Poll: The EU Referendum: How Will You Vote? (May Poll)

[platypus]

Don't be a douche, that isn't what I said. I have no position on this (still undecided), I am just despairing of the way I am seeing the campaign ran.

Then what was the point of your comment that "sheeple will do as sheeple are told I suppose" in reference to the Remain campaign?

What Pudney said.

 

[platypus]

For me, the IN campaign is a little too condescending – there’s lots posted about doom and gloom, lots of random ‘celebs’ coming out to speak in favour of remaining; it just seems a little too try hard, and a bit iffy.

Both [official] campaigns are as bad as each other!

 

[Avenged7Fold]

lol

Cant comprehend someone else's view, so they assign them the label sheep.

 

[dannyjo22]

Perhaps it shouldn't but it well could be. Let's not assume that people will make a choice based on personal and family impacts. People care about issues that affect them and are generally apathetic about the ones who don't.

It's one of the reasons that I'm so apathetic about the whole sovereignty issue. It's hard to see how that affects me specifically.

If people go on lots of european holidays then this really could affect their lives and that matters.

As someone who gets his money from aviation, what I will save in a yearly holiday and roaming charges I have lost 10 times over in wages due to loss of jobs to 20p maintenance in Eastern Europe. The loss of maintenance standards and maintenance training due to EASA regulations bothers me more than £200 on a holiday.

 

[Zethor]

I know you're frustrated because of the outlook of your little project but you should play the ball not the man.

 

[George Hincapie]

What Pudney said.

I was alluding to the influence the media has over the public and the mis-use of the media by the campaigns. I thought that was clear - my mistake.

 

[George Hincapie]

lol

Cant comprehend someone else's view, so they assign them the label sheep.

Who is that directed at?

 

[Dave M]

I wouldn't trust the government to get a good deal here, either because they can use it to soften up something else we want more, or because they simply don't have any interest.

In the event of exit I can imagine us agreeing to a horrendously bad deal just to avoid free movement of people - and then give visas to 90% of those who would have come anyway because our labour market needs it.

The politicians can't be seen to give in on immigration but also we can't do without immigration. Just to appease public opinion we'll give the Spanish our fish, the French our rebate and follow every regulation like Norway. And get absolutely nothing back except 'control of our borders', which we won't, and don't even when we can now.

Whose idea was this referendum anyway? Seems a bloody stupid idea!

 

[platypus]

I was alluding to the influence the media has over the public and the mis-use of the media by the campaigns. I thought that was clear - my mistake.

Ok apologies. I was a bit brash certainly.

 

[NoobCannon]

Got my poll cards thru the post this morning!

 

[Emlyn_Dewar]

I am not sure I believe the latest polls. And the fear mongering from Remain is frankly disgusting. Its campaign has been almost wholly negative. You should be inspiring people to vote for you, not scaring them.

Still, sheeple will do as sheeple are told I suppose.

I guess it's exactly the same as what happened with the Scottish Independence referendum.
Inaccurate fear-mongering, scaring old folks and fence-sitters, into skewing the vote.

No-one cared then, and no-one cares now.

 

[Roar87]

In the event of exit I can imagine us agreeing to a horrendously bad deal just to avoid free movement of people - and then give visas to 90% of those who would have come anyway because our labour market needs it.

The politicians can't be seen to give in on immigration but also we can't do without immigration. Just to appease public opinion we'll give the Spanish our fish, the French our rebate and follow every regulation like Norway. And get absolutely nothing back except 'control of our borders', which we won't, and don't even when we can now.

Whose idea was this referendum anyway? Seems a bloody stupid idea!

We can revert to WTO rules if needs be

 

[MichaelAwkward]

For example Norwegian's flights from Gatwick to North America can only operate as a result of the EU.

I'm sure the rebuttal will be 'well we'll just agree something!!111' but nobody else in the world has done that...

I see. Interesting.

However, if it's benefiting other EU airlines as well at the moment surely that does add weight to the argument that a deal would be wanted by both sides? Rather than the pettiness we have in the headlines at the moment about the EU punishing us for leaving, etc.

 

[thep02]

. I genuinely feel at this point in time that the long term benefits for my chukdren are greater outside of the current EU. I wpuld love for us to be in a genuinely reformed EU but I can't see that happening if we vote to Remain. If anything it would push us further down a road I can't agree with. Project Fear has just made me wonder why they are so desperate for us to stay In.

Fully agree.

 

[Mr Jack]

However, if it's benefiting other EU airlines as well at the moment surely that does add weight to the argument that a deal would be wanted by both sides? Rather than the pettiness we have in the headlines at the moment about the EU punishing us for leaving, etc.

