EU Referendum

Lord Soley

So who is for and who is against a referendum on membership of the EU in the middle of the period when we are supposed to be negotiating the terms? The referendum has to be before a set date in 2017. So we could vote to leave as the negotiations are proceeding or we could vote to stay. Either way it is not a good negotiating tactic.
If we are to have a referendum then let’s have it after the negotiations. And lets remember that we had one before when the argument of those against was that it would put the matter to bed once and for all. Referendums very rarely do.
Here are the arguments:

7 comments for “EU Referendum

  1. 26/01/2014 at 8:28 pm

    Lord Soley,
    What this seems to demonstrate is the increasing difficulty experienced by all major powers in deciding what the proper interaction of internal political activity and external or foreign policy ought to be. Here where I live (and we discover our country’s Central Asian policy from an Iranian leader’s Twitter accounts, NSA procedures from a defector to Russia and where our Presidential candidates are forced to criticize in detail all major foreign players in some way under our recent electoral process) we have different specific issues. But it seems to be real, serious and universal challenge more than even its perennial existence as a challenges of all historical states.
    I tend to think your analysis is right. Yet one can see how the situation arises and may arise again. Unless some new consensus of “manners” in this regard were somehow forged. It seems unimaginable that the last would happen soon.

  2. Gareth Howell
    27/01/2014 at 7:36 pm

    and we discover our country’s Central Asian policy (Frank Summers) And the EU’s too, which I am glad about. Obama has made it his business, and so has Baroness Ashton,(EU Foreign Secretary) to develop a foreign policy for that Super-nation. I only wish that a more sonorous nomen could be found than “Super” this and “Super” that! UKIP/BNP mock the
    so called Euro-speak, which is indeed ugly. Nobody else has tried to do better with the etymology(meaning and form)
    of the EU.
    I was grateful by the way for her recent Radio News statements in regard to those developing policies, and for which I may have asked, if not prayed!

    LS’s question also applies to the Constitution Committee discussion on Scotland’s referendum which is second guessed
    by “whatif” consequences. Obviously knowing the issues is
    best for all voters. B Jay and L Irvine lead the intricate discussions.

    One is referendum first; discussion later. The other is referendum in the middle of discussion.
    If the rest of the UK has to agree to a “Yes” Vote, what in heaven’s name is the Scot independence referendum for? Fun?

    The Science of this particular aspect of voting (psephology?)
    is hopelessly inadequate, one notable xample of scuppering having been the NE Regional referendum, which put an end to the enthusiastic English Regional councils, in about 2006.

    Grim irony that a sucessful procedure towards federal independence for Scotland may result in the renewal, of those “English Regions” demands (9?)

    The word “Federal” may become essential.

  3. Dave H
    28/01/2014 at 2:14 am

    I think we should have one. If the EU can’t get their act together and negotiate before 2017 then we’ll go by what’s on offer at that point.

    By giving them a target date, it’ll give the negotiations some focus, otherwise it’ll just drag on forever. If the EU really wants Britain to remain a member then they’ll buckle down and talk seriously and listen to the concerns of the citizens, not just those living in the Westminster bubble.

    To look at it another way, Lord Soley, how long do you think negotiations should take? I think three years from now should be more than enough, giving everyone several months to digest the results before a referendum in May 2017.

  4. maude elwes
    29/01/2014 at 10:19 am

    What is imperative, before we have any referendum on the staying in or pulling out of Europe, is that the public are fully aware of the truth in these issues. The full and transparent truth of what is going on in the motives of our politicians and the rulers of their thoughts in government.

    First,l the facts given to us via our media are half truths, obfuscation and in part utter lies. Lets just look at this report on the Beeb with Andrew Neil, who does try to inform but appears strapped to an electric chair should he reveal as much as he obviously could.

    As important in this discussion is, what plans the government has for us all after the referendum takes place, should we be forced to pull out of Europe. Where are they planning to lead us and with whom once we are so called ‘free’ of the dreaded union to our closest neighbours? And here, in thi slink, we see what the thinking on that side of the coin is. The Anglosphere brigade.

