Copyright © 2015 - 18 euexit.com. All rights reserved.

14th February 2018

Some of the Benefits of Leaving the EU *

A lot of "Brexit" reports in the press are deliberately doom-laden and always threatening, so we have included a short section on how and why we benefit from being outside the EU. 


The most important benefits are reclaiming our own

  • Sovereign Parliament, Judiciary, Courts and Police - to be able to remove those who make our laws when they do not act in our interests; to have a genuinely UK Supreme Court, and other courts that uphold our Common Law protections not ones controlled by the EU which recently usurped the power of our Parliament on its behalf - while we are in the EU they are part of an evolving Police State. (see short EU Summary)


  • Fishing Grounds- to be able to restore our fishing industry and its sovereign rights, and ensure and protect a viable, long term marine ecology around our shores and beyond.


  • Border controls - to decide who can live and work in our country and the rights that they can hold whilst they do so - not have rules forced upon us by a foreign court (ECJ).  Establish and enforce our own Asylum and Refugee policies in line with International Law not those Laws of an organisation whose policies have only one end goal - "ever closer Union", which uses refugees to break down the borders of its Member States - in order to make their populations less "homogenous", destroy their culture, traditions and unity en route to destroying their national identity and political power.


  • ​Military capability - to ensure that we maintain our Military and accord them the greatest respect - not to be used by a foreign power for its own ends. To build upon the traditions of our armed forces and provide them with all means necessary to protect and defend our country not the EU. Maintain our commitment to NATO.


  • Identity - to protect our identity by removing the relentless EU and other Marxist propaganda being forced upon our youngsters through our public education system - Schools and University - and the Media; rid ourselves of the EU related Quango's undermining our public services and costing the British taxpayers' millions of pounds.


  • Regulatory systems - to remove completely the imposition of Directives and Regulation (over 120,000) from the EU, which also cost us millions of pounds and are mostly designed for two specific purposes (a) to give advantage to large businesses and Multinational companies over small and medium sized companies who cannot afford to lobby the unelected EU Commissioners, nor afford the costs associated with the regulations (2) to maintain the restrictive Single Market, keep the EU Member States firmly under its control and proceed with closer integration.  


  • Financial control - take back our ability to designate funding for UK projects which are designed to benefit the UK not part of the EU plan (HS2) and ensure that we can control our own budgets not scrutinised and restricted by the EU (see The EU's Austerity not the Tory's)Stop spending our money for the benefit the EU and spend it on our priorities, stop paying EU subscriptions, helping to bail-out failing EU Member States and underwriting infrastructure and other projects in the poorer EU countries - when there is a massive, genuine need to fund the UK.


  • Foreign Trade and Influence - to be able to trade freely outside the EU we have to leave the EU Customs Union, the EU is our competitor not our friend - whether it is the individual members or as a bloc there are diverse interests - staying in the EU gives it the advantage. Leaving allows us to trade freely with former Colonies - an astonishing situation - that we would not be able to have a free trade agreement with them because we are in the EU - which wants to have it to itself and restrict us. The EU would takeover our seat on world bodies such as the UN etc. as well as taking over our Foreign Embassies and Consulates - anyone who thinks that any Member State will not be asset stripped and otherwise completely assimilated should take a closer look at the Lisbon Treaty (2007)    


*Updated

  • Foreign Aid Expenditure - The EU is using the member states to provide overseas aid funding which, when added together with funding from the Commission (our contributions) makes the EU a major international donor - when in reality the EU is just using the money from its Member States (directly and indirectly) 


  • Basically the EU is controlling the level of overseas funding from the members in order to big itself up - this is why we have  0.7% of GDP commitment - to help out the EU at a time when we are in dire need of using such funding to look after our own public services - Hospitals, Police, student fees, the homeless and our parents and grandparents etc.


  • Leaving the EU would free us from this and other EU commitments - after all the EU is simply milking its Member States for its own benefit, to be used to enhance its position and status on the international stage. This explains why our own government cannot adequately justify its expenditure or use the aid funds domestically.


