• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

REFERENDUM RESULTS AND DISCUSSION THREAD

Not in the industries I sell to and in some cases we are miles behind the US. I guess what this proves is there is a real disparate set of rules around the EU and I guess the failing of the EU is not to unify everybody under those rules.

This is my biggest problem with the EU really. It doesn't function without becoming a superstate and effectively being the United States of Europe and we (the UK) and Scandinavia would never let that happen. It needs reform but I think it would be better to reform from the inside than out but that looks like herding cats.

The single market would be a good solution across the whole of Europe for me but that isn't going to happen without total freedom of movement so I have absolutely no idea why the Leave voters think that we are going to be better off out of the EU. It makes no sense to me.

What industry are you in?

The recent FORs directive, Boris tried to get it through as an EU directive, but was rejected and now just a requirement to go into London and other construction sites around the UK. The new Direct Visibility Directive means that HGVs in their current form won't be allowed into London for 2021 (I think) and only low level cabs (Similar to a waste wagon) will be allowed. These are the type of stuff that should be EU driven and not just UK driven.

The problem is that the manufacturers of plant and commercial vehicles won't fit the items on a production line until it becomes part of their ISO standard as the UK is too small for them to care about. Obviously helps companies like ours, but isn't really how it should be.
 
What industry are you in?

The recent FORs directive, Boris tried to get it through as an EU directive, but was rejected and now just a requirement to go into London and other construction sites around the UK. The new Direct Visibility Directive means that HGVs in their current form won't be allowed into London for 2021 (I think) and only low level cabs (Similar to a waste wagon) will be allowed. These are the type of stuff that should be EU driven and not just UK driven.

The problem is that the manufacturers of plant and commercial vehicles won't fit the items on a production line until it becomes part of their ISO standard as the UK is too small for them to care about. Obviously helps companies like ours, but isn't really how it should be.

My industry is safety helmets and armour across a number of markets and the DIN/ EU standards and UK standards are the same as are motorcycle helmets and armour. Both were driven by Germany and the UK played catch-up. It is clear that Germany drove this and they are the dominant power in the EU as you've proved and if they don't like something it doesn't go through. Horse riding helmet standards changes were changed by the UK but quickly changed back when the EU realised mainland Europe (and the UK) couldn't meet the standard (which was based on an Australian change and UK accident).

But in sports safety we are behind the Americans by a long way.

Much of my product is plastics and the Germans have driven the safety reforms when they built/ invested in infrastructure in the Eastern Bloc countries with the UK putting in place some working regulatory reforms along with safety and COSHH guidelines. However, I'm not sure the current government don't want to repeal these reforms when leaving the EU.
 
I am talking about countries that have been in the EU for many years. Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal for example. Of course Eastern block countries wanted to join, they get financial incentives to open up their state controlled companies, to foreign investors. The problem is, that money comes at a cost and it is working class people who have being paying the price. That is why that many of the people from the countries you mentioned are leaving their respective countries to find work in the UK and other north European countries.
That was one of my main reasons for voting out. Spain has recieved 100's of billions of taxpayers money to open up the market for privatisation, which has made high unemployment, austerity and forced many people to have to leave their country to find work. Where have the billions gone to? What benefit are their for normal working class people? No thanks, I prefer the UK to be controlled by a democratically elected goverment. The EU is a failure for the working class.

Are you trying to say that the lives of working class people in countries like Poland have got worse since their EU membership? I don't doubt that there are big businesses that have benefitted from the open market having thrown off the shackles of previous Soviet opression but there's no way the ordinary man on the street is worse off as a result. The reason many people from countries like this are leaving to come to the UK isn't because the EU has made their lives worse, it's because it's a shortcut to an even better life, if they stay in Poland or wherever they could have to wait years until the country manages to catch up to modern standards following EU entry but they have an instant right to freedom of movement so they can move elsewhere such as the UK to get all of those improvements instantly.

