9 ms·

This fear mongering has got to stop. It might just as likely boost the economy of the UK. And it certainly would assure the people of sovereignty, something the

by wsc981 10y ago

This fear mongering has got to stop. It might just as likely boost the economy of the UK. And it certainly would assure the people of sovereignty, something the UK would lose if it would further integrate with the EU. Just look at my country, Holland. Pretty much all important decisions are made by the EU. An example: we cannot control our own borders. We cannot decide how many immigrants we want to allow. The EU wants to force quotas on countries and if they don't accept the quotas, they want to give the countries fines. The EU is undemocratic and if one values freedom, one should stay as far away from the EU as possible, even if it would be at some cost of the economy (though I'd say this is speculation).

actionwords 10y ago
you want to control your own borders and say who and who not can become Dutch? That sounds awful [buzzword] of you. You don't want people to think you're a [buzzword], do you? Support EU. Don't be a [buzzword]. National sovereignty is overrated anyway.
Gys 10y ago
> It might just as likely boost the economy of the UK. Pure assumption on your side or can you support this with sources ? > We cannot control our own borders. We cannot decide how many immigrants we want to allow. Seems to me much of this sentiment about leaving the EU is merely fear for being overrun by non-natives. Talking about 'This fear mongering has got to stop'...
- abritinthebay 10y ago
  You're not wrong. I've yet to hear any pro-exit talking point that isn't xenophobic, jingoistic, or at BEST just hopelessly misinformed economically. The fact that the BNP and UKIP are solidly behind an exit should be a good indication that it's terrible. They are like a bellwether for awful ideas.
  - UK-AL 10y ago
    Pro-immigration person here. Considering brexit. [0] http://www.adamsmith.org/the-liberal-case-for-leave http://www.adamsmith.org/the-liberal-case-for-leave [1] http://www.adamsmith.org/evolution-not-revolution http://www.adamsmith.org/evolution-not-revolution
    - abritinthebay 10y ago
      That's a very smart summary of a lot of data but it's not supporting its conclusions very well - all it seems to be able to say is that increased globalization has had a massive economic impact worldwide. Well... yes. The rest of it is a bunch of "well, we'd likely have had a bunch of the good ideas we were forced into by EU membership anyway" which is shockingly optimistic when looking at 80s Thatcherite Britain, verging on naive. Throw in a couple more rather unconnected points that pretend to show significance (while just showing that the less-developed world is growing faster than the developed one. Which is... yeah, obvious, but also expected) The rest of it then swerves into dodgy anti-immigration territory. Which is odd for a "liberal" case. I agree with it that the Brexit plan is optimistic - but I think the article demonstrates exactly why that's a bad thing: because it's stupidly optimistic and convinces itself that everything will be perfectly awesome because they want it to be. Whereas the reality is that this is rarely the case. It's massive risk for little upside vs no real risk for a slightly reduced short-to-medium upside.
  - hardlianotion 10y ago
    Then look out for some and test your notions. Decent arguments for leaving exist, and there are links on this page for the start of your search for good reasons.
    - abritinthebay 10y ago
      Based on the "decent" arguments provided it appears I've already seen them. They aren't very good and verge on irresponsibly optimistic at best. Most are just - as I said - very poor and misunderstood economics. The "good" reasons so far have been basically shown to be mostly wishful thinking with very little actual upside and a LOT of risk. Personally I'd not like to play roulette with a country, I'll take slightly slower growth and stability, thanks.
- SixSigma 10y ago
  >> It might just as likely boost the economy of the UK. > Pure assumption on your side or can you support this with sources ? That's the point. It is all speculation.
- monk_e_boy 10y ago
  We don't have the housing or infrastructure to support the vast number of immigrants. Hundreds of thousands a year. For most people it isn't a racist knee jerk, it's watching our schools and hospitals and housing buckle under the pressure.
  - EliRivers 10y ago
    Incompetent government unable to do its fucking job and get houses built is the reason for the lack of housing. Extra people do exacerbate the problem, but the largest culprit is our incompetent, small-minded government refusing to do their job.
  - tudorw 10y ago
