MPs clash over UK’s EU future (From Swindon Advertiser)

Europe screws up Tory cohesion yet again. Both should be warned, this kind of split in a party leaves them vulnerable to voter defections. As for Europe, most people would be ok with it if it wasn't such an obvious gravy train. For me, either fully in, or fully out please, none of this half baked renegotiation cobblers.

I think the main issue with Europe is the railroading into a single federal state. It was originally set up as a trading pact; but has become an overridding governing authority over most of Europe. Some of the idiocy that comes from their is staggering, and seems to be many times more than the few bits of sense. Then as already stated the gravy train; consider the Kinocks and how much money the failed politician of the 80s and his family has made from "public service in Europe".

The most influential/stronges
t/spoken country in the EU is Germany (even France has gone quiet with Sarkozy leaving office. Many people still remember what happened the last 2 times Germany rose to control Europe!


Something else to ponder for all those complaining about the economy and how bad Europe is; whilst driving around in their German build Audi's, BMW's, Mercedes etc is that Germany is a powerhouse because of its manufacturing base......


Yes for a trading pact, no for a federal states of Europe.

I thought there was something even more serious in a division between Tomlinson and Buckland, other than the mere topic of EU?

Also, I wondered why it is the South MP who is doing all the talking with regards to the Honda situation, it is clear that Honda employees cannot trust Tomlinson to support their employer and maybe he should be banned from any visits there in the future? Who's constituency is South Marston in then?

Sharing the same office for admin. was a bit odd as the town's previous MPs were advised to keep their constituencies completely individual and each would not take on case work if the issue was in the other one's domain.

The Tories have tried and failed in every department, though it is odd how marriage seems to make Mr T almost disappear from public in the town?

Britain is part of the second class European club: the EU
The First class club: The Eurozone, will integrate further and form the nucleus of a European Confederation like the USA, that is inevitable and already in progress.
There are plenty of candidates to join the EU, partners willing to cooperate and compromise.
If Britain does not want to cooperate with its EU partners, then obviously the relationship is not working and an exit is necessary.
Britain could join the EFTA/EEA and join the ranks of Iceland, Luxembourg, Norway and Switzerland, maybe it would not be such a bad idea to become a neutral country too.

A.Baron-Cohen says...

There are plenty of candidates to join the EU, partners willing to cooperate and compromise.

And we all know why that is.

If Britain left the EU completely, there would still be a massive influx from Romania and Bulgaria into other western european nations, but not nearly as many as if Britain remains in the EU.

With regards to the local situation, Buckland and Tomlinson taking different views simply means they cancel out each other's vote. Not a big deal.

It's actually quite heartening to see our two MPs holding their own views, and thinking for themselves, rather than the hypocritical party lines that were so slavishly adopted by our previous Labour MPs.

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen says...

There are plenty of candidates to join the EU, partners willing to cooperate and compromise.

And we all know why that is.

If Britain left the EU completely, there would still be a massive influx from Romania and Bulgaria into other western european nations, but not nearly as many as if Britain remains in the EU.

With regards to the local situation, Buckland and Tomlinson taking different views simply means they cancel out each other's vote. Not a big deal.

It's actually quite heartening to see our two MPs holding their own views, and thinking for themselves, rather than the hypocritical party lines that were so slavishly adopted by our previous Labour MPs.

It is the biggest Economy, (free trade) Market on the planet.

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen says...

There are plenty of candidates to join the EU, partners willing to cooperate and compromise.

And we all know why that is.

If Britain left the EU completely, there would still be a massive influx from Romania and Bulgaria into other western european nations, but not nearly as many as if Britain remains in the EU.

With regards to the local situation, Buckland and Tomlinson taking different views simply means they cancel out each other's vote. Not a big deal.

It's actually quite heartening to see our two MPs holding their own views, and thinking for themselves, rather than the hypocritical party lines that were so slavishly adopted by our previous Labour MPs.

It is the biggest Economy, (free trade) Market on the planet.

If it was only a trading block then fine, but's it not, as you well know.
This country has been completely hamstrung by human rights laws, out of control immigration, loss of fishing rights, ludicrous energy initiatives, biased European court rulings, subsidising almost everyone else in Europe etc etc., all aspects of membership you happily ignore.
Staying in the EU is doing nothing for the UK and the sooner we're out the better for everyone. Of course, if you don't like it the feel free to leave - there's plenty of room in Bulgaria and likely to be a lot more if we stay in the EU.

