Poll: The EU Referendum: How Will You Vote? (March Poll)
- Thread starter Burnsy2023
- Start date
- Status
If people voted on political union, why is Heath post vote stating that the EEC was more than just a common market?
The people should have already known that right?
We joined the EEC on 1st Jan 1973. The EEC was only ever a free market body until the EU formed proper in the 90s.
Apologies, you are correct the public vote occurred in 1975, but the EEC was never a political or fiscal union for any of the nations that made it up.
Edit:-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Community
The EU (aka political union) came about from the Maastricht Treaty in 1993.
Apologies, you are correct the public vote occurred in 1975, but the EEC was never a political or fiscal union for any of the nations that made it up.
Edit:-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Community
The EU (aka political union) came about from the Maastricht Treaty in 1993.
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,746
- Location
- Southampton, UK
How do you know they're receiving benefits?
I agree with you that the 1993 Maastricht treaty extended the extent of the union but it's quite clearly that the EEC was more than just a free market body from the start. Just read the Treaty of Rome.
The intro is clear enough (emphasis all mine):
DETERMINED to establish the foundations of an ever closer union among the European peoples,
DECIDED to ensure the economic and social progress of their countries by common action in eliminating the barriers which divide Europe,
DIRECTING their efforts to the essential purpose of constantly improving the living and working conditions of their peoples,
RECOGNISING that the removal of existing obstacles calls for concerted action in order to guarantee a steady expansion, a balanced trade and fair competition,
ANXIOUS to strengthen the unity of their economies and to ensure their harmonious development by reducing the differences existing between the various regions and by mitigating the backwardness of the less favoured,
DESIROUS of contributing by means of a common commercial policy to the progressive abolition of restrictions on international trade,
INTENDING to confirm the solidarity which binds Europe and overseas countries, and desiring to ensure the development of their prosperity, in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
RESOLVED to strengthen the safeguards of peace and liberty by establishing this combination of resources, and calling upon the other peoples of Europe who share their ideal to join in their efforts,
DECIDED to ensure the economic and social progress of their countries by common action in eliminating the barriers which divide Europe,
DIRECTING their efforts to the essential purpose of constantly improving the living and working conditions of their peoples,
RECOGNISING that the removal of existing obstacles calls for concerted action in order to guarantee a steady expansion, a balanced trade and fair competition,
ANXIOUS to strengthen the unity of their economies and to ensure their harmonious development by reducing the differences existing between the various regions and by mitigating the backwardness of the less favoured,
DESIROUS of contributing by means of a common commercial policy to the progressive abolition of restrictions on international trade,
INTENDING to confirm the solidarity which binds Europe and overseas countries, and desiring to ensure the development of their prosperity, in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
RESOLVED to strengthen the safeguards of peace and liberty by establishing this combination of resources, and calling upon the other peoples of Europe who share their ideal to join in their efforts,
But there's plenty more in there which is quite clear this is a more expansive exercise than merely removing some trade barriers.
I wouldn't mind closer union between Scandi nations, Central Europe and Britain...
I think when people saw the dregs of Europe being admitted, the happy progressive times were over (Proven wholeheartedly when the economy collapsed 8 years ago, and the failure of Greece as a state{which is hilariously not hilarious}).
Not that it isnt a good project to up-heave and develop these nations, but its increased risk to the Union... something no corporation would willingly afford themselves. So why should the EU be different in this regard?
I think when people saw the dregs of Europe being admitted, the happy progressive times were over (Proven wholeheartedly when the economy collapsed 8 years ago, and the failure of Greece as a state{which is hilariously not hilarious}).
Not that it isnt a good project to up-heave and develop these nations, but its increased risk to the Union... something no corporation would willingly afford themselves. So why should the EU be different in this regard?
Last edited:
It was hardly a secret treaty. Anyone that voted witjout research only have themselves to blame.
How make vote Conservative, Labour, Loldems or UKIP without reading the manifesto, or speaking to their candidates?
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 12,751
- Location
- Leicestershire
The fact Jeremy Clarkson wants to stay in makes me want out lol.
I like him as a journalist on cars however as an idol no...
I like him as a journalist on cars however as an idol no...
He just doesn't want a tarriff on German cars.
But that wasn't what they voted for. They voted to join the EEC as it stood at the time, there was no other informed opinion to be made because it was never stated what the
would look like. At the very least I would have expected that another referendum would have been required other rather than the mission creep that followed.
And now they wonder why the EU is on the edge of being burnt to the ground?
I don't know. I do know that the EEC was about more than removing trade barriers from the very start.
I'd say it matches exactly with the original mission: "ever closer union"; moveover nearly all of what the EU does remains about unifying markets and making sure that countries are competing on a fair and equal basis.
Aye, shame on them for not jumping on the net to find out eh?
They only had the information they were being given by their politicians and it was never a vote on unrestricted future closer unification.
Before the internet, there was a firm of communication, antidote a few. There was the printed press, the wireless, and even a box with moving pictures.
Why didn't the camping against joining at the time jump all over the ever closer union?
Yeah, I agree. I think that we do need votes from time to time to gain public support for the increasing union of the EU*. What I don't agree is that the voters in 1973 didn't vote for the EU: they did. What they voted in support of included the concept of "ever closer union" and the Maastricht treaty was a continuation of what they voted for.
* - although I think there was no need for this particular vote at this particular time. The logical time to gain public approval would be before negotiating the next incremental treaty of the EU.
Are you posting from your phone? It looks like auto-correct has garbled your post.
In 1975? You had the BBC and ITV, BBC radio. Of course I'm sure the papers at the time would have had details of the Treaty of Rome in them so the people could have made an informed choice on the matter.
Because the vote was on remaining in the common market!
The government's advice to voters at the time:-
http://www.harvard-digital.co.uk/euro/pamphlet.htm
Read that and see if voting "yes" gave a green light for further unity. It's all about soothing fears that this was nothing but remaining part of a free trading bloc.
Yup, my son is still in hospital so one hand typing on a phone. Doesn't help it keeps overheating then throttles so much the keyboard lags like mad.
- Status