    Our schools, hospitals and housing have been under pressure since time immemorial, perhaps if the countries earnings from oil and other resources had been managed better, investment in social housing had been maintained at previous levels, if the lack of investment from the business world in the form of apprenticeships and on the job training had been addressed more pertinently, and if the earnings of the managing and owning class not risen at a faster rate than working class, then this would not be an issue. Blaming a lacking in public services on migrants is not fair, while it's true to say that we have experienced a rise in immigration levels over the last decade, we are talking about a rise from 4 million in 1993 to 8 million in 2014, out of a population of 64 million, well under 10%. To blame all the failings of our state on that small section of society, migrants who are more likely to be of working age than our recumbent ageing population, and hence more likely to be adding to our GDP over the long term, is not only unfair, it's bad economic policy too, without immigration our country will fall to it's knees supporting legions of pensioners...
    - monk_e_boy 10y ago
      Where I live there isn't much space left for new houses. I guess we could build up, but it doesn't seem desirable. Give the local people the choice of building low cost high rise accommodation or voting out of the EU... well, that's the decision we're all making at the moment.
- mc32 10y ago
  Would you disagree that countries should have a mechanism under their control under which they have a say as to who gets to settle, work or study in their country? Are customs and border control not useful any longer? Have we decided they aren't something countries should have control over? Wanting to be able to control ingress is not the same as blocking all ingress. In this case I believe some in the UK, more than anything, resent having their migration policies promulgated in Brussels.
  - izacus 10y ago
    How about counties? Cities? Towns? Neighbours? Federations? What makes "Holland" so special that it should have the ability to bar people from settling instead of "European Union", "Utrecht" or old grandma from the house across the street?
    - mc32 10y ago
      That would be something "Holland's" electorate can decide upon, governed by their laws and regulations, rather than policymakers in Brussels. It's like wanting to dictate to China to abolish the Hukou system. I see it as unfair, but that's their own internal problem to solve.
      - icebraining 10y ago
        Nobody is dictating anything. Holland joined the EU of its own accord. The question is not whether the people of Holland should be stripped of that decision, but whether they should partially delegate it. And why shouldn't they?
        mc32 10y ago
        Why delegate? And what if they want to bring that decision making back home? I can delegate my finances, or I can make my own choices and maybe I feel like I'll get better served doing things myself.
    - mason240 10y ago
- tsewlliw 10y ago
  Controlling borders is fundamental to sovereignty, the point being that a sovereign nation decides how porous the borders ought to be. To cede that control significantly reduces the self-determination of the people within the border, even if the decision of exactly how porous does not vary between administering entities.
  - throwanem 10y ago
    Sovereignty is widely considered an obsolete concept.
  - NetStrikeForce 10y ago
    So, why should southerners accept all those northerners coming down? The southern people have no sovereignty on the matter. Oh and don't even get me started with those Scots :) The UK is not and has never been in Schengen, so it has borders and has control of it. They just happen to have agreed to a deal with the rest of the EU to give EU citizens almost the same rights as UK citizens. In other words, people voting LEAVE can't have a problem with border control as it is now, because the borders are controlled. The problem is of a very different (and sad) nature.
arrrg 10y ago
Yes, you can, together with everyone else, cooperatively.
- monk_e_boy 10y ago
  It's difficult, we have good benefits, minimum wage, NHS, great schools, etc etc. To negotiate on immigration with other EU countries that don't have these things is really hard.
  - izacus 10y ago
    In what way other EU countries do not have that?
    - monk_e_boy 10y ago
      We have a lot of Polish immigrants where I live. Health care in Poland is delivered through a publicly funded health care system, which is free for all the citizens of Poland provided they fall into the "insured" category (usually meaning that they have their health insurance paid for by their employer, or are the spouse or child of an insured person.) Minimum wage in Poland is 410 EUR, in the UK it is 1,378 EUR ... I could keep going but you get the point. The UK is a desirable place to live. The UK is small. The UK has a housing crisis. The NHS is at breaking point (our local hospital is in crisis)... Not much of this is due to immigration, but it doesn't help that 500,000 (or so) new people turn up each year.
      - izacus 10y ago
        I still fail to see your point. What does free Polish healthcare have to do with the NHS? O.o
        monk_e_boy 10y ago
        Yeah, it is a complex issue. I guess you just need to do your own research and make up your own mind.
jpfr 10y ago
In todays world, Holland is tiny. It cannot make many meaningful decisions on an international level. How would Holland negotiate with the USA or Russia about trade issues? Well, they couldn't. They'd have to concede to any terms that are dictated from the outside. And like that, every European country on its own would be marginalized over the years. Together, they at least have a chance. European countries are always debating and don't speak with a single voice yet. But at least there is a chance for survival. Just look at my country, Holland. Pretty much all important decisions are made by the EU. An example: we cannot control our own borders. We cannot decide how many immigrants we want to allow. The EU wants to force quotas on countries and if they don't accept the quotas, they want to give the countries fines. Exactly. There are a million refugees in Europe. And you cannot just send back refugees from war zones as per international law. Somebody has to take them up. Europe has 500 million inhabitants. So there would be 0.2% refugees (i.e. "no problem") if they were properly distributed. Europe is community. Everybody profits from being a member. But every member has to carry some of the weight.
- rhizome31 10y ago
  > In todays world, Holland is tiny Yes, but there is no correlation between the size of a country and the standard of living of its inhabitants. The people of India, Brazil or Nigeria is not better off than the people of Norway, Singapore or Switzerland.
  - rtkwe 10y ago
    And standard of living doesn't correlate well to geopolitical/economic power which is what GP was talking about with being able to get good terms in trade negotiations.
  - NetStrikeForce 10y ago
    Yeah, but India has more than a billion people and they have nukes. As the parent comment said, Holland is tiny and not only geographically or in population. - It's barely in the top 40 military world powers: http://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=netherlands http://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-det... - It's 17th on GDP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi... (actually below India and Brazil and not so far from Nigeria) As part of the EU, Dutch people live in the (arguably) world's biggest economy. Outside the EU, they're just 17th and far from most of their neighbours. You punch above your weight in football though :) The EU is far from perfect, but we're the ones building it.
NetStrikeForce 10y ago
Who do you think the EU is exactly? Some abstract group of extra-terrestrial aliens? An AI? It's made of European people, like you and me. They're actually politicians from our countries. In your example you've said the EU "wants to" impose immigration quotas and "fine the countries that don't accept". How is that different from e.g. Germany imposing an immigration quota on your country? In exchange of e.g. not leaving you out of a trade agreement. What's stopping your politicians from negotiating those quotas? Nothing, because that's what they're actually doing, but they know part of their voters are xenophobic, so they have to save face by saying "the EU told me to do it". It's politics 101. Finally, please point me to where the EU is not a democratic entity, because I think I've missed the memo.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- Wildgoose 10y ago
  The so-called EU "Parliament" cannot inititiate legislation - it is told what to do by the UNELECTED EU Commission. The EU is not a democratic entity by any stretch of the imagination, it is anti-democratic, over-ruling elected members and overriding the wishes of the people.
  - vixen99 10y ago
    Yes - your point is absolutely unanswerable! For anyone with doubts should see this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTMxfAkxfQ0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTMxfAkxfQ0 (Brexit - the movie). Sure, it's supporting Leave but the factual evidence is, well, just fact.
    - ZenoArrow 10y ago
      Thank you for sharing that documentary, it's convinced me to change my mind, I'll be voting to leave. Please keep spreading the documentary, I'll be sharing it also.
  - ropiku 10y ago
aries1980 10y ago
I don't know where you guys were when you voted for the Lisbon Treaty.
- wsc981 10y ago
  You might want to read up on this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_European_Constitution_referendum,_2005 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_European_Constitution_... Our government doesn't really care what the people think though. The Euro project must go on, no matter the cost.
  - aries1980 10y ago
    I didn't know this, thank you for the link. How did the Dutch & French govn'ts have the power to sign it then?
    - wsc981 10y ago
      A referendum in The Netherlands is not legally binding for the government. The same thing happened just a few months ago when the Dutch people voted against the EU association treaty with Ukraine [0]. The government will still push through with the treaty. The EU project is holy and must go on. Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission said the following on the Lisbon treaty: "If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue'." He also stated: "There can be no democratic choice against the European treaties." [0]: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/06/dutch-voters-reject-closer-eu-links-to-ukraine-in-referendum http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/06/dutch-voters-re...

