Politicians and commercial big-hitters ramp up their rhetoric, exchanging counter- accusations of scaremongering. The Queen is reportedly not keen to stay in, and the governor of the Bank of England is castigated for having an opinion (one that is possibly more informed and objective than most). The clouds of confusion grow denser by the day; members of the public are left with a worrying lack of insight into the issues associated with EU membership and are moved to ask: ‘What has it ever done for us?’
While we are no longer in ‘straight banana’ territory, the question is often supplemented by complaints about ‘foreigners coming over here, and all those silly rules and regulations’, and observations that ‘we were doing alright before we went in’. Largely as a consequence of a long career in and around high-technology manufacturing, reinforced by instinct (and the antics of the more ‘colourful’ Brexit supporters), I believe continued membership is the sensible option. But I’m no expert on macro-economics, I’m just the bloke down the pub, and the decision should not be left up to me.
To be in or out isn’t the only issue here. We elect parliamentary representatives to make decisions in the national interest, based on their experience and knowledge (and in the unlikely event that they have limited understanding of their brief, the considerable resources at their disposal); not to be driven by political expediency to bash the ball back into the court of a largely uninformed electorate. This referendum is unnecessary and irresponsible.
Prominent public figures will contest the figures up to referendum day and beyond, but whatever percentages you care to quote, the EU is the UK’s major trading partner. Not only that, but as members, we’ve seen major inward investment (EU membership might not be the only factor here, but it’s a very happy coincidence): for example, in car manufacturing – the mainstay of our manufacturing economy; and to be more parochial, the establishment and continuing development of one of the world’s leading machine tool manufacturers.
It’s not all about commerce; let’s look at some of the things that affect our quality of life. On the environment, EU legislation has given us cleaner beaches and rivers, improved air quality, lead-free petrol, wildlife protection, restrictions on landfill dumping and a better recycling culture. There’s more protection for consumers and better food labelling, restrictions on harmful additives, and improved animal welfare in food production.
CE Marking and the Machinery Directive have ensured that product safety is better, through a culture – backed by legislation – that embraces everything from toys to machine tools. All employees benefit from smoke-free working environments, and through the Working Time Directive, the right not to work more than a 48-hour week without overtime. Most people would recognise these as benefits; but given a default position of resistance to change and the relatively low priority given to such issues by UK governments of all persuasions, it’s less likely such improvements would have taken place outside the EU.
The European Coal and Steel community was set up in the aftermath of the Second World War, with the aim of securing lasting peace between neighbours. The spirit of cooperation that drove the six founders (Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg) to sign a treaty that prevented them from making weapons to turn on each other, has evolved into one of the most important, but less visible benefits of the EU – its role in supporting collaborative research. EU-funded research is bringing together expertise from different sectors and countries to share knowledge and expand networks; and the UK is successful in attracting funding for Framework Programmes for research and development.
The multinational Joint Technology Initiatives (JTIs) also clearly have implications for UK prosperity and quality of life. Current JTIs include Fuel Cells and Hydrogen 2, to accelerate market introduction of clean and efficient technologies in energy and transport; Clean Sky 2, to develop cleaner, quieter aircraft with lower CO2 emissions; Electronic Components and Systems for European Leadership, to boost Europe’s electronics manufacturing capabilities; and Shift2Rail, to develop better trains and railway infrastructure.
For more information, a key publication is The Royal Society’s report UK research and the European Union. The open letter from Stephen Hawking and more than 150 Royal Society fellows warning that quitting the EU would be a disaster for UK science is timely: “Investment in science is as important for the long-term prosperity and security of the UK as investment in infrastructure projects, farming or manufacturing; and the free movement of scientists is as vital for science as free trade is for market economics.
A breath of fresh air after the halitosis of both sides of the campaign. Thank you.
Well Chris, I guess your comment proves, it is possible to fool some of the people all of the time….
All I wish to know is what is the total money going in, what is the rebate and how much do we get back in grants etc . I may be wrong ,but it looks like we would have a surplus to invest in the UK . The grants etc could be paid directly to Farmers etc.
Please will any stay inners give me a £1000 and I will give them back £600 at the end of the year.
Faily recently we had to give the EU over £1B as we were doing so well . Is any employee willing to return wages if their company is doing well
As regards inward investment no company has ever invested for the good of the people.
GDP is often quoted as the be all and end all is it, if we all made our own sandwiches and flasks of drink instead of buying from companies who minimise tax GDP goes down .
Democracy . The EU immigration commisioner stated it is up to the commision to give policy and up to the member states to implement.
As an example of a poor directive why not just have had all articals which are manufactured from a date be lead free , rather than a ban on use which resulted in a large waste of components which still ended up in land fill .
Mass Immigration . This puts an impossible strain on all resources -schools housing.
Is it good for the economy? I attended school in Southall , a local company there Wolff rubber works had about 95% Indian workers who eventually went on strike and the company closed . The young white population had to find housing elsewere Imigration has a negative effect on balance of payments and we cannot go on borrowing indefinantly.
Housing Schools, the Law of supply and demand will apply .Imigration increases demand ,but you cannot increase supply instantly .
It was not long ago that if you even mentioned immigration you would immediately be branded as racist. Only now with large white influx can it be spoken about.
We used to have a thriving industry I worked for EMI electronics amongst many things it pioneered TV it was so large it had its own power station and railway siding .It not exist now. This was primarily the fault of poor management and government so in this referendum I will listen to my heart / mind and those such as Dyson not the goverment advisors who recomended we go into the Euro and sold gold reserves cheap.
The route cause of the majority of the worlds problems are due to the massive rise of population and yet theTurkish PM who wishes to join the EU advocating increasing the family size .
Not sure I agree with the articles biased approach. Surely a tome such as TheEngineer should take an unbiased view in any article it presents under its flagship title.
While I will not state which way my vote will go, we can not in hindsight say that the same things that are cited above would not also have occurred had we still been out of the EU. Nor can we say that we won’t improve on the standards and take a more eco-friendly, safety conscious view should we get out.
