When I vote for a government , I am delegating responsibilities to those elected to take decisions on my behalf , not because I dont have an opinion on a subject but because I'm not an expert in all areas , and particularly where international finance is concerned .
Being an design engineer , I dont expect my boss to know how to work out the structural integrity of a steelwork section , that's what he delegates to me . All he needs to know is that I have the expertese .
It makes me cringe , when the media , and some of the people they ask , give their reason for not joining the Euro as " we want to keep the pound " , what a fantastically well thought through argument that realy is , such a sound basis for the finacial stability of this country for the forthcomming years in the face of a growing European Trading Block .
As I alluded to at the begining , I know I dont have all the answers , and thats why I would rather leave it to the experts , without a referendum , which in my opinion the result of which would be based on VERY LITTLE knowledge of the implications , one way or the other .
The only drawback to this is that even the experts dissagree , but I wonder whether this is from , actual reasoning , or inbred preducices , based on Party political Dogma ?

I like that explaination.
Although I don't feel it's finacially the right time to join the Euro, I look forward to the day we do.

It doesn't make me any less patriotic to the UK, but I just see it as the correct way forward in life!

If we join the Euro, we will not be delegating our economy to our government, but a panel of 12 from different countries, who will make decisions that benefit most of the 12, which will not always be to the benefit of the UK. For example, at the moment we have complete control of our interest rates, albeit via the Bank of England. This can be tinkered in this country only to help control spending, borrowing, etc, which in turn affects house prices and inflation. If a government is handling the economy badly resulting in high inflation and unemployment, we can vote in another government who can try to manage the economy more effectively. If we join the Euro, we will have to grin and bear it, as our government will be representing only 1 in a 12 country panel. Furthermore, as more of the poorer countries in Eastern Europe sign up to the Euro over time, our economy will be dragged down by having to prop up poorer countries. Without the Euro, we have a strong economy, currently the 4th biggest in the world, and unemployment is low. If its not broke, don't fix it!

I am totally against the Euro and am pleased it's been put off for at least a little longer. However, that prat Blair seems hell-bent on dragging us into Europe regardless of the consequences.

Mr Brown - Please do you think it is possible that we can now leave behind all this Euro debate and start to anticipate that you turn all your attention to where it should have been in the first place - that is of course any of the very many domestic issues facing us - Health, Education, Transport, Law and Order, Defense, Environment, Corruption in Loal Government, Pensions, Asylum and Immigration. Is this too much to ask?

If we are to be a part of Europe, why should we be a bit-player and have to accept the decisions that are made?

We are supposedly a world leading nation, perhaps it should be US running Europe and not Europe running us.

Arguments about us losing the pound and losing our identity is pure rubbish. The French lost their Franc but they are still frogs, Germans lose the mark and they are still the same humourless krau... people. I don't wish to offend, but nothing has changed. I go to Dublin, buy a guiness with euros and I know I'm in Dublin and not in a faceless Euro-zone. Same as when I was in France last month. I bought a pint of Hoegaarden with Euros from the same place I bought one a couple of years ago but with Francs.

If a piece of paper is the only thing to show for this country, then we are in a sorry state and have nothing to lose.

Germans may still be that but at least before they had the ability to change their own interest rate. Now if they want the interest rate of the Euro changing they must be in agreement with plenty of other countries too. The result? Recession.

The Euro currently is worth about 58 pence and in Britain this would make a litre of milk £2.32, it would be cheaper to get a cow! :evil:


How can giving up Political and Economic control of your country work?

Originally posted by "Lickszz"

The Euro currently is worth about 58 pence and in Britain this would make a litre of milk £2.32, it would be cheaper to get a cow! :evil:


How can giving up Political and Economic control of your country work?

Umm, how exactly did you work out the price of a pint of milk?

We don't have economic control over our country anyway. As far as t'north is concerned the decision making will just be going a little bit further south.

Originally posted by "Lickszz"

The Euro currently is worth about 58 pence and in Britain this would make a litre of milk £2.32, it would be cheaper to get a cow! :evil:


Could you explain what you mean please?

A litre of milk is about 60p in the shops, right? So if we get the Euro, a litre of milk will be about 1 Euro.

Prices will be converted into Euros, but they shouldn't actually change. It won't be cheaper to get a cow, because the price of the cow will change too.

A friend of mine who is dutch and lives in rotterdam,says that since they have had the euro currency,the cost of living has soared,so, why should we join the common market euro if it is going to increase OUR cost of living.

That is the last thing that people in this country want,this can be likened to a war of attrition where we are being worn down all the time to suit the majority of the EEC who incidently are mostly poor countries and desperately need financial assistance.

It all started off innocently enough, as we originaly were told it was just a market to sell our goods to (about 300 million people.) Now,we find we are going to lose our sovereignty,our pound,the right to make our own decisions,be at the mercy of unelected bureaucrats in brussels who will dictate and domineer and not I may say for OUR good.

Originally posted by "Andy"

The Euro currently is worth about 58 pence and in Britain this would make a litre of milk £2.32, it would be cheaper to get a cow! :evil:


Could you explain what you mean please?

A litre of milk is about 60p in the shops, right? So if we get the Euro, a litre of milk will be about 1 Euro.