by wsc981 10y ago

actionwords 10y ago

you want to control your own borders and say who and who not can become Dutch? That sounds awful [buzzword] of you. You don't want people to think you're a [buzzword], do you? Support EU. Don't be a [buzzword]. National sovereignty is overrated anyway.

Gys 10y ago

> It might just as likely boost the economy of the UK. Pure assumption on your side or can you support this with sources ? > We cannot control our own borders. We cannot decide how many immigrants we want to allow. Seems to me much of this sentiment about leaving the EU is merely fear for being overrun by non-natives. Talking about 'This fear mongering has got to stop'...

abritinthebay 10y ago
You're not wrong. I've yet to hear any pro-exit talking point that isn't xenophobic, jingoistic, or at BEST just hopelessly misinformed economically. The fact that the BNP and UKIP are solidly behind an exit should be a good indication that it's terrible. They are like a bellwether for awful ideas.
- UK-AL 10y ago
  Pro-immigration person here. Considering brexit. [0] http://www.adamsmith.org/the-liberal-case-for-leave http://www.adamsmith.org/the-liberal-case-for-leave [1] http://www.adamsmith.org/evolution-not-revolution http://www.adamsmith.org/evolution-not-revolution
  - abritinthebay 10y ago
    That's a very smart summary of a lot of data but it's not supporting its conclusions very well - all it seems to be able to say is that increased globalization has had a massive economic impact worldwide. Well... yes. The rest of it is a bunch of "well, we'd likely have had a bunch of the good ideas we were forced into by EU membership anyway" which is shockingly optimistic when looking at 80s Thatcherite Britain, verging on naive. Throw in a couple more rather unconnected points that pretend to show significance (while just showing that the less-developed world is growing faster than the developed one. Which is... yeah, obvious, but also expected) The rest of it then swerves into dodgy anti-immigration territory. Which is odd for a "liberal" case. I agree with it that the Brexit plan is optimistic - but I think the article demonstrates exactly why that's a bad thing: because it's stupidly optimistic and convinces itself that everything will be perfectly awesome because they want it to be. Whereas the reality is that this is rarely the case. It's massive risk for little upside vs no real risk for a slightly reduced short-to-medium upside.
- hardlianotion 10y ago
  Then look out for some and test your notions. Decent arguments for leaving exist, and there are links on this page for the start of your search for good reasons.
  - abritinthebay 10y ago
    Based on the "decent" arguments provided it appears I've already seen them. They aren't very good and verge on irresponsibly optimistic at best. Most are just - as I said - very poor and misunderstood economics. The "good" reasons so far have been basically shown to be mostly wishful thinking with very little actual upside and a LOT of risk. Personally I'd not like to play roulette with a country, I'll take slightly slower growth and stability, thanks.
SixSigma 10y ago
>> It might just as likely boost the economy of the UK. > Pure assumption on your side or can you support this with sources ? That's the point. It is all speculation.
monk_e_boy 10y ago
We don't have the housing or infrastructure to support the vast number of immigrants. Hundreds of thousands a year. For most people it isn't a racist knee jerk, it's watching our schools and hospitals and housing buckle under the pressure.
- EliRivers 10y ago
  Incompetent government unable to do its fucking job and get houses built is the reason for the lack of housing. Extra people do exacerbate the problem, but the largest culprit is our incompetent, small-minded government refusing to do their job.
- tudorw 10y ago