It is up to individuals to make their own decisions. In reference to a lot of the above it might be worth remembering Britain was a global leader in HSE prior to any union with the Factories Act being introduced in 1833. The British Standards Institute formed in 1901 , started to change safety of goods across our nation.
Further to my above try asking yourself this question with respect to your vote.
If we were not part of the EU currently, and based on its history, policies , organisation and management to date; Would you vote to join?
Possibly not, but I fail to see the relevance of that to the question we shall be faced with next week because the baselines are completely different: 40 years of non-membership might actually have created a yearning to join, rather than inculcating a position of “I’m alright Jack”, to state it at its simplest.
And I see in today’s news that B Johnson only believes in the advantages to come from leaving, he is not claiming to know that we will be better off, which is what the average voter wants to know.
And that we shall get a rebate on our taxes because the governments not paying an emperor’s ransome to Brussels. But that’s never going to happen because too many little UK politicains want to get their hands on that money and indulge in their own pork barrel politics.
We can’t know which is best because no one can predict the future, we have to rely on ‘belief’, and my belief is that we’ll be screwed in the short term and it’ll take 5 – 10 years to recover, and that’s a long time in which something contrary can happen invalidating everyones beliefs.
I quickly read your article and when I came to”CE Marking and the Machinery Directive have ensured that product safety is better, through a culture – backed by legislation” I know this is not true, as watch dog TV programmes have pointed out it is very easy to get the CE marking for your products, products that are shown to be dangerous. therefore I must take what you say with a pinch of salt.
The main headline implies that we should trust our elected representatives to make the correct decisions, based on their intimate knowledge of the electorate. That is as it should be. (it may not always be the case though..)
However, with the EU, we are governed by a largely unelected group of people…
I do admit that some good decisions have been made though the EU, but also some bad ones, and who can say if we had not been in the EU, whether we would have in fact, for example, cleaned up our beaches, or improved safety law.
In general I mistrust politicians, there are lies and misinformation being tossed back and forth between both sides, Remain and Brexit. What is right, what is factual?
I do believe that the EU accounts have still never been actually approved by their Auditors, due to “irregularities” with a small percentage of contracts (although these do have a huge value in their own right), however, I’m sure that is fine…
Anyway, I’m planning on voting the only way I can to reduce the political overhead we suffer from.
so whats stopping us cooperating between countries and building something if we wanted to but at the same time having our own laws and determining our own destiny?
Having a referendum makes sense in that, in a democracy, citizens should have a direct say in constitutional matters. The thing that beggars belief is that remain/leave can be decided by a majority of 1 vote. Surely for decisions of this magnitude, there should be a “settled will” threshold needing 2/3 in favour of change.
But as we were never granted a vote to go in, you would surely annul our membership first?
After last evenings ITV’S debacle our politicians have much to answer for. Rudds, commentary was quite frankly disgusting.
Voting In or Out is not going to provide confidence in (A) Our existing Politicians and (B) the prospect of what will happen in future decades.
We have a very serious disconnect in this whole mess, from which the Politicians and those representing the UK within the EU, must answer for at some point.
Unfortunately we have very little direct influence over the behavior of the above, and without influence to change it, in real-time.
In or Out we have lost sovereignty and never to be recovered, delivered to us by stealth over the last 40 years.
What a Mess!!!!!!!!
Waste of time and money, if you ask me. For months and months and months, whenever you switch on the TV there is referendum, referendum, referendum, for and against, in and out, back and fro.
Just imagine all that energy had been used to build a flood defense in the North Sea to protect our coast.
Think of it as a cheap soap opera with no script, crossed with the worst of reality TV.
Well thanks for yet another pro EU article that cherry picks at some of the good points achieved by the beast.
However the point so conveniently ignored is the question of DEMOCRACY,
This has been completely thrown into the long grass and now the general public is grasping this fact generally the public opinion is to react to rubbish which is imposed on a population without consultation or any possibility of changing direction of this organisation.
Presumably Mike Excell believes that we should relinquish our rights of democracy to allow the continuation of the present process. Hopefully a majority of this country will disagree with this “lie down and have your belly tickled” approach and then perhaps the EU will transform itself into an organisation which has an acceptable attitude to its population.
We can but hope but I suspect that the persons who believe that democracy is more important than money will be disappointed.
Does anyone know the date when the concessions negotiated by David Cameron will come into force to stop immigrants being able to claim from the welfare system straight away, without paying anything in ?
Will they be turned away at hostpitals if they have no medical insurance, like we are if we do not have insurance ?
Will they be behind UK people for housing ?
Will they live on the streets and become beggers ?
I doubt this.
The ONLY answer is to stop entry at the ports and airports and have a major crackdown on costal defeneces.
Some people may not see how many children are now in a class – can be 50, when I was at school it was 30.
To make an appointment to see my own doctor was minimum 3 weeks last year.
Hostpital; waiting times are on the increase, etc etc , where is the additional facilities generated from the income, that immigration has made according to the government claim ? Certainly there is not enough in many areas.
I can only assume the additional generated income is going into already thick wallets.
I will vote for out , since the lies about immigration have been coming out from the government over the last 10 years, How many get sent back – never are we told this ?
I am not against immigration to the UK, I don’t blame anyone for trying to come here, but the general country facilities are stretched too far already and no plans are being advertised on what is being done to balance the population v facilities available, WHY ? if we make so much money from being in the EU ?
So thank you – but I would need to some answers and policies before I would change my vote, what will UK be like for our children if we ignor these points ?
Wake up David, when you see a Dr / Dentist / medical specialist or a nurse or care worker ask yourself WHY HASN’T THE UK GOV TRAINED ENOUGH BRITS SO THERE IS NO DEMAND FOR THESE PEOPLE? At the same time look hard at a nation that steals trained workers, and openly wants to poach more for nothing, compare this policy with Norway that repays the education costs for professionals it takes!