Prices will be converted into Euros, but they shouldn't actually change. It won't be cheaper to get a cow, because the price of the cow will change too.

I don't quite understand Lickszz's conversion but prices will increase i we converted to Euros. If for example that 60p litre of milk converted to 0.95 Euros, the price will always be rounded up. So in general, all prices will increase slightly as a result of rounding up converted prices. On top of losing control of our own economy, losing our currency, and sharing decisions about OUR country with representatives from foreign countries, it puts the icing on the cake. Its time to say no.

Originally posted by "t020"

The Euro currently is worth about 58 pence and in Britain this would make a litre of milk £2.32, it would be cheaper to get a cow! :evil:


Could you explain what you mean please?

A litre of milk is about 60p in the shops, right? So if we get the Euro, a litre of milk will be about 1 Euro.

Prices will be converted into Euros, but they shouldn't actually change. It won't be cheaper to get a cow, because the price of the cow will change too.

I don't quite understand Lickszz's conversion but prices will increase i we converted to Euros. If for example that 60p litre of milk converted to 0.95 Euros, the price will always be rounded up. So in general, all prices will increase slightly as a result of rounding up converted prices. On top of losing control of our own economy, losing our currency, and sharing decisions about OUR country with representatives from foreign countries, it puts the icing on the cake. Its time to say no.

You're absolutely right, retailers can be relied up on to round up not down every time.

There are clear disadvantages to the Euro, but I believe they are far outweighed by the clear benefits. Why the tories are so against it (apart from Ken Clarke) is beyond me, since you think they'd favour anything that enabled goods and capital to move more freely than ever before, creating the ideal conditions for a booming market.

As for controlling our interest rates, well that is all done by the Bank of England, and in my experience bankers all over Europe are just that, entirely the same breed of Bankers. Our national finances ar so inextricably linked to those of our european and us friends that what happens to them happens to us and vice versa. The Euro will make those fluctuation far more manageable and transparent once a bedding in period (10-15 years) has passed.

Of course this must come with root and branch reform of the Commission, the Parliament and EU bureaucracy, a complete rethink of the CAP and Fisheries to take into account global climate change and the requirements of an enlarged EU.

The Euro will enable British firms who excel in engineering, construction, IT, infrastructure etc to competetively bid for work in the less economically developed former soviet republics, which are desperate to part exchange their resources for hard cash to build up their countries to 'western' standards.

All bureaux de changes will go out of business, putting thousands of greedy and exorbitant money changers out of business.

Political Union will manifest itself with less national and supra national government, and more provincial and local government for less of a 'one-size-fits-all' approach, so endorsed by the then-EEC in the 70s.

And if the UK is outside of the Euro, she cannot actively participate in the processes that are going to govern European Trade and Relations for the forseeable future.

Before we have a common currency we need a common language, that is a far greater barrier to trade.

I'm finding the concept of the Anglosphere increasingly attractive - thats a loose union of the english speaking nations with whom we have much more in common than we do with most of the european countries - Canada, Australia, NZ, US (and debateably a few others like India).

Originally posted by "robh"

Before we have a common currency we need a common language, that is a far greater barrier to trade.

I'm finding the concept of the Anglosphere increasingly attractive - thats a loose union of the english speaking nations with whom we have much more in common than we do with most of the european countries - Canada, Australia, NZ, US (and debateably a few others like India).

I agree. I'd much rather join the US, Australia and Canada rather than Europe. We have much more in common, both with the language and with our cultures.

What about now!!! I shall be dead in ten to 15 years!!!

Originally posted by "robh"

Before we have a common currency we need a common language, that is a far greater barrier to trade.
I'm genuinely interested why you think that is

I'm finding the concept of the Anglosphere increasingly attractive - thats a loose union of the english speaking nations with whom we have much more in common than we do with most of the european countries - Canada, Australia, NZ, US (and debateably a few others like India).

Yes, the anglosphere exists already - should the anglosphere have a common currency? You should include in the Anglosphere the whole commonwealth of nations, which will please Halevan no end, I expect.

what i want to know is what will happen to the commonwealth? will it too have to trade with Europe as opposed to the UK

The commonwealth isn't a trading group anyway. They could trade with whoever they wanted, like they do now.

Originally posted by "Phanerothyme"


Yes, the anglosphere exists already - should the anglosphere have a common currency? You should include in the Anglosphere the whole commonwealth of nations, which will please Halevan no end, I expect.

To be frank I'm not all that happy with the concept of the more powerful nations getting together in trading cartels - the losers are, as always, the poor - in particular the poorer nations. Most of the articulated benefits for a unified europe are fundamentally superficial, self interested and economic. Someone will say that's an opinion, where's the substance behind it. Sorry there is such a lot to say I need a book not a bulletin board.

Originally posted by "Phanerothyme"


Yes, the anglosphere exists already
In a manner of speaking but for example as trade partners it's more to do with history and language than trade treaties. We had long-standing agricultural import ties with NZ when we joined - it was cheaper for us to ship lamb and butter half way round the world than to subsidise the ineffecient European farmers, that had to change, and I see no reason to think Europe will not continue to flex it's muscles in a manner "unhelpful" to those traditional ties.
Originally posted by "Phanerothyme"

should the anglosphere have a common currency?To ape the politicians "I won't rule it out and I won't rule it in". Were there a broad acceptance of the logic of such a move, yes. If it was a political fix, no. And the same applies to the Euro. We shouldn't do it while many are vehemently opposed and the fixers are ready to ladle on the political spin with trivia (you won't have to change your money when you go on holiday) or pseudo facts (unemployment will be lower - prove it please, it's worse in the eurozone 8.3% compared with UK at 5.1%).

