Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%
  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%

  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
That's some level of mental gymnastics, allow brexit or you are responsible for the next trump. If there's people out disturbed enough to vote for a repugnant figure like him, that's on them and them alone.
If we had a decent opposition in which I suggest you are hinting at Boris leading the country - very little chance of that.....
 
Sounds like project fear that mate.

If it all goes to pot, we wont rejoin, we just wont leave. And you suggesting that would involve the EU making us adopting the Euro is just fantasy island tripe
Joey66 the Fearmonger strikes again. If the Brexit result is overturned half the UK will be conscripted to an EU army which wants to start a war with Russia and in addition the UK will be forced to adopt the €. And then he complains about project fear in every second post. Laughable.
 
I actually think if the UK had the right leadership, they could negotiate a very favorable deal to stay in the EU at the moment, much better than what Cameron got and possibly alleviating some of the concerns of Brexiteers
There should be 'side pot' negotiations going on and if successful, that could be put to the people. So it wouldn't be a re run of the last referendum but instead an option to remain in under a new more favorable terms or leave (with a clear path for how to)
 
Sounds like project fear that mate.

If it all goes to pot, we wont rejoin, we just wont leave. And you suggesting that would involve the EU making us adopting the Euro is just fantasy island tripe

Actually I’m not sure it is. Once we go past next March we are out. EU rules now state that any country joining must join both the Euro and Schengen when their systems allow....
 
I actually think if the UK had the right leadership, they could negotiate a very favorable deal to stay in the EU at the moment, much better than what Cameron got and possibly alleviating some of the concerns of Brexiteers
There should be 'side pot' negotiations going on and if successful, that could be put to the people. So it wouldn't be a re run of the last referendum but instead an option to remain in under a new more favorable terms or leave (with a clear path for how to)
think you are correct, but we havnt got a leader brave enough to go for it.
 
You can't keep on having referendums 40 years since the 2016 one, and because the remainers don't like the result.....
They want a vote without being tied to a cronyism EU.....
If they accepted defeat with grace ....
I tell you what if the Remain had won this thread would not exsist...
The entire leave campaign was a lie (more money for nhs) and was funded illegally (see banks and DUP funding)
 
The entire leave campaign was a lie (more money for nhs) and was funded illegally (see banks and DUP funding)
Wrong even without adding the £9 million on government remain leaflets to every UK household plus the backing from establishments remain spent more on their campin than the Brexit campaign -
Rival Remain and Leave campaigners in the EU referendum raised £15.6m in the ten weeks to 21 April, according to the Electoral Commission.

The official campaign for Britain to stay in the EU - Britain Stronger in Europe - raised £6.9m - more than twice as much as Vote Leave's £2.8m.

But the sum raised by all registered leave campaigners was £8.2m - higher than the remain campaigners' £7.5m.
excluding the £9 million leaflets......for Remain......


The referendum on whether the UK leaves or remains in the EU is on 23 June.

The figures published by the watchdog cover the period between 1 February to 21 April, detailing money raised by campaigners spending more than £10,000 in the referendum and individual donations of more than £7,500.

Britain Stronger in Europe raised £6.88m, boosted by two donations totalling £2.3m from the supermarket magnate and Labour peer Lord Sainsbury,

Big donors
Other prominent Remain donors included hedge fund manager David Harding (£750,000), businessman and Travelex founder Lloyd Dorfman (£500,000) and the Tower Limited Partnership (£500,000).

Conservatives In, the party's pro-EU campaign group raised £362,534 while the European Movement of the UK, Michelle Ovens Ltd and Scientists for EU raised £57,494, £95,000 and £60,000 respectively.

Vote Leave, the official Leave campaign, raised £2.78m. Its largest supporter was businessman Patrick Barbour, who gave £500,000. Former Conservative Party treasurer Peter Cruddas gave a £350,000 donation and construction mogul Terence Adams handed over £300,000

The government was criticised by Leave campaigners for spending more than £9m on sending leaflets to all UK households backing EU membership, which happened before the spending limits came into force.