Your access to services has NOTHING to do with immigration and everything to do with cuts in services!
WynO, since when did the government determine what kind of training or employment people should have? This isn’t North Korea. People take jobs that interest them, and for some reason the medical professions don’t attract the numbers we need – that’s why foreigners take the positions. This country is short of many skilled workers in many trades and professions – only recently did HMG announce that they would like to see MORE universities established – as if we weren’t already awash with graduates with useless degrees. As I’ve said before, until there is a culture shift in this country back to manual work, machinery and hard graft, and away from fluffy, theoretical, mouse-pushing jobs, we will continue to have a deficit of the people that actually keep this country ticking – and that deficit will continue to be reduced by foreign workers.
On your point of immigration not tying up local services, if there are more people crammed into a given area, do you not think that will have an effect? More people = more demand. Simple maths.
Thank you for the best analysis of the issues I have yet read, especially the “unnecessary and irresponsible referendum” part. I am convinced that the UK would be stark, staring mad to leave the EU.
Anything which reduces bureaucracy has to be good. If we want cleaner beaches, recycling, no smoking then we should decide. It’s time to take our own decisions about the future of our country.
Even now the UK is behind on many aspects of social legislation, take of your rose tinted glasses, e.g. Aberthaw power stn Barry SE Wales never recieved the investment needed to clean up its emissions.
Although I don’t necessarily agree with your arguments for being part of the EU, agree whole heartily that the referendum was ‘Unnecessary and irresponsible.’. The majority of people (myself included) do not have the real facts or ability to make any sensible judgement other than antidotal evidence. It all seems to be all about who can appear to be the most believable. Boris is winning that one hands down!
The main problem is that the EU is a disaster, fundamentally undemocratic and run by idiots and people with their own agendas. On the other hand the principles are fine.
So do we leave a broken machine or do we remain and try and fix and inefficient and broken machine. At the moment we are in and can threaten to leave and use that to promote change – Leave and we have used our only weapon for change, and that is why the Referendum is unnecessary and irresponsible.
“CE Marking and the Machinery Directive have ensured that product safety is better, through a culture – backed by legislation – that embraces everything from toys to machine tools”
LOL!! you do know that China stamps everything “CE” and claim it stands for China Export, don’t you?
Phil, are you really suggesting that China’s flagrant abuse of copyright is a good reason for leaving the EU? Particularly in light of the fights the have been having on your behalf?
Have you had any dealings with Chinese copy paste devices?
I have many Chinese-made “wall-wart” phone chargers and PSUs, most of which wipe out my amateur radio reception on one or more bands. When one failed, I prised open the case and found that several components forming a mains inlet filter where either missing or wired out! So much for conforming to CE standards for EMC etc.
China Export mark is an internet misnoma. A little background research on such will find this the case. There is no such thing as a china export mark, However there are many CE marked goods that don’t comply with CE regulations. The issue is manufacturers can self certify goods for CE marking. It is up to us , the public to challenge poor or defective goods through trading standards.
China doesn’t claim anything. There are companies, especially retailers in UK and Europe, that do not want to pay for testing. So they buy the cheapest available. Rogue companies that don’t know anything about testing put CE on a product because “everybody does it” just like they put “Gucci” on every bag to claim more money. Some people have put their tongue in cheek and named these products “China Export”, to hint that these fakes most likely come from China.
Even so, the cause is the price pressure by the retailers. If the retailer only pays a pound for a toaster, what kind of material could you use in construction, if you wanted to make a profit?
Interesting – so we should leave important decisions to those self-interested enough to spout forth about them? Why do we need a general election either, on that basis, after all we are all too ill-informed to be right aren’t we?
Sometimes the people not involved can see a lot more and care a lot more than those whose livlihoods now and in the future are wrapped up it the things being discussed. Logically we can’t all be right, but there is a good chance (assuming the fix isn’t in) that a sensible outcome will be reached.
Would the standards we now have happen in or out anyway as part of global trading requirements? I suspect so. Would every country abide by the same rules? I suspect not. Even now the much praised smoke free workplace is observed here, but most hotels in europe still have smoking bars. Level playing field it isn’t.
Go with the flow.
– Just to clarify that despite the Scottish people voting to stay in the UK, you would now say that due to an SNP and Scottish Green majority in Holyrood these ‘experts’ should now be allowed to override the people’s wishes. Similarly, if we wish to leave the EU we would have to vote UKIP, and lets say they got into power with 11.3 million votes – 36.9% of votes (As Conservatives in 2015) this, to you, would be more legitimate than if 51% of the registered electorate voted to leave ? – on top of which we would then have to have a UKIP government !!
You really need a bit more confidence in the abilities of the British people – to vote ‘correctly’ and fashion our future.
Mike
its simple, if you want to be a part of a European superstate vote remain. As a leading nation we have been at the forefront on the environment, personal rights and freedoms for two centuries long before the EU, standing up against authoritarian regimes and passing legislation to improve the lot of our citizens. Since the EU increasingly legislate for all of us it is a ridiculous argument to suggest that progressive legislation would not have happened had it not been for the EU. On science and research much of the collaboration is across borders and does not depend on EU membership.
You vote remain Mike if you want to be governed by the commissioners in Brussels.
Seriously, you think Boris J makes more sense.
Demand accountability..
Demand better transparency perhaps…
But against some of the scandal riven UK politicians with their short term polices…
Nope stay in and extend the M4 straight through Westminster to Dover.
Rarely have I read a more misleading piece of second hand opinion from the Engineer, masquerading as evidence.
The decision to leave the EU will be taken by people who value their freedom. It will not be taken by leaders of institutions or organisation who, for their own selfish needs want the nation to remain part of a failed European integration project.
The € is a failed currency, the Schengen free movement of people is a failed concept being abused by those who would wish us harm. The upcoming European Union Army will present us with conflicts we neither want, or will be able to influence.
