Thought I'd start a new thread as this is going to be a major talking point this year...have not made up my mind yet...(unlike bucksfizz)....but thinking of voting for an exit as Europe is not doing Britain any good at all it seems....

http://heatst.com/uk/five-presidents-eus-jean-claude-juncker-drunk-in-public-slaps-leaders/

Gove won hands down, easily more believable than Cameroon.

Fasil did exactly the same to Cameron, but he handled it better. He was quite clear about Turkey saying that they could not join for decades at the earliest. The £1 billion figure is a made up number by the leave campaign. Gove did better with the public section as they were a very weak bunch.

Faisal, but no matter since the rest is made up and incorrect. What guarantee can Cameron give that Turkey wont join for decades? He wont be around that much longer himself.
As for the public, in your mind the first lot were stupid and rude, while the second were weak and quiet. Perhaps the first lot were fed up with Cameron's tactics, while the second were perhaps more convinced that Gove was at least genuine.
Seems to me that you were quite put out by the favourable response to Gove, Hays. Surprising for a professed Brexiteer.

Gove was very weak on the economic questions.

http://news.sky.com/story/1706655/how-did-michael-gove-score-in-eu-debate

http://news.sky.com/story/1706088/how-did-cameron-score-in-the-eu-debate

As was Cameron on immigration, security, military and sovereignty.

It is for the Government to resolve the possible economic questions given that it will have at least two years to ratify or renegotiate current trade deals, as well as forge new ones.
We all know the markets are very fickle and the usual suspects will make a lot of money either way. Remember who created the financial crisis. How many paid with their heads? It will be a storm in a tea cup as far as the UK is concerned but much more serious for the EU, since the remaining in-mates will see that there is a way out. If the EU had any sense, it would be proposing real change now but, like lemmings, they would rather jump off a cliff.

45% of our exports go to the EU.

Yet the €uro's still export far more to us, so who loses the most?


But it's a stupid argument anyway...no one is going to put up trade barriers, it makes no sense for either side.

After two years we would have to trade under WTO rules if there was not already a trade agreement by then. Any trade agreement has to be voted on by a qualified majority of the member states. There are quite a few countries who plan on voting against any deal as they do not export goods to us and would like their goods to be sold more in the EU. A trade agreement could take many years to pass. In the meantime we would be trading under WTO rules with approx 10% tariffs.

The UK trade deficit with the EU in the first 3 months of 2016 was almost £24 Billion, or if you like over 30 Billion Euros. In 3 months.
So who has the most to lose?
The current trade agreements will stay in place until renegotiated.

At present we are looking at two fighters. Ugly faces before the fight and kissing each other afterwards.

Is it more likely that the deficit with the EU will increase if UK opts out of the EU?

What were the reasons for Heath wanting join and Maggie etc. for staying?

The democracy argument is a red herring.

The immigration factor will be changed very little by getting out.

Suggest you listen to Michael Heseltine on "Any Questions Friday night".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qgvj

No. The EU rules are quite clear. We have to invoke an exit clause in the Treaty of Lisbon if we leave. That guarantees us only 2 years of the current trade deal. Then we operate under WTO rules.

Guarantees is the operative word. It also allows an extension if the withdrawing State and the European Council both agree. For European Council read Merkel. She will not allow, or be allowed, to damage Germany's commercial interest.
The UK is not Norway. For Fred's information, the UK's GDP is greater than Malta, Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Croatia, Bulgaria, Luxembourg, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Czech Republic, Greece, Portugal, Finland, Ireland, Denmark, Austria and Belgium combined.

That is all a bit vague and based on hope.

it's all a high stakes poker game

the eurocrats may threaten blood and thunder in the event of an "out" vote, but my bet is that that will not be the case

It's all down to what Merkel wants (or her bosses)

#2688 is a bit of an eye opener.



Give it up Haystack, you ol 5th columnist you.

Haystacks is an insider..He professes to be a Leaver, but he's far from it,
Everything he posts is Pro-eu.

We invoke article 50, and we have 2 years to agree any trade agreements,
there is NO reason why trade dosn't carry on as it is.

Anyone who says different is LYING and trying to deceive you.

Beware of the likes of Haystacks.

You are living on hope!

I don't give a fig about the likes of haystacks..

The fact is if we vote out the EU will bend over backwards to try and appease
us, but it should be resisted at ALL cost.

We shouldn't be taken in by their promises, they have lulled us into a false
sense of security over the past 40 odd years.

I don't know how many read this BB, but i'm concentrating on the letter's
section of my local paper, where i can reach thousands, and argue the cause
of Brexit, against those who are for remaining.