mazzer:
Where do you get all your information Dolph have you Merkel on speed dial? An article in the Times today (a paper that is pro staying in) states that the trade treaties Europe has are generally detrimental to the UK for example the EU has a 9% tariff on rice from India to protect Spanish and Italian rice growers, so out of the EU we negotiate with India for a better deal as we would not be required to subsidise uneconomical rice growing in Europe. The EU is very much against trade with the rest of the world when it comes to food as it is forced to subsidise inefficient European farmers by the likes of the French government without realising that by opening up the African markets it would improve the living standards of Africans and maybe help to reduce the need for most of northern Africa to come to Europe. The EU talks about unfair competition yet there is no chance of the CAP even being reformed let alone got rid of, millions are wasted and defrauded trough this scheme every year yet no one in Brussels has the will or the balls to tackle it. You believe it is all about trade well it isn’t leaving the EU to most people is about having a say in how your country is run.
Conduct an opinion poll in Bulgaria as to how many people want to take in migrants from Syria and Africa would like to hazard a guess that those wanting them to come are in the minority yet when Merkel gets her way you will take your quota or lose payments from the EU, democracy the EU way just do as you are told!!!
Everything would have been wonderful(and democratic) if UK didn’t went to the Middle East and destroyed countries with the help of its best friend US. We wouldn’t have this mess if Saddam, Guaddafi and Assad were in power…as bad as they were they are 10 better then what is today ME and this refugee crisis.
And Merkel is an idiot to invite them into Europe, I dont know if she has some agenda, or feels WW2 guild and I don’t care we all know its idiotic. We could seal very easily the whole border and no refugee will come, hopefully this is happening as we speak. Lets hope Merkel don’t go crazy and invites more…
P.S. Of course no one here wants illegal muslim invaders, all male, but as in marriage there is good and bad stuff(EU quotas), hopefully once Syria war stop and situation gets better we will deported them back.
Because of the bad weather, fierce cops and mountain terrain illegals are trying to get into EU via vehicles. I’ve always wonder, how some not one of them, not single one has ID document of some kind, if they say the truth and they are Syrians and Iraqis, where are their passports/id cards.
"No one is crossing Serbia’s borders,“ Tanjug quoted Vulin as telling local TV channel Pink when asked about the level of migration influx on Saturday.
"If the countries located behind us along this route or final destination countries do not want to receive migrants, then Serbia cannot let them pass through its territory,“ the Serbian news agency quoted Vulin as saying.
The Western Balkan route stretching from Greece via Macedonia and Serbia has been practically closed to migrants as of midnight Tuesday after Slovenia and Croatia announced that only people who have valid visas and passports will be allowed to enter their territory. Serbia has followed suit by announcing the introduction of reciprocal measures on its borders with Bulgaria and Macedonia.
Now we must include that those coming there are to be deported back to Turkey, I very much hope our MP makes a final push to include Bulgaria into the agreement, because if this doesn’t happen we gonna have all this illegals from the Greek islands here. novinite.com/articles/173495 … ith+Ankara
Firstly Dolph wake up and smell the coffee you can’t possibly support an anti immigration agenda while supporting a pro EU and by implication pro Merkel agenda.
As for the idea of leaving the EU because we want to take advantage of cheap imported food etc from exploited third world countries that’s as bad if not worse than staying in.On that note India and Africa need all the food they can produce for themselves not export it to subsidise the UK’s low wage economy.IE putting European and British farmers out of work while contributing to third world food shortages is as bad as Merkel’s idea of bringing the third world to us.
When the idea of leaving should be that we can do protectionism in looking after our own national interest,without exploiting others to do it,better than the EU can.On that note why is the UN providing food aid to Africa for example.When Africa is exporting beef to us in one of the best beef producing countries in the world and in which British farmers are being closed down by the banks because they can’t sell their products here at a good enough price because of under cutting by cheap third world competition.
mazzer:
Where do you get all your information Dolph have you Merkel on speed dial? An article in the Times today (a paper that is pro staying in) states that the trade treaties Europe has are generally detrimental to the UK for example the EU has a 9% tariff on rice from India to protect Spanish and Italian rice growers, so out of the EU we negotiate with India for a better deal as we would not be required to subsidise uneconomical rice growing in Europe. The EU is very much against trade with the rest of the world when it comes to food as it is forced to subsidise inefficient European farmers by the likes of the French government without realising that by opening up the African markets it would improve the living standards of Africans and maybe help to reduce the need for most of northern Africa to come to Europe. The EU talks about unfair competition yet there is no chance of the CAP even being reformed let alone got rid of, millions are wasted and defrauded trough this scheme every year yet no one in Brussels has the will or the balls to tackle it. You believe it is all about trade well it isn’t leaving the EU to most people is about having a say in how your country is run.