For the sake of the nation and for the freedom of our citizens, all our citizens, vote to leave on the 23rd of June.
Nato? Has been partly a European army, and we send them ill equipped into places and situations they can’t win in… is this what scares you or is it another return to the Falklands?
I have no anxiety about another Falkland crisis. While the UK remains in control of the Islands destiny. It is very clear however, once the EU army command has been set up,any UK administered territory including Gibraltar will cease to have any UK protection. The offloading of such responsibilities by the newly established EU Defence Force will happen in the blink of an eye.
I completely agree. We probably have the best deal in the EU. Manufacturing industry that exports to the EU will still have to supply products conforming to the various directives, with out a seat at the table that develops those directives. Please vote REMAIN.
We live (supposedly) in a Democracy, albeit a representative democracy, and a pretty badly run one, but nevertheless, that is what it is supposed to be. The people have asked for a referendum because they are worried that the UK is fast becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of EU .PLC. On that basis alone it is neither unnecessary or irresponsible to call a referendum! They wany out, and so do I!
With every wish there comes a curse……
Careful, you have not thought this through.
A well informed and interesting article and with one big boot democracy was kick into the long grass. Your distrust of UK Government to implement some if not all of the shopping list, mentioned in your article, surmises the the EU and its anti-democratic stance works for the benefit of the UK voter. I do not think so!
The current political furore, that has been hatched, nurtured, developed and perpetuated by our political peers on both sides of the debate, is simply shameful! Irrespective on whether you believe we should be “in” or “out”, the one thing we all have in common watching from the sidelines is the total incredulity and disbelief of the way these elected politicians are conducting themselves during these debates.
In our world of Engineering, we welcome debate, we reason together whilst conducting ourselves in a manner that befits our responsibilities and status.
A direct message needs to be sent to ALL politicians to cut the rhetoric, stick to whatever facts or statisticians you believe, and conduct yourselves calmly and respectfully! It’s the public that you’ve asked to make this judgement! The very people that pay your salaries! We deserve better!
The future is unknowable post exit or remain. Just crazy figures being flung out in the hope we are fool enough to accept them.
What is demonstrable and factual is the steady growth in the size of government. Take the UK parliament and civil service (local and national) – already too big by far. Add the Scottish and Welsh governments and now the devolved local authorities but note that there has been no cut at the centre. Don’t forget the QUANGOS.Now, heap on top of this, all the hugely expensive Brussels mob and we end up with a monster. Soon, there might be one non-producing bureaucrat for each wealth creating producer.
That’s why I’m voting out.
This article deserves a far longer rebuttal than I can give here, but starting at its key point about the ‘referendum being unnecessary and irresponsible’ is typical of those who both are cynical about problems and the voting public and attempt to replace politics with the idea of near incontestable expertise. (I’m no expert on macro-economics, I’m just the bloke down the pub, and the decision should not be left up to me.”- sounds like a slight amount of lack of self belief there).
I am completely for Brexit, but apart from a few honourable exceptions do not align myself with the so called official Brexit camp I am pro free movement for those outside and within the EU. I’d happily debate why with the anti migration leaders and individuals, but just taking that as one example, our membership of the EU makes any discussion about the subject meaningless since there is no clear and logical path of responsibility and accountability for many policies and decisions – allowing our govt (and total political class) to be able to say they have no full control (whether they are right or wrong it is too hard to find out).
Back to the referendum – the reason referendums on the EU are rare is because in most cases (Ireland, Denmark. Netherlands, France) they have at first been rejected. Ie the ‘People’ have given the ‘wrong’ result. The Political ‘class’ in general is detached from its electorate (increasing so since Thatcher etc in the 80s) and prefer to gain authourity from each other, from the European Council of ministers and various other endless summits. Look how the Remainers tried to use President Obama to give themselves credibility rather than making their own strong case for something positive. In turn the electorate have ended up feeling left out of politics, reinforced by the idea that all of their policies are pretty similar – and as often as not being aimed at managing people (non smoking zones, alcohol pricing just as a start). People as just seen basically as a problem, whether it be ‘over-consumption’ to picking the ‘wrong’ parties (eg UKIP).
To then go and suggest that people should not be allowed to have a referendum is pure arrogance. If nothing else it is only through the democratic process before a vote that people stand the chance of building up their judgement ‘muscles’. Not everything can be put down to simple technical decisions made by experts driven by simplistic criteria. Just look at the issue of the premature closure of coal powered electricity plants – driven by EC carbon targets, potentially likely to cause energy issues in the medium future. I see no mentions of State Aid controls were made in the article. Would Rolls Royce now be able to be rescued by state intervention as it was in the 70s? Whether state aid is good or bad is a political decision which should be decided in the UK (or Greece for that matter).
Briefly – apart from migration on both sides the arguments have been over economics (I include trade) – ironically – productivity (and the UKs and in general most of the EUs woefully low rate of productivity has been absent from the discussion). Politics used to be important to people when growth was high (up until mid 70s) where how to utilise the growing wealth of society (public/private) meant something- because economics was ‘healthy’. Now Economics is more likely to be about how to bean count a static pie by those ‘macro (and micro)economic experts’– possibly accounting for the lack of real ‘politics. What ever the real reason for the end of a contested but future oriented politics a proper historical analysis of the past needs to be made.
Nearly all of the points made by Mike Excell are open to criticism and interpretation (eg peace in Europe from 45 until the late 70s was just as likely to be related to a growing and vibrant world economy – not to mention the role of the Cold War in ‘freezing’ other tensions in Europe).
As I said at the beginning I could go on, but to suggest ordinary people in general are not capable (and shouldn’t) play an active part in how decisions are made on their behalf is something that should be strongly resisted.
So yes, many of the Brexit leadership are ‘nutters’ but there are valid and principled reasons to oppose the EU.
