Insurance1 min ago
Instead Of Throwing The Toys Out Of The Pram....
78 Answers
why don't the 2 main parties try and understand why UKIP are gaining popularity. Is it just possible that the general public are sick of the EU and all it stands for? Could the main parties gain a lot more support if they started to understand rather than calling any non Euphile their usual batch of names?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
A fair comment TTT, I must admit. But the LibDems are an established political party, who won 57 seats in 2010. They went into the election with 62 seats. And that was enough to ensure that they were in a good position to bargain with both Labour and the Tories in the days after the election.
The LibDem Party was formed in 1988, so it took them 22 years to get to the position of king maker. But UKIP are starting with zero seats in Westminster, and its unrealistic to think that they can go from 0 to 57 seats, or more in one fell swoop.
I have chosen the next site entirely at random :::
http://
I am not sure if any Bookie will give you odds on UKIP having enough seats to bargain with in a forthcoming coalition bunfight. So again, I question the wisdom in voting for a party that cannot give the voters what you say they want.
The LibDem Party was formed in 1988, so it took them 22 years to get to the position of king maker. But UKIP are starting with zero seats in Westminster, and its unrealistic to think that they can go from 0 to 57 seats, or more in one fell swoop.
I have chosen the next site entirely at random :::
http://
I am not sure if any Bookie will give you odds on UKIP having enough seats to bargain with in a forthcoming coalition bunfight. So again, I question the wisdom in voting for a party that cannot give the voters what you say they want.
Is it just possible that the general public are sick of the EU and all it stands for?
You might be, but that's not what the polls of the general public show
http://
You might be, but that's not what the polls of the general public show
http://
AOG....
// Please explain why since being in the EU we have lost most of
our fishing fleets... //
We haven’t. We have 6,406 boats employing 12,,445 people. That is about 10% less than 10 years ago, but the tonnage of fish caught is about the same.
// Our ship building… //
Was privatised in 1983 to foreign companies who took the work abroad. The Government is building less warships. The North Sea Oil boom has gone and Cruise liners are built by the lowest bidder, usually Korean.
// Our steel industry… //
Was privatised in 1988. It was merged with a Dutch Company before being bought by an Indian Billionaire.
// Our ports… //
We haven’t lost most of our Ports. Obviously air freight has increased but we have opened Super Container docks more recently. Here is a list of our ports. http://
// Our power providers are now all foreign owned… //
Because they were sold to foreign companies by the Conservative Government in the 1980s.
None of changes you have highlighted are due to our EU membership. They were either the result of policies of the Government of the day, or have not occurred at all.
// Please explain why since being in the EU we have lost most of
our fishing fleets... //
We haven’t. We have 6,406 boats employing 12,,445 people. That is about 10% less than 10 years ago, but the tonnage of fish caught is about the same.
// Our ship building… //
Was privatised in 1983 to foreign companies who took the work abroad. The Government is building less warships. The North Sea Oil boom has gone and Cruise liners are built by the lowest bidder, usually Korean.
// Our steel industry… //
Was privatised in 1988. It was merged with a Dutch Company before being bought by an Indian Billionaire.
// Our ports… //
We haven’t lost most of our Ports. Obviously air freight has increased but we have opened Super Container docks more recently. Here is a list of our ports. http://
// Our power providers are now all foreign owned… //
Because they were sold to foreign companies by the Conservative Government in the 1980s.
None of changes you have highlighted are due to our EU membership. They were either the result of policies of the Government of the day, or have not occurred at all.
"the "benefits" are achievable by agreements and cooperation"
Why is benefits in quotes?
Do you not believe they are really benefits?
Also, are you absolutely confident that trade agreements can be easily re-engineered by UK businesses if we ever left the EU?
If it were the case, why are the CBI and IoD so firmly against us leaving the EU? What is it that business leaders know that we don't?
Should we not take their opinions on the matter very seriously?
Do you think that the narrative on Europe has been so skewed as to make it difficult for the general public to make an informed decision on membership?
Why is benefits in quotes?
