17 reasons to leave the EU

17 reasons to leave the EU

Leaving the European Union would:

1 – Restore UK freedom & sovereignty and disentangle us from `ever closer political union` – politicians have given sovereignty away to undemocratic EU institutions such as the unelected European Commission who are effectively the EU Executive and wield the power. Sovereignty & liberty lies with the people and their ability to elect an alternative government who should have the ability and powers granted to alter the laws of the land. (Elected MEPs cannot initiate legislation, propose legislation or even repeal legislation. The UK has failed block a single proposal from the EU Commission passing through the Council of Ministers, despite trying 55 times. EU Regulations are not approved by (UK) Parliament. Once published in the Official Journal of the EU they automatically become Law.)

2 – Restore UK Security- NATO has provided peace and security in Europe for decades. EU expansionism has caused issues in Ukraine and proposals for an EU Army will undermine NATO. The recent Jihadist terror attacks in France show the dangers of the current system of open borders. The former head of Scotland Yard`s Counter Terrorism unit Richard Walton has said that “reducing terror plots absolutely not dependent on EU membership”. Former Labour Foreign Secretary and founder of the SDP has said that staying in the EU is “a more dangerous option for British security” than a vote to leave. We would continue to share intelligence bilaterally with all our allies (both EU & non EU countries as we do presently including through interpol & europol). 18 non EU countries currently participate in europol.

3 – Restore the UK on various global bodies such as the World Trade Organisation which it had lost to the EU.

4 – Give the UK the freedom to make stronger trade deals with other nations. The Lisbon Treaty stipulates that the EU must make a trade agreement with a country which leaves the EU and WTO rules would ensure all UK-EU trade would continue. The EU has free trade agreements & customs unions with over 50 countries (including Andorra, San Marino, Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, Turkey, Guernsey, Ukraine, Mexico & Kyrgystan, who are not in the EU. The UK would be the EU`s largest trading partner. Graeme MacDonald, chief executive of JCB, has said he does not think `Brexit` would make a “blind bit of difference” to trading with Europe. Whilst Willie Walsh, the chief executive of the owners of British Airways / Aer Lingus has said he doesn`t believe `Brexit` will have a material impact on the business.

5 – Give the UK freedom to spend UK resources, currently sent to the EU, in the UK to the advantage of our citizens. The UK is a huge net contributor to the EU contributing £19.6bn annually of which we receive some back resulting in a net contribution of £11.1bn.

6 – Give the UK freedom to control our national borders and introduce an Australian points based immigration system which would be fair and equitable to all , removing the current preferential treatment of EU citizens. This would also address the issue of wage compression which occurs in unskilled low paid jobs when there is an oversupply of labour.

7 – Restore the primacy of UK law. (Northern Ireland Attorney General John Larkin has described the EU courts as “supremely and unassailably unaccountable”)

8 – Allow the UK to deregulate the EU’s costly mass of laws. 95% of UK businesses do not trade with the EU yet 100% are saddled with costly EU red tape.

9 – Freedom to make major savings for British consumers. The Institute of Economic Affairs also reports that EU food prices are on average 17% higher compared to world wholesale prices due to EU regulations. EU energy regulations result in higher energy prices which affects industry and manufacturing.

10 – Give the UK freedom to improve the British economy and generate more jobs. The majority of UK trade happens within the UK. Northern Ireland DETI figures show that of £65.8bn sales in 2014, £22.5bn went outside Northern Ireland. £12.7bn went to the rest of thrUK, £5.8bn wet to the EU (£3.6bn of which went to the Republic of Ireland) and a further £4bn went to the rest of the World. Treasury figures show that the UK trades more with the rest of the world than it does with the EU. Non-EU Exports for December 2015 were £17.1 billion. EU Exports for December 2015 are £10.4 billion. Figures show that the trend is for trade with the EU to continue to decline whilst trade with other parts of the world including the Commonwealth are increasing year on year.

11 – Free our farmers from red tape and introduce a UK equivalent to CAP funding. CAP funding has been reducing in recent years and this will continue. British farmers currently only receive half of what the UK taxpayer puts in to the Common Agriculature Policy.

12 – Give the UK freedom to regenerate Britain’s fisheries which has been devastated by EU regulations. The UK currently only has 30% of the quotas for UK fishing waters. £130 million of fish is dumped annually under the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy.

13 – Save the NHS from TTIP US-EU trade deal which would see privatisation.

14 – Allow the government to protect our hard hit sectors such as the steel industry – currently banned by EU regulations.