It is without doubt a monumentally important decision for our country and without quoting financial gains/losses by being in the EU there will be a cost both of us staying or leaving. What I am fundamentally in agreement with is us having greater control not only of our borders but in the laws that govern OUR country. Human rights can continually be improved for all dwellers of the UK whether we are in the EU or not. We cannot plan financial requirements for our hospitals, schools etc without some degree of control of numbers of residents, something we currently do not have. I will most certainly be voting LEAVE.
I thought Mike Excell’s piece was an excellent summation of the current position and the obvious benefits that have resulted in membership of the EU up to the present day.
However, whilst I cannot disagree with anything that he stated – including “I’m just the bloke down the pub…” as it is vital to understand all consequences of our decision to leave or remain.
These are largely unknowns – and mostly the opinions of many eminent people from many walks of life – and evenly dispersed among the leave or remain camps – so who do we believe most?
For me joining the EU all those years ago was the right thing to do but it has to be said the EU is a very different club today and is changing on a daily basis – it would appear not for the better with “Riots, Labour reforms, Loans and Debts, and the Euro Currency” all appearing to be in turmoil with more disruption to come.
In addition threats from senior European ministers against the UK makes me extremely angry, and if they were hoping these would make me warm up to them then they can forget it!
If someone can tell me with certainty backed up with evidence and relevance and not mere conjecture or supposition (as a data driven engineer I really need this) then I can make an informed decision one way or the other – as it is I am left confused with the negative cat calling and scaremongering, and it has to be said this has been a dismal campaign by both sides.
I am just reminded of Groucho Marx who said that he would not join any club that would have him as a member – perhaps we shouldn’t remain in any club that could be so hostile towards us that they would threaten us so vehemently with leaving.
Malcolm, this is a qualitative not a quantitative decision. Like all natural, human and social problems, it has a fuzzy solution. I am also an engineer, but first a citizen of the world, a member of the human species, in this role I would look for an answer to the unnecessary and irresponsible, but real referendum.
Numbers in economics, politics and finance are not the same as in engineering, so anybody can make up whatever data fits their argument. Do not look for data, look for the principles of living together on one planet in the XXIst century. Let’s stay together rather than apart. We have much bigger and wicked problems to solve: how to stop a runaway climate change that endangers our survival as an advanced human civilization.
Thumbs up for a good analysis. We elect our representatives to do a job for us – in this case to decide based on reasoned, informed argument whether to stay or go. This is far more likely to take place in a parliamentary setting with access to real data than in the sound-bite-driven media. To delegate this job to The People is despicable – if it all goes pear-shaped, there’ll be deafening cries of “it wasn’t my fault!”. This is a far too important and complex issue to delegate to those who know very little about it – and I include myself in that camp. This is our future prosperity we’re gambling with – I don’t want to leave that choice to the people who kept John Sergeant on Strictly because he was a nice guy.
The people who kept John Sergeant on Strictly Come Dancing did so because it is not a dancing competition, but an entertainment show, and they found him more entertaining than a strictly clinical technically perfect dancer, hence they were right to vote for him.
You mention the following in your article:
“We elect parliamentary representatives to make decisions in the national interest, based on their experience and knowledge (and in the unlikely event that they have limited understanding of their brief, the considerable resources at their disposal); not to be driven by political expediency to bash the ball back into the court of a largely uninformed electorate. This referendum is unnecessary and irresponsible.”
I respect your opinion but don’t you see the irony that these ‘elected parliamentary representatives’ with their ‘considerable resources’, you are advocating make the decision for us, are just as divided across all parties as the rest of the country, and are slinging just as much mud at each other as the typical ‘blokes down the pub’. Why is this? Don’t you think it is still ultimately based more on personal opinion/preference than any intellectual/political/financial argument? If this is the case, then perhaps it is best left to the country to decide. Cumulatively as a nation, we are certainly not clueless and perhaps, just perhaps, are more fit to decide the fate of our own country than a set of individuals whose motives may not always be for the common good, but rather to satisfy those sponsors/paymasters who frequent dark corners and try to control any institution of power – including the EU!
The other reason for taking it to the country of course, is that in true slippery style, politicians can always attempt to absolve themselves of any responsibility when things don’t turn out like they had hoped.
That’s quite clear: the referendum is unnecessary and irresponsible. As if there were no major problems in the UK, the Conservatives really had to create a huge, wicked one. It is unacceptable to play with national and people’s interests for the sake of your own power. David Cameron had to placate Boris Johnson and all the Euro-sceptics in his party to stay in power. And now he is sweating to make it all work in his favor.
I agree with all the arguments and numbers in the article, however the European project and globalization are above numbers and trade, they are about getting people closer, breaking down barriers, increase collaboration, solidarity, freedom, human rights and caring and decrease competition, fighting and rejection of “others”.
I fail to understand the logic of the argument that there will be more freedom by re-creating borders. And the Euro is a failed project just because London FX trade cannot stand it that they lost so much business, as it is more important to constantly speculate with money, than do real, useful work and destroy people’s lives and whole economies, from time to time. Euro has created a more frictionless, wasteless EU economy. Do you like to pay absurd FX commissions when you travel or in your business? I don’t.
We are all in this together! UK please stay in EU, love from America.
There is a lot of healthy cynicism expressed in these comments. I too think the EU is corrupt, undemocratic, too concerned with the minutae of vacuum cleaner power consumption and woefully unsuccessful in calming East European war, Russian aggression and even protecting the original European Coal and Steel community – we now have no coal or steel industry. However, we need Europe to unite as a 500 million political block to counter the power of Russia, China and the United States. I will vote Remain and hope the UK can inject some common sense into EU activities!
I loved the link to ‘The life of Brian’ -“wot ‘av the Romans ever done for us…”
[Apart from “peace, clean water, safety, sewers, education, plentiful supplies of food, law and order on the streets….as John Cleese replies, …not a lot!]
