Poll: The EU Referendum: What Will You Vote? (New Poll)

[Superficial]

Why do you think the EU would agree to a CETA style agreement rather than a Swiss/Norwegian style?

The economic benefits. We are a much larger economy.

 

[datalol-jack]

North West 2011 population

Rochdale 211,700

1 in 211 more like, assuming zero growth since 2011........

I was being kind by just taking the town; the met borough is much larger, and the stat becomes even less significant!

 

[GAC]

It's cheap, and costs the public purse less to house refugees there. No, they won't go away if we leave the EU, neither will the conflict in Syria end magically overnight.

Yes, I think we should send more money to the councils up North. But it ain't Armageddon. So quit chewing the rag over that flimsy graphic -- it scares nobody, and convinces no-one.

yeah apart from the people living in such area's honestly take a trip "up north" and who knows you may learn something other than what you have read on the internet. i have friends who are struggling to find a place to live in rochdale at the moment due to the double whammy or wage compression and low rent housing being prioritized to said 1000+ people but i guess its all fine if it doesn't directly effect you.

 

[itchy]

And stop invoking Godwin's Law, it brings out the fruit bats!

Have you worked in the civil service?

 

[Pudney]

The economic benefits. We are a much larger economy.

We're also geographically closer and economically dependent on the EU for trade. There's no incentive to encourage trade with us (which is part of the reason for CETA to encourage their trade to come here rather than their local neighbours).

 

[FoxEye]

The economic benefits. We are a much larger economy.

Interesting tho that CETA agreement is, I do hope we'll be making this decision on more than just assumption and hypothesis.

That would be madness. We'd need to know - in advance - that we could get a CETA style agreement, and not just assume we'd get one.

 

[Superficial]

We're also geographically closer and economically dependent on the EU for trade.

So you agree the economics, at least, make sense...the same argument can be made for Germany to a much larger extent btw on a bilateral basis and Germany has a lot of clout.

There's no incentive to encourage trade with us

Yes there is - the existing trade that exists in EU countries favour. In FTA's that is the single most important factor.

I think people need to understand that we can say EU a lot but it will not change the fact that the EU is not a single country but a union of sovereign states each with their own economy to think about and each one has it's own say.

Look I'm not saying we'd get a CETA type deal - what I AM saying is that a Canadian style deal would be a good starting point and one that has precedent but that we may not get it due to a punitive stand by the EU for BREXIT - which is the point I made above.

 

[Superficial]

Interesting tho that CETA agreement is, I do hope we'll be making this decision on more than just assumption and hypothesis.

That would be madness. We'd need to know - in advance - that we could get a CETA style agreement, and not just assume we'd get one.

Oh I agree

The line I am drawing that I would like both the Leave and remain camps to see is that a case precedent and template exists with a much smaller economy for pretty much exactly what Brexiters 'SAY' we could get. Though i'd personally like to know more about how the City would function in that environment - Toronto is no slouch in that regard though.

BUT - as I said before that is no guarantee we would get it but that that reason could only be due to a souring of relations.

In effect I am saying that the Remain camp might be right but not for particularly noble reasons...as such I am still in the remain camp.

 

[izzop]

I keep reading from the Pro-EU, "We need to know how the UK will look if we exit", "How much will we actually save" etc...

How about the Pro-EU providing those who think we're better off out of the EU with facts and answers such as, "How they think the UK will look like in 10 years if we remain in the EU", "What price will we have paid in 10 years time to remain in".

It's all well and good telling people that to vote to leave is a leap into the unknown/madness etc., when it's no different voting to remain in.

 

[datalol-jack]

yeah apart from the people living in such area's honestly take a trip "up north" and who knows you may learn something other than what you have read on the internet. i have friends who are struggling to find a place to live in rochdale at the moment due to the double whammy or wage compression and low rent housing being prioritized to said 1000+ people but i guess its all fine if it doesn't directly effect you.

I lived around Greater Manchester and Manchester proper for 3.5 years, so know the lay of the land, deprivation and crime included, thanks.

Yes, we haven't built enough houses recently. No, it's not an EU or a refugee-caused problem. You could argue the same about large families, and other groups in greater need, being bumped up the priority list. Neither I nor the EU write the council housing rules in this country, or apply them to individual cases.

The government brought the people in on humanitarian grounds; and the ball is very much in their court to support them humanely, until their claims are processed, and they can start fending for themselves legally. Raving at the EU, who do offer regional development funds, cash for infrastructure and community projects, by the way, won't solve all the problems in Rochdale or elsewhere up North. I hope you can see that much.

 

[GAC]

didnt say leaving the eu would solve said issue, they are here and they arnt going anywhere any time soon. what i was replying to was the constant brushing off of the issues that people on the stay in side seem to see as trivial on here. and even start trolling people about it.

 

[FoxEye]

I keep reading from the Pro-EU, "We need to know how the UK will look if we exit", "How much will we actually save" etc...

How about the Pro-EU providing those who think we're better off out of the EU with facts and answers such as, "How they think the UK will look like in 10 years if we remain in the EU", "What price will we have paid in 10 years time to remain in".

It's all well and good telling people that to vote to leave is a leap into the unknown/madness etc., when it's no different voting to remain in.

The burden of proof is on the Brexiters, since they're the ones making wild claims about how much better off we'll be if we leave. Esp since those claims don't seem to be borne out by the experience of Norway or Switzerland.

Asking the remain side to predict the future is a tough ask

It's true that a remain vote isn't a vote for the status quo. But personally I'd be happy for closer union. I like the idea of the EU and a Federal States of Europe would be fine with me.

 

[datalol-jack]

I keep reading from the Pro-EU, "We need to know how the UK will look if we exit", "How much will we actually save" etc...

How about the Pro-EU providing those who think we're better off out of the EU with facts and answers such as, "How they think the UK will look like in 10 years if we remain in the EU", "What price will we have paid in 10 years time to remain in".

It's all well and good telling people that to vote to leave is a leap into the unknown/madness etc., when it's no different voting to remain in.

Total BS, and you know it, izzop, my boy! Come on now! If you're too lazy to look back in the thread, then go to Eurostat and ONS, and knock yourself out. And that's before we get to the policy briefs and budget projections.

You can find dunce media scare stories just fine, and you're capable of reading them, so why don't you use Google for the greater good and your personal education, for once, eh?

We know how much we pay in, how much we get back, and how much we earn from the free trade with the EU. If you have the memory of a tabloid goldfish, then please kindly refrain from just dumping your already debunked opinion on auto-repeat -- you're a thinking human being not a banged-up record!

Honestly, the populist wing of Out -- cat memes is your best defence! Facts and numbers aren't in your corner.

 

[datalol-jack]

The burden of proof is on the Brexiters...

This. This is what your side, my dear Leavers, shall greatly require in ample supply if you want to convince anyone beyond your conspiracy theory group on Facebook! Please do pass this kernel of sound campaigning strategy to your movers and shakers; otherwise they'll just be wasting everyone's time and money.

Asking the remain side to predict the future is a tough ask

If they ever find anyone out there in the whole wide world, who can give you anything more than a reasonable forecast, tell them to tell him to call me! We have much money to make!

didnt say leaving the eu would solve said issue, they are here and they arnt going anywhere any time soon. what i was replying to was the constant brushing off of the issues that people on the stay in side seem to see as trivial on here. and even start trolling people about it.

Fair dos, GAC.

Have you worked in the civil service?

I'd love to tell you but then I'd have to kill you.

 

[Cosimo]

The Brexit mob don't offer very much clarity (blah it will be all ok) on trade should we leave so have a read of this (Times):

Canada, Norway and Switzerland will crop up regularly as the referendum approaches and campaigners on both sides try to explain how the UK could trade with Europe from outside the Union.

Britain could keep its open trading access if it voted to leave, but only by emulating Norway in accepting free movement of people and forfeiting any say over the rules of the game.

Switzerland has a more arm’s-length relationship, which does not allow complete access for financial services — a crucial part of the UK’s economy — and means that Swiss banks have to set up subsidiaries in the EU.

Countries such as Canada and South Korea have their own agreements with the EU but it took years to negotiate preferential treatment in many, but not all, areas. The biggest threat to an independent Britain would be a failure to reach a deal within the two-year separation period allowed by the Lisbon treaty, leaving trade to be governed by general World Trade Organisation rules. This would mean high cross-border tariffs in some sectors, such as a 10 per cent duty on imported cars.

Norway is part of the European economic area (EEA), set up in 1994 to allow non-members to share in the free movement of capital, goods, people and services. This means accepting all the associated EU laws, such as the working time directive which is estimated to add costs of £4.2 billion a year to British employers, but protects paid holidays and rest periods.

Unlike EU members, Norway is free to negotiate its own deals with international partners — but even this is restricted by EEA membership. “A lot of issues in free trade agreements are about non-tariff barriers like food security, and technical standards are already in the acquis [law] of the EU so we cannot negotiate on these things,” said Ulf Sverdrup, director of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs. So what we in reality can deal with in those free trade agreements is very much constrained.”

Because a vote to leave the EU is likely to have been fuelled by opposition to its regulations and freedom of movement, Britain could try the path of Switzerland, which rejected membership of the EEA to remain in the European free trade association (EFTA).

