Jose Manuel Barroso the (un-ellected) European Commission President has opened his mouth and put his foot in it stating that the UK outside the EU would be "relegated" to the likes of Switzerland or Norway.

What better reason for the UK to leave??

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ni...utside-the-eu/

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics...-closed-europe

The UK can only benefit from leaving the EU.

Given what Barroso actually said, the thread title is very misleading indeed:

He might well be overestimating how much extra leverage that EU membership gives the UK in international affairs, but there is nothing there at all promoting the UK's leaving the EU. At all. No matter how much Telegraph bloggers wish there was.

MMMMMMmmmmm. I think you are missing the point.

The subject of this thread is (obviously) mine. By suggesting that the UK might be like Switzerland or Norway to my way of thinking is positive, not negative, and something the UK should aspire to.

It is time post-industrial, post-colonial, post-most-everything Britain woke up to the fact it is no longer a major world force and concentrated more on itself, rather than trying to keep up with the big boys and hob-nobbing with the like of the USA and China and fighting in every war around the globe...

No, I think the title of the thread is completely misleading given what he actually said.

Leaving the EU will not suddenly transform us into the idylls of Norway and Switzerland. We'll still be a country with all the same problems (e.g. violent crime, teenage preganancy, diminished social responsibility, celeb worship, binge drinking, dysfunctional families, poverty, rising unemployment, dwindling manufacturing, speculative housing markets, City spivs depleting pension funds etc..).
I personally think Barroso makes a reasonable point, Britain has clout in the European Parliament with many outspoken and articulate MEPs pushing through our agenda. A lot of the smaller countries look up to us as we're seen as distinctly different and less dictatorial than the Franco-German hegemony.

Torygraph readers say no thanks to this and yes please to the "good old days" pre-1973.

And exactly how would that work? Or put it another way how is the EU currently preventing the UK from reaching it's potential? I only ask because I often hear it said, but never explained....

A) The U.K. of course has a heavy influence onto EU matters. Particularily John Major used this influence in a positive way. That Tony Blair, the "Poodle of the President", and Gordon Brown practically abstained from using their power was BAD. It looks as if Mr Cameron, realising the psycho-gap between Mrs Merkel and Mr Hollande is re-entering Continental politics, as his recent visit to Berlin has shown.
B) The U.K. leaving the E.U. might have a few advantages for the U.K. but would be BAD for the E.U. and even to Europe as a whole as it would increase the German-French dominance, or as an uncle of me says THE TEUTONIC DOMINANCE in Continental Europe
C) I personally doubt that Brits would really love the status of Norway and Switzerland ! The influence of the U.K. in the world would be severely limited, and while Norwegian and Swiss diplomats for ages were used to exert influence "out of the corner", British ones were not. And just dropping out of the E.U. would not make the U.K. a kind of "larger Norway". The Bilateral Process of Switzerland was started in the mid 90ies and is still not yet concluded. It did cost Switzerland TWO decades and lots of money to achieve.

What Mr Barroso really has in his mind is unknown to me, but if his thought is that a UK outside EU and Germany and France divided would help Spain and Italy into European leadership, he might rather consult his doctor !

I wonder if the UK can afford to be in the Norway/Switzerland group. Norway is nothing without oil revenues and Switzerland is nothing without you-know-what. Does anybody know?

If Cameron has his way, the UK will be staying in the EC.
It is quite obvious that Cameron is conning the UK public for his personal gain.
In fact, I think Cameron is using the UK referendum threat to negotiate his personal future employment in the EC. Cameron knows that Conservative will not win the next election in 2014.
The reason being that so many Conservative supporters appear to be future UK Independent Supporters.
There are also rumors that Blair is coming back as Labour leader. Highly feasible as he wants to get back into politics now that he has a personal fortune in his foundation that joe-public believe is a charity. Blair wanted to be president of the EC but due to the rest of the world believing Blair correctly to be a War Criminal was not offered the position so it is back to UK politics for him possibly. Blair would be welcomed back by the Labour party to replace plonker Balls.

Once the Conservative austerity measures kick in more in the UK with the increased unemployment and reduction of all those Tax Credits/Handouts the labour government were giving; it is highly likely that UK voters will probably think that times were good when Blair was in power.

Cameron knows that after the next general election, it will be hung parliamnet again but this time with 4 parties able to black mail each other (Labour, Conservative, UK Independent and Liberal).

If Cameron had called a general election 8 months again with the Conservative manifesto stating that there will be a referendum (Yes or No) to be out of the EC, Conservative may well have won with a clear majority.

It is not surpring that so many Conservative voters are now going to vote UK Independent next time.
What Nigel Farage has been saying has been basically correct:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdob6QRLRJU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_0g-LImpoU

And of course Baroso (so much for democracy)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgDWk...eature=related

Theoretically, no problem. It HAS oil just like Norway, its economy mainly depends on the export industry just as in Switzerland, its banking business is financially important just as in Switzerland, its agricultural sector is of meagre importance just as in Switzerland, so that by strictly economic criteria why not (ODER?) More than in most continental countries, Britain depends onto its trade with the countries of the Commonwealth, and so, the U.K. indeed could do well without and outside the E.U. But in case any Brits believe that the influence of the U.K. in the world could be kept at its present level or increased they clearly are mistaken. A U.K. outside the E.U. would be of less use for the USA then now.

A word about Norway. Norway was nicely well off BEFORE the oil business started.

And so back to the EU. In the EU parliament, Norway and Switzerland would not have enough seats to have serious influence. Britain however has so many seats that it HAS a serious influence. If the UK left the EU, the relative weight of Portugal (Barroso's home-country), Spain and Italy would increase.

Barroso knows the business inside the EU, and may have some calculatiions

Are you telling me that the UK's oil money is flooding the state budgets like in Norway? I was convinced that UK's oil was totally privatized and that the money goes to the private companies, leaving peanuts to the state as taxes that they are very eager to avoid with success. Was I wrong?

Sorry, but Norway was prosperous before oil like Belgium was before they discovered they had no oil in the 80ies, if you see what I mean. At the times before oil, whole Europe was industrially as least as happy as Norway was. Oil made it possible for Norway not to have a crisis like pretty much anywhere else, UK included even with oil for a reason called Mrs Thatcher (although any other Prime would have privatized the same way, I guess, she just happens to be the one who did the job).

If you actually believe any of this, I would recommnd popping into Ladbrokes or Willy Hills the next time you are back in the UK - I would imagine you could get pretty long odds on most of the above happening.

-
Sorry, but wrong you are. Why ?
Because Norway has a population of
5 millions
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegen
--
While the U.K. has a population of
62 millions
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vereini...%C3%B6nigreich
-
The oil on both sides is comparable, but the effect in Norway is 12 times the effect in the UK. This may change if Scotland goes independent and gets most of the oil


-
While oil of course made Norway RICH, Norway was in a far better state than Belgium. In the old times, Wallonia was the rich industrial area, but in modern times, Wallonia had become the "rust-belt" of the country and Flandern had become relatively wealthy. Until King Albert took over as King and in his charming way kept the Belgians together, everybody spoke about Belgium breaking up. Which would have been and may be a pity. As I like that nice country. I intentionally lead my return from Britain by car three times via Belgium, as I like Belgian cuisine and its nice cities, and much liked the old ferry ships. Those ships were slow as turtles and as dilapidated as the Hohentwiehl, but romantic and charming and had superb (and rather cheap) restaurants