As far as I can see, most of those attributes were not supplied by politicians of any stripe, colour or any level…but by citizens exercising their technical and managerial skills to benefit their fellows. And frankly, looking at our apparent “greaters and betters -why don’t we call them GBs” they would not know what technology or management was if it knocked them down in the street. If their retoric gets any mors absure, I might feel justified to do just that!
Democracy? “the will of the people, expressed through Parliament and interpreted by HM justices in HM Courts?” Sadly, the part that is lacking is the last one. 99% of all disputes between citizens, corporations and the State are not dealt with as above: but by unelected mercenaries-occasionally passing matters ‘up’ to poachers turned game-keepers. Please tell me where the democracy part fits in: whether in Brussels of the High Courts?
I guess the irrisponsible part is that David Cameron says it will be such a disaster if we leave yet he promised the referendum. It is a tough call which way to vote but on balance I view our democracy as more important than money. I have owned companies in France and Germany which looked good but in reality that was where we lost money due to untrustworthy clients and regulations
Great article and fascinating response.
I have moved from remain to Brexit mainly based on European bureaucrats and the coming problems with the EU economy as its membership increases. The Greece / Portugal / Ireland/ Italy problems showed the weakness in control of the Euro-based economies: they are still using Quantitative easing to balance the books and no sign of stopping.
A lot of the arguments have been disingenuous and it is certainly difficult to ascertain the short and longer term effects of either decision: the 2008 global recession was not predicted by our economists and politicians!
So we can survive and prosper independently as a small post imperial nation with a massively diminished industrial base without close links to our near neighbours? I think not. There seems to be a strong vein of “Little Englander” pervading the Brexit campaign most of which is disingenuous. It would be a better strategy IMH to stay in and press very very hard and succeed in bringing about fundamental reforms within the EU rather than sitting on the sidelines with diminished influence (but a requirement to comply with rules and regulations set without any UK participation) and perpetual moaning. Extensive involvement in European projects for the last two decades suggests to me we have a lot to learn from Europe in terms of industry, commerce, technology and a whole lot more. Our own national and local administrations and governance are hardly democratic, efficient or effective. Weapons grade incompetence and ineptitude seems to spread through almost every agency of the state here so why should going it alone make things any better. Some deep seated structural reforms involving governance within the UK might be a useful option. Can we get rid of the lunacy that the world ends in Dover and that fog in the Channel implies the continent is cut off?
We elect parliamentary representatives [ wouldthat we did: we elect a jury of purchased persuasion which nods through the ill-informed, ill-judged ramblings of a group of ‘toffs’] to make decisions in the national interest [they make decisions’ like this Brexit rubbish in whatever will advance their personal interests and that of those who pay, applaud or eccourage them to follow the adgenda of meja moguls?] based upon based on their experience and knowledge (and in the unlikely event that they have limited understanding of their brief, the considerable resources at their disposal); not to be driven by political expediency to bash the ball back into the court of a largely uninformed electorate.- “What time is it?” -“What time would you like it to be sir/madam!
“the bloke down the pub”, that would be the one who only drinks a single pint whilst proselytising to the other pub goers about how to think and act, drink up and get another.
EU & Peace? Where indeed were these peacemakers and keepers during the break up of the former Yugoslavia? the Arab spring?, I recall an American led NATO brokering a closure to the fighting in the former.
The CE directive? practically applies to imports from the world outside the EU. Most European countries already produced safe goods before the advent of the EU.
A largely uninformed electorate, unlike the author I suppose. To me that sounds like an “X-factor” generation comment i.e. where everyone is a judge with superior knowledge to everyone else, except statistically we are all then of a similar voting value.
Economics and experts? of course! that subject which prior to the 1980’s was for many students who couldn’t quite hack it in Engineering, Science, Medicine , Law, English, Classics, History, Languages, Art et al, you know the traditional subjects. Now it has climbed into the mainstream and grasped the credibility netal, ruling the respectability roost. Could you build an Airbus , a Car, you name it, with the modelling prediction credibility that Economics expertise regularly hands down from the mount. Those 2008 financial crash predcitions were seriously thin on the ground.
You can still love Europeans, immigrants and be friendly with our neighbours without succumbing to fan worship of superstatism. Looking at that anecdotally, the most successful superstate is the USA, the least being the former USSR with say India and China somewhere between on this anecdotal line. What is the end game for the EU, how many more countries does it need in the club before it shuts the doors. Democracy does not scale linearly…VOTE LEAVE
The CE-Marking is not about safe products. It is about free trade. If your product bears the CE-Mark it can be traded without further interruption in all EU member states. It is still your responsibility to make sure they are safe. Because the liability laws prescribe stiff penalties for noncompliance.
When you put a CE mark on your product you declare that your product is safe.
If the product is not safe and you still put the CE-Mark on it to benefit from free trade, you commit fraud.
But then, fraud is a way of life in the UK.
Thanks Jeremy, sensible to the point and rational.
The referendum was caused by the Tory split and rise of UKIP.
I’ve swung from Remain to Brexit because as I’ve evaluated the information I have become convinced that the major issue is the judgement about the future of the “United States of Europe”, which becomes more horrifying the more it is examined. The economics are as clear as mud, and the risk of leaving is more in mind than fact, as we will obviously still be an increasing market for EU suppliers and continue to export less whether we are in or out: our poor economic performance is down to our leaders belief in finance markets as the future.
The Brexit will cause a re-assessment by many EU countries and that is what is frightening the EU leaders. It could drive the EU away from its currency and political union push.
People really ought to watch this, then decide.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYqzcqDtL3k
I wonder if they will even allow this post on this site.
The Engineer should have kept its biased opinions to itself. We get enough biased opinion from the papers and the BBC thank you.
The EU is: undemocratic, unanswerable and dishonest. Faceless Eurocrats make laws behind closed doors that are then forced upon us all. We have no recourse to changing these laws whatever form they take. The UK is heading down an ever-increasing level of integration both financially and governmentally .. whatever Cameron and his cronies keep telling us. And I for one do not accept a word of what Cameron keeps telling is about his great “re-negotiated” relationship with the rest of the EU. It will count for nothing if we stay in.
