Careful you don't "spiral out of control".

Oh that happened years ago - long before all this BREXIT palaver.

Probably for many of us.

So, based on that conjecture (you should read up about the fishing industry and how it was going for them before we joined), how long after we leave will be see a massive growth in fishing, wages racing up and energy costs reducing?

It is strange then that most fishermen are very much against the EU and you mention Iceland who very much believe they are better of out with their fishing, as Norway thought best and as Greenland think best. If we had been left to our own devices we may not have had over a decade of throwing away untold thousands of tonnes of viable catch largely because very little agreement could be reached within the EU who were 'safeguarding' our stocks but at the same time protecting Spanish boats overfishing in international waters in the troubled North Atlantic fisheries.

The EU is the master of bureaucracy, it is the lifeblood of the EU. It thrives on bureaucracy it creates it to control and enmesh its members, as we are finding out.

The EU is not a scapegoat it is an institution that never had public support at any time but had strong support in the highest echelons of governments from whence its bureaucratic governors are continually drawn. It is an institution that exists above the democratically elected governments of countries and thrives on patronage and political nous and is a body devoted to the elevation of politicians rejected by electorates.

I have and I do and I do not pretend that all was rosy in the UK fishing industry. I am not sure that throwing away ultimately millions of tons of viable catch and quota hopping by Spanish factory trawlers was a way forward for us and strangely that is the view of many fishermen.

EDit. To be clear one cannot undo damage in a few short years and perhaps never will and the comment was regards what the EU has done (not all is rosy in the garden).

In 2015 the UK paid more per capita to the EU than any other country.

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showt...806&highlight=

I know you saw that thread Britain's Departure Likely to Cost EU Billions as you posted on it

Which country are you from? It it one of the receivers of the EU budget? Is this why you are so upset at the UK leaving the EU?

It was made clear several times and accepted that immediately we would start seeing meetings where the UK are no longer at the table but i'm sure you and all other Brexiters know this as it has been made clear at every opportunity since the referendum that everyone who voted out is highly intelligent, watched every minute of every discussion (including recording and watching back all the ones from when they were at work) and made an educated decision based on knowing all the facts.

And?

A household where the income is greater the average will likely pay more tax than the majority of other households.

So that makes all members of the EU not full members then as they either get rebates or money returned to spend on projects. Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark are just some countries that get a specifically negotiated rebate I am sure Germany would be interested to know they are not seen as full members . And only 19 of the 28 members are in the Eurozone so that means the other 9 are also not full members by your reckoning

But then when the ECA finds as it did in 2013 that £109 billion out of the £117 billion spent was affected by error then I doubt the EU knows what is going on really

As for Theresa may not being shunned I think most people could see she was.

It's there in my post and you posted on that thread about this. Some of us can back up our claims, whereas your claim that I responded to, seemed to be made up in your head.


Here it is.... again
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2179806

From that thread

Britain's Departure Likely to Cost EU Billions

"10 Billion Euros or Worse

Commissioned by the European Commission and the General Secretariat of the European Council, the first calculations on how expensive Brexit might be for the 27 remaining member states have now been completed. According to one paper, net revenues that flow into the EU from Britain each year range from 14 to 21 billion euros. If you subtract the money Britain gets back from Brussels, the EU budget would shrink by up to 10 billion euros per year."





"In 2015, the study found, Britain was in second place: The British paid 12.7 billion euros more than they got back from the EU. By comparison, Germany paid 15.6 billion. The paper also determined that the British paid more into the EU per capita than Germany did that year. "After this country's withdrawal from the EU, this net amount will have to be redistributed among the other member states," writes CEP report author Matthias Kullas. "The other major net payers -- especially Germany, France and Italy -- will be facing significant additional costs."

Brexit could also lead to painful shortfalls for the European Investment Bank (EIB), Kullas calculated. If the British were to withdraw their share capital in the development bank, it would result in a shortfall worth billions. The EIB would be forced to make fewer loans -- loans that are vital for infrastructure projects across the Continent.