UK is like a married man (Wife = traditional trading partners) who has had a flirtation with a bimbo (Europe). The marriage is still good and strong, the wife is "a bit annoyed" but loyal. The husband is confused, he knows where his true loyalties lie. He knows that once the bimbo's won she'll move on the her next conquest but she offers temptation, forbidden fruit, he wants to resist but... The bimbo wants everything: ditch the wife and kids, marry me.

Just fancy that.
26/4/1975: A one-day conference held by the Labour Party to debate Britain's membership of Europe has voted by almost 2-1 to leave the European Economic Community.

At the present time there are 15 members of the E.C. currently there are 9 net contributors to the finances. These are Germany £5.9 bn. Holland £2.4 bn. Italy £1.8 bn. France £1.7 bn. U.K. £1.1 bn. Sweden £0.8 bn. Austria £0.4 bn. and Finland £0.1 bn. However our relatively decorous contribution is entirely due to the rebate famously acquired by Thatcher amounting to an average of £3.0 bn. If this rebate was witheld our net contribution would rise to £5.8 bn. making us the second largest contributor. Recently we saw in the news the clandestine agreement between Germany and France to put pressure upon us to forego this rebate by refusing to reform the wasteful agricultural policy where France is the biggest beneficiary. Now onto the plans for expansion of the E.C.
in 2004 the following countries will be swallowed up Czech Republic,Slovenia,Malta,Estonia,Latvia,Poland,Lith uania,Slovakia,Hungary and Cyprus. Nearly all if not all of these countries will be net recipients from the E.U.finances.
The gdp per capita figures are as follows E.U.£13900,Britain £14600,
Czech rep.£3420, Slovenia £6200, Malta £5700, Estonia £2405, Poland £2800, Latvia £2100, Lithuania £2100, Slovakia £2470, Hungary £3100, Cyprus £8990. So it is most unlikely that any of these new countries will be net contributors and will need considerable support from the net payers,is it any wonder that Germany and France are trying to claw back our rebate? But this may not be the worse problem for us. A strong argument being put by the pro-europeans is the security of jobs but is this likely, let us now look at some other figures ,the average wage figures which are on an annual basis .E.U.£18000(which includes the british average.)
czech rep.£4250,slovenia £7900,malta £7252,estonia £3950,latvia £2500,poland £4740,slovakia £3300,hungary £3820,lithuania £3020,cyprus £14000.the only country anywhere near the E.U.average seems to be Cyprus. How long will it take for the big and small producers to realise that by moving their production to these low paid areas much larger profits will be made? Even comparatively modest producers like Matthews and Dyson have already done this so when will the big boys follow suit and will they continue to keep their expensive production lines in the U.K. open? these are questions we should all ponder very carefully and right now before any move to adopt the Euro be made.

Trouble is that the experience in Euro countries is that retailers (and councils, and government) have all jumped on the bandwagon and increased their prices, and not just by a copper or two. Some reports state that 50% is not unusual e.g. Germany, where retailers changed the Mark signs to Euro signs without altering the figures, and no dual pricing. resulting in prices doubling. The answer would appear to be 'don't buy it' but if it is a loaf of bread and everyone has done it, there is not much choice. I recently read that a majority of Germans in opinions polls would like to return to the Mark. Why do we think that is? Alot of people tend to believe anything that spews out of a politicians mouth, Bliar gave a speech in 1983 where is famously said that Britain must remain free and independant from Europe. Funny how a change in jobs can mean a change of opinion!

In The Times Lord Marshall, chairman of pro-euro lobby group Britain in Europe, said that Mr Brown’s recent statement meant that Britain was “firmly on course for a referendum”.

Is this the same Lord Marshall who tried to convince us that BA is the World's favourite airline? Also the same man who stated that cheap flights would never catch on and that Ryanair and Easyjet would be a five minute wonder?
The same man who drove the share price down faster than the costs of the business?

Good to know his opinions are so highly valued.

Corruption is widespread within Europe - Edith Cresson a few years back appointed her dentist to be her paid special advisor on AIDS. The Spanish commissioner when asked what Spain had done with a £2B grant for agriculture had not the faintest idea.
The increasing legal controls are so ludicrous: English wine, made in place like Kent, must now be labelled U.K. wine is just the lastest barmy idea.
We have no say in any of these regulations.
The EU is steadily becoming the most bureaucratic country in the world. Regulations stream out of Brussells at a steady rate and we have to accept them. Legally, any country in the EU can now send out an arrest warrant for you regardless of whether you have committed a crime and the police will then have to arrest you and deport you to that country without any guarantee when they will release you.

Finally if we do go into the EU, expect massive price increases, expect serious tax increases as the EU "harmonises taxes" which are higher in Europe than here. But do not expect any improvement in NHS services to match France! That will remain under our enfeebled governments control.

