h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I'm surprised that no one has begun a discussion about this yet. There seem to be at least four major areas of debate opened up by the referendum: Should the EU become a closer political union or go back to being the Common Market, Will anyone ever produce any definitive economic evidence to make a rational decision, What are the international political consequences of an Exit vote and Will anyone learn any lessons from last year's Scottish Referendum?

Personally, I can't see Cameron getting any major concessions (although the present situation seems to be moving things in his favour) but a sensible pro-EU campaign should be enough to keep us in.

I'm frankly amazed they're holding a referendum. Things like this are far too important to be entrusted to the hoi polloi.

Ah well, whether democracy is a good or a bad thing is a much wider debate. Reminds me of the film where Peter Cook became a Machiavellian Prime Minister who bombarded the electorate with referenda until they voted to make him an absolute dictator...

Well said Icy they just don't want to take the blame when it goes wrong, and it will.
The day we leave the French will open the flood gates at Calis thousands will arrive within weeks.

Trade will suffer the value of oil will not recover for some time (as electric cars are here to stay). Devolution wont help its just a storm whipped up by 3rd rate politicians who could not make it in Westminster.
If they want to go their separate ways fine but you want it you pay for it independance includes financial independence, and that includes printing their own money. All it is doing is weakening our credibility.

Add that lot together and the thought of leaving the EU is about as s%3927d a thought as Harolds thinking that he would be alright at Hastings as Williams lot would be tired after their long boat trip.

Remember what Charles de Gaulle said after WWII

" Reminds me of the film where Peter Cook became a Machiavellian Prime Minister who bombarded the electorate with referenda until they voted to make him an absolute dictator..."

Was that "Rise and Fall of Michael Rimmer"? Would it be worth looking for on DVD or online service?

Paul: yes, that is the film I was thinking of; not sure if it's still available as I don't think it was a commercial success, but certainly worth watching if you find it.

bobstafford: I'm not sure who 'they' are (hoi polloi or euro-sceptic politicians) and I'm puzzled by the idea that French 'flood-gates' would open if we *left* the EU (surely that would be less likely?).

I agree with your opinion that it would be detrimental to the UK economy to leave, however our opinion needs someone to provide some firm economic evidence to back it up (I don't know enough about the subject to trust my opinion).

I also agree that if there is a substantial difference in the vote between England and Scotland it will give Scottish nationalists an excuse for demanding another independence referendum which would be very unpleasant for those of us living in Scotland who dislike nationalism.

As for De Gaulle, he saw a Franco-German led Europe as a buffer between the Anglo-American and Soviet blocs and the Common Market as a trading alliance consisting of a small number of sovereign nations.

Hello Chris
they are The hoi polloi
I do not think the french will play host to all those wanting to enter the UK, flood-gates will open they will potentially arrive in their thousands. The UK welfare state is the gold at the end of the rainbow (they think)

De Gaulle “Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first.”

bobstafford: On the subject of refugees from Syria, Afghanistan etc trying to get to the UK from France - I imagine one of the main arguments put forward by those wanting to leave the EU when campaigning starts will be that being a sovereign nation gives complete control of borders, so presumably one of Cameron's negotiating points in his current talks with other EU leaders will be that of border controls in order to placate his euro-sceptic MPs. Thus it would seem, whatever way the vote goes, there is unlikely to be an immediate invasion from Calais.

The french are controlling their borders they are enforcing exit controls, I am sure that the english channel ports would love to have entry control, we all believe that if they set foot on british soil they will be home and dry, handouts for all.

Our problem entry controls are worthless with a weak willed enforcement, and there is not one region of the UK that would be willing to accommodate them. This is unfortunate situation and people are suffering and many more may have problems to come.

I wish I had an answer

I think the EU referendum will have a similar problem to the Scotland one - what exactly is it that we're voting for?

We know more or less what it will mean to stay in the EU, but we don't know it would mean to leave. What would the new arrangements be, and how would they work? Would we be like some other European countries that aren't members but which nevertheless are part of some institutions and agreements, or would we be out completely? Will there be trade barriers? What about rights to work in other EU countries, or to live, or to visit?

I worry (if that's the right word) that comparisons with Norway and Switzerland are a little disingenuous (from the anti-EU camp) because those countries were never members but negotiated agreements etc over the years.

I don't really think it will be that "petty" but I can imagine that leaving a club and then trying to make similar arrangements is a whole different kettle of fish and the French and Eastern European countries (who had to jump through hoops to join the EU club) won't be at all well disposed to giving the UK anything approaching a helping hand.
(on a personal level i hope the UK stays in because I'll have to get work permits and shizzle. The Gruesome Twosome will probably, reluctantly, give up their British passports)

The problem is the referendum will be open to every voter, a large majority are influenced by the tabloids and have not the intelligence to realise what the issues are. The EU is our best option it is a fantastic asset for our trade The Americans are hoping the UK stays in and keeps our ability to influence European policy. Referendum! Since when did the lunatics get to run the asylum.

