And the main point to take out of that video ...is Brexit is being used as an excuse whenever any business decides to restructure ( as they have done throughout the years and will continue to do ) .....I genuinely believe that remainers are now becoming a laughing stock in the minds of most rational people.
I have previously made my thoughts about the stuff you, and your mates usually post, extremely clear. They are not only my thoughts, as the last time you were involved on this thread, Tikay had to intervene.
I have no wish for a repeat of that.
Much of the time when you and your mates are involved any debate seems to turn into a pantomime.
No its not, yes it is, oh no its not, oh yes it is, oh no its not, oh yes it is, heeeeeeeeees beeeeeeeeeeeeehind you.
If you wish to have a serious debate about Brexit, I am quite happy to do so.
You could start by listing the benefits that you think we will gain from Brexit and we can debate them.
I made my thoughts clear on the debate shown on The Pledge, yesterday. You could dispute them, and we will have a debate.
Your mate wrote off quite a comprehensive post I wrote yesterday, with "mostly scaremongering remainer bs", and then disappeared, that is not a debate. A debate is about presenting another side of a discussion with coherent arguments.
If you don't wish to do this, then you can carry on with your sniping, and I will just continue to ignore your posts.
I am fine with whatever you decide.
Are you addressing me or Rainman ? ...you quoted one of my responses , but seem to be talking to him . Either way , this thread isn't and never has been a debate , just mainly you spouting a load of remain propaganda .....if you genuinely want a debate then you shouldn't be trying to shut down anyone , like you obviously are . Noone seems really interested in presenting a leave argument , and I don't like the idea of a thread which is so patently one sided , hence my input ....which as per normal you seem eager to quash and dismiss , just because you don't really want any other opinions .
It doesn't seem to make much of a difference which one of you is addressed.
Neither of you seem keen to enter into any debate.
You continue to make the same criticisms about the thread, yet you keep posting on it.
If you could be bothered to justify your comment that I quoted then maybe it would be more of a debate. You just ignore reasonable comments, and most questions
I welcome alternative opinions, but you don't seem to have any that you are prepared to express.
Just creating arguments does not improve the thread.
I am not quashing or dismissing anything, on the contrary you are.
If you take the comment that you made, that I referred to, that was half a sentence of nonsense, which was in response to a post where I had taken the time to many points.
If you were interested in a debate you wouldn't have responded as you did.
You would have disputed the post with a coherent argument on a point by point basis.
I questioned a number of your recent posts, and you are so keen to debate them, you just disappeared.
I would welcome alternative, thought out opinions.
You will spend all day arguing about shopping, and ignore the more important stuff that is going on.
One doesn't have to rationale ones thinking to enter a so called debate ....the fact that you don't agree with others opinions doesn't make them any less valid , nor does the fact that people can't be arsed to validate or rationale it . I find it amusing that the king of arguing for the sake it , doesn't appreciate differing opinions on his thread . Whoever said that people have to necessarily reason out their comments ? ...some of us actually have other things to do with our time , than devote it your ego stroking . The thread is about Brexit , you have your opinions , others like me will have mine and unless it's your intention to try your best to get us shut down , simply becvause we disagree with you , then the nature of the thread will continue to be one opinion against another . No one has to validate their opinions , there aren't any rules with thread posts that suggest such . I now suggest we get back to the subject of Brexit !
The Brexiteers politicians, experts and journalists, very often dismiss any bad news that doesn't suit them with a cry of project fear. This has happened since the referendum, and it stifles debate. This all stems from the George Osborne forecasts relating to the economy, and what would happen in the case of a leave vote. These forecasts proved to be incorrect. I have no knowledge of whether they were genuine forecasts that just turned out to be wrong, or that they were exaggerated in favour of supporting the remain side of the argument. The point is that just because one set of forecasts turns out to be incorrect, you surely cant write off every other forecast forever because of it. Yet the Brexiteers do this on a daily basis. I wrote a genuine answer to someone elses post detailing my opinion of what they had posted. Yet your response was to write it off as scaremongering remainer bs. You might just as well have said project fear, as your response stifled the debate in exactly the same way. If you compare my response to your mates video about Nissan, I responded with my thoughts on the relevant points that had been left out. Of course it all stops there, and there is no further comment.
I asked a number of questions regarding your posts yesterday, and you failed to answer any of them.
You claim to know that various people in posted interviews are not portraying the views of the average leaver, yet you cant say what these views are.
Talking of views I don't know what yours are. Any response to a post that you write yourself, is usually short and disputes something I have posted, normally without explaining any reason.
If the response to every post was either remainer bs, or Brexiteer bs, it would be pretty pointless.
I don't think it is possible to be neutral on Brexit.
The politicians and experts get on my nerves with their clichés. We are very close to the cliff edge, yet every day when they are questioned many of them come out with "the EU never do deals until the last minute" as if it was some sort of reasoned thinking that there is nothing to worry about because it always happens. There are so many more clichés used every day, but my table just popped up.
And the main point to take out of that video ...is Brexit is being used as an excuse whenever any business decides to restructure ( as they have done throughout the years and will continue to do ) .....I genuinely believe that remainers are now becoming a laughing stock in the minds of most rational people.
I have previously made my thoughts about the stuff you, and your mates usually post, extremely clear. They are not only my thoughts, as the last time you were involved on this thread, Tikay had to intervene.
I have no wish for a repeat of that.
Much of the time when you and your mates are involved any debate seems to turn into a pantomime.
No its not, yes it is, oh no its not, oh yes it is, oh no its not, oh yes it is, heeeeeeeeees beeeeeeeeeeeeehind you.
If you wish to have a serious debate about Brexit, I am quite happy to do so.
You could start by listing the benefits that you think we will gain from Brexit and we can debate them.
I made my thoughts clear on the debate shown on The Pledge, yesterday. You could dispute them, and we will have a debate.
Your mate wrote off quite a comprehensive post I wrote yesterday, with "mostly scaremongering remainer bs", and then disappeared, that is not a debate. A debate is about presenting another side of a discussion with coherent arguments.
If you don't wish to do this, then you can carry on with your sniping, and I will just continue to ignore your posts.
I am fine with whatever you decide.
Are you addressing me or Rainman ? ...you quoted one of my responses , but seem to be talking to him . Either way , this thread isn't and never has been a debate , just mainly you spouting a load of remain propaganda .....if you genuinely want a debate then you shouldn't be trying to shut down anyone , like you obviously are . Noone seems really interested in presenting a leave argument , and I don't like the idea of a thread which is so patently one sided , hence my input ....which as per normal you seem eager to quash and dismiss , just because you don't really want any other opinions .
