Brexit...

[Matt]

That's true. Voting for your next Government has long been a case of 'voting for the better evil'!!!

i can't vote anywhere, but I'll try and share my opinion

[holystove]

Is it EC which has unelected members who all debate the new rules and regulations etc? I was watching a programme on it the other day. While the elected 'face' members just throw mud at each other, like they do here?!!!

 

Who elected the President of the EU? And the previous one?

 

I like what the EU is supposed to be. The idea and the foundations it was built on 'way back then' were all for good intentions. However, I feel that as it expands and welcomes in anyone and everyone, it will become more a headache for average joe than it will a benefit. And I'm all for average joe, because I think these are the people that make our countries tick but as the EU expands and grows in size and stature, average joe gets silenced and big fat greedy Banker and his mistress Mrs multi national corporates becomes ever more powerful.

 

I fear true democracy is slowly dieing but that people aren't able to see it. We have a chance to snatch back some democracy.

 

My head hurts reading this thread.

 

Just to clarify: there is no EU president. There is a president of the European Council. The European Council is a group of heads of state who decide the general direction of the EU. These heads of state were ellected by their the citizens of their country.

 

There is one country at the forefront of keeping the EU undemocratic and that is the UK, by blocking further political integration. (again, this is why I hope Leave wins though I'm very much convinced it would be bad for the people in the UK; in an ideal world the UK would leave now, the EU would integrate further, and then the UK can re-apply in ten years or so).

 

-

 

 

It's most definitely fine to be against the EU, but none of the arguments that I've read here make any sense.

 

Reading this thread there is such a lack of understanding, people just don't know what the EU is; what it does; and how a strong EU can serve us (all Europeans) in the coming years.

 

With the lack of knowledge, and the misinformation through British media perhaps Mike said it best: can you vote for something being campaigned for by Johnson, Gove, Duncan-Smith and Farage?

[johnh]

 

Reading back through the thread just now John; I'm sorry to break the news to you but the TT poll is not legally binding :dont know:.

 

I wish you'd told me earlier, I've sent the results to the Sun.

[johnh]

 

My head hurts reading this thread.

 

Just to clarify: there is no EU president. There is a president of the European Council. The European Council is a group of heads of state who decide the general direction of the EU. These heads of state were ellected by their the citizens of their country.

 

There is one country at the forefront of keeping the EU undemocratic and that is the UK, by blocking further political integration. (again, this is why I hope Leave wins though I'm very much convinced it would be bad for the people in the UK; in an ideal world the UK would leave now, the EU would integrate further, and then the UK can re-apply in ten years or so).

 

-

 

 

It's most definitely fine to be against the EU, but none of the arguments that I've read here make any sense.

 

Reading this thread there is such a lack of understanding, people just don't know what the EU is; what it does; and how a strong EU can serve us (all Europeans) in the coming years.

 

With the lack of knowledge, and the misinformation through British media perhaps Mike said it best: can you vote for something being campaigned for by Johnson, Gove, Duncan-Smith and Farage?

 

That's exactly right. People don't know what the EU is, what it does............ This is because it is continually evolving. It started off as a 'Common Market' with the ultimate aim of becoming a 'super state'. The EU elite knew that they could never get that objective accepted by (most) member states which is why it is being done piecemeal. The pace will quicken though if we vote to remain. Those who think the EU is democratic because there is a vote for MEP's must have the EU elite laughing all the way to the bank. The 'elite', where the real power is invested, can't be shifted.

[holystove]

A common market has been achieved for over 25 years. Ever since the goal has been integration in every domain where action taken by the EU would be more effective than action taken at national, regional or local level, resulting in an "ever closer union". A super-state isn't possible under EU constitutional law and isn't, nor was it ever, the end goal.

 

Some countries try to block this process towards an ever closer union (I singled out the UK, but there are others - Poland, Czech Republic, ..). Therefor the EU would prosper without these countries. I don't see how you can state "the pace will quicken though if we vote to remain"; quite to the contrary.

 

About this "EU elite"; do you mean the Commission? Or something more obscure, conspiracy-theorist-thing?

 

If you mean the Commission, I would agree that it's necessary to give legislative initiative to the European Parliament, instead of just the Commission but the Commission can't decide anything without the OK from the Parliament (direct democracy) and/or the member states (indirect democracy).

 

If you don't mean the Commission; who are these elite? Are they only in Europe or also in the UK? Can they be shifted in the UK? How will the Brexit affect these elite?

 

The democratic deficit in the EU doesn't exist in the sense that there is no direct or indirect link with people taking the decisions and people who voted for them.