15 – Reject the European Arrest Warrant which is an abuse of Habeas Corpus (seek relief from unlawful imprisonment) by allowing British citizens to be arrested & deported without evidence and imprisoned for years abroad without trial.

16 – Give the UK full control of our tax & VAT systems again. The EU want the UK to charge VAT on food when food prices are already 17% higher due to EU regulations and tariffs.

17 – Freedom for the UK to invest in Science & Technology. The Royal Society has reported just 3% of UK Research and Development between 2007-2013 was funded by the EU. 13 countries outside the EU are in Europe-wide science networks. The UK already participates in European Southern Observatory, European Space Agency and CERN which are thriving European science collaboration projects outside the EU. The Swiss Institute & Israel`s The Weizmann Institute both secured EU science funding despite not being in the EU.

IT Technical Manager for a CCTV company in the UK & Ireland. Christian, Orangeman, Unionist. Webmaster of Ulster-Scots Online. Occasional blogger on Slugger O’ Toole. Eurosceptic. @Kilsally

  • Karl

    Just slip out the back, Jack
    Make a new plan, Stan
    You don’t need to be coy, Roy
    Just get yourself free
    Hop on the bus, Gus
    You don’t need to discuss much
    Just drop off the key, Lee
    And get yourself free

  • Chingford Man

    Well said.

  • Karl

    1. In a globalised economy sovereignty is not what it once was. COuntering increasing political union can be offset for a time, but there is / will a price to pay for access to a free market.
    2. It is NATO and not the EU which has caused destabilisation with the circling of Russia by NATO members and Associate members and not just in Europe.
    3. The UK, as one of the largest members of the EU is further amplified in global organisations. The UK has chosen not to engage fully with the EU model and has been caught between the US, the EU and the Commonwealth.
    4.If you think that the US, China and India are going to cut trade deals with a 65 million market that are more favourable than a deal with a 600 million market then you dont understand how trade deals work. The first deal that you will need to cut is with the EU and that will be indicative of the power that the UK wields in global trade.
    5. As a percentage of UK GDP, this is a pittance and not all of it will come back. As stated previously, there will still be a price to access Europe.
    6. Wage comprehension will continue as the economy contracts on Brexit. The working class get shafted either way.
    7. Every EU law must first be passed by Westminster before it comes into effect. UK law has primacy.
    8. Health and Safety, Competition, environmental protection – its not all bad or unecessary or given the UK govt being in thrall to big corporates it may not even have happened
    9. It does cost more to live in a first world, developed, safe economy.
    10. That trend will definitely continue on Brexit. Your argument seems to suggest that while within the EU that trade with non EU is growing. Surely thats what a Brexit is arguing for.
    11. A lot of the red tape is around regulatory safety and consumer protection. It is likely that Tesco are a bigger overhead on production that the EU
    12. Its a fair point in isolation but aquaculture and not fishing is the future of marine development.
    13. The Tories dont need the TTIP to privatise the NHS
    14. Entering protectionism and protecting traditional industries will sent the UK back to the 1970s. The UK will never be able to compete in the mass production of steel, coal and ships. The world has moved on.
    15.Dont know enough about it to comment. Increased cross border police cooperation seems like a good thing
    16. This is a repeat of 9. Ultimately the UK government sets tax rates
    17, There is no EU blocker on the UK investing in R&D.

    Ultimately, the EU has been shaped by its members. The UK is arguably the second most important member. Inarguably the UK has not used its position effectively to mould the EU in the image it desired.

    A Brexit will be a King Canute effort against the tides of globalisation and conglomeratization.

  • Big Yellow Crane

    TTIP Myths and Facts


    This presentation was released in 2014 by the negotiators who the video inserted above accuses of negotiating in secret.

    Some responses

    1 – Restore UK freedom & sovereignty

    For a progressive society the EU enhances sovereignty. It allows us to set standards without the risk that our neighbours will undercut our competitiveness by operating to lower standards. I’d rather be free from a seaside full of sewage than free to dump in the sea thanks.

    2 – Restore UK Security- NATO has provided peace and security in Europe for decades

    You’d think that people who oppose the obligations that the EU imposes on business standards would oppose the obligations that non-elected NATO bureaucrats (operating from Brussels as it happens) impose on our defence policy. Our NATO allies in US and Canada are particularly keen on us staying in Europe. And the “EU Army” is a handful of battle-groups that allow non-NATO states to make some contribution to shared defence – Ireland contributes to the Nordic battle-group. It’s not remotely in competition with the divisions under the control of NATO.