I think a lot of the problems you suggest in the more modernised, supposedly stronger countries within the EU, Spain, Italy, Greece, etc. have been caused more by the Euro rather than the EU or their own individual governments. Somewhere like Greece never stood a chance of keeping up with an economy like Germany's, so having the same currecy was always going to be a struggle for them, add in the level of corruption in their national government and you see a shit load of money wasted that should've been helping to catch them up. Sure there are now vast swaithes of the Greek population now struggling under this EU imposed austerity but it was bought about by their own failures and corruption, was the EU just supposed to turn a blind eye opening the gate for other countries to milk them in the same way? They can't just keep throwing them money, eventually someone has to be accountable.
 
Not in the industries I sell to and in some cases we are miles behind the US. I guess what this proves is there is a real disparate set of rules around the EU and I guess the failing of the EU is not to unify everybody under those rules.

This is my biggest problem with the EU really. It doesn't function without becoming a superstate and effectively being the United States of Europe and we (the UK) and Scandinavia would never let that happen. It needs reform but I think it would be better to reform from the inside than out but that looks like herding cats.

The single market would be a good solution across the whole of Europe for me but that isn't going to happen without total freedom of movement so I have absolutely no idea why the Leave voters think that we are going to be better off out of the EU. It makes no sense to me.
That's because those rules are determined by each state's sovereign parliaments to comply with the directive.
 
Are you trying to say that the lives of working class people in countries like Poland have got worse since their EU membership? I don't doubt that there are big businesses that have benefitted from the open market having thrown off the shackles of previous Soviet opression but there's no way the ordinary man on the street is worse off as a result. The reason many people from countries like this are leaving to come to the UK isn't because the EU has made their lives worse, it's because it's a shortcut to an even better life, if they stay in Poland or wherever they could have to wait years until the country manages to catch up to modern standards following EU entry but they have an instant right to freedom of movement so they can move elsewhere such as the UK to get all of those improvements instantly.

I think a lot of the problems you suggest in the more modernised, supposedly stronger countries within the EU, Spain, Italy, Greece, etc. have been caused more by the Euro rather than the EU or their own individual governments. Somewhere like Greece never stood a chance of keeping up with an economy like Germany's, so having the same currecy was always going to be a struggle for them, add in the level of corruption in their national government and you see a $#@! load of money wasted that should've been helping to catch them up. Sure there are now vast swaithes of the Greek population now struggling under this EU imposed austerity but it was bought about by their own failures and corruption, was the EU just supposed to turn a blind eye opening the gate for other countries to milk them in the same way? They can't just keep throwing them money, eventually someone has to be accountable.

The Polish people I speak to do not want to return to Poland, which suggests the UK is a much better place to live.
The Euro is an integral part of the EU. You can't blame poverty and austerity on the Euro without holding the EU responsible.

I actually find most of your post quite decent and agree with most of it.
 
That's because those rules are determined by each state's sovereign parliaments to comply with the directive.

You mean the plastics? It was driven by the companies who were paying for the infrastructure improvements and the sovereign parliaments had to tow the line or there would be no funds (particularly as these funds were largely matched by the EU itself). Much of this was driven by the EU's desire to have the same set of rules across the board in this particular industry which I think is a good thing.
 
Maybe you don't understand THM but we are not part of the Schengen agreement therefore we can do what we like about immigration from non-EU citizens. The FT has an article that explains it very well here: https://www.ft.com/content/57556aa2-1e9a-11e6-b286-cddde55ca122

If a Turkish person has a family member who lives in another EU country, he goes to work there on a visa for 4 years and then is allowed to do any job in that country, could the UK stop a non EU national, who is working legally in another country in the EU, from then working in the UK?
Genuine question, I don't know the answer.
 
No Johnny. I was referring to H&S. There is also a distinct difference to the application of law in mainland Europe to the UK. In Europe the spirit of law applies. In the UK the letter of the law applies.
 
No Johnny. I was referring to H&S. There is also a distinct difference to the application of law in mainland Europe to the UK. In Europe the spirit of law applies. In the UK the letter of the law applies.

Apologies, I got confused (which is easily don these days). You also highlight another problem with the EU there. FWIW I prefer the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law which makes us much closer to the USA.
 