It doesn't seem to make much of a difference which one of you is addressed.
Neither of you seem keen to enter into any debate.
You continue to make the same criticisms about the thread, yet you keep posting on it.
If you could be bothered to justify your comment that I quoted then maybe it would be more of a debate. You just ignore reasonable comments, and most questions
I welcome alternative opinions, but you don't seem to have any that you are prepared to express.
Just creating arguments does not improve the thread.
I am not quashing or dismissing anything, on the contrary you are.
If you take the comment that you made, that I referred to, that was half a sentence of nonsense, which was in response to a post where I had taken the time to many points.
If you were interested in a debate you wouldn't have responded as you did.
You would have disputed the post with a coherent argument on a point by point basis.
I questioned a number of your recent posts, and you are so keen to debate them, you just disappeared.
I would welcome alternative, thought out opinions.
You will spend all day arguing about shopping, and ignore the more important stuff that is going on.
One doesn't have to rationale ones thinking to enter a so called debate ....the fact that you don't agree with others opinions doesn't make them any less valid , nor does the fact that people can't be arsed to validate or rationale it . I find it amusing that the king of arguing for the sake it , doesn't appreciate differing opinions on his thread . Whoever said that people have to necessarily reason out their comments ? ...some of us actually have other things to do with our time , than devote it your ego stroking . The thread is about Brexit , you have your opinions , others like me will have mine and unless it's your intention to try your best to get us shut down , simply becvause we disagree with you , then the nature of the thread will continue to be one opinion against another . No one has to validate their opinions , there aren't any rules with thread posts that suggest such . I now suggest we get back to the subject of Brexit !
The Brexiteers politicians, experts and journalists, very often dismiss any bad news that doesn't suit them with a cry of project fear. This has happened since the referendum, and it stifles debate. This all stems from the George Osborne forecasts relating to the economy, and what would happen in the case of a leave vote. These forecasts proved to be incorrect. I have no knowledge of whether they were genuine forecasts that just turned out to be wrong, or that they were exaggerated in favour of supporting the remain side of the argument. The point is that just because one set of forecasts turns out to be incorrect, you surely cant write off every other forecast forever because of it. Yet the Brexiteers do this on a daily basis. I wrote a genuine answer to someone elses post detailing my opinion of what they had posted. Yet your response was to write it off as scaremongering remainer bs. You might just as well have said project fear, as your response stifled the debate in exactly the same way. If you compare my response to your mates video about Nissan, I responded with my thoughts on the relevant points that had been left out. Of course it all stops there, and there is no further comment.
I asked a number of questions regarding your posts yesterday, and you failed to answer any of them.
You claim to know that various people in posted interviews are not portraying the views of the average leaver, yet you cant say what these views are.
Talking of views I don't know what yours are. Any response to a post that you write yourself, is usually short and disputes something I have posted, normally without explaining any reason.
If the response to every post was either remainer bs, or Brexiteer bs, it would be pretty pointless.
I don't think it is possible to be neutral on Brexit.
The politicians and experts get on my nerves with their clichés. We are very close to the cliff edge, yet every day when they are questioned many of them come out with "the EU never do deals until the last minute" as if it was some sort of reasoned thinking that there is nothing to worry about because it always happens. There are so many more clichés used every day, but my table just popped up.
"One doesn't have to rationale ones thinking to enter a so called debate ....the fact that you don't agree with others opinions doesn't make them any less valid , nor does the fact that people can't be arsed to validate or rationale it . I find it amusing that the king of arguing for the sake it , doesn't appreciate differing opinions on his thread . Whoever said that people have to necessarily reason out their comments ? ...some of us actually have other things to do with our time , than devote it your ego stroking . The thread is about Brexit , you have your opinions , others like me will have mine and unless it's your intention to try your best to get us shut down , simply becvause we disagree with you , then the nature of the thread will continue to be one opinion against another . No one has to validate their opinions , there aren't any rules with thread posts that suggest such . I now suggest we get back to the subject of Brexit !"
quoted the above In case you didnt read it first time around ...I'm not here to answer your questions or anyone elses. Throughout my working life , I was the one who did the asking. not answering, that isn't going to change on an internet forum . Back to Brexit .
Struggling to see what relevance this has to Brexit.
If the benefits to Brexit are not paying MEP’s salaries and expenses, plus Yellow vests in France, well....SMH. How will I benefit by someone fighting in the streets of France? Will I see extra money in my wages/benefits by not paying an MEP?
@HAYSIE has made some really good points, quoting sources which can be scrutinised. Please let’s be adult and have a sensible debate, this thread has been a real eye opener for me and I’m grateful for everything Haysie has posted here., there’s too much anger in our country as it is without it spilling over into what could be a sensible thread showing the pro’s AND cons of Leaving the EU, so far I haven’t seen any pro’s, but plenty of cons (sic).
Struggling to see what relevance this has to Brexit.
If the benefits to Brexit are not paying MEP’s salaries and expenses, plus Yellow vests in France, well....SMH. How will I benefit by someone fighting in the streets of France? Will I see extra money in my wages/benefits by not paying an MEP?
@HAYSIE has made some really good points, quoting sources which can be scrutinised. Please let’s be adult and have a sensible debate, this thread has been a real eye opener for me and I’m grateful for everything Haysie has posted here., there’s too much anger in our country as it is without it spilling over into what could be a sensible thread showing the pro’s AND cons of Leaving the EU, so far I haven’t seen any pro’s, but plenty of cons (sic).
So experts and historians, talk about the collapse of the eu and you can not see the relevance. Do you include the bbc as sources which can be scrutinised ? I never mentioned that the yellow vests was a benefit, i am merely pointing out the discourse amongst a large swathe of the French population, with the ruling elite.
Struggling to see what relevance this has to Brexit.
If the benefits to Brexit are not paying MEP’s salaries and expenses, plus Yellow vests in France, well....SMH. How will I benefit by someone fighting in the streets of France? Will I see extra money in my wages/benefits by not paying an MEP?
@HAYSIE has made some really good points, quoting sources which can be scrutinised. Please let’s be adult and have a sensible debate, this thread has been a real eye opener for me and I’m grateful for everything Haysie has posted here., there’s too much anger in our country as it is without it spilling over into what could be a sensible thread showing the pro’s AND cons of Leaving the EU, so far I haven’t seen any pro’s, but plenty of cons (sic).