Huge sums of money have “disappeared” to line the pockets of the privileged few who: award themselves fat salaries, set themselves low taxes, and carry on blindly ignoring the ever-growing far right extremists who will cause big problems in the future if things don’t change. If the EU were a private company it could have been closed down years ago given that its books have never once been balanced by auditors.
Our own systems of government and law have been adopted by many of the great democracies of the world; yet we have bizarrely sat back and allowed our own systems of government and law to be diluted to the point where the European courts rule over our own and we are governed by Brussels.
How can people not see this???????
Vote Leave – it is the most important decision any of us will make in our lifetimes, and I for one care about the future of my kids and grand-kids!
It’s interesting that the majority of commentators on this forum are Brexiteers. Mostly, one would assume, educated, with professional qualifications, which I haven’t.
My tuppenceworth, therefore, is probably not worth much but I don’t see the referendum as a Pounds, Shillings and Pence exercise, but rather one of a Golf Club mentality.
In my experience, Golf, Rugby, Football, Cricket etc. etc. clubs are more often populated by those that have more to gain than to give. As is the EU.
Despite the UK’s naturally self-deprecating nature, we are a wealthy country, we don’t make cars or computers anymore because, frankly, it’s beneath us, but we would never dare say it.
Instead, we provide the world with a great deal of what it wants, money. We are one of the greatest trading nations in the world. But as trade in widgets gets ever more competitive, we have adapted. Were it not for Thatcher, we would all be competing for jobs making cars and ships at Chinese labour rates, damn the woman, we could all still be down the mines!
And on the back of our success, the EU rides. Failed states rely on the UK, and yes Germany and France, to prop themselves up and generate………tourism! Let’s invite the wealthy to our undiscovered shores, replete with unique coffee bars, garden parasols over wooden tables with views across the Mediterranean sea that look no different from any other view from another shoreline.
In return? We must deal with their ongoing financial incompetence; their individual, Politically Correct sensibilities and their ‘right’ to travel to the most profitable country of their choice.
The UK is far from perfect, and it took us a long time to reach imperfection, but we learned how to fish, for ourselves.
Handing out shedloads of cash and opening borders is no solution to a united Europe. Benevolence is a curse, on the subject, and the provider.
We need borders, we need divisions; we are are a world that likes everything in boxes. Sadly, Enoch Powell’s “Rivers of Blood” speech will only be valued when we drop our pathetic, social acceptance of Political Correctness and recognise there are differences between sexes, races, cultures and religions.
Should the UK get out of the EU? Damn right. We joined it as a Common Market, not as a governmental organisation. We are devolving our own politics, quite rightly, so why on earth would we want to be governed by a centralised body that will insist on more and more regional intervention. Westminster did it, and it hasn’t worked. Why would it work from Brussels?
I’m a Jock, and I suffered the division our referendum inflicted, but I was a secure NO voter. For no other reason than it was financial insanity to leave the Union. The dramatic drop in Oil price and subsequent decimation of Aberdeen as an industrial centre has proven me right, unfortunately.
On the other hand, an independent, wealthy UK has no fears from leaving the ‘failed state’ that is the EU. Indeed, it would be a breath of fresh air. The EU may well collapse, but in adversity, there is opportunity.
The fact we’re debating a Brexit demonstrates the EU is failing.
How would you know that an independent UK is wealthy? The time of colonialism is over. England cut down all her trees for ships and now has to cope with flooding everywhere.
Soon we’ll be fracking under Windsor palace and the earthquake will destroy the monarchy. Literally.
The last year was wasted discussing the referendum. The next years will be wasted to make Brexit work. Making new laws for the immigrants. Future immigrants will be blocked off. Current immigrants will have to comply with new rules.
Germany tried to get Indians in, but in fear of immigrant influx specified they had to go back after 5 years and couldn’t bring their family. As a result, maybe 3 came, or 50. But not many more. Why bother? To work as a slave?
So, Britain would need to rely on Benefit street to fill in the posts of carers and cleaners, engineers and drivers. Which is great if you could make it work. Only need to free some teachers to teach those guys all they need to know. Or you could use those lawyers returning from Brussels and Strasbourg to work in care homes instead of Philippinas. As they’d be native they wouldn’t need to earn 35k annually to get indefinite leave to remain.
Some very good responses here but I feel the article is biased, in the same way the government are using tools at their disposal to influence the general public, which I think is wrong, they should just wait for the public to cast their vote, a lot of MP’s consider their own interests before the good of the country!
Your very biased article seems to suggest that smoke free working environments are a result of EU legislation. They are not. The EU made a non legally binding recommendation that member states make moves to ban smoking in certain places.
But we do not need a big brother “recommendation” to do things like this. We are sensible enough and capable enough to decide that smoking is antisocial and detrimental to personal and public health.
Every single claim and counter-claim by both parties seems to contain the words “might”, “could”, “may” or “possibly”. What I want to see is statements of fact containing the word “will”. Only then will I be able to make a reasoned decision.
This whole debate centres on uncontrolled immigration and the adverse affect on public services, the NHS and employment. Very little else is of interest to the man in the street, which is why I think Brexit will win at the polls. Based on current levels of immigration, which is only going to get worse, and the fact that nobody can give me any concrete evidence about the advantages of being in the EU, I can’t see the point in remaining. The revenue we would save could be put to far better use sorting our own mess rather than paying to fix other peoples.
Here we are, All Engineers -trained and operating in the world of precision, accuracy, care, rational argument, the scientific method -the approaches which mirror our daily lives as technologists, Engineers and scientists…and we are supposedly subjected (because for 1000 years of myth, warfare, religious ‘dogma, fairty-tales, and so on those who could read and write felt they had the right (and so often from the Right!) to continue to run things to suit their continued exercise of power. Its over, they (no matter what language they express themselves in) are done! the new frontier of the human state will be that which ‘we’ control. the absolute dominance of Natural Laws and Nature’s . Those to which we alone have the keys? In, out, it will all be irrelevant within a few years?
