EU Referendum: what it means for ME (+ a poll)

[Marco]

Cryptic, must be the Cognac.

Maybe we could chat off thread on the leftist case for Brexit?

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

Maybe we could chat off thread on the leftist case for Brexit?

I am not sure that I see the issue as left or right. I think it is about water, mostly, which goes beyond politics.

 

[Hip]

It is probably best to take note of the advice not to discuss sex, politics or religion. Especially with those whose motivation is unclear.

I think rules allow politics if it is related to ME/CFS (which was @Cheesus's angle).


It seems that in general, to have an educated opinion on whether we should leave the EU or not, you first have to have some sort of stakehold. For example, if you run a business, and you have worked out that leaving the EU will be better/worse for your business, then you have a rationale on which to vote.

In my very limited following of the media, that seems to be everyone's take on the vote: whether or not it is good for them personally (as opposed to more ideological considerations, such as whether the EU might help prevent wars between European nations).

So if ME/CFS patients' angle is what might most benefit ME/CFS research and treatment, then that leaves us with the issue of trying to work out what to vote for. I do not have the brainpower to figure that out!


Note that the EU is not the only European club. The original club was the European Commission in Strasbourg, of which I believe Britain will still remain a member. And then there is the European Economic Area (EEA); it is not clear if Britain would remain a member of the EEA if it left the EU, but the option to remain is there.

 

[alex3619]

I just really hope we aren't going to replay the 1930's again.

A large minority of economists think this next time might be much worse, but there is a lot of uncertainty in economics. We have not only not fixed our global economic issues, largely due to vested interests, we have doubled down on the bet. Further the world is entering into a time when there will be more and more major structural problems due to factors outside the general economy.

I said it some years ago, but I still think its valid. We need answers for ME and CFS sooner rather than later or the changing economic times will put a massive brake on research.

 

[voner]

I am not sure that I see the issue as left or right. I think it is about water, mostly, which goes beyond politics.

Oh, @Jonathan Edwards, I disagree, water is a core political issue in areas like where I live. We have an old saying in the western USA, "Whisky’s for drinkin’ and water’s for fightin’"....

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

Oh, @Jonathan Edwards, I disagree, water is a core political issue in areas like where I live. We have an old saying in the western USA, "Whisky’s for drinkin’ and water’s for fightin’"....

What I meant was that the problems of access to water go beyond left-right politics. As I understand it the UK is now the most heavily populated country in Europe. There isn't enough water for more people, nor enough electricity, houses, school playing fields for children to play in. It goes beyond politics because it is now a global problem. 300 million Indians may run out of water completely this summer. Migration is not the solution. We need to tackle the problem that there are now too many people - the most important result of which is that people are cheap, unvalued or even considered a nuisance. Economic cycles and blips are trivial in comparison. The EU is sleepwalking into chaos. With new right wing governments in Poland and Austria internal population shifts will probably accelerate. The UK needs to be able to control its resources.

But as someone pointed out, none of this has much to do with ME research. All I can say on that front is that my experience of EU funding is of encrustation in bureaucracy and awards by lottery. Local committees may not be much better but there are no EU trees that grow money - it all has to come from us in the first place.

 

[LizO]

ME/CFS is a political subject. It is not a party political subject but political nonetheless. The decisions taken by the NIH and NHS on where to commission and direct funding are about power and resources; career decisions by young doctors (as well as more established medical researchers) whether to move into an exploratory, interdisciplinary field as yet barely recognised or an established high profile area of research, is political because they are associated with power and career progression. We in the ME/CFS community need to be political to support those making the decisions and do all we can to create an environment that recognises ME/CFS for the very serious debilitating biologically based illness that it is and supports the hundreds of thousands of people world wide who continue to suffer. #canary in a coal mine, #MissingMillions and the many national and local charities that support ME/CFS all help. There are green shoots now, lets take our political decisions on the grounds of doing all we can to nurture them.

 

[msf]

I would say that migration is quite clearly the solution if there are too many people for the water resources in a particular area, the other solutions would be very inefficient (like desalination in Dubai), or politically unpopular (like instituting a one-child policy).

Here is some of the volatility I was talking about:
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...erendum-brexit-polls-janet-yellen-speech-live

By the way, I would just like to congratulate everyone on the very calm, mature way they have conducted this discussion.