Incidently, has anyone noticed how 454.5g has diappeared and been replaced by 400g in supermarkets but has the price fallen to follow suit?

Another worrying thing is that it's been reported that some countries will not accept the Euro from other countries, they have to be from their own country. If this is the case it obviously this needs addressing urgently.

The whole point of this single currency is to eliminate exchange rates and to have ONE currency for europe, but if you have to run around exchanging Irish Euro's for French Euro's, whats the point?

The only thing this Euro business will achieve is to clearout all of the UK's gold reserves and deposit them in another country, and we will STILL have to exchange the blasted currency anyway.

I wish I could print my own currency instead of using the Euro. I'd just have to get my Lickszz note accepted a few places and then there I go. :wink:

All good points Lickszz.

It seems that a lot of the voting public from less educated backgrounds can be won round easily enough by the "you won't have to bother changing your pounds when you go on holiday" argument. While I am all for a referendum, it bothers me that so many people like that exist and will quite happily be brainwashed by the government into voting 'yes' to the euro just on that basis. People need to be educated fully into the pros (the few that exist) and the cons (several!) of joining the euro. Not having to "change me bloody currency when we go to Spain" is hardly the basis on which to build our country's whole economic future.

TO20: I agree with you totally, the common market is a very attractive proposition to all these poorer countries in Europe,as it will give them security and financial prosperity at our expense.

Originally posted by "t020"

It seems that a lot of the voting public from less educated backgrounds can be won round easily enough by the "you won't have to bother changing your pounds when you go on holiday" argument. While I am all for a referendum, it bothers me that so many people like that exist and will quite happily be brainwashed by the government into voting 'yes' to the euro just on that basis. People need to be educated fully into the pros (the few that exist) and the cons (several!) of joining the euro. Not having to "change me bloody currency when we go to Spain" is hardly the basis on which to build our country's whole economic future.

Well said. The same also goes for those who say that the pound is our national identity and we can't scrap it because it's a part of our heritage. So were groats and farthings, we got rid of those.

Originally posted by "Lickszz"


The only thing this Euro business will achieve is to clearout all of the UK's gold reserves and deposit them in another country, and we will STILL have to exchange the blasted currency anyway.

We (Gordon Brown) already did that:

The fall in the euro has wrong-footed Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, who last May announced plans to sell more than half the country's reserves of gold and instructed the Bank of England to reinvest 40 per cent of the proceeds in euros. Mr Brown described the controversial plan as a sensible move aimed at diversifying the reserves. However, the euro's weakness has led to a direct loss of £34 million. Despite some offsetting gains on dollars and yen, the overall loss is still £26 million. (Telegraph 4/5/00)

And by announcing he was about to sell 415 tonnes of gold, of course the price (which had been rising) dropped (...immediately damaging effect on the gold price, which fell nearly $7 to $281.50 an ounce...) so he sole it cheap THEN spent the proceeds on Euros. Gold is currently around $355.

Originally posted by "alchresearch"

It seems that a lot of the voting public from less educated backgrounds can be won round easily enough by the "you won't have to bother changing your pounds when you go on holiday" argument. While I am all for a referendum, it bothers me that so many people like that exist and will quite happily be brainwashed by the government into voting 'yes' to the euro just on that basis. People need to be educated fully into the pros (the few that exist) and the cons (several!) of joining the euro. Not having to "change me bloody currency when we go to Spain" is hardly the basis on which to build our country's whole economic future.

Well said. The same also goes for those who say that the pound is our national identity and we can't scrap it because it's a part of our heritage. So were groats and farthings, we got rid of those.

Yes I agree. My biased viewpoint being against the Euro meant that I neglected this point, but this is the flip side of the coin. People on both sides of the fence should not use ridiculous, worthless arguments such as currency conversion on the pro-side, and national identity on the anti-side. Instead, people should be better informed about what it would actually mean to our country and how it would affect our economy. My points against the euro mainly revolve around the fact that we will lose control of our own economy, such as the way in which the Bank of England (or the government should they wish to retake control of interest rates) can currently tinker with interest rates in response to the economic climate of our country. If we joined the Euro, this would no longer be the case, and instead we'd just be a small cog in a big machine. If our economic climate dictated the need for lower interest rates, for example. we would only get those lower interest rates if it also suited the majority of the other countries in the Euro.

One point that certain members of government make, or at least imply, is that the voting public are not capable of making an educated vote in a referendum. What do they base this on? The fact that they have won 2 elections from this voting public?

I'm sorry t020 I can't agree that there is any implication that the public are not capable of making an educated vote in a referendum. As far as I can tell Blair & Brown have stated all along that there will be a referendum and that the public will choose. I think it's the press and assorted think tanks who go around saying the issue is too complicated for the outcome to be decided by us, the voters.

I'm quite enjoying this thread as, like you, I was prejudiced but I can now see that there are 2 sides to the argument. I'm now only about 85% in favour of the Euro but I'm biased because I've seen British industry decimated by the vagaries of the exchange rate. In particular the steel industry which relies on a stable base on which to make financial decisions.

I wish there more debates like this and to a wider audience, perhaps then the electorate would be more informed.

As I say, I'm not entirely convinced and it may even be by the time a referendum is held I may be persuaded the other way.