    8 – Allow the UK to deregulate the EU’s costly mass of laws. 95% of UK businesses do not trade with the EU yet 100% are saddled with costly EU red tape.

    I run an SME. I’m not aware of any specifically EU red tape that affects me. I am aware of professional obligations, HMRC requirements and UK employment law that has nothing to do with the EU. One of the ironies of the leavers is that when they’re not complaining about EU regulation they’re complaining about UK “gold-plating” or foreigners not complying with the laws we comply with. A “gold-plated” law (eg 28 days minimum holiday rather than the EU minimum of 20) is not an EU obligation. It’s a UK law. All the EU’s doing is protecting us by ensuring that no-one else offers less than 20. Perhaps Kilsally could name an actual burden that he would like to be without.

    13 – Save the NHS from TTIP US-EU trade deal which would see privatisation.

    Allowing US firms to tender alongside EU firms doesn’t force privatisation.

    14 – Allow the government to protect our hard hit sectors such as the steel industry – currently banned by EU regulations

    Since when did Thatcherite UKIP’ers decide that they wanted to start protecting loss making industries. What happened to “get on your bike”? Chinese dumping into Europe is the biggest threat to UK steel yet the Brexiteers tell us they want to give up EU collective negotiation and bargain directly with China on our own. And 71% of our steel exports are to the EU. A market that will disappear if we cheat on prices by subsidising our industry at the expense of our neighbours.

    15 – Reject the European Arrest Warrant which is an abuse of Habeas Corpus (seek relief from unlawful imprisonment)

    Nearly choked on that one. When IRA on the runs weren’t extradited from the Republic or the US during the troubles unionists (like the poster) were apoplectic.

    16 – Give the UK full control of our tax & VAT systems again. The EU want the UK to charge VAT on food when food prices are already 17% higher due to EU regulations and tariffs

    No they don’t. There is a worthwhile non-tabloid conversation about whether it’s better to have 0% VAT rates on items like food than to make them fully exempt. If you sell an exempt item you can’t reclaim the VAT involved in producing it. So if you sell just exempt food and you pay VAT on electricity, delivery costs, rent you can’t reclaim any of that and you have to pass it on in your costs. So an exempt item often contains more VAT than a 0% item like pharmacy or even a 5% VAT item (like sanitary products) where all input VAT has been reclaimed.

    At the same time though it’s the EU that held HMRC back from their never ending attempts to claim that some medical services (eg Hearing Aid dispensing) are actually retail items that should be subject to VAT.

    Ending exemption and replacing it with low and effectively neutral or better VAT rates cleans up accounting and removes red tape – it doesn’t impose minimum VAT rates.

  • Sir Rantsalot

    “1 – Restore UK freedom & sovereignty

    For a progressive society the EU enhances sovereignty. It allows us to set standards without the risk that our neighbours will undercut our competitiveness by operating to lower standards. I’d rather be free from a seaside full of sewage than free to dump in the sea thanks.”

    How on earth can you say the EU enhances sovereignty??? Control is taken away from the UK in many areas. That is a loss of sovereignty. Do you think people will believe that? ?
    Your description of standards has nothing to do with sovereignty. What standards can we not set as an independent country?
    You are saying that we have more control by being part of a state that requires us to give up large amounts of control. That’s crazy talk dressed up as a reason to remain. No one with 2+ brain cells would fall for that.

  • whatif1984true

    I hope this is not off topic but it is an aspect of Brexit that I have never heard discussed or even mentioned. It is a colossal matter which the incompetents in the EU have never mentioned.
    Brexit may not bankrupt the EU but it will shake it to its foundations.
    The top Net contributors to the EU are Germany UK France Italy Netherlands who in 2014 paid in 43 billion euro more than they got back. If UK leaves that means there is a 11 billion euro hole in their finances. We all know this is the result of Brexit
    The totally unanswered question is where will the axe fall in the EU. Which projects/countries will lose the most from this gigantic shortfall which represents maybe 20% of the EU net spending power.

  • Sir Rantsalot

    Great points. Remainers must be sweating to try and think up another scare story worse than WWW3 ! ????

  • Big Yellow Crane

    “Control is taken away from the UK in many areas”

    Control is the ability to make things happen. We’re better able to make what we want to happen, happen, within our union than we would be marooned on this island, denied non-visa travel and forced to operate our businesses to a rule book we had no hand in writing for no other reason than to pander to your prejudices.

    Am I in more control on my bike than on the bus? Normal people would say that depends on the weather and where I’m trying to get to.
    Or would that be crazy talk?