The Polish people I speak to do not want to return to Poland, which suggests the UK is a much better place to live.
The Euro is an integral part of the EU. You can't blame poverty and austerity on the Euro with holding the EU responsible.

I actually find most of your post quite decent and agree with most of it.

Well they wouldn't want to return would they if the UK is a better place to live, which I don't doubt that it is for the most part, but that's not what I was disputing. You ask the same Polish people if they think their native land is better now as an EU member state than it was 25 years ago, it may always be playing catch up to the UK but it's certainly in a much better position now than it was a couple of decades ago.

Whilst the Euro is an integral part of the EU now, that wasn't always the case was it? You can see why they wanted that unity in principle but in practise there were always likely to be problems as there was far too much disparity between different ecomonies it was grouping together. The EU isn't forcing austerity onto it's member states through some ideological vision, unlike the Conservative government in the UK, they're trying to dig themselves out of the mess made by the Euro and some member states' corrupt governments.
 
Well thats not true, is it? If the whole point of Brexit is to stop forrins freely coming to the EU then the opposite will also end. Why would the EU open its labour markets to UK residents if we're not prepared to do the same?

But if you have the right skills and experience to offer a company in France or Germany and you are clearly the best person for the job, the fact that you reside in the UK would surely become irrelevant, whether we are in the EU or not ? By the same token, we won't be turning away Professionals from EU countries when we Leave the EU will we ? Some argue it will be fairer as we won't discriminate against, for example, Skilled Workers or Professionals from India, where we have put limits and quotas in place, whereas with Freedom of Movement in the EU, anyone can come here regardless of what they have to offer ?
 
Apologies, I got confused (which is easily don these days). You also highlight another problem with the EU there. FWIW I prefer the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law which makes us much closer to the USA.

I think in some cases the spirit of the law should be applied, but when it is health and safety and can mean the difference between life and death then the letter of the law should be followed.
 
Yes Tony Blair refused to use the veto of new member states.

Irrelevant to the situation now.

Great for multinationals a disaster for the British working class. As I said both parties have used immigration to their advantage. The EU has been a useful vehicle that was used by both parties to shaft the workers. Removing the EU, will make democracy more democratic and more accountable.

How? If people are misinformed to the extent that they think a failure to implement immigration reform is the fault of the EU rather than successive UK governments unwillingness to use the powers available to them then leaving the EU will change nothing.

We did not have complete control of non EU immigration. The EU had agreements with several non EU countries allowing nationals to come from Turkey for example to move to EU countries if they had a job. So for example a Turkish person could come to work in a Turkish hairdressers in the UK, if he had worked in another EU country. Renew his visa for 4 years and then at the end of of the 5th year he was free to work where he liked. There is nothing the UK coukd do to stop that, if it had wanted to.Therefore for example a town close to where I stay, when I come back to the UK, has had 6 new hairdressers salons in the town centre in the last 2 years. They start off cheaper and then when the local hairdressers have to close down as they can't afford to keep going the Turkish hairdressers up the price. Nail bars, Kebabs, restaurants are often about EU agreements with none EU countries. I have no problem with the before mentioned but to say we had absolutel control of none EU immigration, was wrong. Being in the EU, did not us allow to control non EU immigration.

Irrelevant - the UK isnt part of the Schengen area which was covered by the EU Turkey agreement.

So do you have any arguments that stand up to scrutiny?
 
But if you have the right skills and experience to offer a company in France or Germany and you are clearly the best person for the job, the fact that you reside in the UK would surely become irrelevant, whether we are in the EU or not ? By the same token, we won't be turning away Professionals from EU countries when we Leave the EU will we ? Some argue it will be fairer as we won't discriminate against, for example, Skilled Workers or Professionals from India, where we have put limits and quotas in place, whereas with Freedom of Movement in the EU, anyone can come here regardless of what they have to offer ?

1 - It won't be up to the company in Germany or France to decide if you can work and reside in that country though will it, so it is relevant.

2 - Why is it ok to only have people come here for work if they are professionals? Why can people not come here for low-skilled work, if they don't have opportunities for work in their own country?
 
