EU Referendum | UK residents vote today.

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the EU?

  • Total voters
    653
Status
Not open for further replies.
712 said:
I can't get my head round this NHS privatisation and the US treaty thing. If the government awards contracts to private firms (which I would probably be against in the first place, but no matter) then is it imagined that these contracts would be in perpetuity, rather than for a fixed period? Obviously they would be for a fixed period which, when finished, would be the ended. Where does the US treaty come in?
Click to expand...
https://fullfact.org/europe/does-ttip-mean-privatisation-nhs/
 
712 said:
Unfortunately he then gilded the lily by saying a decisive Remain vote would also mean joining the Euro and Schengen. How to throw away a good argument.
Click to expand...

Considering the path along which Brussels is heading, i don't think that is an unreasonable conclusion on Hannan's part. Contrary to the belief of many Remainers we are not as it stands at the heart of the EU, and people would do well to cease such in this delusion. There should be some acceptance that if people intent to consign the UK to the European project, that this shall sooner or later equate to the Euro and Schengen, as well as further taxation from continental sources.


sun_tzu said:
https://fullfact.org/europe/does-ttip-mean-privatisation-nhs/
Click to expand...

There is a fair bit of guess work and blind faith in that article.

And to be quite frank, until such time as they remove ISDS' from the treaty i wouldn't go near it.
 
I've mentioned this before but a Britain begging for access to export markets outside the EU will have to offer access to NHS money to the Yanks, it's too large a chunk of our spending for them to ignore
 
Mozza said:
I've mentioned this before but a Britain begging for access to export markets outside the EU will have to offer access to NHS money to the Yanks, it's too large a chunk of our spending for them to ignore
Click to expand...
They won't. It would cause uproar in the country and no government would be in long enough to do it. But if the EU decided....well there's not much we could do. We are just 1 of 28 countries and so we only have 1 voice.

How anyone can possibly trust people that they have not voted for and have no idea who they are to make regulations and decisions on our behalf is completely beyond me. We can hardly say that they have our interests at heart can we! They couldn't give a toss about us, remember that.
 
Red Defence said:
They won't. It would cause uproar in the country and no government would be in long enough to do it. But if the EU decided....well there's not much we could do. We are just 1 of 28 countries and so we only have 1 voice.

How anyone can possibly trust people that they have not voted for and have no idea who they are to make regulations and decisions on our behalf is completely beyond me. We can hardly say that they have our interests at heart can we! They couldn't give a toss about us, remember that.
Click to expand...

The publics of Europe also value their versions of the NHS. I would be more worried about a Tory Government selling the NHS then the EU. They managed to impose the biggest change in NHS history whilst simultaneously promising no top down reorganisation of the NHS in their manifesto
 
Mozza said:
The publics of Europe also value their versions of the NHS. I would be more worried about a Tory Government selling the NHS then the EU. They managed to impose the biggest change in NHS history whilst simultaneously promising no top down reorganisation of the NHS in their manifesto
Click to expand...

Spot on. The Tories then claimed it was in their manifesto all the time, but never explained the complete failure of even one of them to bother mentioning it during the campaign.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Lol its £9m. The feigned outrage when the government spends basically feck all on something is always hilarious.
Click to expand...

I've a feeling the Out campaign won't be short of donations from mega-rich far right Tories before long, they'll easily outspend the government anyway.
And that's not counting the value of relentless propaganda from right-wing newspaper owners. £9m to next to that is nowt. Whinging from either side on the subject is a bit hypocritical.
 
712 said:
I've a feeling the Out campaign won't be short of donations from mega-rich far right Tories before long, they'll easily outspend the government anyway.
And that's not counting the value of relentless propaganda from right-wing newspaper owners. £9m to next to that is nowt. Whinging from either side on the subject is a bit hypocritical.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's the thing. If they were complaining about the government getting involved at all then that's a different matter. But people seem to genuinely be acting like they think £9m is a lot of money it's really odd.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Lol its £9m. The feigned outrage when the government spends basically feck all on something is always hilarious.
Click to expand...
Lol!!!

It's £9 million that would have been far better spent by giving it to the NHS. Just like all the other millions they waste. In times of austerity...which of course we are in now and that's why the poor and vulnerable have had their money cut...... the government should not be wasting money on such as this when there are far more essential places for that money to go.
 