As with arguments of this form, the problem is that the EU is much bigger than the UK so we gain far more from the right to run these flights in the EU than other EU countries gain from the right to run their flights in the UK. Some EU airlines will, of course, be desperate to maintain their UK services but others will be pleased by the drop in competition so it's not at all obvious that the EU would want to restore the agreement post-Brexit.

 

[scorza]

As with arguments of this form, the problem is that the EU is much bigger than the UK so we gain far more from the right to run these flights in the EU than other EU countries gain from the right to run their flights in the UK. Some EU airlines will, of course, be desperate to maintain their UK services but others will be pleased by the drop in competition so it's not at all obvious that the EU would want to restore the agreement post-Brexit.

In the example given - Norwegian hubbing at Gatwick - Norway isn't a member state of the EU.

 

[Outcast]

Bah .. Not the right vid !

bbiab

But here's the FB link

https://www.facebook.com/danielhannan/videos/10153449385137331/

 

[kindai]

I see. Interesting.

However, if it's benefiting other EU airlines as well at the moment surely that does add weight to the argument that a deal would be wanted by both sides? Rather than the pettiness we have in the headlines at the moment about the EU punishing us for leaving, etc.

There have already been leaks of documents alluring that in the case of a Brexit brussels will (and im quoting from memory)

"Immediately stop or tone down any rhetoric of punishments"

"Open trade talks with a view to establish a deal as quickly as possible"

 

[Amp34]

Wow did not see that coming in the Guardian.

Why? It's an opinion piece. The opinion section is generally pretty open about its views. I saw a piece in there the other day about why the US should elect Trump...

As a aside from that and back to the point of the link, there are a couple of recent articles arguing the opposite -

One that the EU has been dragging the UK kicking and screaming into a more environmentally sound stance and for the environments sake we should stay.

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...environmental-consequences-britain-leaving-eu

The UK really was once the dirty man of Europe. We had the highest level of sulphur dioxide emissions in Europe, resulting in acid rain that devastated Scandinavian forests. Our seas were akin to open sewers as we pumped human effluent in them as part of a "dilute and disperse" approach to pollution – the result of which I vividly recall from family holidays. And our drinking water was contaminated with a cocktail of chemicals.

British politicians consistently used the mantra of "sound science" as an excuse to dither and delay, often only taking action when incontrovertible damage could be proved – and sadly, in many cases, already done. This backward, discredited approach to policy making – which proved so damaging in the case of BSE – is still favoured by many UK politicians and civil servants, as demonstrated by the government's refusal to back recent EU restrictions on neonicotinoid pesticides linked to bee decline.

The EU's approach to policy making is fundamentally different. Informed by the precautionary principle, and institutionalised within the environmental provisions of the Lisbon treaty, it requires that laws be introduced if there's a potential risk to human health or the environment – at least until evidence demonstrates otherwise. This is an approach – largely due to the efforts of our more progressive continental cousins in Scandinavia, Germany and the Netherlands – that is still not properly understood by many UK politicians and civil servants (as George Monbiot explained recently).

As a result we enjoy cleaner drinking water, cleaner bathing beaches, and cleaner air. The laws that gave those benefits to us were strongly resisted by the UK government.

The second one, whic I think I've posted before, argues that the UK should leave the EU because it is holding back a lot of environmental legislation. Sacrifice UK wildlife for the good of European wildlife. Note, this is also an opinion piece.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/09/brexit-europe-wildlife-eu

In fact, I fear that we’re actually quite good at this trick – of holding everyone back on key environmental votes in Europe. In recent years, many NGOs raised concerns about the impact on deep sea habitats of trawling in EU waters. The scientists were deeply concerned. What part did the UK play in the investigation or in the later vote on the issue? Not much. We stalled for most of the time, saying that we were not convinced.

It continued on like this. In 2015, many European countries expressed formally their concern that environmental legislation was being watered down within the European Commission, yet Britain couldn’t really be bothered to say anything at all. This one really surprised me. We couldn’t even think of anything mealy-mouthed to add? We’re normally quite good at being mealy-mouthed. But it couldn’t get any worse, surely? Yes it could. It spoke volumes when it was discovered, in September 2015, that British ministers attempted to actually block EU moves to clean up air quality. For wildlife lovers like me

 

[Amp34]

LOL, you just concentrate on finding housing for your beloved migrants, and explaining to the good folk of Lincolnshire how marvellous they are for the future of the county, its infrastructure and cohesion

Do you have cattle? Have ever had TB testing done? Have you ever engaged your veterinarians in conversation about TB inoculation worldwide, and its pros and cons? I can tick all those boxes.

I presume then that you don't and will not be selling any of your beef in and/or to the EU?