So experts and historians, talk about the collapse of the eu and you can not see the relevance. Do you include the bbc as sources which can be scrutinised ?
Nope, still can’t see the relevance. What is being discussed in this thread is the vote to leave the EU and reasons behind people voting the way they did, not the collapse of the EU, perhaps you could start a different thread on that story. All sources need scrutiny, there’s a lot of Fake News around.
Now I’ve been courteous enough to answer your questions, would you be so kind as to answer mine as to how I benefit financially by not paying an MEP, and people fighting in the streets of France?
Struggling to see what relevance this has to Brexit.
If the benefits to Brexit are not paying MEP’s salaries and expenses, plus Yellow vests in France, well....SMH. How will I benefit by someone fighting in the streets of France? Will I see extra money in my wages/benefits by not paying an MEP?
@HAYSIE has made some really good points, quoting sources which can be scrutinised. Please let’s be adult and have a sensible debate, this thread has been a real eye opener for me and I’m grateful for everything Haysie has posted here., there’s too much anger in our country as it is without it spilling over into what could be a sensible thread showing the pro’s AND cons of Leaving the EU, so far I haven’t seen any pro’s, but plenty of cons (sic).
So experts and historians, talk about the collapse of the eu and you can not see the relevance. Do you include the bbc as sources which can be scrutinised ?
Nope, still can’t see the relevance. What is being discussed in this thread is the vote to leave the EU and reasons behind people voting the way they did, not the collapse of the EU, perhaps you could start a different thread on that story. All sources need scrutiny, there’s a lot of Fake News around.
Now I’ve been courteous enough to answer your questions, would you be so kind as to answer mine as to how I benefit financially by not paying an MEP, and people fighting in the streets of France?
I do not know how it will personally benefit you, we already have too many mps dipping into the public purse, so i am all for culling how many politicians we have to pay.
Struggling to see what relevance this has to Brexit.
If the benefits to Brexit are not paying MEP’s salaries and expenses, plus Yellow vests in France, well....SMH. How will I benefit by someone fighting in the streets of France? Will I see extra money in my wages/benefits by not paying an MEP?
@HAYSIE has made some really good points, quoting sources which can be scrutinised. Please let’s be adult and have a sensible debate, this thread has been a real eye opener for me and I’m grateful for everything Haysie has posted here., there’s too much anger in our country as it is without it spilling over into what could be a sensible thread showing the pro’s AND cons of Leaving the EU, so far I haven’t seen any pro’s, but plenty of cons (sic).
So experts and historians, talk about the collapse of the eu and you can not see the relevance. Do you include the bbc as sources which can be scrutinised ?
Nope, still can’t see the relevance. What is being discussed in this thread is the vote to leave the EU and reasons behind people voting the way they did, not the collapse of the EU, perhaps you could start a different thread on that story. All sources need scrutiny, there’s a lot of Fake News around.
Now I’ve been courteous enough to answer your questions, would you be so kind as to answer mine as to how I benefit financially by not paying an MEP, and people fighting in the streets of France?
The collapse of the eu, could be a reason why some people voted to leave.
1. Centralised power is the wrong way to go People thrive most in societies in which power is distributed as thinly and widely as possible. In such environments they are happier, healthier, wealthier, freer, and they achieve more.
The EU, by design, centralises power in Brussels and makes laws uniform. This while we are moving into an age of decentralisation and localisation. Just have a look at what’s going on with bitcoin, Ethereum and other cryptocurrencies, Uber and internet commerce, and how we get our goods, news and information.
The EU is the wrong model for our times
2. Fringe nations perform better Since the inception of the EU in 1993, the economies of Norway, Switzerland and Iceland (even with its financial crisis) – the fringe nations – have on a per capita basis dramatically outperformed their neighbouring EU economies. They show that it is possible to become important EU trading partners without losing sovereignty to the EU.
For instance, Norway and other members of the European Economic Area (EEA) follow most of the rules of the single market, and must accept free movement of EU workers, but are allowed to keep parts of their economies excluded from the EEA, like farming or fisheries.
The Swiss are only partially beholden to EU law, as they have a special static deal that enables some sectors to operate outside of EU regulations. Their banking sector is the living proof of that.
In both cases these countries have to pay the EU for access, but far less than we already do. More importantly, given the EU’s restrictive trade practices with other nations, they’re free to establish trade deals with other countries, as the Swiss have done with China.
And don’t forget that Switzerland’s population is around eight million, and Norway’s five million. With 65 million citizens and a much larger economy, Britain is in a much stronger position to negotiate a proper deal that reflects our size.
3. Regulation should be local Around 65% of regulation is now set in Brussels. It is of a one-size-fits-all variety, and so often inappropriate to local circumstances. Rather than facilitate progress, regulation hinders it.
Once in place, regulation is hard to change. Rather than get cut, it is added to. We already have too much in our lives. What we need would be much better set locally, according to local needs and circumstances.
Not to mention, all those regulations cost money to apply. A lot of money. Since the financial crisis of 2008-2009, Britain’s contribution to the EU budget has skyrocketed while our receipts remained steady
4. The economic disaster that is southern Europe At the time of the referendum, we had 39% youth unemployment in Italy, 45% in Spain and 49% in Greece. Even while Europe’s economy is firing, its unemployment rate remains extraordinarily high compared to other nations with similar economies and growth.
Southern Europe is suffering terribly under the EU. Countries are unable to do the things they need to do to kickstart their economies because decisions are being taken on their behalf, not locally, but in Brussels, for the benefit of too broad a group of nations and people.
As if structural unemployment weren’t enough, the financial sector of the infamously named PIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain) isn’t any better. We’ve seen Spanish Banco Popular being sold for the token price of €1 to Santander, and Greece is still on the verge of having to sell some islands in order to get its national budget approved by the Troika apparatchiks.
But a bigger disaster is brewing within Italy. It’s called the “Sofferenza” – the suffering.
These are borrowers who simply can’t repay, but the bank just leaves them in limbo. An Italian banking crisis could start a collapse of the euro and potentially the downfall of the European Union.
I could not support with my vote an organisation that has inflicted such misery on some of its people. Reform of a bureaucratic organisation like that from within is an impossible undertaking. We need to escape.
5. Immigration policy is becoming ever more important We hope to turn the Brexit movement into something that supports immigration of workers equally from all nations based on merit, not political alliances.