    As a side bar, I love the title of this man’s book ‘How We Invented Freedom and Why it Matters.’ Who is the ‘we’ in this title he is referring to? It certainly wasn’t him as he was born and raised on his family farms in Peru and Bolivia. So, his attachment to Europe and a European lifestyle would be slender indeed. Although being educated in later life, via the English Public School of Marlbrorough followed by Oxford, would not remove his South American sense of self. And he says it himself, with his family connections, he has a close understanding of the Irish ‘troubles’ seeing as his father was an Irish Catholic. How they ended up in Peru and Bolivia should be as closely scrutinised by the public as the DM decided was extremely important regarding Ed Milliband and his father.

    What are this man’s motives? For example, why, if he hates the EU so profoundly, does he take a good position within it, living extensively on the largesse of the political union he detests, as does Farage?

    We follow that with his desire for the UK to be the 51st US State. Now, we leave Europe because they as a political force taking away our right of sovereignty but once we do that, under his way of thinking, we should become a supplicant of US largess instead. ROTFWL. So much for the Democracy of the British people. No wonder the Scots want out of British rule, which under this lots thinking, would make them subjected to the rule of the USA.

    So, these are the first matters that must be given to the British public before the feared referendum is addressed. Discussion on all these matters are of great importance. For there is more to this than meets the eye.

    Next, an open discussion on the enormous importance to our nation of the social chapter offered and covered under our union with Europe. And what the full impact would be from removal of us from that jurisdiction. What it would mean to every man, woman and child, should we be subjected to life under US rule, which is not part of HRC legislation. And, as a result, why the American people are exploited and suffering far worse than ours presently under their corporate rule of the ‘super’ rich and that austerity programme. Which same ‘super’ rich have no part of, because they certainly are not in it together with their poverty stricken.

  5. Lord Soley
    Lord Soley
    29/01/2014 at 4:25 pm

    Interesting. The EU is developing a foreign policy. Some years ago the House would have spent much time debating the Ukraine – now Baroness Ashton is in the driving seat with the EU and frankly doing a good job. For a wider view on this see my deabte on the EU and the Middle East:

    Maude – your entry was getting too far towards a major rant! Brevity, brevity, brevity! It’s more effective

    • Gareth Howell
      30/01/2014 at 11:21 am

      “Andrew Neil, who does try to inform but appears strapped to an electric chair”
      Ha!Ha! But what a rant to slip in this little jewel above; it must be something to do with his ancestry, or didn’t they go to Australia?!

      I am a very big fan of the Baroness on leave-of-absence;excellent strength of purpose given the right boss!

      Looking at the constitution of modern Russia the Federal arrangements between Scotland and the rest of the UK would be based on continued Scottish membership, such as L.McC of these columns, of the Noble house, in exactly the same way as the republics of Russia/the Russian federation are, since Yeltsin’s new constitution of 1993, of the upper house.

      If we did decide on the (HofC) being an English legislature, the value of the Englishenglish language to the people of these islands would be enhanced. One of the definitions of language status to Language scholars is that the country in question has its own legislature. England would have, unshared with any other linguistic group.

    • Gareth Howell
      30/01/2014 at 11:33 am

      and it is hard to call the European Union a state, but it certainly has some aspects of a state. (LS Jan 14th Debate)

      It is not a state and has no aspects of a state. UKIP and the BNP mock the lack of ignorance and the blandness of what they describe as Euro-speak.

      It is a Super-nation and NOT a state.

      States are constituent parts of the Union,
      27 of them at the last count.
      The voting power of each individual state depends largely on the population of the state in question. The 2 or 3 FRY micro-states have very limited voting power but the magic free movement of labour and goods to all parts of the Union.

      There are about 20 such Super-nations in the world today of varying importance and organization. The task of the EU Foreign secretary is to establish relationships with those Super-nations wherever possible.

      Can anybody, but anybody, think of a better word than “super-nation”, or does it have to be left to the far…right? Even the name “Euro” for the unit of currency could be improved.

Comments are closed.