Europe would be better off without Britain - rebuttal speeches

Proposers’ rebuttal speech

It takes two to tango. This is true not only for dancing, but also for sustaining a partnership between, let us say a sovereign country and a federal state.

I shall show you conclusively, why Europe would be better of without Britain, by further developing the points of my dear friend, as well as showing you why Europe and Britain can no longer stand side by side, united, for the sake of integration.  (Continued below the fold…)

by Nigel MB

Opposers’ rebuttal speech

Let’s come back in 1957 when the Treaty of Rome has been signed. Contrary to what the proposing team said, the “EU was intended to achieve both economic AND political union”, the two mains goals of this community are the creation of a general common market and the creation of an atomic energy community. Then there is not at all political issue, the goal is to break down the barriers to trade and investment. (Continued below the fold…)

by CC

Proposers’ rebuttal speech

It takes two to tango. This is true not only for dancing, but also for sustaining a partnership between, let us say a sovereign country and a federal state.

I shall show you conclusively, why Europe would be better of without Britain, by further developing the points of my dear friend, as well as showing you why Europe and Britain can no longer stand side by side, united, for the sake of integration.

I would like to begin on a happy note though, namely the blissful ignorance of the opposition.

In something of an unprecedented maneuver, before even knowing our first speech, the opposition went on to accuse us of promoting the greatness of France. Nowhere in my lovely, non-British friend’s opening, was there any mention of neither France nor this Charles figure you spoke of. Indeed, as a British citizen myself, I do not have much good to say about the French. Maybe it was just a failed attempt at seeing into the future? Either way, I smell fish and chips.

To paraphrase Mr. Cameron, the opposition’s analogy with the lovers H and K, is wafer thin. It is however worth noting that whatever Britain does, be it drinking bears by the pint or pulling a Kim Jong-un, there is no way for the European Union to “be the first”. The laws simply don’t support kicking a country out. Mr. Cameron has all the power.

Yes, I have likened the European Union to a federal state; after all, this is one of the core ideologies on the mind of every pro-union politician in Brussels. While it may not be a true federation at this particular point in time, we can all see the signs. Winter is coming.

My country joined the European Union believing it would enter us into a world of political cooperation and economic solidarity. As my prime minister put it “Our participation in the single market, and our ability to help set its rules is the principal reason for our membership of the EU.”

Instead we have been forced to defend our way of life in every aspect. This has taken the form of vetoing a large number of treaties voted on in the European Parliament (2011 EU summit anyone?), leading to a large rift in the relationship between London and Brussels. This obstructionism is a necessary evil that we have to impose in order to protect our economy, our businesses and our people. Clearly the Union would be better served if its politicians could enact treaties without the roadblock that Britain admittedly is? It might even have the possibility to remedy itself from being the immense turd of nothingness that it sadly is at the moment. As the opposition so kindly pointed out, without Britain, the European Union could stride to achieve the political integration that it so desires, and thereby strengthen Europe.

Even though the financials that the opposition brought up really has nothing to do with the topic in question, we cannot hide the fact that we’re grateful for the financial strain that the other countries of the European Union – like France – put themselves through to ingratiate themselves with us. Giving Britain a five billion Euro rebate on our payments to the EU is truly generous. Of course, making up about a twentieth of the budget of the European Union, this cannot possibly be any good when you are constantly struggling to give more money to agriculture, which by the way doesn’t help us at all. I realise Brussels wish to renegotiate this rebate, but heed my warning! They would be better off without Britain, than taking on that debate. I mean, who would give up five billion euros when all you have to do is throw in your veto!

A strong majority of the British people are already set on leaving the European Union. A measly couple of years of negotiation will not produce any results to change their minds. I believe the last couple of years’ incredible inertia when it comes to decisions of any importance proves that. Instead it will take away both energy and resources from the real issues for both parties. The European Union needs to focus on rebuilding itself after the Euro crisis (boy did we dodge a bullet there!) and in order to do so with any traces of efficiency, it will be best for it not having to be jealous of our simply amazing economic system. If it will not agree that our obviously superior rules for the financial systems are enough, it will be better off without having conjure up complex workarounds, like creating non-official treaties with all but one of their members. Of course the Eurozone and the European Union, or even the European Economic Area, aren’t one and the same. That however, doesn’t stop the greedy politicians in Brussels from trying to cover up the mistakes of their national governments by instituting financial restrictions that are suddenly targeting the entire Union, even though we all know whom they should really target.

In the end, this kind of relationship it is all about mutual interests. We set out to create something great together. Great Britain ended up being the only great thing. We can no longer come to simple understandings on simple issues; our paths have diverged. Let us end both of our miseries. The toe stepping that is this tango, can stop. Europe would clearly be better off without Britain.

Nigel MB

Opposers’ rebuttal speech

Let’s come back in 1957 when the Treaty of Rome has been signed. Contrary to what the proposing team said, the “EU was intended to achieve both economic AND political union”, the two mains goals of this community are the creation of a general common market and the creation of an atomic energy community. Then there is not at all political issue, the goal is to break down the barriers to trade and investment. I also want to thank the proposing team which made a very good point about the EU which “has the potential to be as powerful as the US, the European economy being more important than the American one”. Not only has the EU more population than the US but also creates more GDP. Yet, this is possible only if Britain stays in the EU! According to Merkel:  “Europe accounts for just over 7% of the world’s population, produces around 25% of global GDP and has to finance 50% of global social spending”.

Now you are all wondering: is everything possible without the British? And the simple answer is … NO!

Indeed, the British help the EU to build itself. Considering a military point of view, the British strong military power recently helps the French troops in Mali and West Africa. A major goal of the EU is to maintain a peace area, this would not be possible without the British. We must not forget that the British give one more seat in the United Nation Security Council and the presence of the British permits that the US listens to the EU voice.

Now, anticipate the future. The growing population will make the agriculture a thriving market. In 2050, the population is expected to be higher by 50%. The agriculture in Britain is very important and the common agricultural policy plays a big role, it would be a shame to get rid of it. Without the products Britain can make, it would be impossible for the EU to meet the demand without importation.

In order to convince my audience, let’s imagine Britain leave the EU. First of all the EU would lose the membership fees and the 8 billion euros they give every year and one of its biggest economy. Then Britain will consider joining another power to have a voice in this world. The only power I can think of is … the US. Now we are hitting the wall, how Europe could really be better off without the British??

The proposing team also pointed out my debate-mate forgot to talk about the British people but what about all the Europeans that are living in Britain or the British that are leaving in a European country and who would see their world collapse?

To conclude in order to really achieve what the EU is aim for, creating a European economic community, I hope to have convinced you that the good call is ours. Thank you participating in the debate and vote for us!

CC