The reality is that there are more and more people in the world and – whether it’s those displaced by wars, by lack of water, by poverty, hunger or lack of opportunity – more and more of them are on the move. We are in a migration of people of historic proportions.The UK, inside the EU, will struggle with its current immigration levels for a sustained period. We don’t have the infrastructure.
I wonder how we get those numbers down. I’m not sure we can, either in or out of the EU. It is a tide in the affairs of men. But we are in a better position to do it with total control of our own borders and border policy if we leave the EU.
6. Trade deals are a red herring As a percentage share, British trade with the EU has fallen by almost 20% since 1999. British trade with the US, on the other hand, has grown. We have no official trade deal with the US. The point here is that trade policy is only part of the equation. There is no point having a common market if the economies of the countries you’re in that market with are struggling.
Some Remainers fail to notice that the EU is not just a free-trade area, but a customs union. It doesn’t just eliminate trade barriers[AV1] , it creates a common tariff for all its members that impedes free trade with the rest of the world. And that barrier is set at a high level. If we can escape it, trade with the rest of the world would flourish.
Bear in mind that Britain is one of the two members of the EU which trades most with the rest of the world rather than inside the EU. And, were we to leave, we’d become its biggest exports market.
A Britain free to focus elsewhere with its own initiatives is likely to do better on trade than a Britain in the EU.
7. Further integration with the EU means economic decline When Britain joined the Common Market in 1973, the EU (as it is now) produced 38% of the world’s goods and services – 38% of global GDP.
In 1993, when the EU formally began, it produced just under 25%. Today the EU produces just 17%.
The obvious explanation for this is the rise of the Asian economies, which have taken on a bigger share of global GDP. But why then has the US’s share not fallen by as much?
The US’s share of global GDP stood at 30% in 1973, 27% in 1993, and stands at 22% today. That’s a 55% drop for the EU versus a 27% drop for the US.
Because of the shared currency and monetary policy inside the eurozone, there is a divergence in prosperity. The subjugation of peripheral economies to a strong euro has turned upside down the trade deficits across Europe. The German economy is the “motor of the EU” under a euro that is too weak, while others struggle under a euro that is too high for them. The same for monetary policy.
The EU has disappointed its people economically in all sorts of ways. We should run away in order to prosper, just as we escaped the euro’s one-size-fits-all exchange rate and monetary policy
8. Democratic accountability matters One of the biggest arguments for leaving the EU is that it is not a democratically accountable body. I didn’t vote for the administrators and nor did you. I don’t know who most of them are. If we want to vote them out, what do we do? We can’t do anything.
And if you want some idea as to the esteem in which they hold the democratic process, how about this from the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Junker: “Prime ministers must stop listening so much to their voters and instead act as ‘full time Europeans’”. Or how about another one his remarks: “When it gets serious, you have to lie”.
Just what you want in a president. Do you remember voting for him? I certainly don’t. But he’s still your president, and he’s not the only one. Currently, the EU has five presidents! None of them were elected by you or me. What kind of “democratic union” are we in?
9. Land ownership and the Common Agricultural Policy There is no greater manifestation of the wealth divide in the UK than who owns land and who doesn’t: 70% of land in the UK is owned by fewer than 6,000 people. Yet these people are not paying tax on the land they own, they are receiving subsidies for it instead. Landowners are being paid by the EU to own land.
Of the EU budget, 40% goes to agricultural policy. This has created vast amounts of waste. It has propped up inefficient businesses that have failed to modernise. It has re-enforced monopolies which should be broken up.
Worst of all, it has meant that African farmers have been unable to compete, depriving millions of a livelihood (not to mention cheaper food for the rest of us).
More and more voices are rising against land concentration across the EU, especially in eastern Europe. A phenomenon called “farmland grabbing” is extensively described in a report of the Transnational Institute: “Extent of Farmland Grabbing in the EU”. This report exposes how lobbyism and growing monopolisation is killing European farming, which has lost around three million farms in the 2008-2015 period alone.
I cannot endorse with my vote an organisation that does all this and shows zero inclination to change its ways.
10. The Common Fisheries Policy We had to cede ownership of our waters to gain EU membership. What was once a huge industry and the largest fishing fleet in Europe has all but disappeared.
The French, Italians, Spanish and Greeks had fished out the Mediterranean. They were given access to our waters and our quota was reduced to 13% of the common resource. It’s not like we got ownership of Mediterranean olive groves in return.
The quotas system brought about the dreadful practice of discards (putting dead fish back in the sea), and reformed EU regulation now means that rather than being put back in the water, it is brought back for landfill instead.
1. Centralised power is the wrong way to go People thrive most in societies in which power is distributed as thinly and widely as possible. In such environments they are happier, healthier, wealthier, freer, and they achieve more.
The EU, by design, centralises power in Brussels and makes laws uniform. This while we are moving into an age of decentralisation and localisation. Just have a look at what’s going on with bitcoin, Ethereum and other cryptocurrencies, Uber and internet commerce, and how we get our goods, news and information.
The EU is the wrong model for our times
2. Fringe nations perform better Since the inception of the EU in 1993, the economies of Norway, Switzerland and Iceland (even with its financial crisis) – the fringe nations – have on a per capita basis dramatically outperformed their neighbouring EU economies. They show that it is possible to become important EU trading partners without losing sovereignty to the EU.
For instance, Norway and other members of the European Economic Area (EEA) follow most of the rules of the single market, and must accept free movement of EU workers, but are allowed to keep parts of their economies excluded from the EEA, like farming or fisheries.
The Swiss are only partially beholden to EU law, as they have a special static deal that enables some sectors to operate outside of EU regulations. Their banking sector is the living proof of that.
In both cases these countries have to pay the EU for access, but far less than we already do. More importantly, given the EU’s restrictive trade practices with other nations, they’re free to establish trade deals with other countries, as the Swiss have done with China.
And don’t forget that Switzerland’s population is around eight million, and Norway’s five million. With 65 million citizens and a much larger economy, Britain is in a much stronger position to negotiate a proper deal that reflects our size.
3. Regulation should be local Around 65% of regulation is now set in Brussels. It is of a one-size-fits-all variety, and so often inappropriate to local circumstances. Rather than facilitate progress, regulation hinders it.
Once in place, regulation is hard to change. Rather than get cut, it is added to. We already have too much in our lives. What we need would be much better set locally, according to local needs and circumstances.
