European Union - for or against?

[Dynamite Duane]

I recall the suggestion of a thread discussing a chosen topic and we choose sides, perhaps we could do it with this one, if you like? Opted for a poll so we can where we all stand. The 2 teams idea might not work out, but please give reasons why you are for or against.

 

So are you a Europhile or a Eurosceptic?

 

Also did you vote for a candidate or a party because of their chosen stance on Europe in the general election?

 

I'll start off by posting reasons against, as a Eurosceptic.

 

EDIT:

 

Thought I'd add in the undecided and somewhere in between votes.

 

A few reasons off the top of my head why Britain should leave European Union:

 

Loss of sovereignty - Ted Heath, The Queen and others supporting the Britain's EU membership are guilty of treason. Giving away our sovereignty to foreign power.

 

No control over many laws made in Brussells Anyone recall voting for a political parties policy that included a smoking ban? I'm a non smoker but against a complete ban on smoking in pubs and restaurants. A comprimise to have smoking and non smoking venues would be fairer.

 

Loss of border control

 

Waste of tax payers money

 

Post office closures & break up of Royal Mail

 

Here's a link to a useful site:

www.eurofaq.freeuk.com/timefortruth/

 

Complete lowdown here:

www.eurofaq.freeuk.com/eurofaq/

[Frankie Crisp]

I'll start off by posting reasons against, as a Eurosceptic.

Well?

[David]

I'll start off by posting reasons against, as a Eurosceptic.

Well?

 

EDIT:

[Dynamite Duane]

Give us a minute or 10

 

The idea of a European Economic Community as it originally was may have been a good idea for us to trade easily with our neighbours across the water but the project has transformed into something different to what was told. We now have unelected Eurocrats making laws in Europe enforced here in the UK.

 

Here's just one piece of evidence against the UK being in the EU:

 

From BBC Newsnight 11/8/2010

 

The UK Fined

[Klugschei]

Why post the thread if you hadn't finished your main point?

[Big Rob]

I'd quite like to join the Euro, I've got 6 Euros in coins that the Post Office won't change back.

[JNLister]

I cynically suspected a YouTube post from "BNPxtruth" might need double-checking. Turns out the UK itself wasn't fined at all. It's actually UK organisations that received EU funding. One of the conditions of that funding is that you display the EU logo where the funding is used. That can include flying a flag but mainly involves the logo appearing on printed material for projects related to the grant. Organizations that didn't follow this condition had to pay back around 10% of the grant.

 

So it wasn't the UK which was fined, it wasn't a fine, in most cases it didn't involve flying a flag, and it solely affected groups that chose to take money from the European Union.

[d-d-d-dAz]

The further integration of a 'United States of Europe' risks further marginalising working people in the respective European countries. Everything from culture, to modes of production, vary dramatically from country to country that a single sovereignty would be unwieldy, more unrepresentative and risk giving further access to business lobbies and policy forums, like the TABD, to the legislative process.

 

Furthermore, we don't have a great record of supranational cohesion and representation that would suggest an argument in favour of making such arrangements sovereign. Whether it's inter-governmental, like the GATT, or supranational, like the UN/WTO the major decisions always seem to favour an economic neoliberal agenda that makes the worst off in society worst off. And, the major institutions designed to protect the marginalised (such as the ILO) shirk major decisions that favour getting working people entrenched into the international agenda, in favour of maintaining their pre-eminence in their field.

 

I'm an internationalist in as far as that compliments being a humanist, and appreciating that the plight of working people is the same whether they're from the UK, from Germany, from the United States or from Afghanistan. And, my somewhat eurosceptic stance is based not on Europe per se, but the persistent failure of democracy on the international stage, informed by a persistent lack of democracy on a national level. I'm all in favour of international agendas that means working people in Britain don't lose jobs and housing unnecessarily, that people in Palestine don't get locked in a de facto political prison and innocent children in Iraq don't have to dodge bombs because of the decisions of self-interested devils. But, there remains a deficit in information that the international stage is one designed for that sort of achievement.

 

[/left ]

[JNLister]

Oh, and unelected Eurocrats don't make laws. The relevant ministers from each government, who are usually elected, make policy decisions. Commissioners, who are appointed by each country rather than elected, refine those decisions into legislative proposals and look at how resulting laws could be administered. Elected MEPs then debate, amend and vote on the laws.

[AshC]

Very pro-EU. It made it so much easier for me to live, travel and study in 'continental' Europe. Build not burn!

[Yoghurt]

I've had just about enough of your reasonable demeanour and realistic posting Lister.

[KrAzY]

im eurosceptic in the sense that I am a against the EU Superstate/EuroPol etc. But I do believe that a unified europe is good for trade agreements and tackling global warming etc. so im kind of in the middle between europhile and eurosceptic. I dont like it as much as the Liberal Democrats but I dont hate it as much as UKIP/BNP

[Ravenhill Promotions]

Anti-EU

[patiirc]

There's no Andre the Giant option in the poll.

 

This is a sham, so disappionting

[Dynamite Duane]

I cynically suspected a YouTube post from "BNPxtruth" might need double-checking. Turns out the UK itself wasn't fined at all. It's actually UK organisations that received EU funding. One of the conditions of that funding is that you display the EU logo where the funding is used. That can include flying a flag but mainly involves the logo appearing on printed material for projects related to the grant. Organizations that didn't follow this condition had to pay back around 10% of the grant.

 

So it wasn't the UK which was fined, it wasn't a fine, in most cases it didn't involve flying a flag, and it solely affected groups that chose to take money from the European Union.

I did hesitate about posting that video at first, it was probably reasonable that they were fined if taking money and keeping their half of the bargain. Damn them for not flying the flag!

 

I shall post some other links soon representing the against side of the argument.

 

EDIT:

 

One point to raise is the law making aspect and the lack of power our elected government now has due to the EU. OK here's the example, Cameron intends to halt/cap economic migration, the fact is he can only stop immigrants coming in from outside of Europe. Surely our government wants to stop more people coming into the country for whatever reason it should be able to do so?