  • Big Yellow Crane

    Well seeing as almost all EU expenditure is on regional infrastructure (30%), agriculture (47%), policy implementation (consumer protection, nuclear safeguards, R&D) (9%), then one or all of those.

    UK average net contributions are a quarter of a percent of GNI which is a third of our overseas development budget and an eighth of our defence budget. Weird if we don’t think of the prosperity and security of our own continent as worth a third of what we put into the development of less developed nations or an eighth of what we spend to fight wars.

    Without us the rest of the EU wouldn’t notice we’d gone except for the whining and scratching coming from the door as we tried to get back in.

  • Korhomme

    This piece appears on page 3 of today’s Tyrone Courier. It is written, as if it wasn’t obvious, by a Kipper.

    Above it on page 3 there’s an article entitled, “We have more to benefit from staying in the EU”. I can’t find this on-line.

  • Sir Rantsalot

    Control is not the ability to make things happen. It’s the power to make certain things happen and certain things not happen.
    Google says Control is –
    “the power to influence or direct people’s behaviour or the course of events.
    “the whole operation is under the control of a production manager”

    “We’re better able to make what we want to happen, happen, within our union than we would be marooned on this island, denied non-visa travel and forced to operate our businesses to a rule book we had no hand in writing”

    The UK does not make EU law, it just votes on it. The 70+ times the UK objected to a law and wanted it changed, it was ignored. So UK has no control whatsoever. Facts prove this.

    An independent state has 100% control of its affairs. Its not possible to get better than 100%!!! Nobody controls the other party when it comes to making agreements. That’s a red herring thrown up by remainers.

    Regarding your bike bus scenario, if your on a bike (independent), you can steer and peddle as you wish. On the bus (EU) you are a passenger, maybe you can plead with the driver to change ditection, but he’ll just ignore you !
    If you think the weather steers a bike or a bus, then yes that’s crazy talk ! ????

  • Sir Rantsalot

    Why so much noise then about us not leaving? EU heads of state and even other countries such as the US are going bananas at the thought of the UK leaving the EU. You should let them know that there is such a small cost.

  • Ben De Hellenbacque

    What does the extra W stand for?

  • Enda

    Maybe this?….

  • Barney

    1) Transfer freedom & sovereignty to private corporations/oligarchs
    2) Restore UK Security by allowing Britain to invade more countries
    3) Restore the UK’s position as a mouthpiece of Private corporations and not the electorate
    4) Give the UK the freedom to enter a never ending series of protracted trade negotiations.
    5) Give the UK freedom to spend UK resources on subsidising private corporations as the tax base shrinks
    6) Give the UK freedom to control our national borders and introduce an Australian points based immigration system which would be fair and equitable to all who can afford it.
    7) Restore the primacy of UK law except where WTO rules apply
    8) Allow the UK to deregulate the EU’s costly mass of laws like the banking sector which was deregulated with outstanding success.
    9) Freedom to make imaginary savings for British consumers by removing subsidies and having a free market.
    10) Give the UK freedom to improve the British economy and generate more jobs because they have been secretly trying to destroy Britain
    11) Free our farmers from red tape and introduce a UK equivalent to CAP funding thus contradicting point 9 above
    12) Give the UK freedom to regenerate Britain’s fisheries by introducing British red tape
    13) Destroy the NHS from TTIP US-EU trade deal by replacing it with a TTIP US-UK trade deal
    14) Allow the government to protect our hard hit sectors such as the steel industry by erecting trade barriers contradicting many points above and driving investors away.
    15) Reject the European Arrest Warrant in favour of bi lateral agreements such as that between the US and Britain where Habeas Corpus is ignored.
    16) Give the UK full control of our tax & VAT systems when Britain already has full control of its tax system.
    17) Freedom for the UK to invest in Science & Technology which it already has.

  • whatif1984true

    Maybe you missed the point. I said NET contributions. Money that a country pays in and gets back is unlikely to be affected especially those who now get more back than they put in.
    Dismissing the NET 11 Billion from the UK as unnoticeable is just silly, especially as it was growing each year.
    Would you think it less trivial if you looked at it over a slightly longer period of 5 years? It is a HUGE sum.
    The choice will probably be to be to cut either new countries funding/support or the CAP.

  • Big Yellow Crane

    I know you did. And the UK’s average net contribution for 2007-2013 isn’t E11 Billion. It’s 4.872Bn. That’s less than half the Northern Ireland block grant and you’re acting like the rest of the EU will collapse without it.