The democratic deficit in relation to the EU means there is no European identity; noone identifies with the EU institutions because they don't know what they do and even though they take decisions that have an impact on every-day-life. One reason, the main reason even, for this is that everything that goes wrong in Britain is blamed on the EU, and everything that is a positive influence on peoples lives coming from the EU is claimed by national politicians.

[Matt]

Your thesis must've been fascinating to read

[rubecula]

Migration is more than 3 times what the government said we can have according to official figures. (333,000 as opposed to 100,000) with 184,000 coming from Eastern Europe. Make of that what you will.

 

Source: BBC television news. (Today's headlines.)

[Matt]

So?

[johnh]

Migration is more than 3 times what the government said we can have according to official figures. (333,000 as opposed to 100,000) with 184,000 coming from Eastern Europe. Make of that what you will.

 

Source: BBC television news. (Today's headlines.)

 

Cameron said the Government would reduce immigration to 'tens of thousands'.

[markjazzbassist]

I don't understand the objection to immigrants. They take the jobs no one wants, cleaning toilets, cutting grass, housekeeping. What's the big deal? It helps the economy because they will spend money in England.

[johnh]

A common market has been achieved for over 25 years. Ever since the goal has been integration in every domain where action taken by the EU would be more effective than action taken at national, regional or local level, resulting in an "ever closer union". A super-state isn't possible under EU constitutional law and isn't, nor was it ever, the end goal.

 

Some countries try to block this process towards an ever closer union (I singled out the UK, but there are others - Poland, Czech Republic, ..). Therefor the EU would prosper without these countries. I don't see how you can state "the pace will quicken though if we vote to remain"; quite to the contrary.

 

About this "EU elite"; do you mean the Commission? Or something more obscure, conspiracy-theorist-thing?

 

If you mean the Commission, I would agree that it's necessary to give legislative initiative to the European Parliament, instead of just the Commission but the Commission can't decide anything without the OK from the Parliament (direct democracy) and/or the member states (indirect democracy).

 

If you don't mean the Commission; who are these elite? Are they only in Europe or also in the UK? Can they be shifted in the UK? How will the Brexit affect these elite?

 

The democratic deficit in the EU doesn't exist in the sense that there is no direct or indirect link with people taking the decisions and people who voted for them.

The democratic deficit in relation to the EU means there is no European identity; noone identifies with the EU institutions because they don't know what they do and even though they take decisions that have an impact on every-day-life. One reason, the main reason even, for this is that everything that goes wrong in Britain is blamed on the EU, and everything that is a positive influence on peoples lives coming from the EU is claimed by national politicians.

Elites?

Just one example: Baroness Ashton, who was appointed to head the new EU 'Foreign Affairs' outfit, had never been elected to anywhere in her life, either in this country or Europe. We know that the then Labour Government put her forward but there is a fair bet that whoever agreed to her appointment on behalf of the EU wasn't elected either.

[Matt]

[MikeO]

Elites?

Just one example: Baroness Ashton, who was appointed to head the new EU 'Foreign Affairs' outfit, had never been elected to anywhere in her life, either in this country or Europe. We know that the then Labour Government put her forward but there is a fair bet that whoever agreed to her appointment on behalf of the EU wasn't elected either.

 

But we elected the government who put her forward; same as they select any number of non-elected people to do jobs in the UK, Europe and around the World.

 

Not to mention the House of Lords, jam packed with people who've never been voted for having a role in our governance.

[holystove]

Elites?

Just one example: Baroness Ashton, who was appointed to head the new EU 'Foreign Affairs' outfit, had never been elected to anywhere in her life, either in this country or Europe. We know that the then Labour Government put her forward but there is a fair bet that whoever agreed to her appointment on behalf of the EU wasn't elected either.

 

"The high representatie of the union for foreign affairs and security policy" can only represent the EU on issues where the member states are in complete consensus. In other words, it's just an ambassador.

 

Are ambassadors elected in Britain? Is an ambassador considered an elite?

 

 

Migration is more than 3 times what the government said we can have according to official figures. (333,000 as opposed to 100,000) with 184,000 coming from Eastern Europe. Make of that what you will.

 

Source: BBC television news. (Today's headlines.)

 

If you're against immigration from other EU states and feel so strongly about it that it overshadows everything else, then "Vote Leave" is the only option for you. Be aware though that a Brexit would have little effect on immigration from non-EU-member states such as Pakistan, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, ...

[johnh]

Let me use the House of Lords in an analogy. Lets assume that the (unelected) House of Lords were all powerful and ran the country. We all got a vote for MP's in the Commons but they had minimal power or influence - a sop to democracy. This would be a perfect example of the EU, an unelected powerbase with MEP's as a sop to democracy.