“Sadly, Enoch Powell’s “Rivers of Blood” speech will only be valued when we drop our pathetic, social acceptance of Political Correctness and recognise there are differences between sexes, races, cultures and religions.”
In 1962 it was my privilege to attend a gathering in Edinburgh of the Scottish Universities Tory Societies (yes, I know, but we do all make mistakes when young!) Enock Powell, minister of health in the McMillan government was the guest speaker. Fellow bloggers might enjoy a short piece describing that.
” I had a momentary flash back to University days. Enoch Powell, then Minister of Health in the McMillan Government, had come to speak to the Scottish University Tory Societies annual conference, of which I was a member. (We all make mistakes when we are young!) Powell spoke of the extent of dental caries throughout the population of 60s Britain: and the costs he as Minister had to pay to repair such. He had even considered a proposal from one section of the Ministry for extracting all teeth in childhood and issuing the population with dentures: made for pence in such large numbers! As an economic solution, sensible: but a political and social impossibility, as he had confirmed. He also described the 150,000 persons then ‘locked’ into mental institutions, the majority of whom were NOT dangerous to the public. It was his intention to try to get them out of ‘prison’ and into the general community: even though he recognised that there would be incidents and occasional cases where the authorities would get it wrong. But that was a price he believed appropriate to pay to give the majority a better life.”
When we broke for lunch, it was my good fortune that Powell and his aide came to sit at ‘our’ table. His mind was so far ahead of the rest of us, he was thinking of the answer to the question you would ask when you had assimilated the answer he was giving to the question just asked. Far too intelligent to be a Tory!
Congrats to The Engineer and all taking part in this debate, it has more content than all the popular press added together.
The referendum is actually becoming similar to the Scottish one in terms of public interest after a long period of misinformation and I’m certainly looking forward to it, whether it be in or out. Hopefully a good turn-out will occur now
One of the things that I wish to know is how much it costs . As far as I can see we give the EU £350M a week and get back about £100M so our net contribution is £250 and if we do well the rules say we pay more as recently we had a bill for £2Billion. If any stayer will give me £3.5K I will gladly give them back £1K and if the company does well I will expect the employees to give me a gift and pigs can fly. My figures may be wrong please enlighten me.
I worked for EMI electronics once a great company pioneered TV, had its own power generation and railway: no longer exists due to management and government failure. I will listen to the likes of Dyson not the fat cats and government advisors who advised to go into the Euro and sold off our gold cheap.
Why is GDP and inward investment the be all and end all of economics . No company has ever invested in another country for the good of its workers. They will inevitably pay as little in tax as possible in that country
If the state employs 1000 East Europeans to dig holes and another lot to fill them in they pay some back to the state in taxes, but much will leave the country. The GDP goes up, but the balance of payments goes negative. To me our balance of payments is a more important criterion, after you have sold the family silver you cannot borrow indefinitely.
As for mass immigration it is impossible to build homes, provide schools instantly. Result is housing shortage, kids not being able to go to the most local schools. It is a fundamental principle of the EU that there shall be free movement of people. This cannot be changed,’Call Me Dave’ tried and failed
I went to school in Southall and saw the social effects.It did not do the economy much good ,Google Wolff Rubber works.
It is only now we talk about immigration without being branded as a racist
The fundamental idea behind the EU is that Europe should not tear itself apart again, but as long as we continue to trade and have NATO this will not happen. EFTA existed about the same time as the Common Market. The European Project is thus redundant. I do not think tariffs will change . They need us more than we need them.
As a last point for those who do not like Nigel Farage, you will be voting him out of a job.
Yes, because human relationship are first and foremost about petty transactions. And of course there was no way to leave out offending the “others”, in this case Eastern Europeans. There are about 4 million British citizens living abroad, in other words immigrants. You are welcomed, as you should be. We should be free to move, we should be happy to live in one world and share it with everybody. Globalization is not about trading stuff, it is about creating one civilization among people with equal human rights. Remove barriers, don’t build new ones. Best from an Eastern European immigrant in America.
This referendum is “necessary” as it was promised by Cameron as a way to stuff UKIP. Cameron did not think he would win a clear majority and must now he must reap the whirlwind.
All the hyperbole from both sides is contradictory.
The only certainty is a vote to remain will give us 1/28th (soon to be 1/34th) of a shout to control ourselves. A shout that will be heard in the EU as a squeal.
I will not surrender the British democracy our fathers died to retain therefore I’m voting to leave.
“the British democracy our fathers died to retain”. As almost every boy in the school I attended from 1947-1959 was there because of the fact described (as was I) perhaps of all present citizens we might have a particular interest, even as we prepare to make our exits (some have gone already!) in that noble word ‘Democracy’. Do not forget that its root is in Greece and that only very few actually participated then. What’s changed? The franchise (one person, one vote) regularly and widely usurped by party political pressure and power groups, the ‘popular meja’ -privately owned and influenced- access to the Courts (to protect rights -ie the weak from the strong) – denied to almost all ordinary citizens and those who are neither civil nor give service have power and control in almost all aspects of society. The Westminster bubble needs to burst and quickly: and if the ‘pricks’ are to be from Brussels, so mote it be! If you want more of this….you know what to do?
I have read all the comments, and find myself horrified with the rage and irrelevance of some of the contents. There seem to be many serious political falsehoods being peddled as an excuse for Brexit. This would not matter if such issues were seen as political rubbish and ignored.
Unfortunately some vociferous pundits seem to be adding their own political slant as if the the “original” supposition were wholly true, in order to shout down any opposition. And achieve more media coverage.
David Redfern I agree with you. Would there be a benefit in staying in a “reformed” Europe ????? There will NEVER be a “reformed” Europe