This is going to be an election defining issue - UKIP will gain massively in the next election.

When push comes to shove Labour will also cave in and promise this in their manifesto.

That's not an answer to the questions I posited in response to your claim about the state that Labour 'left the country in'.

Largely from the Tories – if the Telegraph forums are anything to go by – thus splitting the Conservative vote.

To begin with, you did not differentiate between trade in Goods and trade in Services.
In terms of trade in goods the UK has had a balance of trade deficit with both the EU and the rest of the world for quite some time.
Services are what puts us in trade surplus with the rest of the world.
I have already said that the services area needs the same attention to harmonisation that the EU gave to the trade in goods.
Secondly, for some reason, you chose a random stat from 2011 (or nearly, it looked about £2bn out to me) rather than either a trend view over a longer period of time or more recent numbers.
We operate on a more level playing field in the EU these days, if Germany can produce a goods surplus, so could we ... but that would mean being more German in our approach and, going by your comments so far, I can't see that sitting comfortably with you.


I have never claimed to be aware of all the facts.
Perhaps you can oblige?
How you are going to monetarise the EUs geopolitical clout remains to be seen.


As contributions are calculated by the richest putting the most in and the poorest getting the most development out, that is not a surprise.


At present there are a limited number of ways that a non-EU state can trade with the EU, by mentioning Norway/Turkey/Switzerland I was considering whether we could emulate any of the current examples.
Regarding your assertion that the EU needs us more than we need them ... about half of our exports go to the EU, but only about 20% of the EU's exports come to us ... we must also remember that the impact of possible loss of that 20% is diluted by a spread of up to 26 countries ... who has the whip hand?


Of course .... but that would naturally be part of the discussions, as it has been with all treaties preceding it ... it doesn't require a) Advance veto (as Cameron tried and failed with before, and excluded himself from discussions) or b) Posturing and a promise of a referendum years ahead, as a sop to the Bill Cash tendency, whilst destabilising inward investment as investors try to second-guess the outcome of a referendum to decide whether the terms gained were satisfactory, when those desired terms have not yet been articulated in anything other than a vehement but vague desire for repatriation of powers. (I am in favour of subsidiarity where it is warranted ... so might be happy to see specifics be discussed).


Who said I missed it?


Whoah there, those free trade agreements were all negotiated and put in place by the EU.


Earlier you said that I was confusing the argument by mentioning Norway and other traders into the EU but now you bring up EFTA, of which Norway is one of the the biggest economies, if not the biggest.
I had chosen Norway as an example precisely because it is an EFTA member.
Would you have preferred me to compare the UK with Lichtenstein or Iceland?

I don't follow you.
If everyone offers a referendum, why would UKIP gain?

I do love a good old-fashioned spot of S&M. And you do seem to have the whip hand, so to speak, oh bearded one.

UKIP gain because disgruntled voters are looking for a protest vote away from the Tories/Clegg, what are their alternatives BNP, ED & ED?

Even you didn't seriously think the rise in UKIP popularity had anything to do with membership of the EEC?

The point is Labour could have taken action earlier so that by now we would have potentially been passed the worst. They gambled on retaining power on the back of less pain now more pain later. Sadly for them the some voters were able to see through their "Its not our fault its a global issue" excuses. Taking unpopular decisions is sometimes required at the point it was required Labour didn't take them.

They would say they had and with growth in the economy starting again key investments in house building, not increasing VAT and not front loading the cuts would have seen us escape what is looking like a triple dip.

Yes, indeed I did (do), and that's why I have to disagree.
I reckon any apparently Europhobic move Cameron makes, takes votes away from UKIP.