Not to mention, all those regulations cost money to apply. A lot of money. Since the financial crisis of 2008-2009, Britain’s contribution to the EU budget has skyrocketed while our receipts remained steady
4. The economic disaster that is southern Europe At the time of the referendum, we had 39% youth unemployment in Italy, 45% in Spain and 49% in Greece. Even while Europe’s economy is firing, its unemployment rate remains extraordinarily high compared to other nations with similar economies and growth.
Southern Europe is suffering terribly under the EU. Countries are unable to do the things they need to do to kickstart their economies because decisions are being taken on their behalf, not locally, but in Brussels, for the benefit of too broad a group of nations and people.
As if structural unemployment weren’t enough, the financial sector of the infamously named PIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain) isn’t any better. We’ve seen Spanish Banco Popular being sold for the token price of €1 to Santander, and Greece is still on the verge of having to sell some islands in order to get its national budget approved by the Troika apparatchiks.
But a bigger disaster is brewing within Italy. It’s called the “Sofferenza” – the suffering.
These are borrowers who simply can’t repay, but the bank just leaves them in limbo. An Italian banking crisis could start a collapse of the euro and potentially the downfall of the European Union.
I could not support with my vote an organisation that has inflicted such misery on some of its people. Reform of a bureaucratic organisation like that from within is an impossible undertaking. We need to escape.
5. Immigration policy is becoming ever more important We hope to turn the Brexit movement into something that supports immigration of workers equally from all nations based on merit, not political alliances.
The reality is that there are more and more people in the world and – whether it’s those displaced by wars, by lack of water, by poverty, hunger or lack of opportunity – more and more of them are on the move. We are in a migration of people of historic proportions.The UK, inside the EU, will struggle with its current immigration levels for a sustained period. We don’t have the infrastructure.
I wonder how we get those numbers down. I’m not sure we can, either in or out of the EU. It is a tide in the affairs of men. But we are in a better position to do it with total control of our own borders and border policy if we leave the EU.
6. Trade deals are a red herring As a percentage share, British trade with the EU has fallen by almost 20% since 1999. British trade with the US, on the other hand, has grown. We have no official trade deal with the US. The point here is that trade policy is only part of the equation. There is no point having a common market if the economies of the countries you’re in that market with are struggling.
Some Remainers fail to notice that the EU is not just a free-trade area, but a customs union. It doesn’t just eliminate trade barriers[AV1] , it creates a common tariff for all its members that impedes free trade with the rest of the world. And that barrier is set at a high level. If we can escape it, trade with the rest of the world would flourish.
Bear in mind that Britain is one of the two members of the EU which trades most with the rest of the world rather than inside the EU. And, were we to leave, we’d become its biggest exports market.
A Britain free to focus elsewhere with its own initiatives is likely to do better on trade than a Britain in the EU.
7. Further integration with the EU means economic decline When Britain joined the Common Market in 1973, the EU (as it is now) produced 38% of the world’s goods and services – 38% of global GDP.
In 1993, when the EU formally began, it produced just under 25%. Today the EU produces just 17%.
The obvious explanation for this is the rise of the Asian economies, which have taken on a bigger share of global GDP. But why then has the US’s share not fallen by as much?
The US’s share of global GDP stood at 30% in 1973, 27% in 1993, and stands at 22% today. That’s a 55% drop for the EU versus a 27% drop for the US.
Because of the shared currency and monetary policy inside the eurozone, there is a divergence in prosperity. The subjugation of peripheral economies to a strong euro has turned upside down the trade deficits across Europe. The German economy is the “motor of the EU” under a euro that is too weak, while others struggle under a euro that is too high for them. The same for monetary policy.
The EU has disappointed its people economically in all sorts of ways. We should run away in order to prosper, just as we escaped the euro’s one-size-fits-all exchange rate and monetary policy
8. Democratic accountability matters One of the biggest arguments for leaving the EU is that it is not a democratically accountable body. I didn’t vote for the administrators and nor did you. I don’t know who most of them are. If we want to vote them out, what do we do? We can’t do anything.
And if you want some idea as to the esteem in which they hold the democratic process, how about this from the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Junker: “Prime ministers must stop listening so much to their voters and instead act as ‘full time Europeans’”. Or how about another one his remarks: “When it gets serious, you have to lie”.
Just what you want in a president. Do you remember voting for him? I certainly don’t. But he’s still your president, and he’s not the only one. Currently, the EU has five presidents! None of them were elected by you or me. What kind of “democratic union” are we in?
9. Land ownership and the Common Agricultural Policy There is no greater manifestation of the wealth divide in the UK than who owns land and who doesn’t: 70% of land in the UK is owned by fewer than 6,000 people. Yet these people are not paying tax on the land they own, they are receiving subsidies for it instead. Landowners are being paid by the EU to own land.
Of the EU budget, 40% goes to agricultural policy. This has created vast amounts of waste. It has propped up inefficient businesses that have failed to modernise. It has re-enforced monopolies which should be broken up.
Worst of all, it has meant that African farmers have been unable to compete, depriving millions of a livelihood (not to mention cheaper food for the rest of us).
More and more voices are rising against land concentration across the EU, especially in eastern Europe. A phenomenon called “farmland grabbing” is extensively described in a report of the Transnational Institute: “Extent of Farmland Grabbing in the EU”. This report exposes how lobbyism and growing monopolisation is killing European farming, which has lost around three million farms in the 2008-2015 period alone.
I cannot endorse with my vote an organisation that does all this and shows zero inclination to change its ways.
10. The Common Fisheries Policy We had to cede ownership of our waters to gain EU membership. What was once a huge industry and the largest fishing fleet in Europe has all but disappeared.
The French, Italians, Spanish and Greeks had fished out the Mediterranean. They were given access to our waters and our quota was reduced to 13% of the common resource. It’s not like we got ownership of Mediterranean olive groves in return.
The quotas system brought about the dreadful practice of discards (putting dead fish back in the sea), and reformed EU regulation now means that rather than being put back in the water, it is brought back for landfill instead.
Let’s have our waters back with Brexit
WE did fishing the other day so what are your thoughts on these?
Comments
You could start by listing the benefits that you think we will gain from Brexit and we can debate them.
List for benefits of BREXIT.
We wont have to have meps, who can claim expenses(on top of their salary) at the taxpayers expense.
More to follow.
And the main point to take out of that video ...is Brexit is being used as an excuse whenever any business decides to restructure ( as they have done throughout the years and will continue to do ) .....I genuinely believe that remainers are now becoming a laughing stock in the minds of most rational people.
