Professor of European Law, Michael Dougan provides his viewpoint on the EU referendum

Professor of European Law at the University of Liverpool, Professor Dougan provides his viewpoint on the EU referendum, and discussed the facts and figures circulated by both the ‘Leave’ and ‘Remain’ campaigns.

Posted in Rebutal, referendum, videos | Tagged , ,

“I want my country back”

By Mark Salad.

I want my country back

The photograph is my place of birth, the world I was born into. It was rough, depressing and squalid. It was a slum. It was already better than my parent’s world. My father – orphaned in his teens – watched his mother die of cancer screaming on the kitchen table. No money meant no doctor, no hospital, no painkillers. There’s precious little of that “cinema working class stoicism and nobility” here – my father grew up into a troubled violent alcoholic. Life expectancy was such that I never met a grandparent.

Luck and some level of determination enabled my parents to get out of this place. Moving just two or three miles was a different world with things called gardens, where the default state wasn’t filth. Eventually, at a cost, we ended up as a working class family in a suburban middle class life. The changes bought a few years on the cycle – I was in my early 20s when my parents died. They died in hospitals, being cared for by trained staff and receiving medications that made their passing less painful. Quantifiable improvements.

The state paid for my education – in full – had it been any other way it would likely have been curtailed earlier. The education guaranteed nothing, but afforded opportunity to put more distance between myself and where I started.
I’m middle class now, dont’cha know – shopped at Waitrose and everything.

All this has happened across two generations. My grandparents were Egyptian, Irish, German and English – mostly migrants – the world that I was born into was already an improvement for them.

So, back to this phrase – heard on both sides:
“I want my country back.”

I don’t want my country back. My country was shit. I want something better than that. For everyone.

The advance of liberalism is infuriatingly slow, but it does happen – incrementally. Even with the occasional setback things are so much better than they were in our supposed golden age.

When the incredibly affluent talk about “taking our country back” the reality of that for the non-affluent is a massive step backward to a time of few rights, no protections and no safety net – that’s not a place you are in any way equipped to survive, let alone thrive.

Drop the nostalgia filter, things used to be awful.
IN.

Posted in Ready, reflections | Tagged | Leave a comment

On Monsters, Villains and the Eu Referendum – J.K. Rowling

Here is an exerpt from a piece by J.K Rowling:

I’m the mongrel product of this European continent and I’m an internationalist. I was raised by a Francophile mother whose family was proud of their part-French heritage. My French ancestors lived in the troubled province of Alsace, which spent hundreds of years being alternately annexed by Germany and France.

I’ve lived in France and Portugal and I’ve studied French and German. I love having these mulitple allegiances and cultural associations. They make me stronger, not weaker. I glory in association with the cultures of my fellow Europeans.

My values are not contained or proscribed by borders. The absence of a visa when I cross the channel has symbolic value to me. I might not be in my house, but I’m still in my hometown.

Source: J.K. Rowling

Posted in reflections, Uncategorized | Tagged

Why working people care about the EU referendum – GMB Trade Union

Posted in workers | Tagged

Some plain truths about immigration

It appears that many people in the UK are concerned about immigration. It’s interesting to note that had fewer people come to the UK over the centuries, many people currently living just wouldn’t exist! Have a watch here:

www.facebook.com/wetwoworld/videos/1100274103352145/ to get an idea.

So what’s the problem with immigrants? The majority of them are in one of two flavours:

  • they come to the UK to do work that UK citizens generally don’t want to do. It’s often low-paid and seasonal, and many of them return home when the season is over
  • they’re well-qualified and seek the opportunities the UK offers in terms of pay and conditions, quality of life etc.. They’ll become long-term residents, making a valuable contribution to the life of the UK and the Treasury (paying their taxes). Some of these are Erasmus students who come over and stay, for example.

What’s not to like? Better for the UK to have them than a mass of older non-working Brits (like me!) coming back. They would put further strain on the NHS, demand their bus passes, Senior Citizen’s Railcard, “disabled” parking spaces etc., as well as having problems with housing because they can no longer afford to buy a property in the prosperous UK.

The UK already has an ageing population, which means there are progressively fewer people paying tax and more claiming pensions. This affects the UK’s finances, why do you think the government is pushing the retirement age upwards?

