Do you think we will ever get a vote on the EU?

[Mitsuru]

After it's been on the news and in the papers over here.
Will the vote ever happen?
What would the options be for the vote?
What would happen if we cut our ties with the European parliament?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18659072

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18663389

As different countries in the euro currency stumble with debt, can we
cut them off and finally pull up the drawbridge and repel boards?

Will we able to get rid of those who have used the European court of
human rights to stop them from being forced to leaving the UK where
they have it cushy in public or even in jail compared to the countries
they came from!

[Maaarrghk]

I think that we are too far in for any government that we are likely to get giving us a simple in/out vote unless things get far far worse than they already are.

There has been some recent speculation about being granted some sort of vote to do with our "relationship" with the EU. Whatever that might mean.

As a MAG member I have recently seen the way that the EU government machine is perfectly willing to ignore its own rules regarding both the conception and implementation of legislation.

Personally, I'm not against the EU in principle but am not at all happy with the way things have been going these past few years.

[suffolkpete]

I'm old enough to have voted in the 1975 referendum and I voted in favour. At the time it was sold to us as a trading partnership and nobody foresaw the extent to which it would grow and meddle in the affairs of sovereign states. Switzerland and Norway manage all right without it and if we left we would save a load of money and be able to immigration much more effectively and wouldn't have unelected commissioners telling us what to do. The Euro crisis will lead to still greater integration which I don't think the British public would find acceptable. If we don't leave altogether, we should retreat to the fringes and go back to the original concept of a trading organisation.

[Martin Evans]

It's ironic how the Labour party wanted to leave the EEC (As I think it was then) in the 1980s and now it's a Tory thing .

I must say I think they have gone too far in Europe and I never felt the idea of the Euro was a good one. I suppose the counter argument to that is that the USA seems to work and they have a single currency (I expect there are big differences between the more developed parts of the USA and some of the back water type places, just as there are between Germany and Greece). However the USA has developed over a longer period; you might say from a clean sheet (With a civil war between two factions along the way, which was far from being a dispute soley about slavery) and I don't think you can force countries, as diverse as those in Europe, together (And certainly not as fast as some theorists would like).

I think it will be a very big plunge, for any government, to take us out of Europe and I wonder how many of those, who say we should leave the EU, would actually mark their ballot paper in the same way Before such a decision was taken, I think Britain would need to develop towards leaving the EU; you can't just pull out and then say "What do we do now?" Perhaps we should consider what we would do after Europe, before considering whether we wish to leave. It maybe that developments with Europe may make that decision for us, so I think we have to at least consider what we could do outside Europe.

One thing is for sure, I think Britain should stick together and it is amusing how the local separatist party has seemingly lost it’s appetite for an “Independent Wales within Ewrope” now that it seems charity may not now be so readily available from that quarter . I have no time for so called nationalism, whether English, Scottish or Welsh but don't get me started on that

[tractorman]

I'm a bit like suffolkpete in that, although I thought we should never have gone into the EU (or Common Market as it was then), I also thought that, once we were in, we should stay in - so voted to stay in. Events that followed led to greater union than I suspect most people (of any nation) really wanted. From what I can see (and I don't read the Daily Mail), France and Germany think they own the EU and expect others to follow rules that they made (but don't necessarily follow themselves!). I seem to remember the "big rebate" that Mrs Thatcher got for us was at the expense of UK farmers not receiving as much "subsidy" as their continental cousins. That, indirectly, set about a decline in UK farming that has led to things like the RSPCA "managing" land so that birds can breed safely (no, I don't know how that works either). The British model for farming was much more sensible than the EU one - we didn't pay farmers to produce a surplus and the population got quality food for a fair price. Now we pay farmers a small fortune to "protect the environment" and the main food retailers - the big supermarket chains - only seem to buy UK products if the farmer is prepared to sell it for less than the cost of producing it! No, I don't know how that works either!

I wouldn't vote to come out of the EU though - we do a lot of business there and would have difficulty replacing that trade elsewhere. Another consideration is that Nissan (among others I suspect) chose to manufacture in the UK as the UK was part of the EU and thus didn't face trade barriers that the Japanese car makers faced some time ago. Would these manufacturers still invest in the UK?

No, I still think we shouldn't have joined but, as said earlier, it would be difficult for us to leave. Yes, there are a lot of things I don't like about the EU - some have been mentioned earlier - and, if we could vote to have more control over our own affairs and not leave the EU, I would seriously consider voting for that change.