         Extract from www.loc.gov (Library of Congress website):

  • Regulation of Foreign Aid: European Union, Library of Congress, Law Library, Research Reports, Legal Reports Introduction, Section A.  Official Development Assistance Figures , 3rd Paragraph;


  • "Nine EU Members met or exceeded the 2010 individual minimum targets and the majority reached their national ODA targets.  The remaining EU Members missed their individual 2010 minimum targets and, hence, the EU missed its collective target of 0.56%. The Commission attributed the EU’s failure to meet the 2010 target partly to the economic crisis currently unfolding among some EU Members but also to a number of Members not adhering to their commitments to achieve the collective EU goal.  In the Commission’s opinion, such failure undermines the principle of fair internal EU burden sharing and has an adverse impact on aid delivery.  On the other hand, the EU expects Members with large economies, such as France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom (UK) to augment the average aid levels to achieve the targets set.  These Members account for 70% of the gap to be filled between 2010 and 2015; therefore, the EU can meet its collective target of 0.7% ODA/GNI by 2015 only if the large-economy countries contribute more than their share" 


  • Based upon the comments in the above extract - the EU is clearly intent upon sacrificing (impoverishing) its member states on the altar of political dogma and its own expansion objectives and ambitions - the EU is an economic "Black Hole" which will suck the Member States dry.


         The EU Reality

  • At the same time as the UK is paying out 0.7% of its GDP in overseas aid Germany and the EU are exporting poverty to the 3rd world, as reported today (16th February 2018) in the Daily Express:


  • "EUROPEAN Union trade barriers are the "best mechanism" to export poverty to the third world as high duties on imported products from Africa help EU member states like Germany reap economic benefits while local producers suffer, Labour MP Graham Stringer claimed:-


  • "The EU Common Customs Tariff (CCT) is in place in all member states on goods entering the country from outside the EU – with duty rates varying based on the nature of the trade products. 


  • The EU imposes a 7.5 percent tariff on roasted coffee entering the single market – with Germany importing nearly 1.5 million tonnes of coffee per year as of 2016. In 2016 Brussels increased import duty on citrus fruits from third-party countries from 3.2 percent to 16 percent. 


  • Mr Stringer said: "That keeps people who are growing coffee, producing oranges – and you can make the same argument on green beans in Kenya – it means those farmers are kept poor and people in the EU are paying higher prices than we need to.​"That is extremely bad and is effectively exporting poverty."


  • So much for the EU's Foreign Aid policies - for all their fine words they are just smoke and mirrors, all that matters is a strong German economy; a total hypocrisy - the real truth is that they could not care less about relieving poverty - whereas after we leave the bloc we can gain twice over - by reducing tariffs and reducing poverty. 


The UK should be exposing how Germany is impoverishing not just those in the 3rd world through high tariffs, whilst maintaining high prices in the EU, but also adversely affecting the southern EU Member States and the UK - through its imposed Austerity measures. 



Second Part 


"17 reasons why we should love Brexit - Imagine all we can do once we’ve left the EU"

Anthony Browne, in The Spectator, 10 February 2018


"So, what could we do once we Brexit? Well actually, given how extensive EU law is, an awful lot. Some will depend on the deal we have with the EU. Some are things we could do but wouldn’t want to do. But there are also lots of popular things the government could do."

  • In 1997, Tony Blair campaigned to scrap VAT on domestic gas and electricity. But because of the EU, he had to settle for 5 per cent. Once we leave the EU, the government could do what Blair couldn’t. Fuel poverty campaigners, take note.


  • In the 1990s, there were endless protests along the coast against exporting live lambs and calves for slaughter in Europe. The government wanted to ban the exports, but couldn’t because of EU rules. Animal welfare groups, take note. In 2012, Nicola Sturgeon passed a law to impose minimum alcohol pricing in Scotland, but it has not come in because the ECJ complained. She could control Scottish fisheries to revitalise Scottish fishing ports.


  • As head of the British Bankers’ Association, I promoted competition in banking, arguing that challenger banks should have a level playing field with large banks on prudential regulation. The government was supportive, but the barrier was the EU. It was a constant frustration to the UK’s global financial institutions that the EU would apply its rules to their operations all over the world, making them less competitive internationally. Come Brexit, it seems likely the government would be able to ensure that a UK bank or insurance company working in the US or Asia can compete with US or Asian banks on a level playing field.


  • Byzantine EU rules can make procurement by public authorities a tortuous quagmire. The former minister Francis Maude fought a valiant battle for major reform. But Brexit means the government can set up a more effective procurement regime, helping improve public services.


After Anthony Browne


For the complete list of the 17 reasons please read the article cited above  


Home