Poll: EU Referendum - Should the UK stay in the EU?

Do you believe the UK should remain a member of the EU?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 154 46.1%

  • No.

    Votes: 165 49.4%

  • Wouldn't Vote In A Referendum.

    Votes: 15 4.5%
  • Total voters
    334
  • Poll closed .
I've had to say yes simply because of the economic benefits that are involved. However if it were an option, I'd pull out and and join the European Free Trade Association in order to avoid the Politics of the EU.

The problem with this of course, is I'm quite sure the EU would attempt to punish the country that left the EU regardless through their economy probably by blocking the attempt to get into the EFTA.
 
I knew you didn't ignore me.

My intelligent musings interest you really ;)

:D

Dolph said:
Do we keep aid? Do we have to pay it back? What happens to projects funded with EU rather than UK money? Etc etc...
Click to expand...

What regional aid? It would stop, just like our payments. We would be better off. No we wouldn't have to pay it back.

You mean under construction / funding just now? Depends, that would be included in the exit talks.






Dolph said:
This is just one aspect of the deal that would have to be discussed. The rest of the EU might not want to agree to that.
Click to expand...

Why would they not want to agree to that?



Dolph said:
It isn't talk of punative action, any more than the suggestion that if Scotland separated from the UK, that there would be an expected deal and withdrawl of UK paid for industries and setups from Scotland would occur. It isn't punative, it's related to who paid for what, and it's entirely justified to discuss when talking about separating from the current situation to a new one. Both sides are going to fight for the 'best' deal for them, which will, of course, be the worst deal for the other side, and so a compromise will be hammered out.
Click to expand...

There will be consequences. You should have said talks.

Just smacked me off paranoia and scaremongering at first, it seems to be the main argument used in the SC discussions by the main supporters. (I should really say the main scarers, as they don't bring a case for the Union. They just try to scare you away from talking about leaving the union)

I don't agree with much of what you say there because I believe utlimately we have paid in more than what we recieve, and will continue to do so. We wouldn't be owe anything.

That is without factoring in economic damage caused.

"UK paid for industries and setups from Scotland would occur" Erroneous. As a sidenote, could we invoice Westminster for the industries they destroyed? Tax revenue back? Scotland pay taxes too.



Dolph said:
That's because its never happened... That makes it somewhat difficult to see how it will actually work, and what deal would be on the table for a new relationship.
Click to expand...

They tend to insinuate upon devilish punative action for rejecting the union.



Dolph said:
It could be, but it might not be, that's why I said I wouldn't vote without more information as to the consequences ;)
Click to expand...

Oh but it really could be, if you weren't too concerned about sub-level agreements like EFTA. We have to be though.

Make your position clear, you are following the will and democratic right of your people, be polite and if the EU would refuse Britain to drop down the to EFTA, something Britain proposed and created, it would show Europe and the EU for their true colours.

There would be no 'trap'.

It would rip the EU apart.
 
Will Lucky said:
The problem with this of course, is I'm quite sure the EU would attempt to punish the country that left the EU regardless through their economy probably by blocking the attempt to get into the EFTA.
Click to expand...

Why would the EU do this?

Why would it be in their favour to act in a malicious way?

WHY oh WHY is this such popular opinion?

:(
 
I voted No, UK SHOULD leave.

If we left there is no reason why we cannot sign deals with France, Germany, Belgium and any other major EU player to allow us the open borders and good trade dealings (ie EFTA)

The problem with the EU is two fold, firstly due to the political structure, but secondly due to it having riff-raff along with the highly economically developed countries
 
It costs us around £1000/year for every man, woman and child in the UK to be a member of the EU, I can't see how that's justifiable to anyone - we should leave.
 
rypt said:
I voted No, UK SHOULD leave.

If we left there is no reason why we cannot sign deals with France, Germany, Belgium and any other major EU player to allow us the open borders and good trade dealings (ie EFTA)

The problem with the EU is two fold, firstly due to the political structure, but secondly due to it having riff-raff along with the highly economically developed countries
Click to expand...

It's bad and we aren't even in the Euro!

It could be worse :(

And probably will be if we don't do something about it.

mushroomsoup said:
No, Europe should join the UK!

God Save the Queen
Click to expand...

