Euro Constitution Referrendum

Just to be clear, I was comparing the bureaucracy of being in the EU with not being in it. So, to that way of thinking, we're not replacing one with another but adding many extra layers.

It's not possible for any country to be successful in the long term, either socially, commercially or militarily, with a large, inefficient and expensive bureaucratic government. Members of the EU have an additional layer of government, which by its nature is larger, less efficient, more expensive and more bureaucratic than the government of almost any country in the world.

This is just one of my many objections to the EU, which, I remain convinced, is ultimately doomed to failure, in much the same way that the bureaucratic strictures on the Soviet Union contributed to its own eventual catastrophic failure.

 

I would have gone with Bush. The EU are too Spinless.

I think it's fact. They may be 'lower quality papers' but @ least they don't try to hide the fact unlike Blair.

 

Mark - if you want to make sweeping accusations about immigration back it up with evidence or shut up. "I think it's a fact" is not good enough I'm afraid . As for the tabloids, they wouldn't know a fact if it hit them in the face.

Michael.

 

If spineless means not constructing a false argument, and then constantly lying about it until it becomes blatantly true you were lying, then I would stick with the EC.
By the way Mark in an admittedly brief trawl through google The statistics seem to suggest we have fewer unplanned immigrants than most other european countries. Compared to Spain and Greece, where many illegal immigrants from Africa arrive, and France and Germany who have accepted many eastern europeans. I can't find anything that backs your assertion, not even in the Suns archives!

 

Oh, I thought you were already...

 

Ball & Pram Spring To Mind.

Just because you dispise the Tabloids, doesn's mean that everything they print is unfactual.

 

Anyone who thinks we'd be better off leaving the EU and joining NAFTA, or even becoming a state of the USA is just showing a total ignorance of economics (not to mention the cultural ties that the UK has with Europe which are much closer than most people imagine).

Also, for those wanting to join the USA, what happened to all that stuff about preserving the UK Sovereignty etc? Are Federal Republics suddenly OK now?

Michael.

 

Mark
you obviously believe everything the media tell you, this is obvious.
You also, obviously dont have much of a clue about possible implications of what you say.

 

Not everything.

And you do know all the implecations? Pray do tell.

 

Why bother, i have seen mostly offensive comments from you, i cant be bothered with that.

 

:baby: There There.

 

If thats what you think Mark, you carry on. Is it your standard reply to anyone who disagrees with you?
As i said in the past, i hope i never have the misfortune to meet you.

 

Mark you still haven't backed up your comments about immigration. If I were you I'd go back to doing your GCSE revision. You'll probably be able to get away with making sweeping statements and not producing the evidence there. If you can supply evidence to support your assertions you'll garner much more respect.

 

I stand corrected on the amount of immigrants we accept, But not on how many apply to come here.

http://www.paih.org/archives/reports/asylum_and_immigration_facts_vs.htm

Penence - I have no desire to meet you either.

 

What does the number of asylum applications in the UK have to do with anything?

Michael.

 

Well no one has yet made a convincing case for me voting for deeper ties to Europe. I agree totally with Steve's comments on this one - more bureacracy is not a useful thing.
Just in case the armchair experts start whining - I have spent a year working in admin for a UK district council, servicing IT for British Steel [~4 years, and meeting lots of intelligent managers] and 5 months carrying boxes in a warehouse with a lot of damn hardworking migrant workers [mostly Portugese, as it happens] - so I have seen a few sides. Just because multinational companies make threats if we don't allow them maximum trading freedom [like a single currency], how is that supposed to help UK industry?? AFAIK, the sooner the planet can no longer afford to send plane loads of Kiwifruit from New Zealand to the UK, the sooner the UK might just manage some self sufficiency - roll on peak oil, I reckon..

 

I'm afraid yet again I'm in a minority here. I think closer ties to Europe is a good idea. Just talk to anyone who has travelled across Europe or works for a multinational. I think you guys are just too paranoid. Why concentrate on only ht e negative aspects of a closer Europe, there is a brand new world out there waiting to be discovered.

 

Dev, I'm not anti European - I'm sitting here drinking 'Pigassou' wine from France.

I can't see how 'Brussels' is a good thing tho. 40 years on and they still have not reformed the C.A.P.
Do you realise what expenses Euro MPs are allowed? When I last saw it reported [in a 'proper' paper of course, about 92, I think] it was over £300000 p.a [relocation, family etc.] So thats got to be £3/4M now - right?? Just for the welsh windbag Kinnock etc. And he is supposed to share my 'Socialist' tendencies..

 

Now, now Graham,

In fairness to Kinnock ...














...Glynnis (his wife) gets it too.

 

What - like chief moneyman Gordon Brown? I thought he was delighted the UK is outside the Eurozone. I also thought the CBI had changed it's stance (from initially being pro Euro) too. Pretty sure Ruth Lea is for keeping the pound too but pro single market membership.

At the end of the day there are no doubt pros and cons but both the yes and no camps seem to be portraying it as a black and white decision.

Matt.