Otto Fisch It'll be interesting to see whether the Out campaign does any better than the independence campaign did in Scotland at reassuring the voters that a step into the unknown is worth the risk. I can't see Cameron wanting to clarify questions like that in case it alienates the 'soft' euro-sceptics in his party.

Sho: It's possible that Poland and Romania, at least, now have so many people working here that it would seriously affect their economies if Britain left.

bobstafford: I think the average voter is probably able to recognise gutter-press ranting when they hear it. The Scottish Nationalists had a similar problem last year; before the referendum they were demanding that Scottish voters' voices should be heard, afterwards they were calling 55% of Scottish voters 'scum' and 'stupid' for being frightened into changing their minds by Project Fear. Personally I think that neither campaign had much effect on the vast majority of voters.

I think the average voter is probably able to recognise gutter-press ranting when they hear it. Agreed but there is a sizeable number of below average voters.

"there is a sizeable number of below average voters"

Almost half of them...

This is the best discussion on the subject I have read on this (ever). And it was written on H2G2 by sprout: A87734532

Everything else I have read since has been overly convoluted, misinformed nonsense by comparison. Yay! H2G2!

Phoenician Trader: Thank you for the link, sprout's article is excellent and provides clear answers to some of the questions in this debate. It hadn't occurred to me to look in the guide as I had presumed the situation moves too quickly for articles to remain relevant. I'm happy to be proven wrong in that assumption.

bobstafford: I'm also happy to be proven wrong in my imprecise use of the word average. As you will remember from school maths lessons, the three forms of average are mean, median and mode; mode being the one I was thinking of when I posted that reply

Here (if the link works) is further useful analysis for the apparently small number of us who think this is worth discussing:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887

Oh Well (as Peter Green used to say), I'm sure you can find it yourself...

Hi Chris,

Without having read what the others have posted, I´ll give you my opinion on the topic, which is that of an “outsider” because I´m no British citizen and no UK resident.

“I'm surprised that no one has begun a discussion about this yet. There seem to be at least four major areas of debate opened up by the referendum: Should the EU become a closer political union or go back to being the Common Market …”

Not advocating the stance of Nigel Farage and the UKIP, just looking at what the EU has become in the past two decades, I´m in favour to reform the EU back to its origin as a loose organisation with the purpose of a common market for trade. I´m against a closer political union because there is less consent and a more growing feeling in many EU member states that the EU is too much dominated by Germany, especially by her current Chancellor Merkel.

As a German, who grew up in the decades before the first election to the European Parliament were held and who also didn´t miss any of those elections because I believe in democracy and see my vote as the only instrument to use my “indirect” influence on the European project by voting for a competing party. When I look back on those past decades, I remember too well the voices from plenty of my fellow citizens who often said that “Germany pays more in that she gets out of it and thus we are the paymasters of the [then EEC and later] EU”. There was less talk about “German domination” of Europe and even after German re-unification it wasn´t so either. That changed just within the past 10 years since Merkel became Chancellor and in due course with the financial crisis, which left France, the other part of the “European Tandem” rather weak and still struggling with the effects of the crisis. One didn´t hear the old mantras of “we are the paymaster of the EU” anymore that often without particular context for several years.

That changed with the Greek crisis and the billions of billions of Euros Merkel, with her minister for finance and in coalition with the ECB and the IMF “imposed” on Greece to have them making domestic reforms in return. It was just all about to help the Greek banks and avoid their and thus the Greeks state bankruptcy. This was the time, when the whole of the EU could just stare at the way of who and how one small circle of people is dominating the EU and what suffered from that most was the idea of a democratic European Union that not only holds her values high but also lives them. The ugly face of a stern and cruel capitalism has shown up and dictated the Greeks what they had to do, what they were allowed to do, which reforms are “required” and where they have set up the cuts. The rich Greeks, who obviously couldn´t care less if their nation and country is going down the drain, had their assets secure somewhere abroad. The “traditional attitude” of the Greeks (which is really in no way a stereotype and no prejudice) to “pay as less taxes as possible or better to pay none of it”, has brought this EU country on the brink of collaps and there she is still.

With the left-wing PM Tsipras elected in January 2015, there was a time, where the EU was showing her true colours and for whom she really is there. This was more proved by the re-action of the “Troika” that is not just in Greece perceived as a “Triangle of eco-financial dicta-torship”, simply ignored the result of the Greek referendum on Austerity that was held in Summer last year on the initiative of Tsipras. In that referendum, the Greek voted for “keeping the Euro, but ending austerity”. Well, logically one can have both as the odds were too contrary like in this case. But what has put me off was that an organisation that claims to be “the hub of democracy” can walk so cold blooded over the democratically expressed will of a part of her member state citizens. This was the very moment where the EU has lost all her credit in my mind and where it was open to see for everyone who looks at it with an open mind and open eyes, had to realise that this EU is in fact not for the people but for the industry, the economy and finance. People do not matter, banks matter, money transfers matter, politician´s vanity matters but a democratic obtained will of a people isn´t worth anything.

