Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EU referendum: Cameron sets June date for UK vote

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 71 posts

Re: EU referendum: Cameron sets June date for UK vote

#51

Post by Silhouette »

s_kilk wrote: post #36
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #29

This is going to have wide-reaching consequences no matter what way it goes. Off the top of my head, potential issues include: * Combined with the sovereign debt crisis and the migrant crisis, this could be the end of the EU (perhaps unlikely, but) * The UK leaving the EU with the Republic of Ireland staying in (there's little support for RoI leaving) could create problems in Northern Ireland * The UK voting to leave…

Certainly an interesting time to be alive. A part of me thinks we (the rest of the U.K.) should just jettison England and be done with it. They're dragging the rest of us down. [edit for clarity]

They're dragging the rest of us down.

By being a net importer from the EU in trade terms, a net contributor in EU budget terms, and having net immigration from the EU? Or by not fully participating in the ever-closer political union and the Eurozone, neither of which has exactly been a huge success in recent years?

This is a complicated issue with several reasonable arguments both for the UK remaining and for the UK leaving. There is a fundamental underlying tension because the UK simply has different priorities in some areas than its European neighbours, such that while no party is inherently right or wrong, not everyone's goals are aligned.

Still, the idea that England is just dragging everyone else down is silly. That's why most of the other EU leaders have been trying, with varying degrees of subtlety, to encourage the UK to stay.

Re: EU referendum: Cameron sets June date for UK vote

#52

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

antillean wrote: post #45
aembleton wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Membership of the EU requires you to sign up to the ECHR, but countries outside of the EU are also members of the ECHR. We can continue to be part of the ECHR without being inside the EU. By leaving the EU, all our existing legislation that has been enacted will stay. It just means that our elected government will have the power to remove legislation without getting permission from unelected commissioners. Under the…

Gove's statement today -- http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-... -- sounds to me like he'd also like the UK to leave the ECHR.

Does it say that? I'll admit to have only Ctrl-F'd and not read it, but I see references to the ECJ in Strasbourg, which is an EU institution, not to the ECHR.

Re: EU referendum: Cameron sets June date for UK vote

#53

Post by calpaterson »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #33
calpaterson wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed it is happening because the political system is broken, but in the exact opposite way from how you have described. "A small anti-EU, right wing party" - UKIP got nearly 13% of the vote and would probably be part of a coalition government with the Conservative party if we had a proportional representation system. Instead they have 1 MP. The SNP got only 8.6% of the vote and they have 56 MPs. The referendum is h…

> The UK joined an economic community that has somehow transformed into a superstate I've seen some variant of this claimed time and time again, but I don't really get it. The EU has always been supranational, always been pro-harmonisation and -integration. The scope of what it covers may have expanded somewhat over time (and that's been actively participated in by the UK anyway), but is it really a fundamentally dif…

The EU simply did not exist in 1975. That's not just a technical comment: it really didn't exist until 1992 with the Maastricht Treaty. Since 1975 there is a currency (and monetary policy), there is a proper and separate legal system, there a real political process with a parliament and an executive and many other changes. Trade is now only a part of a much bigger story.

In 1975 there wasn't even a flag - the circle of yellow stars was a symbol used by different pan-national organisation (that still exists) with no relation at all to the EEC.

Re: EU referendum: Cameron sets June date for UK vote

#54

Post by Silhouette »

aembleton wrote: post #48
Silhouette wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect if we vote to leave, there will be another referendum in 2017 after the EU has had some serious introspection about the democratic deficit. I would expect them to try to keep the UK as a member. In the news yesterday, before the deal was announced, there was talk of incorporating a specific guarantee that any decision this time would be final, and the EU would not then come back to the UK offering an improve…

If the EU make significant changes in the next year, I think another referendum would be a healthy thing. Especially if this one is close. This is a very significant decision and whilst I'm for leaving; I'd rather be a member of a pared down EU that concentrated on free trade and less on bureaucracy and the creation of legislation.

It sounds like we'd broadly agree on the politics. I tend to favour the UK being part of what the EU could be, but I'm much less sure about remaining part of what the EU actually is and what some of the other member states apparently want it to be in the future. As always, I'll choose how to vote at each election on its own merits, and I'll certainly watch how the situation develops over the next few months before making a final decision on this one.

Re: EU referendum: Cameron sets June date for UK vote

#55

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

dogma1138 wrote: post #20
junto wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a Brit living in Germany. A vote to leave the EU is likely to mean that I will need to apply for a work visa to stay here. It is more than likely going to cause me a major pain in the arse. On the other hand I'm tempted to have the anti-EU Brits win and let them see what a disaster that will be for the UK, shutting them up once and for all. Then have them come back with their tails between their legs asking to be…

The UK most likely will still remain within the EEA even if they'll leave the EU, as resident holders within Iceland, Norway and Switzerland can move around and work within any country within the EEA/EU even without being EU members. Not to mention that even a vote to exit will take years and there will be provisions to maintain current status it's highly unlikely that the UK will kick out millions of residents not t…

> The UK most likely will still remain within the EEA even if they'll leave the EU

What's your reasoning for this? I think it might be attractive versus simply leaving altogether, but who says that's what'll happen?

Consider that the EEA might be unpalatable to people against EU membership due to migration.