The UK really needs those young pay-earning people from elsewhere, and it needs people like me like a hole in the head!

And please don’t let people lie to you about control of our borders. The UK’s not in Schengen right now, so the material change after a Brexit would be our European neighbours worrying a lot less about who wanted to come to the UK, because at least they’d be getting rid of them. If anything, it would make any problems worse and more difficult to deal with.

As things stand at present, non-UK EU citizens can enter the UK to seek work, provided they can support themselves, but if they don’t find it within 6 months they can be obliged to leave. Seems OK to me.

It’s been suggested that in future, preference should be given to Commonwealth immigrants – but isn’t this just swapping one sort of immigration for another?

Back in the middle of the last century, when immigrants were invited to the UK to fill job vacancies, they found notices in many boarding house windows saying “No blacks, no Irish, no dogs”. Prejudice and xenophobia – it’s just like today, except the target has changed.

Despite this apparent continuity, is this really what we want the UK to be about?

The richness of our language and our culture has a lot to do with the successive waves of immigrants who’ve sought escape from persecution and/or the chance of a better life in the UK.

Even if you’re not fussed about richness of language and culture –  don’t you appreciate your local Chinese or Indian take-aways and restaurants, the first of which was set up in London centuries ago?

But of course, even if there were to be a Brexit, subsequent arrangements (if they can be concluded) for trade with Europe are very likely to include agreements about freedom of movement, without our having a say about what happens in Brussels.

So what’s the likely result of a Brexit in terms of immigration?

A bunch of very brassed-off European neighbours who won’t give us help in controlling our borders, who’ll demand that there should be continued freedom of movement as part of re-established trade agreements, and who’ll want to demonstrate that leaving the EU causes pain. That’s what.

Undoubted losses and no apparent gains: please beware of people who are trying to sell you this as a good idea for you, your children, your children’s children…

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The EU Referendum, IN or OUT? – The Sceptical Activist

An article by Edward Caplen, a member of one of the SY2E – Remain in the EU groups.You can find the original here

On the 23rd of June the UK shall vote on the European question, I want to be clear right out of the gate, I am voting to remain a member of the European Union and I hope to cover a lot of these reasons in this post, so lets get started.

The EU provides many social, economic and medical safeguards for member-states and their peoples, for example with TATA Steel the EU attempted to save the industry by putting stringent tariffs on Chinese steel exports, which the government decided to veto.

This not only shows that the EU does care about European citizens in all member states, but also that the EU respects the United Kingdoms parliamentary sovereignty.

The EU ensures that trading standards are in line with safety and environmental regulations that ensure the goods you buy are safe for use and ensures cleaner air and energy, which your children and childrens children will enjoy in future.

Not only this but the UK is the second biggest recipient in EU scientific research funding, which has helped ensure medical sciences continue to advance at an unprecented rate. This European wide science funding, has allowed people to travel within the EU under freedom of movement to get treatments, which are not yet available within the United Kingdom, which is essential to some peoples quality of life and extension of it.

Freedom of movement also is estimated to bring in £2billion pounds a year for the exchequer, and according to a in-depth study immigrants are 43% less likely to claim than native Britons are themselves.

As I mentioned previously in the article freedom of movement results in a net profit and gives people access to treatments not available in the UK under FP7 which allows you to also claim the treatment costs back from your own government if your govt provides tax payer funded health care. But more than that, freedom of movement is the freedom to choose where you want to live, work and die, unhindered by unnecessary border regulations with our closest neighbours and friends.

In the European Union we also have the European Arrest Warrant, which ensures that a person being arrested in one country may face justice in the next. The EU is also introducing a new piece of legislation to ensure that countries imprison their own criminals. This is not only just, but also makes the judicial process more flexible and quicker to react when and where required.

Now, lets talk about the economic impact, the EU has ensured the UK is a hub for business. During March and April £65bn in financial investment left the UK, I don’t like using these figures since they’re not pleasant, however this is the reality of how investors feel about the potential repercussions of a British exit, and with no economic or social plan in place for us to review, you can’t say they’re wrong to be worried.

