Thank you for this, Barbara, I shall try to answer without castigation or contempt (not that I’m aware that you’ve been subjected to this in any case; perhaps you could enlighten us. Anyway - and with apologies for the length of this post but you did list a lot of issues:
1 fishing regs. I guess you mean by this the Common Fisheries Policy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Fisheries_Policy). The FT asked a couple of years ago whether Britain's fishermen would be better off after Brexit (https://www.ft.com/content/84f51c84-5fe2-11e7-91a7-502f7ee26895), and concluded that “Given [the] constraints, Britain has little room for manoeuvre in negotiations over post-CFP arrangements. The UK fishing community may emerge from Brexit in a weaker position than it expects.” And although there would be a considerable effect on the fishing industry, it @accounts for only a tiny part of the UK economy.@m So not much joy there.
2 regs re air quality which are non applicable here. Lucille has already responded on this point.
3 proposed EU army. This really is a complete non-issue: there are no firm plans for such an army and in any case, the UK has a veto on EU military policy so couldn’t be forced to participate in it (https://fullfact.org/online/EU-army-conscription/). And I presume you also object, on the same grounds, to our belonging to NATO?
4 butter mountains. This refers to a supply surplus of butter produced in the European Economic Community due to government interventionism, beginning in the 1970s. The size of the surplus changed significantly over time, and had mostly disappeared by 2017 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butter_mountain), so it's an old story, irrelevant now.
5 wine lakes. Another old story (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine_lake) and similarly irrelevant.
6 poisoned olive oil. This is an even older and more irrelevant issue: the tainted oil scandal occurred in Spain as a result of which 1,200 people died (https://medicalxpress.com/news/2017-08-europe-tainted-food-scandals.html). That was terrible, but (a) it dates back to 1981 (1981!!) and (b) it had nothing to do with the EU.
7 unregulated immigration. This is an important issue, but it contains another myth: although freedom of movememt is one of the key ‘legs’ of membership of the EU, this does not undermine the UK’s ability to control its borders, for three principal reasons:
First, the largest category of migrants to the UK come from outside the EU, and are not entitled to rely on EU laws on freedom of movement. The UK’s ability to restrict entry to this group is unaffected by its membership of the EU.
Secondly, whereas many Member States have replaced individual controls with a common policy at their common frontier (known as the Schengen Area), the UK chose to retain its right to independent border control and is entitled to check the identity of every individual entering the country.
Thirdly, EU law does not provide nationals from other EU Member States with an unlimited right to enter or remain in the UK. Most importantly, the right to live in the UK without any conditions or formalities only lasts for three months. In addition, the right is subject to limitations “on grounds of public policy, public security or public health”. Specifically, the UK retains the right to restrict the freedom of movement and residence of EU citizens and their family members, where their personal conduct represents “a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society”[8]and the home Member State of any expelled EU nationals must allow those nationals to re-enter their territory. (http://lawyers-inforbritain.uk/b-m-a/can-the-uk-control-its-borders-if-it-remains-in-the-eu/)
8 the overruling of justice system. The European Court of Justice exists to oversee the correct application and implementation of EU law; however, the UK rarely ends up in the the Court and when it does it wins its cases more often than most European Union (EU) member states, according to Who’s afraid of the ECJ?, from the independent Institute for Government (https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/support-services/brexit-and-the-legal-sector/what-is-the-european-court-of-justice-and-why-does-it-matter/); see also 2 above. Interestingly, one of the few areas where the Court has overruled the UK concerns our long-running failure to deal with atmospheric pollution (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/19/eu-court-rules-uk-government-must-clean-up-dangerous-air-pollution), something you would presumably support!
etc etc. I don’t know what this might refer to, but in any case, you’re answering the wrong question. What we really want to know is this: what, in your view, are the benefits of leaving the EU?
Over to you.
Richard Carter ● 2653d