Yes, PRM. it will please Halevan and I suspect a lot more also.

<smallfont>Originally posted by halevan </smallfont>
What about now!!! I shall be dead in ten to 15 years!!!




I agree Halevan. Blair allows no meaningful debate on Europe...He is taking us in screaming.

Behind the scenes, day by day, he is offering concession after concession to his 'partners' we are being sold down the river.

Why people such as yourself and other senior people (by age) should have to shout and bawl on behalf of the younger element, I haven't a clue!

Just think, from your perch alongside thousands of suicide bombers in paradise, (not forgetting the virgins) you shall observe the eternal damnation Blair is being allowed to force upon everyone.

;)

Originally posted by robh
We (Gordon Brown) already did that:

The fall in the euro has wrong-footed Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, who last May announced plans to sell more than half the country's reserves of gold and instructed the Bank of England to reinvest 40 per cent of the proceeds in euros. Mr Brown described the controversial plan as a sensible move aimed at diversifying the reserves. However, the euro's weakness has led to a direct loss of £34 million. Despite some offsetting gains on dollars and yen, the overall loss is still £26 million. (Telegraph 4/5/00)

And by announcing he was about to sell 415 tonnes of gold, of course the price (which had been rising) dropped (...immediately damaging effect on the gold price, which fell nearly $7 to $281.50 an ounce...) so he sole it cheap THEN spent the proceeds on Euros. Gold is currently around $355.

But what I still don't understand is why did he do this? There is a Conspiracy theory that there is political motives behind this which could involve the removing of a potential obstacle/argument against the Euro in a referendum. Has the Euro price recovered since we invested in them? If so then some may class it as a good move.

Problem I have is that I see the sense in joining the single currency, but also the probs that go along with it. For example, as a trading bloc we'd rival the United States, and actually be able to force their hand on some issues - anyone remember the USA putting ridiculous tariffs on steel to protect their own industry? We could do the same.

The problems begin with the convergence criteria that we will need to meet to enter the single european currency. Add to the mix the loss of control of interest rates and we're pretty much out to dry - reliant on stability in unstable areas of Europe to ensure a solid trading base. Recession in Europe would undoubtedly cause recession in the UK.

A recent article indicated that the Government was considering allowing up to 750,000 European workers, now working in the UK the chance to vote in any referendum on the Euro. If correct this is ignominious conduct of the deepest dye, but par for the course where most New Labour politicians are concerned.

It could only be Blair's idea, or possibly Campbell's

My salary, perks, presidency and pension, right or wrong.

An honourable man would have resigned over the lies and deception of the WMD and the Kelly affair. Pity the man can't be impeached.

Originally posted by Lickszz
A recent article indicated that the Government was considering allowing up to 750,000 European workers, now working in the UK the chance to vote in any referendum on the Euro. If correct this is ignominious conduct of the deepest dye, but par for the course where most New Labour politicians are concerned.

It could only be Blair's idea, or possibly Campbell's

My salary, perks, presidency and pension, right or wrong.

An honourable man would have resigned over the lies and deception of the WMD and the Kelly affair. Pity the man can't be impeached.

Supply proof for what sounds like another Daily Mail scare story and I may be able to answer.

Originally posted by maxt
Supply proof for what sounds like another Daily Mail scare story and I may be able to answer.

Maxt. When you hear or see a news item on TV or in a newspaper, are you inclined to email them and ask their source of information?

You will accept my info on this as a word for word correct interpretation of a Telegraph news item, or publicly call me a liar...end of matter.

As for the authenticity of the news item, it does not rest with me. Take it up with The Telegraph. You can obviously make up your own mind whether you think this is true, I can actually believe it possible knowing how keen New Labour are to see a referendum passed. On the downside the Telegraph isn't known as the Tory Graph for nothing.

Originally posted by Lickszz
Maxt. When you hear or see a news item on TV or in a newspaper, are you inclined to email them and ask their source of information?

You will accept my info on this as a word for word correct interpretation of a Telegraph news item, or publicly call me a liar...end of matter.

As for the authenticity of the news item, it does not rest with me. Take it up with The Telegraph. You can obviously make up your own mind whether you think this is true, I can actually believe it possible knowing how keen New Labour are to see a referendum passed. On the downside the Telegraph isn't known as the Tory Graph for nothing.

Nobody is calling anybody a liar. So many threads on this forum have fizzled out when presented with facts that I thought I would see if that was the case with this one. If you say there was an article in the Daily T then so be it. I will try and trace the article and discover what's behind it.

You also have a strange view of the Labour Party, both Old & New, if you think that they all march to the same tune. The party is evenly split on the issue of the Euro and I'm not convinced that even Tony Blair has been swayed one way or the other as yet.

Why do you have a problem with people from other countries having a vote in any referendum? We operate under a democracy in this country and as we expect people to pay taxes then we quite rightly should ask them to have a say in anything that affects them. Foreign nationals can already vote in elections why not in referenda?

Originally posted by maxt
Nobody is calling anybody a liar. So many threads on this forum have fizzled out when presented with facts that I thought I would see if that was the case with this one. If you say there was an article in the Daily T then so be it. I will try and trace the article and discover what's behind it.

