As the EU Referendum campaigns continue to develop, we, the poor old voters, are being assailed by regular salvoes of the usual political bilge. We are being fed a diet of the lies, damned lies and statistics, half-truths and distorted 'facts' so beloved of politicians. Worst of all, hordes of foreign politicians, ex-politicians and miscellaneous bureaucrats are lining up to tell us what we should do, what is 'best' for us.
How do voters pick the bones out of all of this ?
The simple answer has to be that we ignore all of the politicians and their assembled acolytes, and look at the real facts. As members of the European Union. the UK is subservient to its assorted organs, whether it be the Commission, Court, Parliament or anything else. While we have representation on these bodies, ours is but one voice amongst 28; we are able to apply a veto in certain areas, but these powers are limited. We are required to abide by a raft of EU rules and regulations, whether we like them or not. Essentially, our sovereignty has been severely comprised by our membership.
Few of us can name our MEPs, and yet these are meant to be our representatives in the European Parliament. These 'representatives' are largely anonymous, few of them seeming to make much real attempt to communicate with their constituents but spending much of their time travelling backwards and forwards to Brussels or Strasburg and claiming considerable expenses in addition to their generous salaries. Exactly what they do is a mystery, certainly to me, as it seems that most of the main decisions are made outside of the Parliament, with MEPs merely required to rubberstamp what their masters have already agreed.
On matters of defence and security which have been raised by both sides in the argument, one has to wonder what role the EU has. Defence is a matter for individual governments and NATO, while security is a matter for individual governments and their respective police and security services. There is no overarching EU security or defence organisation, so why all of the noise about the horrors that would arise should the UK dare to vote to leave ? The normal international cooperation would continue, unhindered, whether the UK is within or without the organisation. David Cameron's recent suggestion that a vote to leave could so destabilise Europe that it might lead to war is so ludicrous as to deserve no further comment beyond saying that he must be incredibly desperate to resort to such hyperbole.
On immigration, while the UK remains within the EU it has no effective control over its borders. All EU citizens have an automatic right of entry here and such a right will also attach to however many migrants from troubles in the middles east, north Africa or wherever else, are granted EU citizenship in the future. Already, migrants from eastern Europe have seriously distorted our economy and placed huge burdens on our public services and housing; thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, more immigrants could be catastrophic. The issue of assimilation into our society has been far too poorly managed and very many immigrants have established themselves in ways which serve to create separate micro-communities that have little or no interest in, connection with or loyalty towards our nation. Why would we vote to allow this situation to continue ?
Both sides in the debate have made claims about the economic effects of being in or out of the Union.
Many of these claims seems to be designed to terrify us into voting in one way or the other, but the true facts are few and far between. It is a fact that we have to pay a substantial amount of money to the EU every year; we do get some of this back but only to spend as directed by EU officials. We do benefit from being in a 'free trade' area but, as we import significantly more than we export, what credence can be placed in claims that leaving would lead to the imposition of tariffs ? Would Germany or France really risk causing major damage to their car manufacturers, wine growers, cheese makes and other industries, by insisting that tariffs be levied on British imports to the EU, a move that would surely result in retaliatory action by the UK government ? It seems highly unlikely.
It has been suggested by no less a personage than the US President that the UK would not be offered any special treatment by the US and would find it difficult to negotiate a free trade deal. Given that the negotiations between the EU and US on a trade deal have dragged on for years and seem now to have stalled, would this really be a problem ? In fact, it would surely be much easier for a UK unencumbered by the rest of the EU to negotiate trade deals all over the world, without having to first agree details with 27 other nations.
Forget the numbers, forget the hyperbole and scare tactics; ignore the rhetoric, half-truths and outright lies. Voting to remain in this stagnant pool is a vote for death by a thousand cuts; there is only one way forward and that is to VOTE LEAVE.
No comments:
Post a Comment