    Obviously if you look at the total net contribution for all the countries then, apart from admin, the number should be zero. That doesn’t mean the rest of the EU has no money.

    And as some of the net recipient countries such as Poland which received 8.508 Billion euro on average over that last six years have a FAR better growth rate than the UK (4.3% in Poland the first quarter of 2016 vs our 0.4%) the average over the last six years overstates our future importance.

  • hgreen

    Ha ha. We could come up with 50+ reasons to stay in the EU.

    What the person who wrote this really wanted to say was:
    1. Foreigners
    2. Immigrants
    3. Syrians
    4. Turks
    Etc etc.

  • Sir Rantsalot

    Lol ! Must be something even worse than world war .

  • Sir Rantsalot

    I think you’ve set yourself up for a walk the walk bluff calling. Go on let’s hear the 50 reasons?

  • hgreen
  • Kevin Breslin

    The dishonesty began when a committed conservative like yourself put up a Lexit the movie video up on the site.

    1. UK has sovereignty, EU regulations come under the Communities Act which the UK government has never renegotiated nor tried to leave from.

    This law applies in all 28 Nation states of the EU, yet the UK Leave movement seems to single itself out as the biggest victim, despite lower immigration than Germany, lower social protection payments to EU migrants than France, lower EU regulations than every EU nation bar the Netherlands, no Schengen, no Euro, considerable say in the EU Parliament, its Single Market and Policy making.

    If the UK introduces treaties with other nations similar to the Communities Act as is the case with say the North Atlantic Treaty that makes it part of NATO then the “mala fides” of that decision would be met with reciprocated actions.

    Russia broke international laws by the invasion of Crimea therefore undermining the “bona fides” of the Russian-Ukrainian Friendship Treaty


    This is why David Cameron says that the French may terminate “Treaty of Touquet” in “mala fides” if the UK treats France in “mala fides”.

    2. UK security is secured with 22 NATO partners with the EU, and Europol … and contradicting point 15 a European Arrest Warrant that the UK was so desperate to introduce. The Leave side has no plans on how to tackle cross-border criminality without it.

    The UK shares navy and research, intelligence, knowledge and hardware with France, even leaving the EU its security and ability to defend itself means relying on its closest EU based NATO ally.

    The myth that terrorists cannot cross borders where checkpoints occur would have meant 9-11 would not have happened. Are we supposed to believe that the United States of America is a European Union member? India is a European Union member? Israel is a European Union member?

    And the idea that leaving the EU makes the UK less of a target for Islamist terror groups who happily operate in a hell of a lot of non-EU countries at a larger scale is ultimately ridiculous.

    I would argue the opposite. The United Kingdom is the highest EU nation ahead of France, ahead of Greece, pretty much on par with Turkey which borders a warzone beyond its control in terms of the Global Terrorist Index.

    Closing down borders, and ensuring security checks on people going out of the United Kingdom would protect both the European Union and the Republic of Ireland from the kind of terrorism that the United Kingdom attracts!


    3. The UK is already on the WTO, and because of the unanimous nature of the WTO pretty much depends on the EU and a whole load of other nations to get anything passed there.

    The UK chairs committees in the WTO and has permanent representatives in the United Kingdom with non-democratically elected faceless diplomatic bureaucrats that are completely of the UK’s own choosing.

    4. You are making these arguments with the opinions of business people not trade lawyers. Like the EU trade deals require reciprocation of access, and in terms of the service industries both common rules and free movement have to be accounted for.

    5. The amount of resources that have been claimed to be saved from leaving the EU has been estimated to be 5% of the net contribution. This mainly comes in from abandoning the Working Time Directive and Environmental Legislation that the UK exceeds the EU in anyway. This isn’t about saving resources, it’s entirely about exhausting the human and material resources we already have leading to higher pollution and lower worker morale.

    6. The UK has already an Australian points based system for non-EU migrants and there hasn’t been a decline in non-EU migration. The wage compression argument comes down to how much UK companies value UK based industry at the end of the day.

    The UK’s own foreign based workforce percentage is 7.1% lower than all EFTA countries including Iceland, and half of Ireland’s 14.2% (which of course will include Britons) It’s youth unemployment is much higher than Germany’s and only 2% lower than Poland’s.

    7. The primacy of the UK laws remain, abandoning the European Court of Human Rights or the European Communities Act will remove protections, rights and opportunities granted to UK nationals within the European Union and ECHR rights domain.

    8. The deregulation arguments apply to the UK based regulations that exceed the EU’s common standards and this is race to the bottom logic. It is ridiculously hypocritical to argue about depreciation in wages one minutes then scrapping the Working Time Directive (the UK has a small opt out upon ).