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen says...

There are plenty of candidates to join the EU, partners willing to cooperate and compromise.

And we all know why that is.

If Britain left the EU completely, there would still be a massive influx from Romania and Bulgaria into other western european nations, but not nearly as many as if Britain remains in the EU.

With regards to the local situation, Buckland and Tomlinson taking different views simply means they cancel out each other's vote. Not a big deal.

It's actually quite heartening to see our two MPs holding their own views, and thinking for themselves, rather than the hypocritical party lines that were so slavishly adopted by our previous Labour MPs.

It is the biggest Economy, (free trade) Market on the planet.

That has very little to do with it. Romania and Bulgaria have virtually nothing to sell into the EU.

As the economist Milton Friedman clearly stated: "It is obvious that you cannot have free immigration and a welfare state. It really is an impossible thing."

We are now experiencing his theory in reality. He was absolutely correct.

For me the whole idea of trying to have common policies, laws and taxes for so many countries with differing economies, natural resources, ethnic make up, geographical locations, language, culture, needs etc etc is just crazy. Even in th USA states are able to set their own laws because they realise that in such a diverse group, one size fits all will never work as has been proven here! We should be celebrating their differences rather than trying to clone them!

I would be happier out and in control of our own destiny rather than being shackled to the destiny of so many others who are clearly even worse off than we are! I also think that other countries might look at an independant Britain in a postive way where they can do business without all the EU restraints and wasteful squabbling.

But thats just my humble opinion.

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen says...

There are plenty of candidates to join the EU, partners willing to cooperate and compromise.

And we all know why that is.

If Britain left the EU completely, there would still be a massive influx from Romania and Bulgaria into other western european nations, but not nearly as many as if Britain remains in the EU.

With regards to the local situation, Buckland and Tomlinson taking different views simply means they cancel out each other's vote. Not a big deal.

It's actually quite heartening to see our two MPs holding their own views, and thinking for themselves, rather than the hypocritical party lines that were so slavishly adopted by our previous Labour MPs.

It is the biggest Economy, (free trade) Market on the planet.

That has very little to do with it. Romania and Bulgaria have virtually nothing to sell into the EU.

As the economist Milton Friedman clearly stated: "It is obvious that you cannot have free immigration and a welfare state. It really is an impossible thing."

We are now experiencing his theory in reality. He was absolutely correct.

Immigration is actually good for the Economy, just look at how immigration shaped the USA in the past and even today.
I do not buy the argument that immigrants are a burden on our National Welfare, to the contrary the vast majority of immigrants are net contributors. And when it comes to welfare, the biggest cost is pension payments (60% of Welfare in fact)
I do not believe that we will see a wave of Bulgarian and Romanian migrants, this is mostly a media run campaign to reinforce the Anti-Europe argument.

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen says... There are plenty of candidates to join the EU, partners willing to cooperate and compromise.

And we all know why that is. If Britain left the EU completely, there would still be a massive influx from Romania and Bulgaria into other western european nations, but not nearly as many as if Britain remains in the EU. With regards to the local situation, Buckland and Tomlinson taking different views simply means they cancel out each other's vote. Not a big deal. It's actually quite heartening to see our two MPs holding their own views, and thinking for themselves, rather than the hypocritical party lines that were so slavishly adopted by our previous Labour MPs.

It is the biggest Economy, (free trade) Market on the planet.

That has very little to do with it. Romania and Bulgaria have virtually nothing to sell into the EU. As the economist Milton Friedman clearly stated: "It is obvious that you cannot have free immigration and a welfare state. It really is an impossible thing." We are now experiencing his theory in reality. He was absolutely correct.

Immigration is actually good for the Economy, just look at how immigration shaped the USA in the past and even today. I do not buy the argument that immigrants are a burden on our National Welfare, to the contrary the vast majority of immigrants are net contributors. And when it comes to welfare, the biggest cost is pension payments (60% of Welfare in fact) I do not believe that we will see a wave of Bulgarian and Romanian migrants, this is mostly a media run campaign to reinforce the Anti-Europe argument.

QUOTE
Immigration is actually good for the Economy,
UNQUOTE

This comment is like saying that bricks are good for houses. It sounds relevant, but is meaningless.;
The issue is not “immigration” vs “no immigration.” It is a question of “how much” and “who?”

