This is the first debate I have watched for any length of time and I was struck about the absence of accuracy in the comments made by many MPs. No wonder there is so much confusion over issues and no wonder disillusionment and disengagement are at such high level amongst the electorate.
It began with a standard scare story from David Nuttall (Bury North. Con) stating at Bury Hospital that despite Tory electoral pledges and massive local opposition the children's department, including the maternity ward and special care baby unit are to close, "and one of the driving forces behind the closure plans is the effect of the European working time directive". The Manchester Evening News,
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/health/s/1441451_burys-hospital-births-to-end-as-midwife-led-unit-at-fairfield-hospital-rejected however, gives reasons much as we are hearing about Buckland BUT makes no mention of EU working time directives.
Philip Hollobone (Kettering. Tory) said:
"Nine out of every 10 jobs in this country go to foreign migrants, most of whom come from the European Union".
I have found no evidence to support this claim. There is a Daily Mail account of Frank Field's earlier, similar statement but there seems to be no way of corroborating this. Indeed 'Fact Check' reports on its investigations that:
"The Office for National Statistics does produce figures for how many jobs are in the economy, but these are not broken down by the nationality of the worker, so there is no way of knowing what the proportion of new jobs going to foreign-born workers actually is"
There was plenty of scathing comment on the 'Social Chapter'. The crux of this Chapter being the:
"promotion of employment, improving living and working conditions, proper social protection, dialogue between management and labour, the development of human resources with a view to lasting high employment and the combating of exclusion."
If your points of reference are solely monetary then I can see that such aims would be an inconvenience but I suspect that most people would be glad to sign up to these if they knew about them.
Wayne David (Caerphilly. Lab) made an impassioned speech which resonated with me in which he said:
"The European Union should not just be about a single market for business—it should also be a social Europe for people".
Of course there is room for improvement but attempts to achieve this should be from being at the centre of the EU not standing on the periphery.
One of the better comments of the evening came from Anne Marie Morris (Newton Abbot. Con):
"Does the right hon. Gentleman therefore agree that, in the words of Gandhi:
"Evolution of democracy is not possible if we are not prepared to hear the other side"?"
Honest and open debate would help formulate an action plan for the EU. We didn't get that last night and I doubt we will in the future.