Conduct an opinion poll in Bulgaria as to how many people want to take in migrants from Syria and Africa would like to hazard a guess that those wanting them to come are in the minority yet when Merkel gets her way you will take your quota or lose payments from the EU, democracy the EU way just do as you are told!!!
Everything would have been wonderful(and democratic) if UK didn’t went to the Middle East and destroyed countries with the help of its best friend US. We wouldn’t have this mess if Saddam, Guaddafi and Assad were in power…as bad as they were they are 10 better then what is today ME and this refugee crisis.
And Merkel is an idiot to invite them into Europe, I dont know if she has some agenda, or feels WW2 guild and I don’t care we all know its idiotic. We could seal very easily the whole border and no refugee will come, hopefully this is happening as we speak. Lets hope Merkel don’t go crazy and invites more…
P.S. Of course no one here wants illegal muslim invaders, all male, but as in marriage there is good and bad stuff(EU quotas), hopefully once Syria war stop and situation gets better we will deported them back.
Because of the bad weather, fierce cops and mountain terrain illegals are trying to get into EU via vehicles. I’ve always wonder, how some not one of them, not single one has ID document of some kind, if they say the truth and they are Syrians and Iraqis, where are their passports/id cards.
"No one is crossing Serbia’s borders,“ Tanjug quoted Vulin as telling local TV channel Pink when asked about the level of migration influx on Saturday.
"If the countries located behind us along this route or final destination countries do not want to receive migrants, then Serbia cannot let them pass through its territory,“ the Serbian news agency quoted Vulin as saying.
The Western Balkan route stretching from Greece via Macedonia and Serbia has been practically closed to migrants as of midnight Tuesday after Slovenia and Croatia announced that only people who have valid visas and passports will be allowed to enter their territory. Serbia has followed suit by announcing the introduction of reciprocal measures on its borders with Bulgaria and Macedonia.
Now we must include that those coming there are to be deported back to Turkey, I very much hope our MP makes a final push to include Bulgaria into the agreement, because if this doesn’t happen we gonna have all this illegals from the Greek islands here. novinite.com/articles/173495 … ith+Ankara
Firstly Dolph wake up and smell the coffee you can’t possibly support an anti immigration agenda while supporting a pro EU and by implication pro Merkel agenda.
As for the idea of leaving the EU because we want to take advantage of cheap imported food etc from exploited third world countries that’s as bad if not worse than staying in.On that note India and Africa need all the food they can produce for themselves not export it to subsidise the UK’s low wage economy.IE putting European and British farmers out of work while contributing to third world food shortages is as bad as Merkel’s idea of bringing the third world to us.
When the idea of leaving should be that we can do protectionism in looking after our own national interest,without exploiting others to do it,better than the EU.
Tsk tsk mate, you got to wake up, I already had 2 espresso’s, if you don’t make difference between EU migrants moving around and illegals from ME and Africa you are “crazy”. Im anti illegal invasion while Im pro EU, hope this sounds better.
Its very strange, some Brits here compare the Islamic invasion of male ME to EE migration into UK. So the Bulgarian dentist, Polish nurse or Romanian lorry driver, all Christian are the same as the illegal, uneducated all male without ID muslim invaders who ■■■■ women in Cologne■■? I don’t get this British view, honestly I don’t.
Food from India and Africa is mazzer idea/comment, not mine. Also CF Africa is not a country but a continent, I’ve read here many comment where some of you put all EE under the same umbrella, this are more then 10 countries… Now you are doing the same with Africa.
Dolph:
Tsk tsk mate, you got to wake up, I already had 2 espresso’s, if you don’t make difference between EU migrants moving around and illegals from ME and Africa you are “crazy”. Im anti illegal invasion while Im pro EU, hope this sounds better.
Its very strange, some Brits here compare the Islamic invasion of male ME to EE migration into UK. So the Bulgarian dentist, Polish nurse or Romanian lorry driver, all Christian are the same as the illegal, uneducated all male without ID muslim invaders who ■■■■ women in Cologne■■? I don’t get this British view, honestly I don’t.