QUOTE
just look at how immigration shaped the USA in the past
UNQUOTE

When it was largely empty. Not like us.

QUOTE
and even today
UNQUOTE

The US border patrol spend millions of dollars a year trying to keep Mexicans out.


QUOTE
I do not buy the argument that immigrants are a burden on our National Welfare, to the contrary the vast majority of immigrants are net contributors.
UNQUOTE

Utter drivel. Prove it


QUOTE
I do not believe that we will see a wave of Bulgarian and Romanian migrants,
UNQUOTE

You are the only one then – they can’t wait to come

QUOTE
this is mostly a media run campaign to reinforce the Anti-Europe argument.
UNQUOTE

According to the opinion polls there is no argument.
The people who have a vested interest in the anti-democratic, corrupt, Stalinist EU, put up a vauge attempt at defending it occasionally and the rest of us can see it for what it is.

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen says...

There are plenty of candidates to join the EU, partners willing to cooperate and compromise.

And we all know why that is.

If Britain left the EU completely, there would still be a massive influx from Romania and Bulgaria into other western european nations, but not nearly as many as if Britain remains in the EU.

With regards to the local situation, Buckland and Tomlinson taking different views simply means they cancel out each other's vote. Not a big deal.

It's actually quite heartening to see our two MPs holding their own views, and thinking for themselves, rather than the hypocritical party lines that were so slavishly adopted by our previous Labour MPs.

It is the biggest Economy, (free trade) Market on the planet.

That has very little to do with it. Romania and Bulgaria have virtually nothing to sell into the EU.

As the economist Milton Friedman clearly stated: "It is obvious that you cannot have free immigration and a welfare state. It really is an impossible thing."

We are now experiencing his theory in reality. He was absolutely correct.

Immigration is actually good for the Economy, just look at how immigration shaped the USA in the past and even today.
I do not buy the argument that immigrants are a burden on our National Welfare, to the contrary the vast majority of immigrants are net contributors. And when it comes to welfare, the biggest cost is pension payments (60% of Welfare in fact)
I do not believe that we will see a wave of Bulgarian and Romanian migrants, this is mostly a media run campaign to reinforce the Anti-Europe argument.

You're being far too simplistic.

Immigrants are not generally a direct burden on our welfare system in terms of "benefits". However, many take housing, school places etc, that cost money while at the same time take on low paid menial jobs that could be done by some of our existing unemployed. A double-whammy as we then have to pay benefits to those already here that are unable to do more skilled work.

There are of course many immigrants that are highly skilled, performing jobs that keep us as a nation at the forefront of technological advancement and it is these people we should be encouraging to move here in my opinion.

Bulgaria is approaching a critical minimum number of residents needed to sustain their economy. If they all come over here, at least we could go and move over there - it is after all a beautiful country!

The Real Librarian wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen says... There are plenty of candidates to join the EU, partners willing to cooperate and compromise.

And we all know why that is. If Britain left the EU completely, there would still be a massive influx from Romania and Bulgaria into other western european nations, but not nearly as many as if Britain remains in the EU. With regards to the local situation, Buckland and Tomlinson taking different views simply means they cancel out each other's vote. Not a big deal. It's actually quite heartening to see our two MPs holding their own views, and thinking for themselves, rather than the hypocritical party lines that were so slavishly adopted by our previous Labour MPs.

It is the biggest Economy, (free trade) Market on the planet.

That has very little to do with it. Romania and Bulgaria have virtually nothing to sell into the EU. As the economist Milton Friedman clearly stated: "It is obvious that you cannot have free immigration and a welfare state. It really is an impossible thing." We are now experiencing his theory in reality. He was absolutely correct.

Immigration is actually good for the Economy, just look at how immigration shaped the USA in the past and even today. I do not buy the argument that immigrants are a burden on our National Welfare, to the contrary the vast majority of immigrants are net contributors. And when it comes to welfare, the biggest cost is pension payments (60% of Welfare in fact) I do not believe that we will see a wave of Bulgarian and Romanian migrants, this is mostly a media run campaign to reinforce the Anti-Europe argument.

QUOTE
Immigration is actually good for the Economy,
UNQUOTE

This comment is like saying that bricks are good for houses. It sounds relevant, but is meaningless.;
The issue is not “immigration” vs “no immigration.” It is a question of “how much” and “who?”