Do you not believe they are really benefits?
Also, are you absolutely confident that trade agreements can be easily re-engineered by UK businesses if we ever left the EU?
If it were the case, why are the CBI and IoD so firmly against us leaving the EU? What is it that business leaders know that we don't?
Should we not take their opinions on the matter very seriously?
Do you think that the narrative on Europe has been so skewed as to make it difficult for the general public to make an informed decision on membership?
We are actually pooling our sovereignty. The have done this throughout our history forming pacts and agreements with other nations for centuries.
And we do it with other organisations other than the EU. Our membership of NATO, the WTO and the UN all come with shared obligations.
It was a great mistake of Heath not to get a vote in parliament before sharing our sovereignty.
And we do it with other organisations other than the EU. Our membership of NATO, the WTO and the UN all come with shared obligations.
It was a great mistake of Heath not to get a vote in parliament before sharing our sovereignty.
The difficulty sp1814, with trying to have a calm and reasoned debate on Europe, is that it soon deteriorates into Little Englander issues and before you know it, everybody is talking about warm beer, cricket and wasn't the Queen Mother wonderful. All I can say is that here in South Wales, our membership has been an unqualified success, as European money has allowed us to make a reasonable recovery from the de-industrialisation policies of the 80s and 90s. God knows where we would be with this assistance. But in comfortable, wealthy and middle class parts of Britain, perhaps they don't feel the same.
“How we will replace jobs that are reliant on EU membership is never addressed.”
This oft-quoted problem is not really a problem at all. There are no jobs in the UK (apart from some in politics and the civil service) which depend for their existence on our membership of the EU. Other EU member states will not suddenly cease trading with the UK and nor we with them should we leave. Individual trading agreements will be negotiated (and there is actually a clause in the Lisbon Treaty to enable this) and life will go on. Our membership of the EU merely facilitates trade. It does not create it and leaving will not destroy it. If the EU ceased to exist entirely trade would continue. The business world is far too canny to let a minor hindrance such as that prevent it making money. Our departure would be a short term minor inconvenience with huge long term benefits.
“A key benefit from the single market is that businesses only have to deal with one set of rules rather than 27 different sets of rules when exporting to or operating in more than one EU Member State.”
If the UK left its businesses would still only have to deal with one set of rules - those of what remains of the EU. The upside would be that those businesses that have no dealings with Europe - far and away the majority in the UK - would not be hidebound by EU red tape.
“We are actually pooling our sovereignty…”
You cannot “pool” sovereignty, Gromit, unless you federate the individual states into one (which, of course, is the ultimate aim of the “European Project”). “”Pooled sovereignty” is a ridiculous contradictory phrase coined by Europhiles and designed to convince people that if they cede powers to a supranational organisation they are actually losing no control but gaining a share of something which cannot be shared.
If the EU was such a wonderful institution there would be no disquiet and unease about our membership. The plain fact is that it is a corrupt, discredited anti-democratic organisation which seeks to extinguish nation states and create a Federal Europe (which, if they have their way, will eventually stretch to the Middle East). Its policies have heaped huge misery on the “PIIGS” nations which will not be relieved in the foreseeable future. As 3Ts says, it’s about time politicians set about finding out what people want (rather than telling them what’s good for them) and took measures to facilitate their requirements. If they did the UKIP problem (which is a problem for all of them) would not be an issue. Nobody knows how a referendum would go. But one thing’s for sure. If politicians believed it would return a resounding “In” vote there would be a referendum tomorrow. The idea of a referendum is to find out what people want. The fact that none of the main parties is prepared to “risk” rejection speaks volumes.
This oft-quoted problem is not really a problem at all. There are no jobs in the UK (apart from some in politics and the civil service) which depend for their existence on our membership of the EU. Other EU member states will not suddenly cease trading with the UK and nor we with them should we leave. Individual trading agreements will be negotiated (and there is actually a clause in the Lisbon Treaty to enable this) and life will go on. Our membership of the EU merely facilitates trade. It does not create it and leaving will not destroy it. If the EU ceased to exist entirely trade would continue. The business world is far too canny to let a minor hindrance such as that prevent it making money. Our departure would be a short term minor inconvenience with huge long term benefits.