You also have a strange view of the Labour Party, both Old & New, if you think that they all march to the same tune. The party is evenly split on the issue of the Euro and I'm not convinced that even Tony Blair has been swayed one way or the other as yet.

Why do you have a problem with people from other countries having a vote in any referendum? We operate under a democracy in this country and as we expect people to pay taxes then we quite rightly should ask them to have a say in anything that affects them. Foreign nationals can already vote in elections why not in referenda?

Maxt, I am not going to address all of your points because you could be inadvertently leading me into a trap. ;)

I can't agree on Blair not been decided one way or other. He wants that top job and is interested in feathering his own nest. The key positions in New Labour are held by cronies like Blunkett whom are clearly out of their depth.

Apolgies to Lickzy. Here is the article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3123263.stm

As I read it this would be a double edged sword as many of our EU citizens are as ambivalent about the Euro as we.

Having said that, the article does point out that the idea is only being looked at, as is the idea of offering non-resident UK citizens the vote. Do you not think it would be remiss of any government to not look at these 2 issues?

Whatever is decided the government will be blamed for trying to sway the vote either way.

Giving non UK citizens the vote: many europeans are disillusioned with the euro and are likely to vote against our entry or are likely to vote in favour given the current weakness of the pound

Giving non-resident UK citizens the vote: they may use the opposite arguments that the weak euro would make joining the euro a bad thing.

Either way, whatever happens there will be somebody shouting foul.

Originally posted by Lickszz
Maxt, I am not going to address all of your points because you could be inadvertently leading me into a trap. ;)

I can't agree on Blair not been decided one way or other. He wants that top job and is interested in feathering his own nest. The key positions in New Labour are held by cronies like Blunkett whom are clearly out of their depth.

So don't address any then. Good debating method.

Have I missed something, what top job is this? Given Cherie's earning power what further feathering do you mean?

Believe me, David is no crony of Blairs.

Originally posted by maxt
Apolgies to Lickzy. Here is the article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3123263.stm

As I read it this would be a double edged sword as many of our EU citizens are as ambivalent about the Euro as we.

Having said that, the article does point out that the idea is only being looked at, as is the idea of offering non-resident UK citizens the vote. Do you not think it would be remiss of any government to not look at these 2 issues?

Whatever is decided the government will be blamed for trying to sway the vote either way.

Giving non UK citizens the vote: many europeans are disillusioned with the euro and are likely to vote against our entry or are likely to vote in favour given the current weakness of the pound

Giving non-resident UK citizens the vote: they may use the opposite arguments that the weak euro would make joining the euro a bad thing.

Either way, whatever happens there will be somebody shouting foul.

Apology accepted Maxt.

I did say that they were only considering allowing it.

From my point of view Blair is hellbent on dragging us into the Euro and didn't want a referendum in the first place so if one is likely to happen you'd instantly look for potential obstacles to be removed and any other feasible ways to boost votes in favour.

I think you'll find that a commitment to a referendum was part of the 1997 manifesto which doesn't really tie in with your view about TB not wanting one in the first place, does it?

I also repeat my question: 'Do you not think it would be remiss of any government to not look at these 2 issues?' as you don't seem to have answered that.

Originally posted by maxt
I think you'll find that a commitment to a referendum was part of the 1997 manifesto which doesn't really tie in with your view about TB not wanting one in the first place, does it?

I also repeat my question: 'Do you not think it would be remiss of any government to not look at these 2 issues?' as you don't seem to have answered that.

Oh doesn't it. Yes, he promised a referendum so where is it?

It couldn't possibly be that Blair fears he might lose such a referedum so is denying the British people one until he feels the odds are stacked in his favour could it?

I have already given my reasons as to why I think they are considering allowing these Europeans to vote so that answers your 2 issues. Consider this Maxt. The Germans were not given a vote on the Euro in their country but could be allowed to take part in the UK referendum.

Originally posted by maxt
So don't address any then. Good debating method.

Have I missed something, what top job is this? Given Cherie's earning power what further feathering do you mean?

Believe me, David is no crony of Blairs.

So, you think that Blunkett does a good job do you? If not then why is he still in that job and how did he get the job in the first place? How else would Blunkett keep that position with some of his peanut brained ideas?

I am talking about the top job of EU president. The one that Blair has been campaigning for. It's funny many people think that it will be the ideal job for him when he is no longer prime minister.

I don't suppose it's a coincidence that Cherie is a human rights barrister too. What further feathering do I mean? well, it's common knowledge that Blair has secured his future and that of his cronies with platinum inflated pensions. He and probably them are set for life. And it's OUR money....Happy? I'm not!

Its irrelevant. Labour will be out at the next election and then we won't be duped into joining the euro. It is also clear to me that Tony Blair has an eye on the EU presidency. I want new labour out. They are a high tax party just like 'old' labour except they dress it up in the form of 'stealth' taxes. The question is, where is all this extra funding going? The public services aren't seeing any improvements. Bye bye Tony. Good luck with your president of the EU job.

Lickszz, you've said you don't want EU citizens living in the UK the opportunity to vote in the referendum and I understand, but don't agree with, your reasons.

But what about UK citizens living abroad? Surely they would have more reason to vote in favour of us joining the Euro? They could enjoy the stability of a pan-european currency, no exchange fluctuations or charges and would only need one bank account.