    Perhaps if the UK stopped forcing people to have fifty hour a week jobs, they could focus on training workers to fill skill gaps like pediatric heart surgeons some UK residents in a part of the UK not in Britain may have to go to an EU country on the same island to avail of.

    9. The return of EU customs arrangements that will hit Northern Ireland the hardest combined with the opening of the UK market to Australian, New Zealand and American competition is unlikely to boost the ability of Northern Ireland producers to compete on quality rather than quantity.

    We already import cheap overseas goods so the idea that the UK cannot import sweat shop goods into the European Union is ridiculous.

    As an engineering graduate, I’m far more interested in exports, not imports and the UK’s trade deficit with its EU partners. A culture change is needed if the UK is going to move from a buying country to a selling country.

    When you talk about heavy UK industries that rely on localized demand and supply lines, foreign direct investment from the European union is likely to be under threat from a Brexit because the UK will be seeking to leave the single market.

    If the UK undermines EU supply lines for multinational manufactured goods then the “for want of a nail” effect happens, and if barriers between the UK and EU nations arise then that damages other value added process along the multinational supply chain.

    10. The UK already trades with the rest of the world, as do the rest of the EU. It would be ridiculous for any nation of the EU to be against trading with the rest of the world on terms acceptable to all the nations within it.

    The problem is that the UK doesn’t “free trade” with the rest of the world. And free trade isn’t hassle free in 13. you mention TTIP which is a free trade agreement, the idea that the UK will easily negotiate TTIP like free trade agreement with informed nations in this age of digital communication is ridiculous.

    With low productivity and barriers to exporting the service sector, declines in modern language learning,

    11. Any replacement UK subvention scheme in terms of agriculture will need to be regulated and face red tape. That is pretty much part of any subvention scheme, otherwise the UK government is simply giving away money unchecked.

    The United Kingdom has driven the reduction of agricultural subsidies on principle across the 3 main parties. The UK negotiated a rebate because it wasn’t a big agricultural nation like France, yet it still remains the 5th biggest beneficiary of CAP.

    If the UK parties consistently call for their own farmers to have less subsidies while in Europe, surely the subsidies, the UK’s biggest returned expense is going to be cut to pay for VAT cuts and NHS payments?

    Any cuts to the agricultural subvention is going to hurt more rural parts of the UK like Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales much more harder than say London, Manchester, Birmingham where a lot of the UK population is based.

    As well as that the Brexit arguments fail to ignore the problems in world agricultural markets that will remain inside or outside the EU. Problems such as the Russian sanctions, India’s self-sufficiency in this section and protectionism, the Chinese and Brazilian recessions, The EU like trade barriers that developed world nations have, and the market access problems that the third world have.

    12. See 11. replace agriculture with fisheries. Quotas to the UK’s closest EU partners will be introduced as is the case in terms of Norway. The regional waters of Norway, Iceland

    13. TTIP is a perfect example of a Free Trade Agreement the EU is capable of making, imagine what Free Trade Agreements can be made by Tories that don’t have left leaning nations like France mitigating them?

    14. The Germans have been nationalizing utilities, the Irish their banks, the British plan at great cost to the UK taxpayer to partially nationalize the Tata Steelworks but the Adam Smith Institute warn them that they would be losing tax payer money with a full nationalization approach.



    15. The UK wanted to introduce this, if they showed to same determination to get rid of it as they did putting it in it would be gone.

    “Before the EAW was introduced extradition used to take an average of one year, but now that has been cut to an average of 48 days, the European Commission says. A suspect must be handed over within a maximum of 90 days after arrest. In cases where a suspect agrees to surrender the average extradition time is 16 days.”

    David Ford has since admitted that Northern Ireland would struggle to deal with cross border crime and terrorism without it, as I imagine Claire Sugden will too.

    16. The UK has a veto over budget as do the Republic of Ireland and Malta who also have 0%. The only VAT increase that has been planed on UK food and drink is the sugary drink tax that the UK government plan to introduce to combat obesity.

    17. It already exists and the UK government has cut the money given to the Research Councils to deal with the fiscal deficit.

    Science is the next biggest spend after the CAP/CFP and the UK is the top recipient of the EU of scientific funding including Horizon 2020 and prior Framework programs. In terms of domestic spending on scientific R&D the UK is third behind Germany and France but 13th out of 28 nations on a per capita basis.