Rival groups Leave.EU and Grassroots Out, which lost out in the race for the official designation, raised £3.2m and £2m respectively.
Leave.EU received a single £3.2m donation from stockbroker Peter Hargreaves while Grassroots Out was given £1.95m by Better for the Country, a company with links to Leave.EU founder Arron Banks.
In addition, the Leave.EU campaign reported three loans worth a total of £6m.
Other groups campaigning for EU exit have also disclosed money raised above £10,000. They are the Bruges Group (£10,000), WAGTV Ltd (£110,000) and Trade Unionists against the European Union (£22,000).
By virtue of winning the official designations, Britain Stronger in Europe and Vote Leave can spend a maximum of £7m and are entitled to £650,000 in public funding for TV broadcasts, a mailshot and other publicity.
The limits apply to any reportable spending during the regulated campaign period, which began on 15 April and ends at the close of polling on 23 June.
The limits also apply to spending that took place before the regulated period on campaign materials, such as leaflets, which are then used during this period.
The government was criticised by Leave campaigners for spending more than £9m on sending leaflets to all UK households backing EU membership, which happened before the spending limits came into force.
In a separate development, the Electoral Commission has removed 11 groups that were part of the Grassroots Out movement from its official register of campaign groups, meaning they will not be allowed to spend more than £10,000 on campaigning. Groups on the register can spend up to £700,000.
Britain Stronger In Europe said the Commission's ruling was "a damning verdict on Leave campaigns' attempts to circumvent the strict spending rules".
But Conservative MP and co-founder of Grassroots Out Peter Bone said Britain Stronger in Europe's allegations were "absurd, wrong and very disturbing".
He said the 11 groups had been set up in anticipation of Grassroots Out being designated as the official Leave campaign, which it failed to do, and the leaders of the groups had written to the Electoral Commission to say they would not be carrying out any campaigning activities.
 
The entire leave campaign was a lie (more money for nhs) and was funded illegally (see banks and DUP funding)
that's not funding is it its a claim just like remain stated even if we just voted leave a recession - no growth - mass unemployment etc etc at leat money has been put into the NHS,,,,,
on funding which you raised-
The official campaign for Britain to stay in the EU - Britain Stronger in Europe - raised £6.9m - more than twice as much as Vote Leave's £2.8m.
 
that's not funding is it its a claim just like remain stated even if we just voted leave a recession - no growth - mass unemployment etc etc at leat money has been put into the NHS,,,,,
on funding which you raised-
The official campaign for Britain to stay in the EU - Britain Stronger in Europe - raised £6.9m - more than twice as much as Vote Leave's £2.8m.

For someone who keeps reminding us the campaign is over and leave won, you seem to spend a lot of time talking about something you regard as irrelevant Joe. It'd be nice if you could provide some benefits of leaving or some of the wonderful good news associated with it.

All I've found today is a report from the European Universities Association on the implications of a no deal.

https://eua.eu/downloads/news/brexit how universities can prepare for a no-deal scenario.pdf

They identify four main problem areas:
  • People - residence permits and students paying 3rd country fees (particularly relevant for UK students in EU countries with free university education)
  • Cooperation - UK access to Erasmus and Horizon 2020 programs
  • Data sharing - under no deal UK would not comply with GDPR, relevant for research data and student/staff information
  • Trade - supplies from the UK, eg if phytosanitary checks required under 3rd country WTO rules
 
For someone who keeps reminding us the campaign is over and leave won, you seem to spend a lot of time talking about something you regard as irrelevant Joe. It'd be nice if you could provide some benefits of leaving or some of the wonderful good news associated with it.

All I've found today is a report from the European Universities Association on the implications of a no deal.

https://eua.eu/downloads/news/brexit how universities can prepare for a no-deal scenario.pdf

They identify four main problem areas:
  • People - residence permits and students paying 3rd country fees (particularly relevant for UK students in EU countries with free university education)
  • Cooperation - UK access to Erasmus and Horizon 2020 programs
  • Data sharing - under no deal UK would not comply with GDPR, relevant for research data and student/staff information
  • Trade - supplies from the UK, eg if phytosanitary checks required under 3rd country WTO rules
Bruce I was replying to a poster who claimed Brexit spent more on the campaign what the hell have you googled now? totally irrelevant to the argument the original poster @thirdmantackle posted originally........
 
The entire leave campaign was a lie (more money for nhs) and was funded illegally (see banks and DUP funding)

I'm going to post this again and again until it finally sinks in.

The £350 million figure was an equivalent, not a commitment to spend in a particular direction. The reason being that both campaigns in the Referendum had no executive power to distribute ANY finance in the UK Treasury.
 
I'm going to post this again and again until it finally sinks in.

The £350 million figure was an equivalent, not a commitment to spend in a particular direction. The reason being that both campaigns in the Referendum had no executive power to distribute ANY finance in the UK Treasury.
So carte blanche to lie then, they were just 'suggesting' an extra 350 mill for the nhs, if people choose to read what was advertised as a statement of fact as a statement of fact, I guess that's just the way it goes
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top