  Our schools, hospitals and housing have been under pressure since time immemorial, perhaps if the countries earnings from oil and other resources had been managed better, investment in social housing had been maintained at previous levels, if the lack of investment from the business world in the form of apprenticeships and on the job training had been addressed more pertinently, and if the earnings of the managing and owning class not risen at a faster rate than working class, then this would not be an issue. Blaming a lacking in public services on migrants is not fair, while it's true to say that we have experienced a rise in immigration levels over the last decade, we are talking about a rise from 4 million in 1993 to 8 million in 2014, out of a population of 64 million, well under 10%. To blame all the failings of our state on that small section of society, migrants who are more likely to be of working age than our recumbent ageing population, and hence more likely to be adding to our GDP over the long term, is not only unfair, it's bad economic policy too, without immigration our country will fall to it's knees supporting legions of pensioners...
  - monk_e_boy 10y ago
    Where I live there isn't much space left for new houses. I guess we could build up, but it doesn't seem desirable. Give the local people the choice of building low cost high rise accommodation or voting out of the EU... well, that's the decision we're all making at the moment.
mc32 10y ago
Would you disagree that countries should have a mechanism under their control under which they have a say as to who gets to settle, work or study in their country? Are customs and border control not useful any longer? Have we decided they aren't something countries should have control over? Wanting to be able to control ingress is not the same as blocking all ingress. In this case I believe some in the UK, more than anything, resent having their migration policies promulgated in Brussels.
- izacus 10y ago
  How about counties? Cities? Towns? Neighbours? Federations? What makes "Holland" so special that it should have the ability to bar people from settling instead of "European Union", "Utrecht" or old grandma from the house across the street?
  - mc32 10y ago
    That would be something "Holland's" electorate can decide upon, governed by their laws and regulations, rather than policymakers in Brussels. It's like wanting to dictate to China to abolish the Hukou system. I see it as unfair, but that's their own internal problem to solve.
    - icebraining 10y ago
      Nobody is dictating anything. Holland joined the EU of its own accord. The question is not whether the people of Holland should be stripped of that decision, but whether they should partially delegate it. And why shouldn't they?
      - mc32 10y ago
        Why delegate? And what if they want to bring that decision making back home? I can delegate my finances, or I can make my own choices and maybe I feel like I'll get better served doing things myself.
  - mason240 10y ago
tsewlliw 10y ago
Controlling borders is fundamental to sovereignty, the point being that a sovereign nation decides how porous the borders ought to be. To cede that control significantly reduces the self-determination of the people within the border, even if the decision of exactly how porous does not vary between administering entities.
- throwanem 10y ago
  Sovereignty is widely considered an obsolete concept.
- NetStrikeForce 10y ago
  So, why should southerners accept all those northerners coming down? The southern people have no sovereignty on the matter. Oh and don't even get me started with those Scots :) The UK is not and has never been in Schengen, so it has borders and has control of it. They just happen to have agreed to a deal with the rest of the EU to give EU citizens almost the same rights as UK citizens. In other words, people voting LEAVE can't have a problem with border control as it is now, because the borders are controlled. The problem is of a very different (and sad) nature.