 

[msf]

I think big economic issues like the EU referendum are definitely germane to ME because, as I pointed out earlier, ME patients generally occupy a precarious financial position in society - if we have another recession, it will affect most of us much more than it will affect bankers.

 

[msf]

Looking at the poll results so far, either Brexit will have a negative outcome on average for people with ME, or we don´t know what´s good for us, as the psychobabblers have always claimed!

 

[msf]

Or, as is normal in ME, the sample isn´t big enough.

 

[Cheesus]

What I meant was that the problems of access to water go beyond left-right politics. As I understand it the UK is now the most heavily populated country in Europe. There isn't enough water for more people, nor enough electricity, houses, school playing fields for children to play in. It goes beyond politics because it is now a global problem. 300 million Indians may run out of water completely this summer. Migration is not the solution. We need to tackle the problem that there are now too many people - the most important result of which is that people are cheap, unvalued or even considered a nuisance. Economic cycles and blips are trivial in comparison. The EU is sleepwalking into chaos. With new right wing governments in Poland and Austria internal population shifts will probably accelerate. The UK needs to be able to control its resources.

But as someone pointed out, none of this has much to do with ME research. All I can say on that front is that my experience of EU funding is of encrustation in bureaucracy and awards by lottery. Local committees may not be much better but there are no EU trees that grow money - it all has to come from us in the first place.

The environmental strain of a burgeoning population, globally and locally, and particularly in the context of climate change, is where the wars of the 21st century will be fought (and already are being fought in Sudan). It is a major, major issue. We are united on that front. I think we could rank food security as almost equally threatening, definitely globally if not in the UK specifically.

So, will leaving the EU contribute towards a solution for the UK?

Possibly. We would have to not only reduce immigration but actually evict existing migrants - EU and non - to return to a modicum of national environmental sustainability. We could maybe hold an even keel where we are by leaving the EU, but it wouldn't really be a solution to the problem of scarcity.

However there is actually no real indication that we'll manage to reduce migration. There is no mandate for any particular post-Brexit economic model. Parliamentarians - who are overwhelmingly in favour of remain - are poised to push for a Norwegian model, where we would pay into the EU budget, accept free movement of people, but have no say in how the EU is run. The vision you have is not on the cards.

Environmental problems do not respect borders. International cooperation is necessary to confront these challenges. Isolationism will neither solve nor protect us from scarcity. A Johnson-Gove government and a victory for the Leave-camp will do nothing to address this issue.

The real solution will come from changing people's habits with water, altering the price to reflect environmental scarcity, developing better technology for desalination, addressing climate change, addressing the causes of high birth-rates globally (poverty) and addressing the factors that cause economic migration in the first place (poverty).

The Polish wave the EU flag in defiance of authoritarianism. Catalysing the demise of the EU is a misguided response to this problem. Also the Austrian far-right actually lost the presidential election (though they'll be back). Giving into our own nationalism will not disentangle us from the rising spectre of the far-right.

 

[Cheesus]

By the way, I would just like to congratulate everyone on the very calm, mature way they have conducted this discussion.

I second this.

 

[hamster336]

I second that....Impressive!

 

[msf]

By the way, Prof. Edwards, if you are really worried about water shortages in the South than you are welcome to move to Manchester anytime!

 

[Chrisb]

By the way, Prof. Edwards, if you are really worried about water shortages in the South than you are welcome to move to Manchester anytime!

Until the Welsh seek independence, and control of their natural resources.

 

[Liz_999]

I find that most discussions about the referendum miss the point.

The choice is about sovereignty and democracy. At this point, people can no longer claim ignorance about the nature and objective of the EU. It goes far beyond free trade and single market. It's an attempt to create a unified European state that may or may not be successful.

So the question is how much is British sovereignty worth and how much influence in selecting a government people want their children to have in the future. Everything else is merely a distraction and irrelevant in the long term.

Another thing that caught my eye which I wanted to respond to:
It's unclear to me by which mechanism(s) the EU could possibly collapse. After an UK exit, it could lose other members or it may even be disbanded in the future, but there are no external factors that can cause a collapse. Basically, as long as countries want to be EU members, the EU will exist.

 

[Cheesus]

I find that most discussions about the referendum miss the point.