Red Defence said:
Lol!!!

It's £9 million that would have been far better spent by giving it to the NHS. Just like all the other millions they waste. In times of austerity...which of course we are in now and that's why the poor and vulnerable have had their money cut...... the government should not be wasting money on such as this when there are far more essential places for that money to go.
Click to expand...
If you're of the view that being in the EU is better for the economy, better for the tax take, and therefore better for the NHS, spending money on convincing people to vote to stay looks a better investment.

Though I'd agree in general this whole referendum is a waste of resources that are better spent elsewhere.
 
Red Defence said:
Lol!!!

It's £9 million that would have been far better spent by giving it to the NHS. Just like all the other millions they waste. In times of austerity...which of course we are in now and that's why the poor and vulnerable have had their money cut...... the government should not be wasting money on such as this when there are far more essential places for that money to go.
Click to expand...

Do you know how much we spend on the NHS?

I'll tell you to save you looking it up: £145bn. £9m is an infinitesimally small amount of money for the government to spend on anything.

To put it in to perspective, someone on minimum wage working a 38 hour working week and 21 days a month spends a larger portion of their yearly income taking a slash at the train station than the government has spent on this in proportional terms: 0.0018% vs 0.0009%.

Look, as I said, I don't really mind the argument that the government should not be involved in it as a point of principle. I don't agree with it, but its at least a solid argument. The financial side of the argument is just non-existent.
 
Red Defence said:
Lol!!!

It's £9 million that would have been far better spent by giving it to the NHS. Just like all the other millions they waste. In times of austerity...which of course we are in now and that's why the poor and vulnerable have had their money cut...... the government should not be wasting money on such as this when there are far more essential places for that money to go.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's not like it's an important decision or anything.

The whole thing is a waste in one sense, we're only having a referendum at all because the Tory party can't resolve it's own opinion on the issue.
I realise there are folk other than right-wing tories who are against the EU, but there are nowhere near enough of them to warrant a referendum.
 
Last edited:
Anyone noticed the mass-mail stuff that's been going out entitled 'The UK and the European Union: THE FACTS'? It presents itself as a non-biased, non-partisan informational pamphlet to 'help people decide how to vote' but it's actually paid for by the leave campaign.

Obviously it's basically guaranteed that we'll see dodgy leaflets from both sides and god knows political pamphlets are always packed with misleading stuff, but putting out a biased leaflet whilst not stating your agenda is almost creepy (there's nothing at all on the pamphlet which ties it to the organisation who published it). It's a pretty transparent attempt to manipulative more malleable voters.
 
Just said on Question Time, consider the Mail, the Sun, the Telegraph, and the Times, filled every single day with calculated anti-EU articles and spin, yet their owners don't even live in the UK or pay UK taxes. I don't think the US allows that, and I'm not sure I blame them.
 
TTIP and the imposition of ISDS courts are being agreed upon in the dark corners of the European Parliament
712 said:
Just said on Question Time, consider the Mail, the Sun, the Telegraph, and the Times, filled every single day with calculated anti-EU articles and spin, yet their owners don't even live in the UK or pay UK taxes. I don't think the US allows that, and I'm not sure I blame them.
Click to expand...

What of the Guardian,m the Mirror, the Independent and certain branches of the BBC? It's hardly a one-way street.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
What of the Guardian,m the Mirror, the Independent and certain branches of the BBC? It's hardly a one-way street.
Click to expand...

Are you saying these are owned by people that live outside the UK and don't pay UK taxes Nick?
As for the BBC, I'm watching Question Time at the moment and it's falling over itself for balance. Bit like blaming the referee that one.
 
712 said:
Are you saying these are owned by people that live outside the UK and don't pay UK taxes Nick?
As for the BBC, I'm watching Question Time at the moment and it's falling over itself for balance. Bit like blaming the referee that one.
Click to expand...

I'm saying that the Europhile side of the argument isn't without its biased support amongst the media. All i can say is that i know of pro-EU coverage on BBC News 24 and BBC Radio over the years, and such occurracces have forced the corporation to issue apologies.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
I'm saying that the Europhile side of the argument isn't without its biased support amongst the media. All i can say is that i know of pro-EU coverage on BBC News 24 and BBC Radio over the years, and such occurracces have forced the corporation to issue apologies.
Click to expand...