arrrg 10y ago

Yes, you can, together with everyone else, cooperatively.

monk_e_boy 10y ago
It's difficult, we have good benefits, minimum wage, NHS, great schools, etc etc. To negotiate on immigration with other EU countries that don't have these things is really hard.
- izacus 10y ago
  In what way other EU countries do not have that?
  - monk_e_boy 10y ago
    We have a lot of Polish immigrants where I live. Health care in Poland is delivered through a publicly funded health care system, which is free for all the citizens of Poland provided they fall into the "insured" category (usually meaning that they have their health insurance paid for by their employer, or are the spouse or child of an insured person.) Minimum wage in Poland is 410 EUR, in the UK it is 1,378 EUR ... I could keep going but you get the point. The UK is a desirable place to live. The UK is small. The UK has a housing crisis. The NHS is at breaking point (our local hospital is in crisis)... Not much of this is due to immigration, but it doesn't help that 500,000 (or so) new people turn up each year.
    - izacus 10y ago
      I still fail to see your point. What does free Polish healthcare have to do with the NHS? O.o
      - monk_e_boy 10y ago
        Yeah, it is a complex issue. I guess you just need to do your own research and make up your own mind.

jpfr 10y ago

In todays world, Holland is tiny. It cannot make many meaningful decisions on an international level. How would Holland negotiate with the USA or Russia about trade issues? Well, they couldn't. They'd have to concede to any terms that are dictated from the outside. And like that, every European country on its own would be marginalized over the years. Together, they at least have a chance. European countries are always debating and don't speak with a single voice yet. But at least there is a chance for survival. Just look at my country, Holland. Pretty much all important decisions are made by the EU. An example: we cannot control our own borders. We cannot decide how many immigrants we want to allow. The EU wants to force quotas on countries and if they don't accept the quotas, they want to give the countries fines. Exactly. There are a million refugees in Europe. And you cannot just send back refugees from war zones as per international law. Somebody has to take them up. Europe has 500 million inhabitants. So there would be 0.2% refugees (i.e. "no problem") if they were properly distributed. Europe is community. Everybody profits from being a member. But every member has to carry some of the weight.

rhizome31 10y ago
> In todays world, Holland is tiny Yes, but there is no correlation between the size of a country and the standard of living of its inhabitants. The people of India, Brazil or Nigeria is not better off than the people of Norway, Singapore or Switzerland.
- rtkwe 10y ago
  And standard of living doesn't correlate well to geopolitical/economic power which is what GP was talking about with being able to get good terms in trade negotiations.
- NetStrikeForce 10y ago
  Yeah, but India has more than a billion people and they have nukes. As the parent comment said, Holland is tiny and not only geographically or in population. - It's barely in the top 40 military world powers: http://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=netherlands http://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-det... - It's 17th on GDP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi... (actually below India and Brazil and not so far from Nigeria) As part of the EU, Dutch people live in the (arguably) world's biggest economy. Outside the EU, they're just 17th and far from most of their neighbours. You punch above your weight in football though :) The EU is far from perfect, but we're the ones building it.

NetStrikeForce 10y ago

Who do you think the EU is exactly? Some abstract group of extra-terrestrial aliens? An AI? It's made of European people, like you and me. They're actually politicians from our countries. In your example you've said the EU "wants to" impose immigration quotas and "fine the countries that don't accept". How is that different from e.g. Germany imposing an immigration quota on your country? In exchange of e.g. not leaving you out of a trade agreement. What's stopping your politicians from negotiating those quotas? Nothing, because that's what they're actually doing, but they know part of their voters are xenophobic, so they have to save face by saying "the EU told me to do it". It's politics 101. Finally, please point me to where the EU is not a democratic entity, because I think I've missed the memo.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Wildgoose 10y ago
The so-called EU "Parliament" cannot inititiate legislation - it is told what to do by the UNELECTED EU Commission. The EU is not a democratic entity by any stretch of the imagination, it is anti-democratic, over-ruling elected members and overriding the wishes of the people.
- vixen99 10y ago
  Yes - your point is absolutely unanswerable! For anyone with doubts should see this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTMxfAkxfQ0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTMxfAkxfQ0 (Brexit - the movie). Sure, it's supporting Leave but the factual evidence is, well, just fact.
  - ZenoArrow 10y ago
    Thank you for sharing that documentary, it's convinced me to change my mind, I'll be voting to leave. Please keep spreading the documentary, I'll be sharing it also.
- ropiku 10y ago

aries1980 10y ago

I don't know where you guys were when you voted for the Lisbon Treaty.

wsc981 10y ago
You might want to read up on this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_European_Constitution_referendum,_2005 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_European_Constitution_... Our government doesn't really care what the people think though. The Euro project must go on, no matter the cost.
- aries1980 10y ago
  I didn't know this, thank you for the link. How did the Dutch & French govn'ts have the power to sign it then?
  - wsc981 10y ago
    A referendum in The Netherlands is not legally binding for the government. The same thing happened just a few months ago when the Dutch people voted against the EU association treaty with Ukraine [0]. The government will still push through with the treaty. The EU project is holy and must go on. Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission said the following on the Lisbon treaty: "If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue'." He also stated: "There can be no democratic choice against the European treaties." [0]: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/06/dutch-voters-reject-closer-eu-links-to-ukraine-in-referendum http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/06/dutch-voters-re...