Food from India and Africa is mazzer idea/comment, not mine. Also CF Africa is not a country but a continent, I’ve read here many comment where some of you put all EE under the same umbrella, this are more then 10 countries… Now you are doing the same with Africa.
Firstly you’ve missed the point that Merkel sees no difference between free movement within Europe or free movement between,what she views as, Eurasia.IE she’s a zbwit Socialist and as such she doesn’t do national borders or the idea of the nation state regardless.While in your case you’re just trying to selectively cherry pick which part of that ideology you want to keep for your own benefit and which part you want to ditch by saying free movement based on economic migration is good in some cases but obviously not others.That’s in addition to Merkel’s/EU immigration policies also threatening the stability and cohesion of the indigenous European demographic by importing an unstable alien Asian one.
As for Africa being a ‘Continent’ yes but that still doesn’t make the idea of an ‘African’ country exporting beef to us while another ‘African’ country starves and relies on UN food aid,any mor sensible.In just the same way that one of the reasons for the Irish fight for independnce was the knowledge that greed driven Brits were exporting Irish beef etc while Irish people starved because the potato crop failed and they weren’t earning enough to buy their own beef. Although that is obviously directed at Mazzer’s post which I quoted.
Blimey Boris get real.The Federalist zbwit Obama represents a country which corrupted its own constitution from a Confederation of Sovereign States to full on undemocratic Federalism and then killed a significant proportion of its own population in that aim in a war of Federalist aggression against the justified cause of the secessionist Confederate states.No surprise in that case that they’ll do everything possible,to stop any example of successful secession, regarding an obvious US foreign policy based on a Federal USE agenda.IE in this argument America,or at least its Federalist governmental system,isn’t our friend or ally and we shouldn’t welcome its interference in our domestic affairs.
Especially when that interference is obviously based on fears of US internal divisions at home regarding its own domestic ( justified ) anti federalist agenda and the out campaign should make that clear to Obama.Probably to the point of telling the interfering zb that anyone who values the idea of democracy and the right of self determination would/should have supported the CSA in its legitimate calls for state rights against Federal rule in 1861.That support,at the time,obviously being conditional on repatriation of the slaves.Which probably would have been accepted by the CSA in exchange for British support against Lincoln.
Carryfast, an interesting info about the trading war you keep talking about.Try to read this British article with open eyes.
I think figures say enough who will take the hit post Brexit if outer’s prevail.
Jesus can you both not leave it alone its pretty ■■■■■■■ boring now, endless guardian and telegraph links. propaganda from either or, and being honest dolph as a UK vote/issue it isn’t really any of your business
war1974:
Jesus can you both not leave it alone its pretty [zb] boring now, endless guardian and telegraph links. propaganda from either or, and being honest dolph as a UK vote/issue it isn’t really any of your business
The link I provided have facts in it, trading facts from several countries tax and revenue sources.
Frankly we can discuss whatever we want, as long as we don’t cuss at each other and is by the forum rules .
war1974:
Jesus can you both not leave it alone its pretty [zb] boring now, endless guardian and telegraph links. propaganda from either or, and being honest dolph as a UK vote/issue it isn’t really any of your business
The link I provided have facts in it, trading facts from several countries tax and revenue sources.
Frankly we can discuss whatever we want, as long as we don’t cuss at each other and is by the forum rules .
they all have facts in them it doesn’t even matter if I agree with them or not the amount of bickering you and carryfast are doing is spoiling a decent thread, out of the 15 pages I would guess 10 are from both of you and a touch of winseer.
now I am adding to the problem by getting drawn into it
you have both had plenty of coverage to air views let someone else post please!
Let’s keep it simple. If we were all smart enough to be “Captains of Industry” or even politicians - we’d be that instead of humble truckers.
It can’t be that hard a question to ALL people within the UK at this time - “Do you feel life has been good to you in the past few years?”
If the answer is NO, then you are more likely to be voting for change - and that proposed change on the cards is Brexit. The change on the cards might have been voting the Tories out - but we didn’t do that last year when we had the chance. The change might have been something “half done” and suddenly completed…
All we’ve got to decide is NOT to try and “predict the future” - but instead to interpret the PRESENT.
If you are experiencing good things more than bad right now - then your feelgood factor will steer you away from “rocking the boat of change”.