[johnh]

By the way, Boris has told me that in the event of a referendum 50/50 the poll at the top of this thread will decide the winner.

[johnh]

Democracy EU style.

 

Jean-Claude Junker (unelected) has announced that any EU country electing a right wing populist party will be subject to sanctions and will lose voting rights. Currently aimed at Austria and Poland.

[MikeO]

 

"The high representatie of the union for foreign affairs and security policy" can only represent the EU on issues where the member states are in complete consensus. In other words, it's just an ambassador.

 

Are ambassadors elected in Britain? Is an ambassador considered an elite?

 

Interested in your response to this John. Funnily enough I used the example of our foreign ambassadors when explaining this debate to my wife in the car earlier.

 

 

Democracy EU style.

 

Jean-Claude Junker (unelected) has announced that any EU country electing a right wing populist party will be subject to sanctions and will lose voting rights. Currently aimed at Austria and Poland.

 

Apart from my immediate reaction which is "good" he's not come up with that policy all by himself though has he?

[johnh]

So Mike, what you a saying is, if UKIP were voted in at the next election (I hope not too) you would have no concerns about Junker applying sanctions to the UK and withdrawing our voting rights? It doesn't really matter if Junker thought it up by himself or was just announcing a group decision, except that its even worse if more people think that way. As I said, democracy EU style, which isn't really democracy at all.

[Matt]

John, democracy doesn't exist anyway, not sure where the issue is

[MikeO]

So Mike, what you a saying is, if UKIP were voted in at the next election (I hope not too) you would have no concerns about Junker applying sanctions to the UK and withdrawing our voting rights? It doesn't really matter if Junker thought it up by himself or was just announcing a group decision, except that its even worse if more people think that way. As I said, democracy EU style, which isn't really democracy at all.

 

None whatsoever because I'd be moving abroad with immediate effect .

 

To Syria if necessary.

[johnh]

John, democracy doesn't exist anyway, not sure where the issue is

 

Matt, well at least we go with whoever wins the election. Who was it, Ireland and Holland told to vote again.

[Matt]

 

Matt, well at least we go with whoever wins the election. Who was it, Ireland and Holland told to vote again.

the election process doesn't even represent the people though!

[johnh]

the election process doesn't even represent the people though!

 

Not perfect I agree, but better than some nameless bureaucrat in Brussels making the decision.

[MikeO]

 

Not perfect I agree, but better than some nameless bureaucrat in Brussels making the decision.

 

But, as I said, it's not him making the decision is it? He didn't wake up one morning and think, "That's an idea, I'll impose it!" It will have gone through a lot of stages and discussion (hopefully Holystove will elaborate) before he announced it.

 

(And anyway, how can he be nameless when you just told us his name ?)

[MC11]

I'll be voting to leave - because I can.

[Gwlad]

Out for me and has been since the last vote. That was for a common market which although I accepted, couldn't support. Now it's a double edged sword as I see it; we vote out, yes a leap into the unknown but many people do that in daily life and it turns out ok or very well. If we stay in I think the referendum idea will catch on and some other countries will actually vote out and we'll be left under the thumb of Germany and propping up the minnows who have come/will join.

[Matt]

I'll be voting to leave - because I can.

Utterly unsurprised. Any more behind your reasoning?

[holystove]

Utterly unsurprised. Any more behind your reasoning?

To make America Britain great again!

[holystove]

Democracy EU style.

 

Jean-Claude Junker (unelected) has announced that any EU country electing a right wing populist party will be subject to sanctions and will lose voting rights. Currently aimed at Austria and Poland.

 

I googled this because I wanted to know your source. Turns out it's the Sun? I read the article and it's just blatant disinformation.

 

1) He never said any EU country electing a right wing populist party will be subject to sanctions and will lose voting rights because he doens't have the authority to do so. What he (probably) said and what was (intentionally?) misinterpreted by the Sun is that part of the policy put forth by extremist (left or right) parties is in breach of EU law. It is the role of the Commission to make sure every member state upholds EU law. If a member state goes against EU law, the Commission can summon that member state before the European Court of Justice which can impose sanctions or suspend voting rights.

 

2) Junker is Commission President. He was proposed for this position by a consensus among the member states. He then had to be approved by the European Parliament.

 

.

 

It's a shame that people would vote (stay or leave) just because "they can" and thereby cancel out a vote from someone who genuinely thought about it and informed themselves.

 

It's an even bigger shame that people who try to make an informed opinion are confronted with disinformation and lies.

Edited May 27, 2016 by holystove