    The UK also makes a financial contribution goes towards European Centers of Scientific Excellence in both the UK and on the Continent that may be clawed back for the Brexit slush fund of VAT cuts and subsidies.

    The UKIP plan to charge EU students, possibly excluding Irish at the international rate may act as a deterrent for talent to come to British universities.

    The removal of free movement of goods and people could potentially act as a deterrent for Foreign direct investment of multinationals.

    Manufacturing requires obeying common regulations either global or continental that if ignored lead to defective products. The strategic certainty of the single market being undermined until some sort of FTA is produced, plus the effect that falling pound will have on energy imports may either see cuts to fuel imports or the necessary introduction of unpopular domestic base energy generation like fracking.

    We have seen Switzerland’s crackdown on migration result in the suspension of the Erasmus+ and Horizon 2020 schemes simply because it didn’t want the free movement of Croatians, it returned the EU schemes with less influence and reduced access than they had previously.

  • terence patrick hewett

    Sometimes I think the world is a grotesque madness run by a fraternity of lunatics: if only it was: the insane would do a better job of it.

    If only the world were run by Spike Milligan and Harry:

    and Peter:

    and the musical genius Max Geldray:

  • whatif1984true

    Well said.

  • whatif1984true

    “Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure
    nineteen [pounds] nineteen [shillings] and six [pence], result
    happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds
    ought and six, result misery.”

    “Total UK government revenue is forecast to be £670.3billion in 2015–16”, slightly more than the EU income. Can you get to grips with the result if UK Government at a stroke had the income reduced by 11,000,000,000 euro. Is that a better real world perspective for you.

  • Big Yellow Crane

    UK net contribution isn’t 11Bn though. It’s a bit less than 5Bn.

    If the UK lost 5Bn from its tax take that would be a bigger loss than 5Bn from the EU’s. That’s because the UK budget is already at over 40% of GDP whereas the EU budget is less than 1% of EU GDP. It’s nothing but a centralised farm program to ensure that the most subsidised sector in Europe is treated equally across Europe – as we have a single market. That and some grants for roads like ours to Dublin – again to facilitate trade and the single market.

    To cover €4.872Bn from a population of 443 Million people would cost them €11 each a year.

    They wouldn’t even notice it.

  • notimetoshine

    Awesome rebuttal

  • whatif1984true


    The above gives the official HM TREASURY Fonancial staements and the UK’s Net contribution is nearly twice what you suggest, it is £8.9 BILLION for 2015.

  • kensei

    18 – No one expects the Spanish Inquisition

    19 – Popery

    20 – Winter is Coming

  • AndyB

    @bigyellowcrane:disqus you may be counting farm subsidies twice – they’re administered by the Government. Actual net contribution, including payments from the EU to the private sector for 2014, is €7.09 billion or £5.71 billion.

    @whatif1984true I would say that the £5.71 billion figure is the correct one to use, because post-Brexit, the payments to the private sector as well as the public sector would stop dead. However, it’s still a mere €16 per capita per annum of the remaining population of the EU – and in the event of a free trade agreement, one can expect the actual payments due from the UK to cover a good chunk of that £5.71 billion!

  • AndyB

    A few responses, with sources where appropriate (and if you don’t like where I get my sources, try googling)

    1. The UK has been on the losing side 56 times, abstained 70 times, and on the winning side 2466 times since 1999. 98% is a pretty good rate of success of getting our own way.


    5. Stop repeating the lie that we give £19.6 billion to the EU and get some back. Yes, I said lie, because we actually give £11 billion to the EU (the rebate never leaves the UK). The public sector gets 42% of that back in Agriculture funding, social and regional funding, and other fund, and the private sector gets another 7% in direct funding.


    13. “The NHS would be as safe as a pet hamster in the presence of a hungry
    python if Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Iain Duncan Smith rose to
    power following Brexit.” – Sir John Major. Besides, who actually believes that the UK Government doesn’t want in on TTIP, given its response to the similar Canadian deal?


    14. The EU attempted to protect the British steel industry by increasing tariffs on Chinese imports, but was prevented by the UK, precipitating Tata’s withdrawal from the UK as it couldn’t compete with cheap imports.


  • Sir Rantsalot

    There is no mention of the EU on that page. Just mention of 800 international companies that came to NI purely because of the skills in NI. If anything it is an argument that we don’t need to be in the EU !!!

  • hgreen

    Ha ha keep digging.

    You do know most of the 17 points above aren’t facts or guaranteed. Number 14 for example on the steel industry is just a lie considering the UK blocked tariffs on Chinese steel.

