Should We Leave The Eu As It Is Now Without Any Changes. ?

[modeller]

I have listened to many Question Times and interviews concerning any referendum and no one ever asks the pro EUs the simple question.
"Are you satisfied to leave the EU and it's Institutions as they are now without any changes ? "

Again and again the pros. say " We don't need a referendum because we all have agreed there will be one automatically: 'If there is a 'Tangible' change in the present treaty.
By implication as long as there isn't a 'Tangible ' change, they are happy to leave it as it is.
There have been any number of changes over the past few years , including the one Cameron refused to sign, but apparently none of them have been considered Tangible.
Had it not been for UKIP Cameron would still be hiding behind that word and still is to avoid having one before 2017.

Over the next 4 years there will be several new members but as long they sign up to the present treaties , that wont be a change that will be termed Tangible.

[askyourgran]

It was by joining the Common Market that started this ball rolling, and by stealth we are now part of the greatest con of all. I certainly did not vote to join this, and getting out is going to be a struggle. Cameron is hellbent on our staying in the EU and sacrificing our sovereignty. 'A tangible change' will be twisted to suit any excuse to stay in. We are propping up poor countries who have little or no money while still pumping money into the EU, fending off more immigrants and fighting to regain our economic status. I wouldn't trust Cameron to sell me a second hand car.

[debarri]

The easy thing for David Cameron to do would be to bow to the pressure being brought on him by back-bench Conservative MPs, a few Cabinet Ministers and ex-Cabinet Ministers and call for an in-out referendum now, which given the present economic climate, public anxiety and political propaganda of UKIP, would result in an 'out' vote. Having stymied UKIP with the referendum, he could then call a snap general election which, on the back of a referendum 'triumph', he would be likely to win.

Why doesn't he do the political expedient thing?

Because I think he knows that Britain's best interests lie in being part of the larger European trading block, rather than being isolated and ignored when the US, China and the rest of the world negotiate trade deals with Europe.

[jim360]

Given that most politicians tend to want power, why would they also want to stay in the EU if it really is slowly taking over all of the business of government?

[debarri]

Although I have never voted Tory, and don't think I ever will, I admire David Cameron for not taking what appears to be the easy route to maintaining power and doing what's best for the country by trying to negotiate for Britain from within Europe, rather than being isolated and ignored by being outside it.

[askyourgran]

You have a point there debarri, but his negotiations are taking a long time to bear fruit, the electorate are becoming frustrated with this impasse. I have always voted Tory, but I will hesitate if Cameron is still leader up to the next election. He has not shown anything worthwhile in his leadership up to now, except to support gay marriage which is neither here nor there in the great scheme of things. He is fast losing votes. We are fast losing money to the EU, we do not reap what we sow in that direction, except to be given ridiculous rules and regulations. We would not be left out in the cold as far as trade is concerned. What Cameron ought to be doing is supporting British industries and bring the workforces back, eg. into steel, weaving and tailoring. At the moment we have less to offer because our once thriving industries are now lost, thanks to cheaper imports from China and Eastern Europe.

[jim360]

Has he even started negotiations yet? I think the timetable that was mentioned was: general election/ Tory victory (or Tories in a minority government/ coalition) in 2015, and then "we would have a mandate for negotiating".

[askyourgran]

Jim I'm not quite sure what the agenda is at the moment. I am aware that everyone is wanting action now, before the election. If we have to wait that long I'm afraid he won't have the voters confidence.

[jim360]

It may depend on what precisely the electorate wants. Cameron may end up being insincere in wanting a referendum, but he's trapped into it now, I think. On the other hand, the other main parties aren't offering one at all except "when there is a transfer of powers" -- which, by their definition, could be never. If the public cares enough about Europe, the only choice to get a say on it may be the Tory party. This is probably not an ideal position, but Eurosceptics would be shooting themselves in the foot to turn away from the Tory party, even under Cameron.

[jim360]

Well, he has fixed the economy -- oh, wait...

More seriously, do you feel that a part with as yet precisely zero MPs represents the best hope for running our country? Or, perhaps, how much power do you want UKIP to have come 2015?

[jim360]

Seems reasonable enough. Even as a non-Tory it's clear that Cameron is taking the party in a direction many inside it don't want to go.

[askyourgran]

What else has he done? He has introduced Police Commissioners to each county at a cost of up to £100.000 per Commissioner, who are now asking for deputies at a further cost of £65.000 plus office expenses, our Commissioner in West Yorkshire has asked for and received at least £6m for extra front-line Policemen and a deputy, yet he hasn't been in office for 12 months. All expense to the tax payer to be added to our Council tax bills at a time when we are counting the cost of heating and other utilty bills. Dodgy Dave will have to prove he is listening to the electorate soon instead of making these self determined efforts for the gay community. Wish he was as determined about immigration, sending back those who have outstayed their welcome.