Do you think they should be excluded because they may vote in favour?

You still haven't answered my question about any government looking at the 2 issues. Do you not think it's correct that they should be addressed?

t020, who's going to replace Labour at the next election?

Originally posted by maxt
Lickszz, you've said you don't want EU citizens living in the UK the opportunity to vote in the referendum and I understand, but don't agree with, your reasons.

But what about UK citizens living abroad? Surely they would have more reason to vote in favour of us joining the Euro? They could enjoy the stability of a pan-european currency, no exchange fluctuations or charges and would only need one bank account.

Do you think they should be excluded because they may vote in favour?

You still haven't answered my question about any government looking at the 2 issues. Do you not think it's correct that they should be addressed?

t020, who's going to replace Labour at the next election?

Speaking of Questions Maxt. I don't believe you answered mine. did you?

I said, I believe that Labour could use it as an opportunity for more votes in favour. We have already seen what seems to be Labour manipulating the date and now it's appears the electorate as well. All previous referendums have been limited to British citizens on the electoral register. Most of these foreigners countries have already joined the Euro. Yes, they should be allowed to vote - in their own country. The reasons you mentioned why some Brits abroad would vote in favour are not of most importance in the equation IMO. The economic case against Euro membership is overwhelming and the British people remain implacably opposed. Perhaps it would be better to consider why some of these Brits came to be living abroad in the first place?

We are talking about the British people and probably the most important political and economic decision for 50 years. Who do you think should decide the fate of the £?

Originally posted by t020
Its irrelevant. Labour will be out at the next election and then we won't be duped into joining the euro. It is also clear to me that Tony Blair has an eye on the EU presidency. I want new labour out. They are a high tax party just like 'old' labour except they dress it up in the form of 'stealth' taxes. The question is, where is all this extra funding going? The public services aren't seeing any improvements. Bye bye Tony. Good luck with your president of the EU job.

You make alot of sense. Although, I think it will be too late, by the time good ole Tone departs we will already well and truely have the Euro.

Originally posted by maxt
Lickszz, you've said you don't want EU citizens living in the UK the opportunity to vote in the referendum and I understand, but don't agree with, your reasons.

But what about UK citizens living abroad? Surely they would have more reason to vote in favour of us joining the Euro? They could enjoy the stability of a pan-european currency, no exchange fluctuations or charges and would only need one bank account.

Do you think they should be excluded because they may vote in favour?

You still haven't answered my question about any government looking at the 2 issues. Do you not think it's correct that they should be addressed?

t020, who's going to replace Labour at the next election?

Conservatives. Scrap top up fees idea, tougher on crime and asylum seekers, referendum on euro, not a high tax party, etc. The only problem is that William Hague is no longer leader.

At the end of the day the British public will be given the opportunity to vote on whether or not we change to the Euro. Gordon Brown has set out the 5 economic criteria that have to be met before the referendum. How is this manipulation? If the tories had their way we would not join the euro at all without a vote. Where is the democracy in that?

Lickzz, there is just as much likelihood of non UK citizens being against joining as there is of their being in favour, but the issue still needs to be addressed. You still haven't answered me about the non resident UK citizens. Should we exclude or include them?

All that is happening is that the issues are being addressed. How is that manipulation? Any government would commission study. There are more than 3 million UK citizens living abroad. Hardly unimportant compared with the few non UK citizens living here, I would say.

I agree that we disagree but I cannot comprehend how you see manipulation everywhere.

t020, don't make me laugh.

I'm sorry my political stance amuses you maxt. You obviously enjoy the tax and spend socialist ideals of the Labour party. You must enjoy seeing on your payslip how much of your earnings have just vanished. Where to though? Labour have increased spending but I don't see results. All I see is a country in debt, both the government and people on an individual basis.

Originally posted by t020
I'm sorry my political stance amuses you maxt. You obviously enjoy the tax and spend socialist ideals of the Labour party. You must enjoy seeing on your payslip how much of your earnings have just vanished. Where to though? Labour have increased spending but I don't see results. All I see is a country in debt, both the government and people on an individual basis.

Don't forget that under the last tory regime there were 44 tax rises in 2 years. And yes, I'd rather see tax rises going to pay for education, health, etc., rather than privatisation where the same rises are blamed on market forces and go into the pockets of shareholders.

Originally posted by maxt
Don't forget that under the last tory regime there were 44 tax rises in 2 years. And yes, I'd rather see tax rises going to pay for education, health, etc., rather than privatisation where the same rises are blamed on market forces and go into the pockets of shareholders.

Sorry Maxt can't agree. We are suffering the worst taxes ever under this governnment. Some 60+ stealth taxes. The services you mention have not improved. I think that there has got to be something seriously wrong with the tories if they only have a 3 point lead in the polls when they should have a 30 point lead considering the total and endlessly demonstrated incompetence of New Labour.

There are some issues about joining the Euro which have not been aired in this thread, which I have found really interesting. (A thought occurs - top ten threads so far... hmmn)

Let me state some facts as I see them.