If the opposite is true - then you’ll be gagging for any chance you get to have a stab at real change, which we should all be agreed upon - Brexit definitely represents, should it come to pass…
What everyone else is doing/getting/saying/thinking - is irrelevant.
Vote for your own experience of life in this country per this past decade in particular. It’s really not rocket science.
I could say for myself that since I am earning less for the same hours as 6 years ago - I’m getting worse off by the day, and WILL be voting for change.
If the EU were to offer me some fantastic deal though - I’d of course be voting to stay in.
I’m not holding my breath. The door is only open a crack for the million-to-one shot that the EU gives a ■■■■ about me and mine personally to occur. If it doesn’t, my mind is all but made up - but for MY reasons not those of any politician. I accept the fact that if most other people are better off than I, then I’m in the minority, and am never going to get the change I desire. C’est la Vie.
Dolph:
Carryfast, an interesting info about the trading war you keep talking about.Try to read this British article with open eyes.
I think figures say enough who will take the hit post Brexit if outer’s prevail.
Blimey that bs is trying to deliberately create confusion.By referring to the out campaign ( rightly ) relying on the massive EU trade deficit we’ve been lumbered with since joining the Federalist scam to show that we don’t benefit from trade with the EU it’s actually a net burden on the economy.To then saying that means the out campaign supports that trade deficit situation.
IE the idea isn’t to ‘replace’ our EU trade deficit with an even bigger global one.Although ‘that’ argument will have to come later ‘after’ we’ve ditched the EU to start with.Which in this case means nothing to lose but everything to gain.
If I thought the in campaign weren’t desperately trying to clutch at straws before,that actually proves it now.
Carryfast: I usually read through your posts, but I’ve now put a “federal” str$ filter on any future ones.
I’m sick of reading this word. We shouldn’t even be discussing it this side of removing the monarchy. One step at a time please.
The only “Federal” anything I’d give the thumbs-up for right now - as a British “FBI” as suggested by none other than Boris… Our concerns with how the EU is run are for us to decide in this forthcoming referendum as to “DO we want to be part of it, for better or worse - or not”.
Let’s base our vote on what is rather than what ‘might be’.
war1974:
they all have facts in them it doesn’t even matter if I agree with them or not the amount of bickering you and carryfast are doing is spoiling a decent thread, out of the 15 pages I would guess 10 are from both of you and a touch of winseer.
now I am adding to the problem by getting drawn into it
you have both had plenty of coverage to air views let someone else post please!
Dolph’s putting the argument for in from a Euro perspective.I’m not only putting an argument for out but also specifically from the point of view of a Labour Protectionist perspective in addition to an anti federalist democratic one.Which most recently referred to the issue of Obama’s interference in the domestic affairs of a foreign country for obvious reasons related to his own Federalist agenda.Which he fears will be derailed if we make a success of seceding from the EU.
To which your contribution is to moan about a forum being used for it’s purpose.
Winseer:
Carryfast: I usually read through your posts, but I’ve now put a “federal” str$ filter on any future ones.
I’m sick of reading this word. We shouldn’t even be discussing it this side of removing the monarchy. One step at a time please.
The only “Federal” anything I’d give the thumbs-up for right now - as a British “FBI” as suggested by none other than Boris… Our concerns with how the EU is run are for us to decide in this forthcoming referendum as to “DO we want to be part of it, for better or worse - or not”.
Let’s base our vote on what is rather than what ‘might be’.
Are you saying that the treaties of Rome,Maastricht and Lisbon don’t already bind us to what ‘is’ ‘already’ a Federal governmental structure including Majority Vote among the states to decide policy applying for all.If not what is the argument concerning sovereignty all about and what was Cameron’s sham ‘repatriation of powers’ supposedly all about.
On that note my point is that we ‘should’ be discussing the ‘difference’ between a ‘Confederal’ Europe v a ‘Federal’ one.The former would actually fit the definition of returning powers and sovereignty to the seperate states.Unlike the Constitution contained in the present treaties.
Winseer:
Carryfast: I usually read through your posts, but I’ve now put a “federal” str$ filter on any future ones.
I’m sick of reading this word. We shouldn’t even be discussing it this side of removing the monarchy. One step at a time please.
The only “Federal” anything I’d give the thumbs-up for right now - as a British “FBI” as suggested by none other than Boris… Our concerns with how the EU is run are for us to decide in this forthcoming referendum as to “DO we want to be part of it, for better or worse - or not”.
Let’s base our vote on what is rather than what ‘might be’.
“Ridicule is nothing to be scared of…”
A.Ant 1981
Well said
Carryfast:
Are you saying that the treaties of Rome,Maastricht and Lisbon don’t already bind us to what ‘is’ ‘already’ a Federal governmental structure including Majority Vote among the states to decide policy applying for all.If not what is the argument concerning sovereignty all about and what was Cameron’s sham ‘repatriation of powers’ supposedly all about.
On that note my point is that we ‘should’ be discussing the ‘difference’ between a ‘Confederal’ Europe v a ‘Federal’ one.The former would actually fit the definition of returning powers and sovereignty to the seperate states.Unlike the Constitution contained in the present treaties.
I think what he’s saying, and far be it for Me to speak on his behalf. Is that the vote is about IN or OUT, of what exists at the moment, and nothing to do with changing the wider political doctrine of either the UK or EU, just our membership
Winseer:
Let’s keep it simple. If we were all smart enough to be “Captains of Industry” or even politicians - we’d be that instead of humble truckers.
It can’t be that hard a question to ALL people within the UK at this time - “Do you feel life has been good to you in the past few years?”
If the answer is NO, then you are more likely to be voting for change - and that proposed change on the cards is Brexit. The change on the cards might have been voting the Tories out - but we didn’t do that last year when we had the chance. The change might have been something “half done” and suddenly completed…
All we’ve got to decide is NOT to try and “predict the future” - but instead to interpret the PRESENT.
If you are experiencing good things more than bad right now - then your feelgood factor will steer you away from “rocking the boat of change”.
If the opposite is true - then you’ll be gagging for any chance you get to have a stab at real change, which we should all be agreed upon - Brexit definitely represents, should it come to pass…
What everyone else is doing/getting/saying/thinking - is irrelevant.
Vote for your own experience of life in this country per this past decade in particular. It’s really not rocket science.
I could say for myself that since I am earning less for the same hours as 6 years ago - I’m getting worse off by the day, and WILL be voting for change.
If the EU were to offer me some fantastic deal though - I’d of course be voting to stay in.
I’m not holding my breath. The door is only open a crack for the million-to-one shot that the EU gives a ■■■■ about me and mine personally to occur. If it doesn’t, my mind is all but made up - but for MY reasons not those of any politician. I accept the fact that if most other people are better off than I, then I’m in the minority, and am never going to get the change I desire. C’est la Vie.
That’s a very well thought out summary of the Vote, the only problem I can see with it, is, that your assuming that if everything in your life is worse than before, then its the fault of the EU, or why make the answer to the question "“Do you feel life has been good to you in the past few years?” you then go onto say if the answer is no then you are more than likely to be voting for change, that change being Brexit. Some people may feel that their woes cannot be laid at the door of the EU, and politicians closer to home should answer, but as you say, we screwed that opportunity up last year
eddie snax:
I think what he’s saying, and far be it for Me to speak on his behalf. Is that the vote is about IN or OUT, of what exists at the moment, and nothing to do with changing the wider political doctrine of either the UK or EU, just our membership
The vote is in or out supposedly based on Cameron’s so called ‘re negotiations’.The question then being why didn’t those ‘re negotiations’ include the idea of changing the EU Constitution from a Federal one to a Confederal one.Thereby actually fitting the description of ‘returning’ powers and sovereignty to the respective state governments as advertised in the form of state opt outs and substituion for example.I think Obama has answered that question clearly.
In which case it’s actually a vote regarding who governs us and democratic accountability regards same.But in which the idea of a Confederal Europe seems to be off the table for ‘some’ reason.
eddie snax:
Some people may feel that their woes cannot be laid at the door of the EU, and politicians closer to home should answer, but as you say, we screwed that opportunity up last year
If the electorate really think that ‘our woes’ aren’t all about running an economically suicidal trade deficit and de industrialisation,as part of a so called Post Fordist economy and that handing sovereignty,and with it democratic accountability,over to the conditions contained within the treaty of Rome,Maastricht and Lisbon is supposedly a good thing.Then it really doesn’t matter who they vote for between the choice of LabLibDemCon etc.
eddie snax:
I think what he’s saying, and far be it for Me to speak on his behalf. Is that the vote is about IN or OUT, of what exists at the moment, and nothing to do with changing the wider political doctrine of either the UK or EU, just our membership
The vote is in or out supposedly based on Cameron’s so called ‘re negotiations’.The question then being why didn’t those ‘re negotiations’ include the idea of changing the EU Constitution from a Federal one to a Confederal one.Thereby actually fitting the description of ‘returning’ powers and sovereignty to the respective state governments as advertised in the form of state opt outs and substituion for example.
.
Maybe its because the rest of the EU, wish to move to a closer Union, and that being what we are getting an exemption on, through the opt out’s.
Carryfast:
[
In which case it’s actually a vote regarding who governs us and democratic accountability regards same.But in which the idea of a Confederal Europe seems to be off the table for ‘some’ reason.
The reason its off the table is because, the political class of Europe wish to move to ever closer political union. We will stay out of this, but still be within the EU, but with a series of Derogations and opt outs, and new opt outs and derogations from future treaties. So on this model, as the EU gets ever closer to a single (political) state, we will remain apart from such, but will still have the benefits of open trade and movement.
Carryfast:
The vote is in or out supposedly based on Cameron’s so called ‘re negotiations’.The question then being why didn’t those ‘re negotiations’ include the idea of changing the EU Constitution from a Federal one to a Confederal one.Thereby actually fitting the description of ‘returning’ powers and sovereignty to the respective state governments as advertised in the form of state opt outs and substituion for example.
.
Maybe its because the rest of the EU, wish to move to a closer Union, and that being what we are getting an exemption on, through the opt out’s.
Carryfast:
[
In which case it’s actually a vote regarding who governs us and democratic accountability regards same.But in which the idea of a Confederal Europe seems to be off the table for ‘some’ reason.
The reason its off the table is because, the political class of Europe wish to move to ever closer political union. We will stay out of this, but still be within the EU, but with a series of Derogations and opt outs, and new opt outs and derogations from future treaties. So on this model, as the EU gets ever closer to a single (political) state, we will remain apart from such, but will still have the benefits of open trade and movement.
Let’s get this right.We’re expected to believe,that an unsigned for,non existent amendment,to all the relevant treaties,regarding giving us special Confederal status,within an obviously Federal European governmental system,will deliver all that.
While stopping ‘further’ integration isn’t the same thing as ‘returning’ powers ‘previously’ ‘already’ lost as advertised.While ‘if’ your claims are true how does a Union that supposedly allows any member to do what you’ve described not fit the definition of a Confederal arrangement anyway.Your ( and Cameron’s ) claims of any so called ‘deal’,that supposedly doesn’t hand us over to a Federal Europe,are about as believable in that regard as Heath’s were when he took us into the scam.
As for the reason it’s ‘off the table’ I’d suggest that has more to do with people like Obama bearing in mind the perceived/real threat that presents to the future of the US Federal governmental system at home.
Carryfast:
Let’s get this right.We’re expected to believe,that an unsigned for,non existent amendment,to all the relevant treaties,regarding giving us special Confederal status,within an obviously Federal European governmental system,will deliver all that.
While stopping ‘further’ integration isn’t the same thing as ‘returning’ powers ‘previously’ ‘already’ lost as advertised.While ‘if’ your claims are true how does a Union that supposedly allows any member to do what you’ve described not fit the definition of a Confederal arrangement anyway…:
I have never argued against confederalism, I have merely pointed out My belief that we should remain as part of the EU, if we can hold an autonomous position within the EU then all the better.
I also believe that, other Nations within the EU, whom don’t hold the weight of power that the UK does, are looking to see how this all pans out, and might choose to force the issue for themselves, I’m primarily thinking Denmark and Sweden, both have not yet adopted the Euro, despite reaching the parameters to accept monetary union.
This is one of the reasons that I believe that the EU will make future trade deal negotiations drag on for years, stifling growth here, and there, as a way of putting off other smaller countries (economies) from going the way of Brexit.
I think that the Architects of the European project, would accept, a group of countries being part of the EU, but autonomous from much of its legislation/laws/rules. In order to keep the wider project on the road, the sometimes talked of 2 speed Europe.
Just to save you the effort, that is a kind of amalgam of Federal, and Confederal, but unlike the US, this eutopia will be achieve without bloodshed
in one of the best beef producing countries in the world and in which British farmers are being closed down by the banks because they can’t sell their products here at a good enough price because of under cutting by cheap third world competition.
.