Well, you might be thinking economically, what has the EU done for you, well cheaper flights and no more roaming charges, but if that’s not enough for you the EU also capped bankers bonuses ensuring bankers greed is further restricted ensuring their ability to hurt the economy is limited. These are small I know but the true extent of EU influence over these small benefits are unknown and definitely save you money.

But, the EU isn’t perfect, it is in great need of reform, but working together I know we can reform it, just as Fish Fight reformed the wasteful fishing policies of the EU without any EU influence we can do the same, we just have to be willing to work with our neighbours, and as is a Great British trait of ours, dig our feet in, stick it out and show our friends we will not abandon them and we’re going to help them change this project for the better. I will lay out my overview of preferred reforms to the EU in future post, cheerio and remember to have your say on June the 23rd.

Sources:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-35668682
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/apr/12/sajid-javid-uk-blocked-higher-eu-steel-tariffs-fearing-shoe-price-rises
http://www.cgdsociety.org/genetherapy/newgenetherapytrialforxcgd
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ecoj.12181/abstract
http://news.sky.com/story/1708390/eu-osborne-warning-over-capital-flight-cost
http://www.fishfight.net/

Source: The EU Referendum, IN or OUT? – thescepticalactivistwordpress

Posted in pro-EU campaign, Ready | Tagged

What the Quitters are Scared to tell you: Asylum, non-EU migration and criminal law

There are many ways the UK can control, opt-out or veto the EU’s decisions in regards to asylum seekers, immigration and criminal law.

The UK will not be covered by the proposed law on a European Border Guard. While this law originally provided for the border force to enter a Member State without its consent, that idea was dropped during negotiations. That would anyway not have applied to the UK; and in fact the EU court has ruled that the UK could not opt in to the EU law creating a border agency (the precursor to the proposed Border Guard law) even if it wanted to, without signing up to the whole of the Schengen system.

In the areas of criminal law and policing (which will be the subject of a separate blog post with more detail), the UK had a veto until 2009, when the Treaty of Lisbon came into force. Since that date, it has had an opt-out, which it has frequently used. In particular, it has opted out of the proposal for a European Public Prosecutor.

Note that the EU’s police agency, Europol, is not a ‘federal police force’: the Treaty rules out ‘coercive powers’ for it, so it cannot arrest, question or detain people. Its main role is the analysis of police investigation data.

The abolition of the opt-outs on immigration and asylum, Schengen and criminal law would require a Treaty amendment subject to approval of the government and Parliament. The abolition of the Schengen opt-out would also require a national referendum, under the European Union Act 2011. So would participation in the European Public Prosecutor.

Source: EU Law Analysis: EU Referendum Briefing 1: Can the UK control the EU’s future if it stays a member?

Posted in Ready, Rebutal | Tagged

What the Quitters are Scared to tell you: The UK decides whether to transfer power to the EU

It’s sometimes suggested that there might be future transfers of power from Member States to the EU, as part of the developing single currency project (perhaps following the so-called ‘Five Presidents Report’ on this issue) or for some other reason.

However, the UK has control over these developments. First of all, the UK has an opt-out from the single currency, as discussed below. Secondly, it also has a veto over future Treaty amendments.

But there’s more.

The European Union Act 2011, first mentioned above, also gives control to the British public over any significant Treaty amendment, by means of a referendum. This would apply where the UK would drop nearly any veto. It would also apply to other transfers of powers to the EU from the UK, defined in detail as including:

  1. a) ‘the extension of the objectives of the EU’;
  2. b) any ‘conferring’ or ‘extension’ of any EU competences, including over ‘the co-ordination of economic and employment policies’ (an issue in the Five Presidents’ Report), or;
  3. c) giving any EU ‘institution or body’ any power to give orders or impose sanctions upon the UK.

It’s been suggested that the UK gave up a veto relating to single currency and banking issues as part of the renegotiation deal. This isn’t true, as the deal didn’t amend the Treaties and Parliament has not amended the 2011 Act.

So the UK’s control over any transfer of power from the UK to the EU is threefold: the UK government, UK Parliament and the British public.

Source: EU Law Analysis: EU Referendum Briefing 1: Can the UK control the EU’s future if it stays a member?

Posted in Ready, Rebutal | Tagged