Comments on: The facts are clear: London is better off In

By: Robert Jones

Robert Jones — Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:18:18 +0000

Too easy to be “brave” with other people’s jobs. I voted against joining the EU all those years ago, but the country voted to join and that should have been that – the suggestion is the EU has changed radically in the meantime; well, it has changed: but its direction was always perfectly clear. Outside the EU, the influence of this now minor power will fade into obscurity — if Scotland were then to secede, we should seem all the smaller and less important. And no major company would base its HQ or centre of operations here – not at least unless we embraced the tax-free regulatory system of a banana republic. Business would be “much freer to make trading arrangements with the rest of the world outside the E”, someone says above. The rest of what world? The EU seeks to grow, and has grown – with whom, other than the US, China, Russia, are we to make trading arrangements? How many of those countries outside the EU are going to want the bother of renegotiating trade agreements they had thought settled with the EU? And what, other than financial services made possible through our present association with the EU, are we going to trade IN? We don’t make anything any more!

“It’s better out than in” generally refers to some digestive upset – it’s not much use as an economic policy.

By: Jimmy Glesga

Jimmy Glesga — Wed, 24 Feb 2016 00:22:19 +0000

The only people better off are the EU beuraucracy and idle politicians in the EU parliament. We need to get out and the rest will follow. All we need is fair trade.

By: David Davies

David Davies — Tue, 23 Feb 2016 21:34:18 +0000

The `Only Place That Matters’ is better off, whatever happens!

By: Robert Petulengro

Robert Petulengro — Tue, 23 Feb 2016 20:24:09 +0000

Len, I think you are making two assumptions neither of which is true.

The first is that nobody (in their right mind) is suggesting a clean break on 24th June if the LEAVE vote wins. At the very soonest, we can apply for Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, as Mr Cameron so rightly said in parliament, and that will take 2 years. Switzerland took 16 years to come to an arrangement. Any form of business will have a lot of time to come to terms with any new relationship (And do not forget the EU is changing too into a Federal Union. So that is an option which you have not factored in.)

Secondly we are already in the EEA. Nobody is suggesting we leave that. We can also apply for membership of EFTA during the negotiation process. Spinelli actually offers us Associate Membership which Boris Johnson mentioned yesterday. Trade and banking will be unaffected during the negotiations. On the other hand, business will be much freer to make trading and banking arrangements with the rest of the world than is the case at the moment.

We have thought all this out. What is sad is that you haven’t done the homework.
http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html

http://www.eureferendum.com/documents/flexcit.pdf

http://www.eureferendum.com/documents/fundamentallaw.pdf

By: Eric

Eric — Tue, 23 Feb 2016 19:40:26 +0000

It’s this bit that clinches it for me:

“In 2014, a report from consultancy Deloitte looking at London’s business success found that of the world’s largest 250 companies:

40 per cent had their European headquarters in London
60 per cent of the top non-European companies with an HQ in Europe chose London.”

If you were a CEO of a North American or Far Eastern company that wanted to expand into Europe, would you set up your European headquarters in a country just outside Europe or would you do the obvious thing and set up your business inside Europe? If you were CEO of a company that had two manufacturing sites in Europe, one in the UK and one in Italy both serving the European market, which one would you close first if business conditions compelled you to make cut backs?

By: Richard MacKinnon

Richard MacKinnon — Tue, 23 Feb 2016 08:52:49 +0000

Its articles like this that show up Labour’s total lack of understanding of the magnitude of the decision of this referendum.
” The facts are clear: London is better off In”.
First of all the facts are not clear. Second, it may be that there are jobs in London that depend on EU membership but what about rUK.
Labour List has an article this morning by Alan Johnson “50,000 apprenticeships at risk due to Brexit”. Maybe, but the £55 million per day UK contribution to EU?
Once again we see Labour watching events from the sidelines with nothing to offer but Project Fear II.

By: Julian

Julian — Tue, 23 Feb 2016 08:51:00 +0000

Len Duvall is a London Assembly Member – it’s his job to be London-centric!

But he makes the case quite clearly in his closing lines – the UK as a whole is better off in.

By: DWP

DWP — Tue, 23 Feb 2016 08:23:45 +0000

“London is better off in” and what about the rest of this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?

Pull your London centric goggles off