Yes Ed, quite

You can tell David Cameron is getting desperate when he claims that the same people who kept Britain out of the euro now want to join the single currency – as he absurdly claimed about Labour at PMQs.

In his first year as Conservative leader Cameron said his party needed to stop \”banging on\” about Europe but he is now destined to spend the rest of his time in office defined by it.

You would think that with the economy stagnant, businesses going under and long-term unemployment rising, the big new year speech from the prime minister would be on how to kickstart the economy.

Kickstart the economy by leaving the EU of course.

Just one teenise, weensie example: it currently takes 18 months to do the environmental impact study on any new industrial project. That is entirely EU law. And yes, obviously that does indeed slow economic growth. Worse, the effect is higher on new companies, new market entrants, than it is on established players. And it is new companies, new market entrants, that are the long term drivers of economic growth.

Leaving the EU would allow us to have a bonfire of these sorts of stupidities. Thus, to kickstart the economy, we need to leave the EU.

I hope I\’ve made that explanation simple enough so that even a Labour politician can understand it?

13 thoughts on “Yes Ed, quite”

  1. >Leaving the EU would allow us to have a bonfire of these sorts of stupidities.

    In theory it would. In practise, getting these laws off the books is unlikely to happen even if we were out (it’s not like the Tories ‘bonfire of the quangos’ really happened, right?)

  2. Indeed at Tank. Leaving the EU would either involve keeping all of the same regulations, or imposing different incompatible ones (thereby making life even harder for businesses that trade internationally).

  3. If I thought that we had a better calibre of politician waiting in the wings ready to improve the lot of this country once the shackles of the EU were cast off, I’d be all for it. But we don’t.

    Looking back, many if not all of the major cockups in the last 20 years have been all our own work: Various failed IT projects, CSA, Rural Payments, Foot and Mouth, debt mountain, public sector bloat, exam grade inflation, 2nd gulf war, id cards…

    There are plenty more, and the EU had nothing to do with any of them. Ok, you could argue that the EU is piling Pelion on Ossa, but I’m not convinced.

  4. Agreed as to our own idiots and evildoers. That is no reason, however, to put up with more idiots from overseas as well.

    We must get rid of the whole political establishment, both EU and domestic scum.

  5. “That is entirely EU law.”

    Not necessarily. In some instances the EU is just a conduit for implementing regulations decided on an international level.(eg: UNECE) It (and member nations) will have had some say in those regulations at the higher level but they aren’t wholly EU regulations.

    In the environmental sphere Agenda 21 is king and Agenda 21 would be inflicted on us whether we are in the EU or not. Perhaps not to the extent it is at the moment but our councils and MPs have drunk the kool-aid on that.

    Leaving the EU would mean the UK could stand up for its own interests on bodies such as the UNECE rather than what it does at the moment – align with the other EU members to have a common position around these international tables.

  6. I think you chaps are missing the point on the difference between our masters and their puppets

    1) EU regulations – Permanent
    2) UK regulations – Can be changed

    I don’t say will be changed, but there is always the possibility, with changes of government. In the EU the government never changes.

  7. “Leaving the EU would allow us to have a bonfire of these sorts of stupidities.”

    How naive. Does anyone really believe that our own idiots in Westminster wouldn’t simply enact our own versions of the stupid laws that currently come from Brussels?

  8. >I don’t say will be changed, but there is always the possibility, with changes of government. In the EU the government never changes.

    Sure, and I wasn’t arguing against leaving, there are many, many reasons for doing so. But the idea that this will result in a a free market paradise is naive. It isn’t – or isn’t just – the EU holding back business here, it’s the political class in general.

    Even Richard North says that to have any chance of selling an EU withdrawal to the people and business and the ruling class we would have to implement all EU legislation so that there is no difference the day after we leave. The best case scenario would then be that we can gradually improve things, but unless politics in Britain has changed a lot by then that’s going to be difficult.

  9. Tank
    “Even Richard North says that to have any chance of selling an EU withdrawal to the people and business and the ruling class we would have to implement all EU legislation”
    Citation please. If we left the EU we would be responsible for our own fishing waters so at a minimum that would involve changes in legislation.

  10. Eddy, I don’t really follow EU fishing policy, but I’m happy to accept for now that it’s rubbish. But if we leave and get rid of it, it makes bugger all difference to the overwhelming urban UK population. We’re not Iceland. We can’t let policy be dictated by 1000 fishermen.

  11. Sorry, forgot the obvious comment. You (Mr W) say it takes x weeks to approve an industrial project. But isn’t that your great tungsten project in Germany? If we leave EU, how will that reduce approval time for your project outside UK?

    Sorry to keep banging on about effects on UK rather than expatriates.

  12. >Citation please.

    Citation for what? That Richard North thinks this? Go and read EU Referendum.

    > If we left the EU we would be responsible for our own fishing waters so at a minimum that would involve changes in legislation.

    North’s point is that there *will* have to be changes in legislation, and lots of it, in order that things carry on pretty much as before, despite us no longer being in the EU (but hopefully in the EEA). But obviously not exactly everything is going to be the same, such as fishing and the CAP, which is all to the good as no-one in Britain will cry for them.

  13. #3 -Steve Crook – That’s a variation on an argument used by the late Auberon Waugh – and it’s the strongest I’ve seen in the EU’s favour – the idea that UK politicians are simply not competent enough to run anything and that we’d be far better off with what he used to describe as a ‘Committee of Belgian Ticket Inspectors’.

    The fact that total submission to the EU would reduce the control of Ed Miliband and by extension his ’eminence grise ‘ the appalling RichardJMurphy, is mildly compelling, however it ignores the fact that the EU is just as inept and corrupt as our own bureacracies and political class, and because it is primarily unelected it is a good deal harder to get rid of.

    Nevertheless, there is a need for realism – the Socialist mindset of massive over regulation of the economy and every aspect of human behaviour is deeply ingrained, both in the innumerable bureaucrats, both at the EU and national level, and overcoming this and stripping back the level of regulation will be a Herculean task even in the event of leaving the EU.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *