Nuts EU Referendum - How will you be voting?

Well a few weeks off yet and time to change your minds but as it stands now how will you be voting and why?

There's been far too much scaremongering from both sides and precious little in the way of solid facts and evidence.

Neither campaign has come up with anything like a convincing or compelling argument for their cause.

So for that reason, I'm voting to continue as we are.

If it ain't broke, etc.......

In for me. There is a case for leaving but it's not the one Boris and Gove's lot are making. Handing power to those right wing prats would be a disaster.

http://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2016/06/05/how-to-vote-in-the-eu-referendum/?utm_source=MSE_Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=07-Jun-16-v1t&utm_campaign=nt-oneliners-one&utm_content=3

The best thing I've read about the pros and cons.

I'm voting in as well but our agreement needs to be drastically altered. We should be part of a Europe wide trade agreement which is what we joined up for originally and nothing more

I was all for voting out recently but have changed my opinion. To be honest like breaders said,  all the toing and froing from both sides has left me not really knowing what is for the best and fir that reason I'm voting to keep it as it is.

I'm voting out for reasons expressed on other threads, but part of me would like the vote to keep us in but close enough for it to be a real wake up call to those in power that the current status quo isn't acceptable or sustainable.

edit: the vote shows 6 to 4 in favour of out but the comments are all from people voting in apart from mine, why are the out voters not commenting?

Problem is nobody has any idea what could happen if we leave rhe EU as no country has ever done it before.

People don't have enough information and are either voting for out so we can "control our borders" or voting in because out is the unknown quantity.

I was going to vote undecided.

I'm out. This agreement with the US, conducted in almost secrecy could be a millstone, plus every time there's a bit of news, good or bad, it's Frau Merkel or Messr Hollander standing in front of the camera. I though we had a rolling President so surely that person should be the one who does the necessary. Plus I don't really like the idea of an EU army. Bit Napoleonic if you ask me. On the good side, managed to buy two bananas yesterday so no truth in the three per bunch.

TTIP's not likely to go through now, largely thanks to it coming out in the press and mass protests (been some big ones in London). Agree with you on the principle though Bollotom the fact it snuck through so far shows how undemocratic the organisation can be.

Having said that, it also shows the existing value in Brussells regulation. You can be absolutely certain that given free reign the likes of Gove and Boris would remove as many workers rights as possible which Brussells enforces to make the country 'more attractive for investors' which translates as an ability to slave drive working people with no interference.

Definitely voting out. I doubt anyone knows whether leaving the EU will be a good or bad thing, but I'm prepared to take my chances.

Natasha Whittam wrote:Definitely voting out. I doubt anyone knows whether leaving the EU will be a good or bad thing, but I'm prepared to take my chances.

We know exactly the type of policies the likes of Gove and Boris would look to implement. This is not the time to vote out and not the set of leaders to hand power to.

I've been imagining Boris in Downing St,and Trump in The White House. We'd all be going to hell in a hand cart whether we were in or out of the EU.

Norfolk will be voting out. All of 'em from what I can gather.
I understand the thick racists doing that but I'm surprised at the farmers who get a disproportionately high amount of funding subsidy and grants from Europe. I suppose they'll be expecting that they will get the same directly from the British taxpayer if we leave which is a fair enough assumption seeing as nobody has said anything about how what's left of the economy will be run post Brexit.

On the immigration issue, can anyone tell me if there is anything in place that would prevent the British Government from introducing a law that says benefits and NHS medicare etc will only be given to to people or the dependents of people who have paid tax into the system for a minimum of e.g. 10 years? I don't think there's anything stopping us from doing that but would appreciate some advice to help me make up my mind.

wanderlust wrote:
On the immigration issue, can anyone tell me if there is anything in place that would prevent the British Government from introducing a law that says benefits and NHS medicare etc will only be given to to people or the dependents of people who have paid tax into the system for a minimum of e.g. 10 years? I don't think there's anything stopping us from doing that but would appreciate some advice to help me make up my mind.

I hope someone has the sense to implement that, it would change immigration overnight.

Didn't the Tories say that new immigrants couldn't claim any benefits for 3 years? Not sure if thats just EU migrants or in general and when it actually started?

Natasha Whittam wrote:

wanderlust wrote:
On the immigration issue, can anyone tell me if there is anything in place that would prevent the British Government from introducing a law that says benefits and NHS medicare etc will only be given to to people or the dependents of people who have paid tax into the system for a minimum of e.g. 10 years? I don't think there's anything stopping us from doing that but would appreciate some advice to help me make up my mind.

I hope someone has the sense to implement that, it would change immigration overnight.

The reason I ask is that I've heard "Out" campaigners using immigration/medical tourism/benefit claimants as a reason to leave Europe, but if we have the power to change the law as per above, the problem has absolutely nothing to do with Europe.

I personally believe that our Welfare State is struggling so it makes sense and moreover seems fairer, to give the services to those that have paid for them.

In Norfolk, they seem to think that it's Europe that is forcing the UK to give benefits and free medical treatment to immigrants and that's what is attracting more immigrants. But if we already have the power to decide who gets benefits, then their worries are completely unjustified and they should focus their efforts on lobbying our Government to sort it out rather than blaming Europe for our Government's weak performance.

I'm pretty sure that when dodgy Dave got his European concessions,the benefits after 3 years was one of his few successes

I'm perturbed by the huge numbers of ex-convicts here that we are unable to deport.....

"One of the most notorious cases was that of Learco Chindamo, who was 15 when he stabbed headteacher Philip Lawrence to death outside his London school in 1995. In 2007, Chindamo, an Italian national, won an appeal against his proposed deportation at the conclusion of his sentence, on the basis that he was from an EU country and had already lived in the UK for 10 years by 1995.
Ministers blamed the Human Rights Act but the decision was mainly based on immigration rules, brought in to comply with an EU directive, which say that a national of an EU state who has resided in the UK for 10 years cannot be deported except on “imperative grounds of public security”.