:D

Brought a lol even from me.
 
I think an important point is that its a devils choice, there isnt necessarily a 'middle option' of compromising or exiting on only agreeable terms, nor is there necessarily an option of remaining in the EU and only taking the 'good parts'.

Hence why really in a sense it does just come down to a binary Yes/No - any withdrawal would obviously be negotiated on 'best terms' - whatever, if anything that means, the question being does the UK's future belong in the EU or not. :)
 
No idea if it's been mentioned or not, but legally speaking a country can't actually leave the EU on its own will. It's a massive misconception that a country can do so, no matter what Article 50 may suggest.

I voted that we should leave the EU. Though, I accept it can no longer ever happen. We are in the EU and will remain so for the rest of my lifetime/the lifetime of the EU. There is no chance of us leaving it. It would be economic and political suicide. This is fact, and this is coming from someone who doesn't think we should be in it...
 
Last edited:
How is that, out of interest?

In my view it seems under Article 50 it's very clear, 2 years after notification in the absence of any agreement (a time period which can only be extended with consent of the departing State) the Treaties no longer apply to that State - in effect a unilateral disengagement.

Interesting poll so far - exact dead heat between the yes and nos! :)
 
Rich_L said:
How is that, out of interest?
Click to expand...

The basic idea is this:
If country A wished to leave the EU then they would have to repel their national law which permitted them to be members.
European Law overrules national law, therefore it does not matter if a country repelled their own law as they would still be bound by EU law which would make them a member.

Admitably, it would probably never happen but it isn't possible for a country to withdraw themselves from the EU. The Council would have to approve any removal. At the moment, I can't remember the threshold of votes that is required for a Council decision to be authorised but no country has the individual right to remove themselves from the Union.
There is a lot more to this, and various safeguards in place to ensure that no country can remove themselves. But that is the basic idea, I shall return tomorrow and outline this in more detail if any one is interested.
Sorry, should have added - These safeguards were put in place to ensure that the Empty Chair crisis would never happen again.
 
Last edited:
britain does not need the EU, we were great for hundreds of years and still have the capacity for being a world leader without these lecherous chancroids robbing our taxes and screwing our immigration policies amongst other things
 
That seems a bit out of date and something put together before the Lisbon Treaty was ratified, as before that there was no clear secession route and so that kind of position sounds plausible at least.

Article 50 really is very simple and very clear, and it even specifically provides for the circumstance where the EU body would not, either through lack of will or lack of ability, reach an agreement or ratify an agreement to leave allowing a member state to unilaterally disengage if they so wish.

It smacks a bit of conspiracy theory muddled with out of date law and a misunderstanding of the EU Supremacy position that a member state is 'unable' to leave the EU to be perfectly honest.

For example, Parliament could repeal the EC Act 1972 and would no longer be subject to the European Law supremacy doctrine leaving only the Treaty obligations - the mechanism for withdrawal from is now clearly set out in Article 50.

Interesting paper from the ECB regarding withdrawal/expulsion scenarios setting out the practical and legal position pre- and post-Lisbon:

http://www.ecb.int/pub/pdf/scplps/ecblwp10.pdf
 
Last edited:
Can we not go to the purely economic level like Finland (i think it's Finland? ) rather than withdraw completely?
 
Interesting that the poll is almost even at the moment. 82 say stay in, 83 say get out.

I think we should be a part of the EU, but that it could be be done much better.
 
doofski said:
Norway do quite well outside the EU. The UK should leave.
Click to expand...

Norway does quite well because it still has North Sea gas/oil, we don't any more - we are a net importer and have a population of 60m compared to Norway's 5m.

If we left the EU and got a free-trade agreement then our economy would be totally dependant on a major economic power and we'd have no say at all in how that major economic power was run. That puts us in a very weak position. It's unfortunate that since Thatcher, our governments have preferred to pretend that the EU isn't important, we're not sure if we really want to be here, therefore we'll let the others decide how it should be run. If our governments had engaged with the EU political process I believe the EU would be a much better run institution today.
 
Why would anyone want to join the Euro? Hasn't the past few years shown you that maintaining control of your own interest rates is hugely beneficial? Economies across Europe are just fair too different to have one rate. Germany and France probably wish they'd never said yes after Ireland and Greece!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom