Two referendums - then and now

figges

1975

Britain votes whether to remain in the EEC (EU)

votes to remain 17.3M (67%)

votes to leave 8.5M (33%)

65% turnout

Forward 41 years and .....

2016

Britain votes whether to remain in the EU

votes to remain 16.1M (48%)

votes to leave 17.4M (52%)

Turnout 72%.

What has changed in Britain over the last 40 years that lead to a 20% swing to leave (an extra 9 million votes !) ??

- even allowing for an increased population that is a huge number.

Possibly just a coincidence but the total number of votes cast to remain was similar in both referendums.

What consequences will this result have for both UK and Ireland and their inter-relations in the next 15+ years ?

K-9

Hard to compare, the 70's were a very volatile time in British politics.

I suppose the EU is a very different beast to the EEC and that explains principled objections to its increased powers.

Other things like globalism and the erosion of the British manufacturing base would be big factors but how much of that can be laid at the door of the EU I'm not sure.

Sand

There has been 40 years of media propaganda and misinformation where the EU has been blamed for every failing of UK governance. Before anyone could even challenge the lie, the media would be on to the next lie.

figges

The 70s were very volatile yet the UK wanted political partners not to go it alone. And it was far from pc - Bernard Manning and shows about "ignorant" foreigners (Mind your Language) were all over the TV.
The EU has grown hugely and is not without its flaws but generally has been a force for bettering peoples lives allowing prosperity and security as an umbrella organisation. It has felt that equality was at its core and perhaps National governments dont necessarily like that. Unquestionably the media has increasingly questioned its authority.
When the "debate" focused so much on terrorism and immigration the issue of the unprecedented times of peace Europe has enjoyed have been totally underplayed. 100 years after the battle of the Somme it is more than a little, tragically, ironic that Germany is Europes moral compass and it is Britain that is perceived as the right wing country that is destabilizing the continent. How did it come to this ?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

ancapailldorcha

The other factor was that then prime minister, Ted Heath knew he could could on the Labour party to rally the working class vote in favour of remaining. This year we've had the Tory party squabbling amongst themselves while Labour is being led by a Eurosceptic who visibly couldn't care one whit.

oscarBravo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Outside of the pages of the Express and the Telegraph, there still isn't.

oscarBravo

oscarBravo wrote: »

Outside of the pages of the Express and the Telegraph, there still isn't.

The Law on Cabbages

A Tyrant Named Miltiades!

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

The Law on Cabbages

I still don't see what the issue is there. It lays down conditions for classes so that it means the same everywhere. Is there anything in the law saying I can't grow a cabbage outside of those guidelines? No. I could easily grow a cabbage outside those guidelines and sell it. If I want to send it abroad to someone who can't see it before buying it then they may well want some assurance of the quality. If they don't I can still sell it without referring to the EU regulations.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I still don't see what the issue is there. It lays down conditions for classes so that it means the same everywhere. Is there anything in the law saying I can't grow a cabbage outside of those guidelines? No. I could easily grow a cabbage outside those guidelines and sell it. If I want to send it abroad to someone who can't see it before buying it then they may well want some assurance of the quality. If they don't I can still sell it without referring to the EU regulations.

You're answering a different point. I'm not saying it's a harmful regulation. I'm not saying it outlaws 'bad cabbage'.

I'm giving an example, in attestation of Permabear's point, about the enormous breadth of EU regulation. It is immense.

oscarBravo

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

You're answering a different point. I'm not saying it's a harmful regulation. I'm not saying it outlaws 'bad cabbage'.

I'm giving an example, in attestation of Permabear's point, about the enormous breadth of EU regulation. It is immense.

It regulates (inter alia) a free trade agreement among (for the moment) 28 member states with a combined population of half a billion people. There will, of necessity, be a great deal of regulation involved.

That's not exactly the same thing as a "massive bureaucratic technocracy in Brussels hell-bent on regulating everything that move".

oscarBravo

oscarBravo wrote: »

It regulates (inter alia) a free trade agreement among (for the moment) 28 member states with a combined population of half a billion people. There will, of necessity, be a great deal of regulation involved.

So now we've gone from explaining why the cabbage law is not bad, to explaining why it's necessary.

Again, not my point. Not even close to my point.

To repeat, my point is on th sheer immensity of EU regulation. Not the merit. Not the justification. The very existence of it.

Permabear was using a figure of speech, I assume. Although, at it's most literal, it's not far off the truth. I cannot think of anything that moves and is not regulated by the EU. No beast of the sky or of the land, no chattel, no coinage, not a postage stamp nor a jumbo jet, not a condom nor a cabbage, not a bent banana nor a sod of turf is free.

Sam Russell

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

You're answering a different point. I'm not saying it's a harmful regulation. I'm not saying it outlaws 'bad cabbage'.

I'm giving an example, in attestation of Permabear's point, about the enormous breadth of EU regulation. It is immense.

I think the EU should regulate chickens.

A chicken from Thailand imported in Hungary and disected and sent to Holland where water is added to the chicken breast along with a few chemicals. It is then imported into Ireland where it is put into a chicken pie which is sold as an Irish product.

They should regulate Best Before labels.

If I buy an apple with BB of 17/7/2016, then I assume it was picked a few weeks ago, but it is likely (given it is an apple) it probably ripened on the tree last October or October the year before and has been in storage since. It should say I]Picked 06/10/2015 Stored until 06/06/2016 BB 17/7/2016[/I. That way I am fully informed and can decide whether to buy or not. Just saying BB 17/7/2016 does not inform me at all.


If a bureaucrat does a regulation, why be surprised if he does it thoroughly?

Who will do this work for the UK when they leave the EU? Answer: their bureaucrats - they call them Civil Servants.

ancapailldorcha

Sam Russell wrote: »

Who will do this work for the UK when they leave the EU? Answer: their bureaucrats - they call them Civil Servants.

If we get the EEA deal the EU bureaucrats will continue in this vein without a British voice to hinder them.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Sam Russell

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Well, yes. But there should be a regime where non-compliance is tollerated for SMEs.

For example: there was an issue about food safety here a number of years ago with relation to food prepared for sale. In order to comply, food had to be prepared in a registered professional kitchen with temperature records of fridges and other requirements that are necessary to prevent poisoning the purchasers.

However, that is not possible for cakes put up for sale for the local church fete as Mrs Murphy, who makes a lovely sponge cake, does not have a professional kitchen and has been baking without incident for the last forty years. So, church fete cake sales are out for Mrs. Murphy and fete makes less money - bureaucracy wins. Well no, all that is needed is a change to regulations. A cake baked in a professional kitchen carries a green sticker with the reg number of the kitchen (as dairy products do for the dairy) or a red sticker which makes it clear the buyer should be aware it is up to them to be careful. [I do not think this happened but it is an example of what could be done].

The exemption already applies to small companies wrt audit and VAT. It is not beyond the wit of the EU to offer similar exemptions for regulations relating to SMEs.

oscarBravo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I've been running a small business for more than a decade. The unsustainable costs of the EU's regulatory burden are notable by their absence.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, yes. But there should be a regime where non-compliance is tollerated for SMEs.

For example: there was an issue about food safety here a number of years ago with relation to food prepared for sale. In order to comply, food had to be prepared in a registered professional kitchen with temperature records of fridges and other requirements that are necessary to prevent poisoning the purchasers.

However, that is not possible for cakes put up for sale for the local church fete as Mrs Murphy, who makes a lovely sponge cake, does not have a professional kitchen and has been baking without incident for the last forty years. So, church fete cake sales are out for Mrs. Murphy and fete makes less money - bureaucracy wins. Well no, all that is needed is a change to regulations. A cake baked in a professional kitchen carries a green sticker with the reg number of the kitchen (as dairy products do for the dairy) or a red sticker which makes it clear the buyer should be aware it is up to them to be careful. [I do not think this happened but it is an example of what could be done].

The exemption already applies to small companies wrt audit and VAT. It is not beyond the wit of the EU to offer similar exemptions for regulations relating to SMEs.

I guess that explains why there hasn't been a church fete bake sale in the EU for the last four decades.

Icaras

Living in the UK and a few things Ive noticed:
1. Media - for some reason papers like the daily mail are very popular (my gf has the app on her phone), it seems to be only celeb gossip, England can win the world cup and foreigners want to blow up the UK/take all the UK jobs/take all the UK money and the sad thing is people believe it!
2. Class - it seems once you are in your class bracket you stay there (or are expected to) and there is a lot of snobbery both ways i.e. one of the Tata steel guys interviewed on the news looked like he was going to loose his job said he never work in a marshmallow factory because he makes steel - it does have to be seen to be believed.
3. The UK is getting like America for suing at the drop of a hat (no win no fee seems to have gone away), in work we have a risk assessment for sweeping the floor and no-one can sweep the floor unless they are signed off and made sure they are competent! To me this seems to be coming from UK issues but always EU regulations are blamed for things like this
4. People - people are convinced the UK (England) is a great nation and can be great again if the EU just butted out and cant seem to understand there are some serious issues within the UK. An example would be like the English football team - always think they can win the competition, attract supporters who think they can go around being nobs because, you know, England and they are the ones influencing the impressionable so the impressionable ones become nobs.

I could go on.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

figges

Constitutional crises are rarely simply caused by bureaucracy.
A former empire lost for direction and not being able to exert the influence it wants on a federation might.
The question is what direction does a Brexit government take? There are no more colonies to conquer, no religious allies to call upon. How will it feed its desperate need for self determination? Is this a constitutional blip that will be undone by a general election on a mandate for a new referendum? - or is this really the future of this nation and we have to buckle up for the ride with Cap'n Johnston and chief mate Gove and await the unholy alliance of the special relationship with Commander Trump?

Godge

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

So now we've gone from explaining why the cabbage law is not bad, to explaining why it's necessary.

Again, not my point. Not even close to my point.

To repeat, my point is on th sheer immensity of EU regulation. Not the merit. Not the justification. The very existence of it.

Permabear was using a figure of speech, I assume. Although, at it's most literal, it's not far off the truth. I cannot think of anything that moves and is not regulated by the EU. No beast of the sky or of the land, no chattel, no coinage, not a postage stamp nor a jumbo jet, not a condom nor a cabbage, not a bent banana nor a sod of turf is free.

Yes, but if you are to dismiss the sheer immensity of EU regulation, you need to demonstrate why particular regulations are completely unnecessary or why 28 different versions regulating the same thing would be better.

Surely, we are better off with one EU regulation than 28 different ones?

Sam Russell

Godge wrote: »

Surely, we are better off with one EU regulation than 28 different ones?

Exactly. Do you need 28 times as many civil servants to do it - probably not.

But it all makes work for the bureaucrats to do. Long live bureaucrats.

Godge

Godge wrote: »

Yes, but if you are to dismiss the sheer immensity of EU regulation, you need to demonstrate why particular regulations are completely unnecessary

Eh?

What do you mean, "dismiss the sheer immensity of EU regulation? I don't understand what that is supposed to mean. I am not dismissing the immensity of EU regulation, I am acknowledging it.

This thread isn't called 'Why I don't like the EU'... it's an attempt to query why voters have come to resent the EU.

A lot of people see it in the way Permabear has described, whereby people perceive an increased burden of EU regulation in their daily lives, and particularly in business.

You might disagree with the extent of that burden, you might accuse those people of exaggerating. That really doesn't matter. We're talking about public perceptions of the EU in attempting to analyse changing attitudes towards EU membership.

Not every discussion on the EU needs to descend into a EU good/ EU bad diatribe. The OP is fundamentally about public perceptions.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

figges

oscarBravo wrote: »

I've been running a small business for more than a decade. The unsustainable costs of the EU's regulatory burden are notable by their absence.

I'll take this as sufficient evidence that increased regulation itself is not the real issue here.

What seemingly has significantly changed in 40 years is accountablilty and therefore possibly the loss, to a greater or lesser degree, of democracy. That is potentially, if true, hugely significant. The political argument for Leave, seemingly, is that in recanting Nationalism of all kinds the EU has progressively lead to power by commission with decreased accountablity where democracy is diminished leading to a reduction of political accountablity. This has given rise to an inflated union pushed, in disregard of a common will, in the direction the commissions see fit. Is this in any way true ? Is Brussells/Strasbourg less democratic than Westminster?

Or is it not true and Britain/England just wants out?

Was De Gaulle right all along when he twice vetoed Britains membership of the EEC, saying that Britain had a "deep-seated hostility" towards European construction and that Britains membership would result in the break up of the community?

Britain only joined after he died a few years later.

Jayop

I'd love to see the papers leading up tot he first referendum compared to last week.

Jim2007

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Deleted User wrote: »

I still don't see what the issue is there. It lays down conditions for classes so that it means the same everywhere. Is there anything in the law saying I can't grow a cabbage outside of those guidelines? No. I could easily grow a cabbage outside those guidelines and sell it. If I want to send it abroad to someone who can't see it before buying it then they may well want some assurance of the quality. If they don't I can still sell it without referring to the EU regulations.

You're answering a different point. I'm not saying it's a harmful regulation. I'm not saying it outlaws 'bad cabbage'.

I'm giving an example, in attestation of Permabear's point, about the enormous breadth of EU regulation. It is immense.

Yes and it is with good reason, we and the UK have our laws based in Common Law, while most of Europe have their laws based in Civil Law - in other words the judge can't make it up as he goes along no matter how reasonable his ruling might be, so unless something is codified you have no rights to any remedy not listed in the law.