QUOTE
just look at how immigration shaped the USA in the past
UNQUOTE

When it was largely empty. Not like us.

QUOTE
and even today
UNQUOTE

The US border patrol spend millions of dollars a year trying to keep Mexicans out.


QUOTE
I do not buy the argument that immigrants are a burden on our National Welfare, to the contrary the vast majority of immigrants are net contributors.
UNQUOTE

Utter drivel. Prove it


QUOTE
I do not believe that we will see a wave of Bulgarian and Romanian migrants,
UNQUOTE

You are the only one then – they can’t wait to come

QUOTE
this is mostly a media run campaign to reinforce the Anti-Europe argument.
UNQUOTE

According to the opinion polls there is no argument.
The people who have a vested interest in the anti-democratic, corrupt, Stalinist EU, put up a vauge attempt at defending it occasionally and the rest of us can see it for what it is.

We may not like the idea of immigration but it is not only good for the Economy because migrants are net contributors. Immigration is also vital to maintain our way of life, since we do not produce enough children to work and pay for our pensions, benefits, we need to "import" fully grown educated adults.
And just to correct you, I do not believe the UK should remain in the EU, but I believe the EU is a good idea and should continue without the UK in it.

A.Baron-Cohen says...

Immigration is actually good for the Economy

You can keep repeating that statement as many times as you like, but, unfortunately, the reality is that immigration has not been economically beneficial to this country.

A.Baron-Cohen says...

Economy because migrants are net contributor

Really? Official government statistics tell us that, for example, 90% of Somalian immigrants living in London, the most expensive place to live, are unemployed and in receipt of housing benefit. The same people have also imported the delightful practice of female genital mutilation to Britain. That's just one example.

The amount of foreign nationals in our prisons has also sky-rocketed, at a cost of c.£40,000 per yet, per convict - let alone the Legal Aid, translators and all the rest of it that we provide free of charge to them.

The House of Lords report, The Economic Impact of Immigration, states:

"The available evidence suggests that immigration has had a small negative impact on the lowest-paid workers in the UK"

"Record levels of immigration have had little or no impact on the economic well-being of Britain"

"Competition from immigrants has had a negative impact on the low paid and training for young UK workers, and has contributed to high house prices."

"Our general conclusion is that the economic benefits of positive net immigration are small or insignificant"

Given the social downsides immigration has brought, it makes for pretty grim reading, really.

The one thing that worries me about this debate is the having your cake and eating it attitude that's all too prevalent in the UK.

In the 80's people wanted tax cuts but still wanted public services so the government had little choice but to sell off BT, British Gas, water companies and electricity boards. Now people moan about utility bills and private companies daring to make a profit for their shareholders.

If Britain did ever leave the EU I can foresee people moaning bitterly about employment rights they've lost, jobs being exported to the EU or cheap non-EU countries like Ukraine and Turkey, reimposition of strict duty free limits. Perhaps the biggest cause of complaint (ironically amongst a lot of readers of the Daily Express/Mail) would be any fall in house prices (no bad thing actually) because of all the Europeans leaving.

As the saying goes "be careful what you wish for, it might come true"

Same old fallacies that Britain's trading position would be compromised if we left the EU.

Put simply the main EU states need us more than we need them. Whilst the EU may currently be the largest trading block the emerging markets are elsewhere, as Honda and others have clearly indicated.

Britain would prosper outside the EU. As for the suggestion that few Bulgarians and Romanians will come here, I seem to recall Labour predicting about 30,000 when we opened our borders 10 years ago, close on 3 million later, I think we can expect at 100,000 in the first full year.

Two MP's from the same party just means they are independent thinkers, why shouldn't they be. If voters disagree with Rob or Justin then they won't get voted in again, and what is wrong with them sharing to reduce costs to tax/rate payers, seems eminently sensible to me.

Put simply the main EU states need us more than we need them

Why would other states need an unpopular barmen?

I have no idea Empty Head, as I am not one, popular or otherwise. Perhaps you should get help for your delusions.

Anyway off to catch my train. Hope we don't have the cold weather delays.

RichardR1 wrote:
Same old fallacies that Britain's trading position would be compromised if we left the EU.

Put simply the main EU states need us more than we need them. Whilst the EU may currently be the largest trading block the emerging markets are elsewhere, as Honda and others have clearly indicated.