“A key benefit from the single market is that businesses only have to deal with one set of rules rather than 27 different sets of rules when exporting to or operating in more than one EU Member State.”
If the UK left its businesses would still only have to deal with one set of rules - those of what remains of the EU. The upside would be that those businesses that have no dealings with Europe - far and away the majority in the UK - would not be hidebound by EU red tape.
“We are actually pooling our sovereignty…”
You cannot “pool” sovereignty, Gromit, unless you federate the individual states into one (which, of course, is the ultimate aim of the “European Project”). “”Pooled sovereignty” is a ridiculous contradictory phrase coined by Europhiles and designed to convince people that if they cede powers to a supranational organisation they are actually losing no control but gaining a share of something which cannot be shared.
If the EU was such a wonderful institution there would be no disquiet and unease about our membership. The plain fact is that it is a corrupt, discredited anti-democratic organisation which seeks to extinguish nation states and create a Federal Europe (which, if they have their way, will eventually stretch to the Middle East). Its policies have heaped huge misery on the “PIIGS” nations which will not be relieved in the foreseeable future. As 3Ts says, it’s about time politicians set about finding out what people want (rather than telling them what’s good for them) and took measures to facilitate their requirements. If they did the UKIP problem (which is a problem for all of them) would not be an issue. Nobody knows how a referendum would go. But one thing’s for sure. If politicians believed it would return a resounding “In” vote there would be a referendum tomorrow. The idea of a referendum is to find out what people want. The fact that none of the main parties is prepared to “risk” rejection speaks volumes.
I genuinely don't think we've given up enough to justify leaving the EU. And besides, much of what I refer to in regards to the EU are features of the common market. All we ever seem to hear about nowadays are abuses of the ECHR, EU flags on number plates and the flood of Romanians and Bulgarians coming over to claim houses and pickpocket us.
Can anyone ever remember reading anything in the papers to give us balance on the question of EU membership?
If you asked the man or woman on the street how much EU membership is worth to the UK GDP, do you think they could make an informed guess?
Can anyone ever remember reading anything in the papers to give us balance on the question of EU membership?
If you asked the man or woman on the street how much EU membership is worth to the UK GDP, do you think they could make an informed guess?
New Judge
From the IoD:
"A recent survey of members found that 57 per cent support the Prime Minister’s planned renegotiation. If a referendum were held 49 per cent say they would vote for the UK to remain a member, with a third saying it would depend upon the renegotiation. Just 15 per cent would vote for a British exit. 79 per cent of IoD members have some form of business link with the EU, and 60 per cent agreed with the statement that “continued access to the Single Market is important to my organisation”. However, there is a broad appetite for deep reform. Members cite home affairs, employment law and corporate governance as areas where powers should be repatriated."
15% against membership of the EU is very low.
From the IoD:
"A recent survey of members found that 57 per cent support the Prime Minister’s planned renegotiation. If a referendum were held 49 per cent say they would vote for the UK to remain a member, with a third saying it would depend upon the renegotiation. Just 15 per cent would vote for a British exit. 79 per cent of IoD members have some form of business link with the EU, and 60 per cent agreed with the statement that “continued access to the Single Market is important to my organisation”. However, there is a broad appetite for deep reform. Members cite home affairs, employment law and corporate governance as areas where powers should be repatriated."
15% against membership of the EU is very low.
its not always as clear cut, this from last year.
http://
http://
emmie
Seriously?
You're saying that these two institutions representing British business interests don't know what they're talking about?
Who should we turn to when we want to find out what business leaders are saying about the EU?
Should we ignore the IoD and CBI?
Just rely on politicians and the media?
Seriously?
You're saying that these two institutions representing British business interests don't know what they're talking about?
Who should we turn to when we want to find out what business leaders are saying about the EU?
Should we ignore the IoD and CBI?
Just rely on politicians and the media?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.