However, I can see a vote happening soon after the EU announce that they will disband national governments, but doubt that the general public will be able to vote for much else!

[mr rusty]

despite all the nonsense about straight cucumbers and the like one major effect of political and economic unification is that we have had an unprecedented period of peace in Western Europe- I can't think of a longer period in history when we haven't been fighting the French, Dutch, Spanish, Germans, etc, either one at a time or any combination thereof, and they haven't been fighting each other either. This is the reason I would always vote to stay in, in fact I would personally like to see even more centralisation! It's also a very good reason to bring the Eastern countries in.

What many Europe knockers fail to understand is that it's not the only organisation of its type. The USA, and the clue is in the name, United States, is a collection of diparate states sharing a common currency and federal government, but with their own local laws and government. It is possible for any state to opt out- Texans occasionally rumble on about it, but ultimately they stay in. I see no reason why Europe cannot become as powerful as the USA, and believe me, if we're out, we're on our own, the 'special relationship' would be worth nothing. Switzerland can do it because of their geographical and economic peculiarities which they've managed for a very long time, but we couldn't.

Now vif the price of peace and security is being part of a United Europe then so be it as far as I'm concerned!

[Martin Evans]

Nissan (among others I suspect) chose to manufacture in the UK as the UK was part of the EU and thus didn't face trade barriers that the Japanese car makers faced some time ago. Would these manufacturers still invest in the UK?

Exactly; now if only we had kept our indigenous motor industry These are the sorts of things I meant when I said we are not in a position to just leave the EU. I think it would need a big culture shift on the part of the public. I have often said that many of the flag wavers would sooner wave a Union Jack made in China if it cost £0.50 less than a British made example (I'm sure it would be the case with a Welsh flag made in China or Merthyr Tydfil).

As to the period of peace, I think that was more to do with the two armed camps (The Warsaw Pact and Nato) staring at each other from behind huge stocks of nuclear weapons (In 1914 there wasn't that kind of deterrant). Each side knew what would happen if restraint wasn't exercised. If anything, I think the world is more dangerous now, than before the Iron Curtain came down, as the Soviet Union was at least useful in keeping, what we in the West would call rogue states, in some kind of check.

[EricTheRed]

I can't think of a longer period in history when we haven't been fighting the French, Dutch, Spanish, Germans, etc, either one at a time or any combination thereof, and they haven't been fighting each other either.

What evidence do you have that this period of peace is a direct consequence of the existence of the EU?

What many Europe knockers fail to understand is that it's not the only organisation of its type. The USA, and the clue is in the name, United States, is a collection of diparate states sharing a common currency and federal government, but with their own local laws and government.

The USA is nothing like the EU in one very important respect. If you ask someone in the USA what their nationality is they will say "American". If you ask the same question to people in any of the EU states I doubt very much that a significant number of them will say "European". The EU is a supra-national organisation which, from the British public's point of view, has been imposed on its people without their consent and with which they do not identify. If you're looking for similar organisations I would suggest the USSR or Yugoslavia.

Hopefully the EU will suffer the same fate as the USSR and Yugoslavia!

[mr rusty]

What evidence do you have that this period of peace is a direct consequence of the existence of the EU?

........none other than observation, but I suspect without political and economic union European conflict would have been more likely rather than less- for example a sizable proportion of the money pumped into Ulster to aid the peace process has been European. Count the European conflicts from 1945...apart from the Balkan conflict and it's specific roots, there hasn't been a European war since 1945. Now, look back prior to WWII and it's a somewhat different picture. Now common sense would say bring the Balkan nations into a union with the Western European nations- an economic and political union. Despite all the rumblings from Greece, I very much doubt they'll actually leave, they're not stupid, they don't want the Colonels back any more than Spain wants Franco's version of fascism back.

If you ask someone in the USA what their nationality is they will say "American"

.....ask a Texan!That's where secessionist movements are most vocal and a Texan is usually a Texan first and an American second, but there's quite a large movement in the North Western states and you'd be surprised how many people do not actually consider themselves to be 'American'.

[Martin Evans]

Note though that the Yugoslavian wars came soon after the collapse of the Soviet Union. They may not have been a member of the Warsaw Pact but I am sure the Soviet Union kept a lid on things. I'm not saying the Soviet Union was a force for good; it was just a powerful force, that acted as a kind of political counter weight. I wonder whether the Egyptian, Libyan or Syrian people would have risen if the Soviet Union had been there (I am not making judgements on them). I suspect some Syrians hope the West will get drawn in; in the Cold War years, the West wouldn’t have dared.