Britain would prosper outside the EU. As for the suggestion that few Bulgarians and Romanians will come here, I seem to recall Labour predicting about 30,000 when we opened our borders 10 years ago, close on 3 million later, I think we can expect at 100,000 in the first full year.

Two MP's from the same party just means they are independent thinkers, why shouldn't they be. If voters disagree with Rob or Justin then they won't get voted in again, and what is wrong with them sharing to reduce costs to tax/rate payers, seems eminently sensible to me.

Do you seriously believe that leaving the EU would make Britain better off?
Norway pays the EU to trade and Switzerland has to re-negotiate bilateral trade treaties.
Do you think Germany France and others would allow us to obtain favorable trading terms?
If we leave the EU, we still would have to pay to trade with it, and would also have to comply with EU regulations and standards without having a say or influence on the decisions made, I hardly think that this would be or put Britain in a better trading and negotiating position.
Britain is a trading Nation, always have been, but in this new Global World to obtain good trade deals you need to be in a position to obtain them, this means having the necessary geopolitical influence.
How can we expect to get good deals without wars as a country of 60 millions? that is the question that politicians should be answering.

Norway and Switzerland pay a tiny fraction of what we pay, however per head of capita receive a huge amount in return.

I will say it again Norway pay about £350 million for a trade surplus of about £50 billion. We pay a net contribution of about £9bill and rising for a net deficit of about £50 bill.

Now I know which one I would rather be.

The other thing Norway and the other EFTA countries can do is to have trade agreements with the rest of the world, without having rules dictated by the EU, or a 15% tariff for the privilege.

The economic benefits of being outside are clear which is why over 60% of Brits would vote to leave if we were asked.

You'll be telling us next that the EU has prevented European military conflict, when in reality that was NATO, with most of the active nations not even in the EU.

RichardR1 wrote:
Norway and Switzerland pay a tiny fraction of what we pay, however per head of capita receive a huge amount in return.

I will say it again Norway pay about £350 million for a trade surplus of about £50 billion. We pay a net contribution of about £9bill and rising for a net deficit of about £50 bill.

Now I know which one I would rather be.

The other thing Norway and the other EFTA countries can do is to have trade agreements with the rest of the world, without having rules dictated by the EU, or a 15% tariff for the privilege.

The economic benefits of being outside are clear which is why over 60% of Brits would vote to leave if we were asked.

You'll be telling us next that the EU has prevented European military conflict, when in reality that was NATO, with most of the active nations not even in the EU.

Our EU contribution represents a tiny 1% of our National budget! we pay more in Foreign Aid and in a Nuclear weapons.
Millions of us have a job because our employer is European & / or trade with the EU.
I do not have a problem being outside the EU if someone can clearly demonstrate that I as a person will be better off.
From what I can see from the Tories, they want to pull out the EU to make you and me work more hours and have less holidays and work/social protection.
As for NATO, all NATO members are EU members except for Norway.
And it is absolutely true that the EU has pacified the European continent (2012 EU Nobel Peace Prize), by making nations collaborate and cooperate

I said active States in NATO.

Heavens the Peace Prize roundly condemned by most of the world as becoming political, from a country like Norway who strangely enough refuse to join the EU.

As for aid, it was £8.6bill in 2011. We spend an estimated £150 bill a year as a direct result of our membership of the EU according to the Taxpayers Alliance and Bruge Group research.

We have a total deficit of trade since we joined the EEC/EU in 1973 of close on £500 bill and rising.

We have 3mill EU related jobs, the EU's main countries have 6mill jobs relying on UK trade, so the argument they wouldn't trade is ridiculous.

Each and every family would be £3000 a year better off by leaving simply accounting for saving membership and regulation.

So you would keep your job and be better off.

Why do you think it is that every successive government since we joined the EU refuses to do an independent cost benefit analysis of our membership. Answer because they know it would reveal the true extent of a financial and political deficit which will continue to get worse.

The EU presidents have said that no way will they allow a model for the UK that Cameron states he wants, which leaves us no option, and as a 2012 report by Open Europe said:

'The Norwegian, Swiss and Turkish options do not constitute off-the-peg models that the UK can
adopt, but are all products of individual countries’ characteristics illustrating that a ‘UK model’ is
achievable, but one that is a product of the UK’s circumstances.'

So in short we could trade with the EU from the outside, and we could propers like Norway and Switzerland.