The Swiss finalised their trade agreement for goods with the EU in 1972, but have never been able to negotiate a full deal on services. Originally this was because of objections in Brussels to Swiss banking secrecy, but in the era of more open banking it has become a political question. The EU is refusing full access until Switzerland agrees to a system of court oversight — preferably by the European Court of Justice.

Failing to get full access for financial services for Britain would mean it could no longer offer international banks, traders or insurers a route into the single market, a loss that might prompt an exodus from the City.

An independent Britain would probably want a comprehensive free trade agreement more like those the EU has with South Korea and Canada. These took years to negotiate, more than a decade for Canada and four years for South Korea, partly because of the wait for ratification by every EU state.

Britain and the EU have a free trading relationship, so why should it take more than two years to sign a deal after Brexit? Because states like France could take the opportunity to protect their markets from British competition or deny the UK access to financial services as a means of reducing the influence of the City.

Trading places

EEA (European Economic Area)

Inside the single market, accepting all European Union laws on free movement of capital, goods, people and services, with no say over them. The three member states that are not in the EU — Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway — are able to negotiate their own international trade deals.

EFTA (European Free Trade Association)

Founded in 1960 by Britain, now has four members: Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Switzerland. Not to be confused with Switzerland’s free trade agreement with the EU signed in 1972, which covers only trade in goods.

FTA (Free Trade Agreement)

Description for deals by countries such as Switzerland, Canada and South Korea with the EU. A misnomer, since it is not completely “free” trade, but an agreement on preferential trade arrangements to cut barriers such as tariffs, quotas and product standards.

 

[Cosimo]

Latest YouGov poll. Now running neck and neck:



Much closer now then when the first draft of the EU deal was published at the beginning of the month where there was a nine-point lead for leave.

 

[Freakbro]

Latest YouGov poll. Now running neck and neck:

http://i.imgur.com/BEY1XrH.jpg/img]

Much closer now then when the first draft of the EU deal was published at the beginning of the month where there was a nine-point lead for leave.[/QUOTE]

At least it's swinging back the right way, and with 25% of the vote still to decide, it's still all to play for, for both sides of the fence.

And only 96% of UKIP supporters want out? Who's that 4% of splitters :p

 

[deuse]

None of Cameron's deals has passed the European Court of Justice and won't be.
And don't forget it stands above the nation states.

 

[Insanties_birth]

Can someone explain this to me. People say if the UK leaves the EU we will just start trading with countries further afield. What exactly are we going to trade?

Manufacturing is almost dead in this country, our economy is service sector based. We are nowhere near the same league as countries such as Germany, Japan when it comes to producing and exporting products. We are not rich in natural resources.

Why would we give up power and influence in the world, for the sake of a few migrants that are supposedly bleeding us dry? Last time I checked a lot of them have jobs. The migrant problem is temporary and will eventually resolve itself in the longterm. Leaving the EU is like jumping out of a skyscraper without a parachute. There is no plan in place.

Can you explain what power and influence? When was the last time we resolved any global issue (russia annexing crimea, isis, middle east dictators, mexican drug wars, north korea using missile tech it shouldn't, china creating islands in the sea). Oh that's right, EU has done nothing on those issues and the whole world influence argument is another false argument. At best we can try and vote within the EU but when you have 27 other nations voting on there self interest that's just a gamble with bad odds at best anyway. If we ever wished to we could always join up or assist any EU global initiatives anyway. We're all quite displeased with the EU rules anyway so what has 40 years of being in the EU and having a vote on EU affairs really helped?

I agree on the trade issue but even still, we'll trade with EU one way or another and we'll trade outside one way or another so I don't feel the trade argument is a big one either. Trade isn't the entire economy either, we make money from within the UK as well but we can always trade with other countries and lose out a little but it's not going to be doom and gloom like people predict.

 

[scorza]

The Brexit mob don't offer very much clarity (blah it will be all ok) on trade should we leave so have a read of this (Times):

Neither does the EU mob - turns out the thin gruel deal isn't legally binding after all, and can be modified or struck down by the European Court of Justice or could still be scuppered by the European Parliament. Can anyone tell me for example how long the British Army will last for if we stay in? Can anyone tell me what's in this secret TTIP deal the EU are negotiating on our behalf? Both options are a leap in the dark - the future is always uncertain - Leaving the EU does mean one thing though; that the UK will be governed from London and not from Brussels.

Latest YouGov poll. Now running neck and neck:

...

Much closer now then when the first draft of the EU deal was published at the beginning of the month where there was a nine-point lead for leave.

It said 60-40 in favour of the EU on Radio 4 this morning