That is the reason I never buy or read newspapers, they are full of lies and nonsense.

I'll be voting out for my own personal reasons. Where I live I doubt they will get many yes votes.

I sometimes wonder why intelligent people don't check facts before believing everything which is said to them about what the EU is 'doing to us'. From fullfacts: Claim: The EU plans to ban British kettles, toasters and hairdryers. Conclusion: At best this is a stretch. It's not a ban: the EU is considering regulation which would limit the amount of energy appliances such as kettles and hairdryers use. A study into the proposals has been drafted, but no legislation has been brought forward yet. In other news the EU aren't banning glyphosate.

Not yet, but after June 23rd that can change.

The proposed glyphosate ban has been reported a few weeks ago and the garden centre believe it will happen. AstraZeneca is a major manufacturer of glyphosate at a plant in the UK.

Limiting kettle power is pointless, it takes a fixed number of calories/joules to boil a fixed mass of water, 2KW will do it twice as fast as 1KW but the total energy is the same. Many hotels/B & Bs already provide low power in-room kettles, it is noticeable how long they take even to boil 2 cupfuls.

The point is, this is needless meddling in matters which are none of the EU's business, to justify the (highly paid) existence of the committees who dream up these ideas.

I sometimes wonder why intelligent people don't check facts before believing everything which is said to them about what the EU is 'doing to us'. From fullfacts: Claim: The EU plans to ban British kettles, toasters and hairdryers. Conclusion: At best this is a stretch. It's not a ban: the EU is considering regulation which would limit the amount of energy appliances such as kettles and hairdryers use. A study into the proposals has been drafted, but no legislation has been brought forward yet. In other news the EU aren't banning glyphosate.

I believe that the 'ban' on glyphosate is related to banning it in non-commercial garden products, i.e. if you employ a gardener to look after a home or workplace garden area, then they can continue to use products they can only buy through commercial outlets (presumably via some licence or suchlike). The final decision on whether the licence for manufacturers to keep using it more generally is up for renewal in June by the EU.

See: www.telegraph.co.uk/gardening/how-to-grow/gardener.../

daveyjp - as others have said, limiting the amount of energy used by electrical products is only worthwhile IF they employ some kind of non-direct energy transfer device, such as a motor, wherby the electrical energy used can be reduced by making the motor more efficient.

An electric heater, such as toasters or kettles, are by their very nature (all forms of energy will eventually end up in heat form through inefficiencies when transforming from one type to another) highly efficient (a small amount is lost to the environment is waste heat and sound [e.g. the 'hum' of a toaster]), with really only a small percentage of 'wasted' energy left to reduce through better insulation and some kind of cover on the top, controls (e.g. only of the toaster slots heating when one slice of toast is being toasted - this may already happen on expensive toasters) in the absence of some new technology to transfer the heat energy directly to the heated item without wasting it (e.g. burning toast). That would not come cheap, which is fine if you have £££ to spend, not so much on the poverty line.

What would be far better is for everyone to be better educated about wasting energy/resources, such as boiling only the minimum amount of water needed, using a full load of washing in the washing machine, not running taps for brushing teeth etc, etc. That and finding more efficient, sustainable and continuous ways of both generating and transmitting electricity, e.g. local combined heat and power for entire communities, invloving business/industrial use as well as for homes and schools.

So much energy is wasted at the moment by heat going up boiler flues, via industrial chimneys (and suchlike) and through poorly insulated buildings, plus we have huge amounts of roof space available across such buildings to site PV panels (even if they are currently only 10-15% efficient) to generate electricity we then wouldn't need from powere stations.

Thing is no one knows for sure what will happen, and the extremes of both sides hasn't helped.

Whatever the cost, and yes to me personally too, i wish to regain the right to sack my leaders when they fail to do the right thing.

The issue for me is democracy, if you can't sack those who rule over you, and we can't, then its no longer a democracy.

On the flip side of that, the 'Inners' have not given one convincing reason why we need to stay in either. much of the 'In' reasons is all speculations and maybes.

Its not aimed at you personally Brompt BTW.

I think it's difficult for either side to come up with a killer reason. Even with stuff like today's furore over process/timing for Turkey to join fact seems thin on the ground.

My starting point is one of being reasonably committed to In. I don't even regard greater federalism as a red line. Trying to be more sceptical I still conclude that we're geographically part of Europe, that the EU is likley to be still there without us and is a huge market to which our businesses need unfettered access. Furthermore we've spent the last 50 years preparing for and being Members and we'd need some real and tangible gains on offer to leave. Norway or Switzerland seem to have potentially worst of both worlds; subject to regulation but in no position to influence it.

Out we might possibly be able to reduce migrant labour from EU. But we'd do so at cost to our own ability to work over there and to current ex-pats. Furthermore, government's attempts to reduce non EU migration for work - filling skill shortages etc - hasn't exactly been a crushing success. If business (and the NHS) needs the workers then will government succeed in bucking the market? EU migrant labour is for most part tax positive and free movement is probably a net gain to the nation.

The idea we can turn the clock back to 1972 or any other date is absurd.