The five tests are designed to ensure that our immediate future after joining the euro would be favourable.
The EU is looking at expansion to include the poor eastern european countries.
The EU government is in need of reform. This kind of doesn't matter as we are a part of the EC and many of their decisions will affect us anyway.
We lose the ability to adjust interest rates.
We should gain a stable currency on joining the euro due to the enormous amount of wealth producing industry backing it up.
We are europeans and despite the assertion of a prior post our culture is much more closely related to that of Europe than of the US.


So at the referendum which may never come, because labour may not be in power when the 5 tests are met, what way will I vote?

I ignore the holiday exchange argument for joining as frivolous, similarly I reject the heritage argument - when people start talking of fighting wars for the ound they lie, people fought for their lives and their families and against facism, i.e. for choice - so we can take this choice freely.

Well assuming that the 5 tests are met I will first have to make a judgement about the long term future of the county not just the immediate needs, and we are facing tough times.. Consider the de-indutrialisation of the country - in fact the whole of Europe as industry moves to the far east - particulalry China. Consider the moves in the IT industry to ship highly technical jobs programming to India. Consider that as a nation which wants to increase our wealth we have to get more money into the country than leaves it. Our interests will be best served by aiding our industry and in particular our exporters and people who bring money into the country. I believe that manufacturers and the financial industry are going to be the hope here eruo or no. But as one of the five tests is that it benefits the financial industry and that test has already been met, I would expect that thinking along these lines I would be in favour of joining the euro.

There is of course much more to consider in linking ourselves with Europe this closely.

Should the poorer countries that have applied to join Europe be accepted I would need to evaluate the effect on Britain as of right now I have no data. Remeber the aim of the game is to be sure that we are alright and we do this by a growing economy, more money in than out. We may support the poor countries for a while but then in the free trade spirit we may find a useful market in the future. A market which may well be excluded from us by our lack of membership from the euro.

I also have the feeling that if we do not join the euro we will move closer to the US in both our economy and our thinking, something which we as a country have been doing for years. I fear this.

In the US there is a completely different thinking about welfare and social security. They believe that equality is produced through social mobility and that they have a classless society which allows all members of their ssociety to achieve as much as they like so long as they are prepared to work for it. This leads to laws which are primarily concerned with protecting property rather than people. Thus the americans do not have a national health service and as dubya gives tax breaks to the richest 1% he makes welfare handouts to the poorest 10% smaller and harder to get, and whats more the people generally dont mind because they believe that they will one day be rich.

Over here we have a very different view of government. one which we share with our western european counterparts. We generally believe that the state should provide a cushion for every indivual who finds themselves jobless or ill. This is the social contract. We will be ruled by others so long as they provide a place where we can grow and learn and live our lives and should anything terrible happen we should be given help to get back on our feet. This is the european view of government. Here we have started following American ideals however, money given to Jobseekers has been cut and it has been made harder to get.

As far as our economy is concerned we again have moved closer to the US's conservative view that we should have "flexible" labour markets as seen by the decline of trades unions, and we are also dangerously close to relying upon consumer spending to maintain our economy.

In the US thery have a trade deficit, a huge one, every year $4bn flows out of american hands (If i remeber correctly.) If it was not for two factors the American economy would be sunk. The first factor is foriegn investment - which would dissapear if the economy started looking shakey. The other prop of their deficit is increased borrowing and spending by the American public - a terrible situation to be in as the pulic are a fickle lot. If one of these two props should look unsteady the other would crumble and the american economy will go tits up with it.

Should this happen, and I think it will, for what its worth, then we will be far best placed to deal with the world wide repercussions by being in the euro which would then become the preferred currency. Since I think this will happen this leads me to support joining.

Nobody in the euro will want it to fail. Germany is in trouble for its own reasons as my german friend Jõrg told me recently. As the country has limped towards their current recession he said the politicians have been busy arguing with Italy for after some Italian made Nazi references. He got really angry about them. He doesn't feel the europ has an effect, for what its worth I take his word for it.

I vote yes so far.

Just for those who havent guessed yet, i am terrible at checking threads I have posted to for replies. Apologies.

Nice one Richard.

Unfortunately, you've fallen into the classic trap of introducing facts which, no doubt, will stop this thread dead.

Ah but I didn't back them up!

Originally posted by richard
Ah but I didn't back them up!

Maybe not, but reasoned arguments usually have the same effect.

Certainly stopped this track dead richard.

Still, at least t020 was wrong about the election. It proves he's not infallible, as previously suspected.

Like the issue of the UK's entry into the eurozone, this thread is almost dead but it won't quite lie down. There is not a single valid argument for joining the euro anytime soon, and a lot of powerful arguments against. Even the pro-euro lobbies are now half-hearted and equivocal in their support for early entry.

In my opinion, the debate will only revive again when two things happen. Firstly, when the economic performance of the eurozone outstrips that of the UK for a sustained period (no signs of that happening yet); and secondly, when the European monetary system is made more flexible than it is at present (despite the de facto changes to the Growth and Stability Pact, the system is still quite rigid). If this is combined with other factors, such as a fall in Foreign Direct Investment into the UK relative to that of the eurozone, plus an increase in the volatility of the pound relative to other major currencies, then the debate might spring back into life. But even if it does, the obstacles would still remain formidable (for example, public opinion is still very largely hostile, as are most of the public prints).