Re: EU referendum: Cameron sets June date for UK vote

#56

Post by antillean »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #52
antillean wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gove's statement today -- http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-... -- sounds to me like he'd also like the UK to leave the ECHR.

Does it say that? I'll admit to have only Ctrl-F'd and not read it, but I see references to the ECJ in Strasbourg, which is an EU institution, not to the ECHR.

Ah, yeah, you're right. My bad.

Re: EU referendum: Cameron sets June date for UK vote

#57

Post by flexie »

bjourne wrote: post #13

I hope Sweden leaves too, and/or Brexit causes the union to collapse. We have paid billions in aid to the poorer EU countries for years and all we get back are refugees, Romanian beggars and criminal gangs from the Balkans.

Well, I assume you are Swedish. A lot of Swedish people are respected internationally: Zlatan Ibrahimovitch, of Balkan origin, is one. What have you done that compares to what he has done for your country? Nothing, right? Your country has benefitted more from Eastern Europeans than they have from you.

Re: EU referendum: Cameron sets June date for UK vote

#58

Post by dogma1138 »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #55
dogma1138 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK most likely will still remain within the EEA even if they'll leave the EU, as resident holders within Iceland, Norway and Switzerland can move around and work within any country within the EEA/EU even without being EU members. Not to mention that even a vote to exit will take years and there will be provisions to maintain current status it's highly unlikely that the UK will kick out millions of residents not t…

> The UK most likely will still remain within the EEA even if they'll leave the EU What's your reasoning for this? I think it might be attractive versus simply leaving altogether, but who says that's what'll happen? Consider that the EEA might be unpalatable to people against EU membership due to migration.

That's why I said most likely, the immigration from the EU isn't an actual problem, not as far as the "problematic" immigration into the UK goes.

EU individuals do not make the bulk of the economic immigration into the UK while making the majority of the high paid migrant workers.

If the UK want to deal with immigration "family" visa's and bogus work permits for people who end up earning below the minimum wage is a far better target than EU nationals.

Re: EU referendum: Cameron sets June date for UK vote

#59

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

calpaterson wrote: post #53
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The UK joined an economic community that has somehow transformed into a superstate I've seen some variant of this claimed time and time again, but I don't really get it. The EU has always been supranational, always been pro-harmonisation and -integration. The scope of what it covers may have expanded somewhat over time (and that's been actively participated in by the UK anyway), but is it really a fundamentally dif…

The EU simply did not exist in 1975. That's not just a technical comment: it really didn't exist until 1992 with the Maastricht Treaty. Since 1975 there is a currency (and monetary policy), there is a proper and separate legal system, there a real political process with a parliament and an executive and many other changes. Trade is now only a part of a much bigger story. In 1975 there wasn't even a flag - the circle…

> The EU simply did not exist in 1975. That's not just a technical comment: it really didn't exist until 1992 with the Maastricht Treaty

Under its current name, yes, but the European Union we know today is really the successor to the European Communities of yesteryear.

> Since 1975 there is a currency (and monetary policy),

Which the UK doesn't participate in, mostly.

> there is a proper and separate legal system,

This isn't new. There has been EU law since before the UK joined. The European Communities Act 1972 specifically provides for the conversion of EU law into UK law, and its supremacy over UK law.

> there a real political process with a parliament and an executive and many other changes.

The European Parliament existed long before the UK joined, and has been named that since 1962. But in fairness, it only started having elections in 1979 (it was previously appointed).

The European Commission, the executive, also existed before the UK joined. It has been a single body since 1967 (and there were three executives before that - their merger is sometimes considered the beginning of the modern EU).

> Trade is now only a part of a much bigger story.

It's always been part of a bigger story. The European Economic Community, after all, was only one of the three European Communities we joined.

> In 1975 there wasn't even a flag - the circle of yellow stars was a symbol used by different pan-national organisation (that still exists) with no relation at all to the EEC.

So? Lots of international organisations have flags. The Commonwealth of Nations has its own flag, and it's never considered a superstate.

Re: EU referendum: Cameron sets June date for UK vote

#60

Post by Silhouette »

aembleton wrote: post #21
vertex-four wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like you're treating this as a game. Fact of the matter is, if we leave the EU, a whole bunch of minorities lose a whole bunch of human rights protections. When this happens, the ability to lead a life of any sort decreases and suicide rates increase. The UK being "kinda-sorta part of the EU" is not a wonderful thing, but being out of it entirely would be far worse for real people. Fight for more integrat…

What human rights protections will be lost by leaving? In fact, what legislation would be removed by leaving? Surely all existing EU legislation is enacted into British law via an act of parliament.

One possible consideration is that while the main European human rights provisions are separate from EU legislation and organisations in principle, membership of the EU does require being a signatory to the ECHR under the Maastricht Treaty. Unless there is a very significant element of Cameron's deal that is getting remarkably little coverage so far, there doesn't seem to be any proposal to change this as a result of the recent negotiations.

This creates an interesting political minefield for the UK's current Conservative government, since their stated policy is to abolish the Human Rights Act (the current UK legal foundation for respecting the ECHR) in favour of a British Bill of Rights, yet as of today their stated policy as a government is also to campaign to remain in the EU. These policies seem to be incompatible under Maastricht, not to mention almost polar opposites in the underlying philosophy they represent.

Post reply on HN