I have previously made my thoughts about the stuff you, and your mates usually post, extremely clear. They are not only my thoughts, as the last time you were involved on this thread, Tikay had to intervene.
I have no wish for a repeat of that.
Much of the time when you and your mates are involved any debate seems to turn into a pantomime.
No its not, yes it is, oh no its not, oh yes it is, oh no its not, oh yes it is, heeeeeeeeees beeeeeeeeeeeeehind you.
If you wish to have a serious debate about Brexit, I am quite happy to do so.
You could start by listing the benefits that you think we will gain from Brexit and we can debate them.
I made my thoughts clear on the debate shown on The Pledge, yesterday. You could dispute them, and we will have a debate.
Your mate wrote off quite a comprehensive post I wrote yesterday, with "mostly scaremongering remainer bs", and then disappeared, that is not a debate. A debate is about presenting another side of a discussion with coherent arguments.
If you don't wish to do this, then you can carry on with your sniping, and I will just continue to ignore your posts.
I am fine with whatever you decide.
Are you addressing me or Rainman ? ...you quoted one of my responses , but seem to be talking to him .
Either way , this thread isn't and never has been a debate , just mainly you spouting a load of remain propaganda .....if you genuinely want a debate then you shouldn't be trying to shut down anyone , like you obviously are .
Noone seems really interested in presenting a leave argument , and I don't like the idea of a thread which is so patently one sided , hence my input ....which as per normal you seem eager to quash and dismiss , just because you don't really want any other opinions .
It doesn't seem to make much of a difference which one of you is addressed.
Neither of you seem keen to enter into any debate.
You continue to make the same criticisms about the thread, yet you keep posting on it.
If you could be bothered to justify your comment that I quoted then maybe it would be more of a debate. You just ignore reasonable comments, and most questions
I welcome alternative opinions, but you don't seem to have any that you are prepared to express.
Just creating arguments does not improve the thread.
I am not quashing or dismissing anything, on the contrary you are.
If you take the comment that you made, that I referred to, that was half a sentence of nonsense, which was in response to a post where I had taken the time to many points.
If you were interested in a debate you wouldn't have responded as you did.
You would have disputed the post with a coherent argument on a point by point basis.
I questioned a number of your recent posts, and you are so keen to debate them, you just disappeared.
I would welcome alternative, thought out opinions.
You will spend all day arguing about shopping, and ignore the more important stuff that is going on.
One doesn't have to rationale ones thinking to enter a so called debate ....the fact that you don't agree with others opinions doesn't make them any less valid , nor does the fact that people can't be arsed to validate or rationale it . I find it amusing that the king of arguing for the sake it , doesn't appreciate differing opinions on his thread .
Whoever said that people have to necessarily reason out their comments ? ...some of us actually have other things to do with our time , than devote it your ego stroking .
The thread is about Brexit , you have your opinions , others like me will have mine and unless it's your intention to try your best to get us shut down , simply becvause we disagree with you , then the nature of the thread will continue to be one opinion against another . No one has to validate their opinions , there aren't any rules with thread posts that suggest such .
I now suggest we get back to the subject of Brexit !
The Brexiteers politicians, experts and journalists, very often dismiss any bad news that doesn't suit them with a cry of project fear.
This has happened since the referendum, and it stifles debate.
This all stems from the George Osborne forecasts relating to the economy, and what would happen in the case of a leave vote.
These forecasts proved to be incorrect. I have no knowledge of whether they were genuine forecasts that just turned out to be wrong, or that they were exaggerated in favour of supporting the remain side of the argument.
The point is that just because one set of forecasts turns out to be incorrect, you surely cant write off every other forecast forever because of it.
Yet the Brexiteers do this on a daily basis.
I wrote a genuine answer to someone elses post detailing my opinion of what they had posted. Yet your response was to write it off as scaremongering remainer bs. You might just as well have said project fear, as your response stifled the debate in exactly the same way.
If you compare my response to your mates video about Nissan, I responded with my thoughts on the relevant points that had been left out. Of course it all stops there, and there is no further comment.
I asked a number of questions regarding your posts yesterday, and you failed to answer any of them.
You claim to know that various people in posted interviews are not portraying the views of the average leaver, yet you cant say what these views are.
Talking of views I don't know what yours are. Any response to a post that you write yourself, is usually short and disputes something I have posted, normally without explaining any reason.
If the response to every post was either remainer bs, or Brexiteer bs, it would be pretty pointless.
I don't think it is possible to be neutral on Brexit.
The politicians and experts get on my nerves with their clichés. We are very close to the cliff edge, yet every day when they are questioned many of them come out with "the EU never do deals until the last minute" as if it was some sort of reasoned thinking that there is nothing to worry about because it always happens.
There are so many more clichés used every day, but my table just popped up.
I have no wish for a repeat of that.
Much of the time when you and your mates are involved any debate seems to turn into a pantomime.
No its not, yes it is, oh no its not, oh yes it is, oh no its not, oh yes it is, heeeeeeeeees beeeeeeeeeeeeehind you.
If you wish to have a serious debate about Brexit, I am quite happy to do so.
You could start by listing the benefits that you think we will gain from Brexit and we can debate them.
I made my thoughts clear on the debate shown on The Pledge, yesterday. You could dispute them, and we will have a debate.
Your mate wrote off quite a comprehensive post I wrote yesterday, with "mostly scaremongering remainer bs", and then disappeared, that is not a debate. A debate is about presenting another side of a discussion with coherent arguments.
If you don't wish to do this, then you can carry on with your sniping, and I will just continue to ignore your posts.
I am fine with whatever you decide.
Are you addressing me or Rainman ? ...you quoted one of my responses , but seem to be talking to him .
Either way , this thread isn't and never has been a debate , just mainly you spouting a load of remain propaganda .....if you genuinely want a debate then you shouldn't be trying to shut down anyone , like you obviously are .
Noone seems really interested in presenting a leave argument , and I don't like the idea of a thread which is so patently one sided , hence my input ....which as per normal you seem eager to quash and dismiss , just because you don't really want any other opinions .
It doesn't seem to make much of a difference which one of you is addressed.
Neither of you seem keen to enter into any debate.
You continue to make the same criticisms about the thread, yet you keep posting on it.
If you could be bothered to justify your comment that I quoted then maybe it would be more of a debate. You just ignore reasonable comments, and most questions
I welcome alternative opinions, but you don't seem to have any that you are prepared to express.