According to Kullas, the British have thus far borne the greatest burden at the bank. Their share of total capital is 16 percent, but they only benefit from 8.8 percent of the loans. No other country has a larger imbalance. "
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...a-1111724.html

She's the new kid on the block and what's the first thing she says...I'm leaving...."Brexit means Brexit" what else is there talk about?

She was off the radar during the referendum, she reportedly doesn't hang around the tea rooms etc in the House of Commons....she's not exactly charismatic.

From the same publication 2014

What does that have to do with us according to you not being full members when other countries have the same rebate deal ?

But the choice between a more democratic EU and Britain's continued membership is clear. Europe must choose democracy.

As for democracy well yes it is very democratic threatening to punish a member for leaving isn't it ?

Talk about Project Fear...can you link to anymore doom & gloom?

If you see the article I linked to the UK isn't seen as full joined up member of the EU, it's always been on the side lines.

The article you link to is too simplistic in its calculations....I'm satisfied what we get from the EU (it's not all directly visible) is far greater than we put in.

Various ministers have indicated the UK wishes to be part of certain EU projects for which, like other countries the UK will continue to make a contribution. The article you linked to doesn't take that into account.

Most of the other members probably see the UK as a pain in the arse, not a team player, want's to play by its own rules, not a fully committed member of the EU as the article stated UK has 'blackmailed' and made fools of the other EU members.

One of the first threads on here after the referendum stated the EU said they'll punish the UK, but nowhere in the interview with two foreign MEPs did they use the word 'punish', they said they were sorry to see the UK go.

So what we had was someone who hates the World starting a thread in which they used words that were never expressed. Sometimes it like watching an episode of the Jeremy Kyle show, where leave voters have to wind themselves up into a frenzy of anger.

The way Theresa was treated is no surprise. That failed club has taken the mick out of the UK for 43 years now and the best thing we can do is get out ASAP.

If the EU is not trying to create a United States of Europ explain why they have their own parliament, their own currency, their own law system, a court system, etc.. All things that belong to a country.

The EU want rid of individual countries and to get one big one

That would be like inviting your spouse to join you when you're discussing negotiating tactics for your divorce.

[quote=Eurostar;84896383]
Had the EEC stayed as the EEC and been properly administered. Had the issue of bringing in other nations been carried out on a more gradual basis. Had there ever been a proper plan instead of a mish-mash of ideas dreamt up in the corridors of power. Had there been, at the start, an all encompassing agreement that didn't suffer from transitional changes.

And had there never been the threat that the end-game was a United States of Europe.

Their own flag, their own anthem, officials taking time to make plans for an army...
Even if if they want to be seen as more important than a good old fashioned trading bloc, there was never a need for any of those things and the money wasted could have been spent for the benefit of the member countries. But it's much more fun planning a political union where quite a chunk of Europe does what it's told by those who know better, as no doubt they see themselves, and incidentally gives jobs to thousands of obscure or failed and/or retired politicians on large salaries, Shame about all those millions of little people in the real world who may not appreciate the idea.

This is slightly daft, basically what i4u said above. She probably has not formed many connections, I would imagine as unpopular as Tony Blair was he probably would not be shunned as he would be very engaging, and probably had formed a few connections.

But hang on it was the UK that pushed hard for the EU to expand rapidly, years ago Boris Johnson made a speech in the House of Commons wanting far bigger expansion than the current 27 countries, including his beloved Turkey.

Yet, one of the prominent cries of those who voted leave was about the UK parliament taking back control....the very politicians that pushed forward plans that you regard as a disaster.

The Social Care funding, NHS problems etc are directly down to the control UK politicians already have and want to give them more control to make a bigger mess of the country.

Yeah, think of how much money would have been saved if rather than having an EU flag, we continued with a flag for each of the nations every time the EU was represented.

Well quite.

They are simply worried that other countries will follow suit.

I would like to see a longer version of the video, to see if she worked the room. From the smile on her face it's possible the guy with his back to the camera had chatted to her and moved on and her apparent awkwardness says more about her character.

I can't imagine Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair or Boris Johnson standing around not engaging with other leaders or being in the back row on the edge of frame when it came to group photos.