Frankly, I think that when it comes to the real core of the EU, such as she and her represent-atives, with Merkel, Schäuble, Lagarde and the ECB at the front of it, has shown during the past year, there is no need for an ever closer Union because it will just move even closer against the citizens of the EU if democracy has such a real low stand as shown in the case of Greece. It will surely be enough to have the old common market re-established in a way that the bureaucrats get lost and with them their power and that power is been given back to the national parliaments and the people to look better after themselves than this EU ever was prepared to do or even “capable” to.

What there is on advantages in trade and movement of working people beyond the borders, could be settled in multilateral treaties among the countries themselves or within the frame of a replaced EU that is in essence nothing more than the former EEC but nothing less.

The EU is not representing the dream of a free Europe of equals, not anymore because what lies at the grassroots of this “European dream” of a free Europe was consent among the countries, no domination of the continent by a single country of by a couple of them.

Mr Farage, in his long standing anti-EU stance always criticizes the EU for what she is, what she´s done, what she´s doing or not doing. In the past I´ve rather laughed at his speeches, but since the Greek crisis, I have to say, that he´s more and more be proved right in his opinions because the EU herself is delivering by her very actions that he is right and this EU has no bright future ahead for herself.

Mr Cameron, the one I´m rather inclined to follow in his attempts to reform the EU, even on the basis that he´s doing that for the benefit of the UK in the first place which I don´t find objective at all, is having a different approach on the EU matter than Farage. But Cameron isn´t that sort of a radical like Mr Farage. Cameron is more the pragmatic politician and he knows that he might get some things out of it for the UK without having to say “all or nothing or we are out”. That´s up to the British electorate to decide which path they choose to go, either stay or leave. But what Cameron is doing too is to give the EU the chance to take up his proposals to reform itself in due course and improve it. Sometimes, lesser is better than more and looser is better than closer. But I don´t see the EU taking that chance and rather giving Cameron some concessions the EU can live with and he can take back home without losing face. But I believe that in the EU referendum, which certainly will be held rather in June 2016 than at the end of 2017, the British might give their majority in favour of leaving.

If the British vote for the Brexit, it could trigger the downfall of the EU in a midterm of say two to five years. That said by bearing in mind that in the Eastern EU countries, authoritarian right-wing or far-right governments are on the rise. Such as in Poland and Hungary. In due course of a refugee crisis which won´t be solved on a EU basis, because they are too many coming in and there´s little to zero interest of many EU member countries to “take their fair share”, resistance against Brussels might also increase, the more Brussels is attempting to put more pressure on the member states to get the “shares” pushed through.

“Will anyone ever produce any definitive economic evidence to make a rational decision, What are the international political consequences of an Exit vote and Will anyone learn any lessons from last year's Scottish Referendum?”

There might be various scenarios for a Brexit taking place, but as “sensitive” as the interna-tional economy is, it´s rather hard to produce a real reliable and definitive economic evidence that is either in favour for stay in or for leave. I think that the economically situation is rather unpredictable and that in some ways some arrangements would be made in order to keep the trade with the UK going. On the other hand, the UK could (again) change their orientation and get closer with her partners of the Commonwealth of Nations and put more trade and investments in that which – given that it´s successful – could have some global effects, even on the weaker member states of the Commonwealth. But the point is, that in this club which was founded by the British and where there is more common ground from the old times, the UK could, in consent with the other members, make their own rules and improve where things can be improved and remove things where they just represent an obstacle and are no longer needed. This could be the counter blue print to an international successful trade market across the globe. But it would also mean hard work and it would take time.

I´m not so sure whether the motivation of the people is like the same as it was with the Scottish referendum for Independence. Although, I´m aware that there is a stronger pro-EU sentiment among the Scottish voters than among the English, this Brexit referendum has more of an national impact for all UK citizens, including the expats who live abroad and who would, in case of the Brexit, be confronted with a new residence permission legislation as foreign nationals. Up to this day, any UK citizen can take residence and settle within the EU as he/she pleases and doesn´t has to apply for residence permission. That is a thing that would get lost with the Brexit unless, the EU (in consent with her member states) would draw a new legislation which would guarantee them free movement and settlement as it is now.

“Personally, I can't see Cameron getting any major concessions (although the present situation seems to be moving things in his favour) but a sensible pro-EU campaign should be enough to keep us in.”

Probably not much more as he already has by now. Farage is waiting in the wings to use it himself for his advantages, but well, that´s politics and the Tory party is split on that matter anyway, with no signs of any alteration.

Cheers,
Thomas