Of course there is some biased support for the EU, it's just a lot smaller in size of newspaper terms.
It puzzles me that it's ok for the Out campaign to be daily and hugely supported in titles owned by non-UK residents and non-UK tax payers, yet our elected government isn't allowed an opinion, apparently.
As for the BBC, you really are just blaming the referee. This a standard Tory view, despite the fact that chief figures like Andrew O'Neill are most definitely Tory. (I like him though, he does try hard to be disinterested, then again, he's in the BBC now).
 
jeff_goldblum said:
Anyone noticed the mass-mail stuff that's been going out entitled 'The UK and the European Union: THE FACTS'? It presents itself as a non-biased, non-partisan informational pamphlet to 'help people decide how to vote' but it's actually paid for by the leave campaign.

Obviously it's basically guaranteed that we'll see dodgy leaflets from both sides and god knows political pamphlets are always packed with misleading stuff, but putting out a biased leaflet whilst not stating your agenda is almost creepy (there's nothing at all on the pamphlet which ties it to the organisation who published it). It's a pretty transparent attempt to manipulative more malleable voters.
Click to expand...
I believe it states it was sent out by 'Vote Leave' in the small print right at the very bottom.
 
Remain... Piss off farrage
Leave... Make farrage happy
I'll certainly be voting remain... Though the thought of farrage et al structuring trade deals with "bongo bongo land" is mildly amusing (in the same way president Trump might be)
 
NinjaFletch said:
Do you know how much we spend on the NHS?

I'll tell you to save you looking it up: £145bn. £9m is an infinitesimally small amount of money for the government to spend on anything.

To put it in to perspective, someone on minimum wage working a 38 hour working week and 21 days a month spends a larger portion of their yearly income taking a slash at the train station than the government has spent on this in proportional terms: 0.0018% vs 0.0009%.

Look, as I said, I don't really mind the argument that the government should not be involved in it as a point of principle. I don't agree with it, but its at least a solid argument. The financial side of the argument is just non-existent.
Click to expand...
The government could quite easily have put all the information regarding the EU on one of their websites. And/or they could have taken out a 2 page spread in the daily papers. Both of those would have informed people just as easily as sending out leaflets.

As for thinking that the financial side of the argument is non-existent....consider this. £9 million would have bought 15 hospitals a brand new CT scanner or 10-12 hospitals a brand new MR scanner. With today's tight budgets those are vital pieces of equipment for diagnosis that many hospitals can't stretch to. I'd say the financial argument for not wasting £9 million is a very valid one.
 
Yes but the reason they haven't done that isn't because they spent £9m on this. They can and will always be able to drop £9m on a whim on anything. The fact they don't isn't because of this in anyway.
 
The Government's EU sales pitch arrived a little earlier, what to do...

Shredder
Dog's new toy.
Bedding and piss absorber for a rabbit.

Option three does at least carry the potential of it being put to a constructive use.
 
Ah, you may be a Tory in denial, but any man with a rabbit can't be all bad. Mine used to run all round the house but it would always jump back in it's hutch for it's fresh bunny brunch. The rather large hutch took up a fair chunk of the living room actually.
 
Red Defence said:
The government could quite easily have put all the information regarding the EU on one of their websites. And/or they could have taken out a 2 page spread in the daily papers. Both of those would have informed people just as easily as sending out leaflets.

As for thinking that the financial side of the argument is non-existent....consider this. £9 million would have bought 15 hospitals a brand new CT scanner or 10-12 hospitals a brand new MR scanner. With today's tight budgets those are vital pieces of equipment for diagnosis that many hospitals can't stretch to. I'd say the financial argument for not wasting £9 million is a very valid one.
Click to expand...

You could also say the same about your local council sending out it's annual crap that nobody ever reads.
 
If we end up voting to leave the blame will rest with Cameron and his rabble. They've spent years peddling xenophobia and the myth of hordes of scrounging migrants to justify cuts to welfare and that same rhetoric lies at the heart of the mainstream 'leave' campaigns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.