Well they wouldn't want to return would they if the UK is a better place to live, which I don't doubt that it is for the most part, but that's not what I was disputing. You ask the same Polish people if they think their native land is better now as an EU member state than it was 25 years ago, it may always be playing catch up to the UK but it's certainly in a much better position now than it was a couple of decades ago.

Whilst the Euro is an integral part of the EU now, that wasn't always the case was it? You can see why they wanted that unity in principle but in practise there were always likely to be problems as there was far too much disparity between different ecomonies it was grouping together. The EU isn't forcing austerity onto it's member states through some ideological vision, unlike the Conservative government in the UK, they're trying to dig themselves out of the mess made by the Euro and some member states' corrupt governments.

The EU is forcing conditions, which results in Austerity. The point if it is ideological or not is a bit irrelevant. The fact is the EU is dictating conditions for it's original mess up with the Euro, that directly cause austerity to be paid by the poorest in society
Government corruption is a valid point, but you can only do deals with so many corrupt governments, before you have to hold the EU responsible for ineptitude at the very least.
 
Ok, I have now read the article and I can understand the authors reasons as to why somebody who is left wing may think that the EU is not an organisation they should be supporting. I can also see the faults with the EU. I know it is far from ideal and knew that when I voted to remain.

However, what I had to look at is whether we are better off staying in it or coming out of it and I couldn't (and still can't) see any positive change that will come about from leaving the EU. I could only see negatives. What is going to improve?

I agree with what TP put in his post earlier that all the problems we currently have in our country are caused by our government not by the EU. I can only see these problems getting worse now due to a combination of Brexit and a cruel Conservative government calling the shots. Any problems I may have had with the EU were minuscule in comparison with the problems I had with the Conservatives.

Maybe it's a generational thing. I am 37 this year so have have spent my entire adult life being an EU citizen and have no rose tinted, nostalgic, pre-EU past to look back on. I have just never really seen being the part of the EU as being any sort of a problem and the positives of our membership out weigh the negatives.

When I read Brendan O'Neill's article next to your comments, I realise why the vote could have gone either way for so many people. That's why it's hard to stomach some of the abuse we see from some people, on other media, from both sides, just because people didn't vote the same way as them. They seem to take it so personally that people were 'stupid enough' to vote the other way. But how can it be cut and dried when we read your comments, Templeton Peck's comments etc; and Brendan O'Neill's article. The truth is we listened to many views and then we had to vote for one side or the other.

I do think that for many Labour voters, their stomach's turned at the thought of voting the same way as Farage and Johnson, but like O'Neill says in his article, there were more important issues at stake. Voting Leave did not mean that you support Nigel Farage. Voting Remain did not mean that you support certain Tory MP's.

Maybe it won't be until ten years down the line that we discover whether or not we have made the right choice for the UK.
 
1 - It won't be up to the company in Germany or France to decide if you can work and reside in that country though will it, so it is relevant.

2 - Why is it ok to only have people come here for work if they are professionals? Why can people not come here for low-skilled work, if they don't have opportunities for work in their own country?

If you need high skilled people then it benefits the country, if you don't need low paid labour, it would be to the detriment of the low skilled labour workers already living here. Also it wastes government paying benefits to someone, instead of them being able to work.
 
If you need high skilled people then it benefits the country, if you don't need low paid labour, it would be to the detriment of the low skilled labour workers already living here. Also it wastes government paying benefits to someone, instead of them being able to work.

But the UK does need low-paid labour
 
The article is an opinion piece and I don't think it's wise to base a vote on one man's opinion.

I accept that, but for me it did 'tip the scales' in favour of leaving.

My question really is, what do you think of his opinions and his reasoning and did you, or would you have, taken any of the issues that he raises, into consideration, before you voted ?
 
If you need high skilled people then it benefits the country, if you don't need low paid labour, it would be to the detriment of the low skilled labour workers already living here. Also it wastes government paying benefits to someone, instead of them being able to work.

What about jobs like fruit picking which the people in the UK don't seem to want to do?

I saw a documentary a while back where a factory full of EU citizens packing bananas (?) and they interviewed the owner about using UK staff and he said that all the people he'd employed had only lasted a week.
 
Back
Top