available. For example, the countries in the Eurozone were expected to synchronise their economic cycles, but they did the opposite. Interest rates suited Germany (surprise, surprise), and money poured into Spain, creating the unsustainable building boom. Given that the EU is a ratchet that does not allow countries to backtrack, Spain was also clobbered by the grants and subsidies to the windmill and solar industry.
The 2008 Climate Change Act was unstoppable because so many QUANGOs were supporting it: the EU was one of them and the EU financed BBC was another. No wonder the EU is such a mess when policy can rarely be altered, except in panic mode, like the ECB often displays, or through divisiveness: remember they couldn't get the working time directive through at the first attempt, so they used H&S.
We have to recycle our rubbish because Belgium (and Holland?) don't have enough room to do it, so force everyone to recycle, adding to costs! I remember that there was going to be a maximum nitrate content for lettuces, but it wasn't a medical matter, it was to financially destroy the businesses lettuce growers using greenhouses and not in the open air, further South! And then we had the 100 Watt incandescent bulb fiasco, because China was flooding the European market.
It is difficult to appreciate the difficulties of running a business in the EU if you don't run one or can't be bothered to read the business news, but the information is out there: French entrepreneurs move to London, French industry is in the doldrums, the Euro is in permanent crisis. Britain is still a better place for business, but only because it is fighting against Euro-sclerotic red-tape. If we vote to remain, this battle will cease because those fighting it will realise that there is no chance of success.

Europe is not very content, yet Juncker and his gang want even more 'Europe'! Not the place to which I want to be economically and politically subservient.