Just creating arguments does not improve the thread.
I am not quashing or dismissing anything, on the contrary you are.
If you take the comment that you made, that I referred to, that was half a sentence of nonsense, which was in response to a post where I had taken the time to many points.
If you were interested in a debate you wouldn't have responded as you did.
You would have disputed the post with a coherent argument on a point by point basis.
I questioned a number of your recent posts, and you are so keen to debate them, you just disappeared.
I would welcome alternative, thought out opinions.
You will spend all day arguing about shopping, and ignore the more important stuff that is going on.
One doesn't have to rationale ones thinking to enter a so called debate ....the fact that you don't agree with others opinions doesn't make them any less valid , nor does the fact that people can't be arsed to validate or rationale it . I find it amusing that the king of arguing for the sake it , doesn't appreciate differing opinions on his thread .
Whoever said that people have to necessarily reason out their comments ? ...some of us actually have other things to do with our time , than devote it your ego stroking .
The thread is about Brexit , you have your opinions , others like me will have mine and unless it's your intention to try your best to get us shut down , simply becvause we disagree with you , then the nature of the thread will continue to be one opinion against another . No one has to validate their opinions , there aren't any rules with thread posts that suggest such .
I now suggest we get back to the subject of Brexit !
The Brexiteers politicians, experts and journalists, very often dismiss any bad news that doesn't suit them with a cry of project fear.
This has happened since the referendum, and it stifles debate.
This all stems from the George Osborne forecasts relating to the economy, and what would happen in the case of a leave vote.
These forecasts proved to be incorrect. I have no knowledge of whether they were genuine forecasts that just turned out to be wrong, or that they were exaggerated in favour of supporting the remain side of the argument.
The point is that just because one set of forecasts turns out to be incorrect, you surely cant write off every other forecast forever because of it.
Yet the Brexiteers do this on a daily basis.
I wrote a genuine answer to someone elses post detailing my opinion of what they had posted. Yet your response was to write it off as scaremongering remainer bs. You might just as well have said project fear, as your response stifled the debate in exactly the same way.
If you compare my response to your mates video about Nissan, I responded with my thoughts on the relevant points that had been left out. Of course it all stops there, and there is no further comment.
I asked a number of questions regarding your posts yesterday, and you failed to answer any of them.
You claim to know that various people in posted interviews are not portraying the views of the average leaver, yet you cant say what these views are.
Talking of views I don't know what yours are. Any response to a post that you write yourself, is usually short and disputes something I have posted, normally without explaining any reason.
If the response to every post was either remainer bs, or Brexiteer bs, it would be pretty pointless.
I don't think it is possible to be neutral on Brexit.
The politicians and experts get on my nerves with their clichés. We are very close to the cliff edge, yet every day when they are questioned many of them come out with "the EU never do deals until the last minute" as if it was some sort of reasoned thinking that there is nothing to worry about because it always happens.
There are so many more clichés used every day, but my table just popped up.
"One doesn't have to rationale ones thinking to enter a so called debate ....the fact that you don't agree with others opinions doesn't make them any less valid , nor does the fact that people can't be arsed to validate or rationale it . I find it amusing that the king of arguing for the sake it , doesn't appreciate differing opinions on his thread .
Whoever said that people have to necessarily reason out their comments ? ...some of us actually have other things to do with our time , than devote it your ego stroking .
The thread is about Brexit , you have your opinions , others like me will have mine and unless it's your intention to try your best to get us shut down , simply becvause we disagree with you , then the nature of the thread will continue to be one opinion against another . No one has to validate their opinions , there aren't any rules with thread posts that suggest such .
I now suggest we get back to the subject of Brexit !"
quoted the above In case you didnt read it first time around ...I'm not here to answer your questions or anyone elses. Throughout my working life , I was the one who did the asking. not answering, that isn't going to change on an internet forum .
Back to Brexit .
If the benefits to Brexit are not paying MEP’s salaries and expenses, plus Yellow vests in France, well....SMH. How will I benefit by someone fighting in the streets of France?
Will I see extra money in my wages/benefits by not paying an MEP?
@HAYSIE has made some really good points, quoting sources which can be scrutinised.
Please let’s be adult and have a sensible debate, this thread has been a real eye opener for me and I’m grateful for everything Haysie has posted here., there’s too much anger in our country as it is without it spilling over into what could be a sensible thread showing the pro’s AND cons of Leaving the EU, so far I haven’t seen any pro’s, but plenty of cons (sic).
Do you include the bbc as sources which can be scrutinised ?
I never mentioned that the yellow vests was a benefit, i am merely pointing out the discourse amongst a large swathe of the French population, with the ruling elite.
What is being discussed in this thread is the vote to leave the EU and reasons behind people voting the way they did, not the collapse of the EU, perhaps you could start a different thread on that story.
All sources need scrutiny, there’s a lot of Fake News around.
Now I’ve been courteous enough to answer your questions, would you be so kind as to answer mine as to how I benefit financially by not paying an MEP, and people fighting in the streets of France?
https://www.capitalandconflict.com/brexit/ten-reasons-to-leave-eu/
1. Centralised power is the wrong way to go
People thrive most in societies in which power is distributed as thinly and widely as possible. In such environments they are happier, healthier, wealthier, freer, and they achieve more.
The EU, by design, centralises power in Brussels and makes laws uniform. This while we are moving into an age of decentralisation and localisation. Just have a look at what’s going on with bitcoin, Ethereum and other cryptocurrencies, Uber and internet commerce, and how we get our goods, news and information.
The EU is the wrong model for our times
2. Fringe nations perform better
Since the inception of the EU in 1993, the economies of Norway, Switzerland and Iceland (even with its financial crisis) – the fringe nations – have on a per capita basis dramatically outperformed their neighbouring EU economies. They show that it is possible to become important EU trading partners without losing sovereignty to the EU.
For instance, Norway and other members of the European Economic Area (EEA) follow most of the rules of the single market, and must accept free movement of EU workers, but are allowed to keep parts of their economies excluded from the EEA, like farming or fisheries.
The Swiss are only partially beholden to EU law, as they have a special static deal that enables some sectors to operate outside of EU regulations. Their banking sector is the living proof of that.
In both cases these countries have to pay the EU for access, but far less than we already do. More importantly, given the EU’s restrictive trade practices with other nations, they’re free to establish trade deals with other countries, as the Swiss have done with China.