The choice is about sovereignty and democracy. At this point, people can no longer claim ignorance about the nature and objective of the EU. It goes far beyond free trade and single market. It's an attempt to create a unified European state that may or may not be successful.

So the question is how much is British sovereignty worth and how much influence in selecting a government people want their children to have in the future. Everything else is merely a distraction and irrelevant in the long term.

Another thing that caught my eye which I wanted to respond to:
It's unclear to me by which mechanism(s) the EU could possibly collapse. After an UK exit, it could lose other members or it may even be disbanded in the future, but there are no external factors that can cause a collapse. Basically, as long as countries want to be EU members, the EU will exist.

Democracy and sovereignty are valid concerns when making a decision on which way to vote. I have not overlooked them. In fact i regularly cite increased democracy as one of the core reasons I'm voting to stay in the EU.

As it stands, the EU influences about 10% of UK law. On the other hand, the Conservatives were elected to government with 36% of the vote from 24% of the eligible population. They occupy 100% of cabinet seats and around 53% of seats in parliament (I've forgotten the actual figure). The Lords is entirely unelected. This system influences the other 90% of legislation.

I would be delighted if Leave campaigners who were really concerned about democracy turned their attention to what is by far the biggest drain on UK democracy: our own constitution. First Past The Post is, as Nigel Farage put it following the election, morally bankrupt. UKIP got 3.9 million votes (I think around 12% of votes) and won a single seat (around 0.15%). Greens got 1 million votes and won a single seat.

As it stands, I look to the EU to act as a counterweight to a government with only one to two thirds of a mandate to govern. The EU is a thin shield against the tyranny of a minority. I would make the same critique of our constitution even if my favoured party were in government and in the knowledge that UKIP, who generally hold opposing political opinions to me, would hold the balance of power in this parliament. Democracy is very important to me.

So, I hear you loud and clear on this issue. I understand why there is an allure to taking control from Brussels and handing it to Westminster. Democracy has its problems but maximising it is the best way to an equitable distribution of power. Unfortunately the allure of greater democracy from voting Leave is a red herring, and it will further increase the power of people with only a partial mandate to govern.

As democracy is important to you too, I ask you to join me in calling for electoral reform following this referendum, regardless of the outcome? The pursuit of true democracy has no party allegiance.

Our exemption from the 'Ever closer union' clause means we have a legal basis to reject joining an EU state. The others would be free to do it without us whilst we remain members of the EU with our current arrangement. Our own parliament will decide if we were to join or not. We have absolutely no legal obligation to do so.

You may be right about the EU not collapsing. It's an area i talk about but not something i have reflected on to the same extent as democracy and economy. With fewer members the point of it diminishes - and there is a risk of a domino effect - but yes, as long as member states want it then it will carry on.

I had said i wasn't going to be drawn into debate because i am too sick, but like a moth to a flame I just couldn't help myself. Now I'm seriously paying the price. Serves me right for breaking forum rules! I must refrain from responding again.

 

[alex3619]

The major risks of collapse are economic not political for the EU, though political issues, including nationalism, decrease the options. In such economic times research funding is curtailed. Funding for the poor and disabled is curtailed. There are options to deal with things, but too much is not even being discussed because of vested interests. Yet there are signs things might change for the better. Monsanto just lost its licence for glyphosate according to what I have read. People can make big changes if they organize and have a clear and do-able focus.

 

[Cheesus]

I found a report from the Royal Society on EU research funding in the UK. I didn't read it from cover to cover but noticed this quote:

The UK is one of the largest recipients of research funding in the EU and, although national contributions to the EU budget are not itemised, analyses suggest that the UK receives a greater amount of EU research funding than it contributes. The UK O ce of National Statistics (ONS) report an indicative gure for the UK’s contribution to EU research and development of €5.4 billion over the period 2007 – 2013.29 During this time, the UK received €8.8 billion in direct EU funding for research, development and innovation activities.30

https://royalsociety.org/~/media/policy/projects/eu-uk-funding/uk-membership-of-eu.pdf

Whilst we are net beneficiaries of EU science funding, we are net contributors to the budget. But that doesn't take account of the economic benefits of the EU and of taxation revenue from these benefits in the UK. Dr Sarah Walliston MP has just defected from Leave to Remain for this exact reason. The NHS is stronger in the EU, as is our science funding.