  • Sir Rantsalot

    Your post is full of misdirection Kev.

    “UK Leave movement seems to single itself out as the biggest victim, despite lower immigration than Germany, lower social protection payments to EU migrants than France”
    Numbers and payments are not the issue. The issue is about having control of our own immigration. Having less uncontrolled immigration than Germany is not the issue.
    If you can argue that having uncontrolled immigration, with only the EU having the power to change the rules, is better than having control by the UK, then go ahead. ?

  • Sir Rantsalot

    Trying to change the subject ? 🙂
    You linked to a page claiming 800 reasons in relation to remaining in the EU. But the page says nothing about the EU and actually presents NI skill base as the reason for international companies coming to NI.
    Just admit that you are wrong. Admit that there is no need to be in the EU. Its ok, I will forgive you 🙂

  • Reader

    Korhomme: Above it on page 3 there’s an article entitled, “We have more to benefit from staying in the EU”. I can’t find this on-line.
    Maybe the author doesn’t know about blogs, or thinks that Slugger is beneath him. I have seen comments and (I think) articles by ‘Kilsally’ on here before.

  • hgreen

    There is no single reason or pull factor for FDI. If you are blind or choose to deliberately ignore that being part of the EU is a major pull factor for FDI that is up to you. Get back to focusing on immigration. When the exiters talk about the economy it’s just embarrassing.
    800 companies and that’s only in little ole norn iron.

  • Sir Rantsalot

    This is what you stated –
    “Ha ha. We could come up with 50+ reasons to stay in the EU.”
    You are saying you can come up with lots of reasons to stay in the EU. I challenged you to come up with reasons to stay in the EU. You can’t. Making false claims and linking a website with nothing about the EU, is clearly an attempt at trickery. Talking about something else because you have dug yourself into a hole, is “just embarrassing” 🙂

  • Big Yellow Crane

    I’ve taken the average operating balance for 2007 – 2013 from the EU’s reports Andy and I’ve taken averages because they’re as good a reflection on trends as one off years. Here’s the link;


    Example of how the EU works out a country’s net operating balance. 2013.

    Our expenditure was E6,308M of which E128M was UK based EU admin.

    Our 2013 contribution (from VAT receipts and % GNI was E14,509M. (that’s the £11Bn leavers talk about)

    That’s a net contribution in 2013 of £8,330M.

    In 2013 the EU spend E127,046M (ex Admin) in member states against receipts of E124,378M. Our balance is adjusted for that in year overspend. So we get a pro-rata E311M of the overspend for 2013 added to our account.

    So for 2013 the EU reported the UK as having net contributions (ie contribution less receipts + our share of surplus expenditure) of £8,641M.

    This varies between 2007 and 2013 and was as low as E844M in 2008. The average net contribution was E4,872M as I’ve said.

    And as new entrants to Europe grow their economies faster than the rich traditional net contributors our relative contribution will reduce.

    There is another line of revenue that Europe gets. In 2013 the EU received E15,365M in Customs payments. Of these E2,558M were customs collected in the UK on imports to the EU as a whole.

    Tate & Lyle were complaining this morning that their industry was damaged by the EU’s levies on sugar imports. Total UK sugar levies were £13M in 2013. So Tate & Lyle want the UK to leave the EU so their industry can save £13M in levies. And Tim Martin wants to buy cheaper booze from NZ for his pubs. I’m not sure that that warranted a BBC story but it does show that the key leave sponsors are nothing more than importers who don’t want to pay customs. So there’s another area where following their schemes will reduce UK revenues and public services. Leavers want to undermine public services, rot your teeth and wreck your liver.

    And apparently Farage doesn’t believe the fear mongering about tobacco. Bit of a pattern.

  • hgreen

    Yes I came up with 800. Not my fault you don’t see the link between FDI and EU membership. As for false claims the 17 theses above and which you endorse have been thoroughly debunked elsewhere.
    As well as the negative economic impact on N.I. of an exit for me the other main reason to remain is climate change. Together the EU countries will have enormous influence on future climate change legislation. I note that none of the 17 theses above mention climate change. To be expected since the majority of exciter’s are climate change deniers.

  • Big Yellow Crane

    And another thing.

    Here’s the link to UKIP’s immigration policy;


    UKIP’s going to save England for the English by restoring Visa immigration restrictions.

    The average Brit paid E77 to the EU per year 2007-2013.

    A Schengen Tourist Visa valid for 90 days costs E60.

    So follow the leavers and then try to go to Europe more than once in a year and you’ve already lost your so-called saving.