And don’t forget that Switzerland’s population is around eight million, and Norway’s five million. With 65 million citizens and a much larger economy, Britain is in a much stronger position to negotiate a proper deal that reflects our size.
3. Regulation should be local
Around 65% of regulation is now set in Brussels. It is of a one-size-fits-all variety, and so often inappropriate to local circumstances. Rather than facilitate progress, regulation hinders it.
Once in place, regulation is hard to change. Rather than get cut, it is added to. We already have too much in our lives. What we need would be much better set locally, according to local needs and circumstances.
Not to mention, all those regulations cost money to apply. A lot of money. Since the financial crisis of 2008-2009, Britain’s contribution to the EU budget has skyrocketed while our receipts remained steady
At the time of the referendum, we had 39% youth unemployment in Italy, 45% in Spain and 49% in Greece. Even while Europe’s economy is firing, its unemployment rate remains extraordinarily high compared to other nations with similar economies and growth.
Southern Europe is suffering terribly under the EU. Countries are unable to do the things they need to do to kickstart their economies because decisions are being taken on their behalf, not locally, but in Brussels, for the benefit of too broad a group of nations and people.
As if structural unemployment weren’t enough, the financial sector of the infamously named PIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain) isn’t any better. We’ve seen Spanish Banco Popular being sold for the token price of €1 to Santander, and Greece is still on the verge of having to sell some islands in order to get its national budget approved by the Troika apparatchiks.
But a bigger disaster is brewing within Italy. It’s called the “Sofferenza” – the suffering.
These are borrowers who simply can’t repay, but the bank just leaves them in limbo. An Italian banking crisis could start a collapse of the euro and potentially the downfall of the European Union.
I could not support with my vote an organisation that has inflicted such misery on some of its people. Reform of a bureaucratic organisation like that from within is an impossible undertaking. We need to escape.
5. Immigration policy is becoming ever more important
We hope to turn the Brexit movement into something that supports immigration of workers equally from all nations based on merit, not political alliances.
The reality is that there are more and more people in the world and – whether it’s those displaced by wars, by lack of water, by poverty, hunger or lack of opportunity – more and more of them are on the move. We are in a migration of people of historic proportions.The UK, inside the EU, will struggle with its current immigration levels for a sustained period. We don’t have the infrastructure.
I wonder how we get those numbers down. I’m not sure we can, either in or out of the EU. It is a tide in the affairs of men. But we are in a better position to do it with total control of our own borders and border policy if we leave the EU.
As a percentage share, British trade with the EU has fallen by almost 20% since 1999. British trade with the US, on the other hand, has grown. We have no official trade deal with the US.
The point here is that trade policy is only part of the equation. There is no point having a common market if the economies of the countries you’re in that market with are struggling.
Some Remainers fail to notice that the EU is not just a free-trade area, but a customs union. It doesn’t just eliminate trade barriers[AV1] , it creates a common tariff for all its members that impedes free trade with the rest of the world. And that barrier is set at a high level. If we can escape it, trade with the rest of the world would flourish.
Bear in mind that Britain is one of the two members of the EU which trades most with the rest of the world rather than inside the EU. And, were we to leave, we’d become its biggest exports market.
A Britain free to focus elsewhere with its own initiatives is likely to do better on trade than a Britain in the EU.
7. Further integration with the EU means economic decline
When Britain joined the Common Market in 1973, the EU (as it is now) produced 38% of the world’s goods and services – 38% of global GDP.
In 1993, when the EU formally began, it produced just under 25%. Today the EU produces just 17%.
The obvious explanation for this is the rise of the Asian economies, which have taken on a bigger share of global GDP. But why then has the US’s share not fallen by as much?
The US’s share of global GDP stood at 30% in 1973, 27% in 1993, and stands at 22% today. That’s a 55% drop for the EU versus a 27% drop for the US.
Because of the shared currency and monetary policy inside the eurozone, there is a divergence in prosperity. The subjugation of peripheral economies to a strong euro has turned upside down the trade deficits across Europe. The German economy is the “motor of the EU” under a euro that is too weak, while others struggle under a euro that is too high for them. The same for monetary policy.
The EU has disappointed its people economically in all sorts of ways. We should run away in order to prosper, just as we escaped the euro’s one-size-fits-all exchange rate and monetary policy
One of the biggest arguments for leaving the EU is that it is not a democratically accountable body. I didn’t vote for the administrators and nor did you. I don’t know who most of them are. If we want to vote them out, what do we do? We can’t do anything.
And if you want some idea as to the esteem in which they hold the democratic process, how about this from the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Junker: “Prime ministers must stop listening so much to their voters and instead act as ‘full time Europeans’”. Or how about another one his remarks: “When it gets serious, you have to lie”.
Just what you want in a president. Do you remember voting for him? I certainly don’t. But he’s still your president, and he’s not the only one. Currently, the EU has five presidents! None of them were elected by you or me. What kind of “democratic union” are we in?
9. Land ownership and the Common Agricultural Policy
There is no greater manifestation of the wealth divide in the UK than who owns land and who doesn’t: 70% of land in the UK is owned by fewer than 6,000 people. Yet these people are not paying tax on the land they own, they are receiving subsidies for it instead. Landowners are being paid by the EU to own land.
Of the EU budget, 40% goes to agricultural policy. This has created vast amounts of waste. It has propped up inefficient businesses that have failed to modernise. It has re-enforced monopolies which should be broken up.
Worst of all, it has meant that African farmers have been unable to compete, depriving millions of a livelihood (not to mention cheaper food for the rest of us).
More and more voices are rising against land concentration across the EU, especially in eastern Europe. A phenomenon called “farmland grabbing” is extensively described in a report of the Transnational Institute: “Extent of Farmland Grabbing in the EU”. This report exposes how lobbyism and growing monopolisation is killing European farming, which has lost around three million farms in the 2008-2015 period alone.
I cannot endorse with my vote an organisation that does all this and shows zero inclination to change its ways.
We had to cede ownership of our waters to gain EU membership. What was once a huge industry and the largest fishing fleet in Europe has all but disappeared.
The French, Italians, Spanish and Greeks had fished out the Mediterranean. They were given access to our waters and our quota was reduced to 13% of the common resource. It’s not like we got ownership of Mediterranean olive groves in return.
The quotas system brought about the dreadful practice of discards (putting dead fish back in the sea), and reformed EU regulation now means that rather than being put back in the water, it is brought back for landfill instead.
Let’s have our waters back with Brexit