politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The OUT side needs someone other than Farage fronting the c
Comments
-
Exactly so. Cameron is going to be negotiating in entirely the wrong direction if he genuinely wants a better EU. He talks a lot about opting out of things but I've not heard anything much from him about increasing accountability.edmundintokyo said:
The UK are the main opposition to a more democratic EU, so it's not obvious how them having a referendum on it will help, unless they actually leave and stop trying to protect the old unaccountable-head-of-government-stitch-up model.
0 -
I will vote Out. It will probably be my only chance to rectify the mistake I made in 1975.0
-
DecrepitJohnL Boris,s book on Churchill is a very good read...a real warts and all account ..the old boy is not spared at all.0
-
The idea of a more democratic EU does not work because there is no such thing as an EU demos. There would be no more solidarity and sense of shared nationhood between the different European nations than there would be between the different peoples of Yugoslavia when that state attempted to be democratic. And they at least had a majority mother tongue language.0
-
We voted for most of the EU rules!! It's not as if we were very 'late to the table'; the UK, Ireland and Denmark were the first three countries to leave EFTA and join the six founder states of the EEC (Germany, France, Italy and Benelux) in 1973. 19 more countries have since joined.Moses_ said:
I have observed this dysfunctional organisation since Benelux pretty much. Quite simply the original question was /has changed so many times but never has anyone asked directly what we now think. An in vote would also force us towards the Euro and I know that will be refuted by the in group but it will just as the EEC evolved by stealth and as did the EU.JosiasJessop said:
If we vote In, it's quite likely that the same nutters who wanted us to join the Euro ten/fifteen years ago will say they have a mandate. And other EU countries (ref. Germany) would want us to join to share the pain.edmundintokyo said:
I doubt the British will join the Euro until such time as it becomes non-disfunctional.JosiasJessop said:
If we were not to have a referendum, we'd be dragged deeper into the EU. If we have a referendum and 'In' wins, we shall be dragged deeper in. That means that we will be dragged into a dysfunctional, not-fit-for-purpose EU and, later, Euro. The two-speed Europe is dead.
The 'out' campaign will need to remind people of the Euro-fanaticists.
The EU creates problems it does not solve, I objuct to its leaders being directly unaccountable to me at a ballot box ( sorry they are just not) and the quality majority voting just sidelines us depite being one of the biggest contributors. I cannot think of anything the EU and its unelected undemocratic corrupt politicians have done for us and Europe in particular. They have done Lots for themselves on the other hand.
They can also dictate who comes into our country after they under schengen dropped their collective guard. At the time when a humanitarian crisis erupts on the borders of the EU and in Greece in particular now is the time to guard the borders. Give protection to those that need it and weed out the rest, there are plenty of troublemakers there. Meanwhile France accuses us of creating the Calais crisis in their country???
I am not a UKipper but in my personal view we are better off out and away
I've always thought that having an unelected Commission is a very bad feature of the EU; an executive should be elected. However, the UK has had 40 years to object and I've never heard any really adverse comments, possibly because the UK politicians didn't mind this 'democratic deficit'. As for the 'politicians' in the European Parliament, at least they *are* democratically elected.
0 -
Thank goodness we in the UK can rely on the coherence of NI, Scotland, England and Wales. One nation, one culture, one united voice.JEO said:The idea of a more democratic EU does not work because there is no such thing as an EU demos. There would be no more solidarity and sense of shared nationhood between the different European nations than there would be between the different peoples of Yugoslavia when that state attempted to be democratic. And they at least had a majority mother tongue language.
0 -
F1: picking a bet was a bit like pinning a tail on a donkey:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/canada-pre-race.html0 -
Mr. Jonathan, the gerrymandering tomfoolery of Labour is partly to blame for that, with institutionalising political division through ill-conceived, narrow-minded, short-sighted devolution.
That said, if you think the difference within the UK is of the same magnitude as that between Spain, Estonia, Greece, Ireland and Germany, then I think you're a silly sausage.0 -
I have observed this dysfunctional organisation since Benelux pretty much. Quite simply the original question was /has changed so many times but never has anyone asked directly what we now think. An in vote would also force us towards the Euro and I know that will be refuted by the in group but it will just as the EEC evolved by stealth and as did the EU.
The EU creates problems it does not solve, I objuct to its leaders being directly unaccountable to me at a ballot box ( sorry they are just not) and the quality majority voting just sidelines us depite being one of the biggest contributors. I cannot think of anything the EU and its unelected undemocratic corrupt politicians have done for us and Europe in particular. They have done Lots for themselves on the other hand.
They can also dictate who comes into our country after they under schengen dropped their collective guard. At the time when a humanitarian crisis erupts on the borders of the EU and in Greece in particular now is the time to guard the borders. Give protection to those that need it and weed out the rest, there are plenty of troublemakers there. Meanwhile France accuses us of creating the Calais crisis in their country???
I am not a UKipper but in my personal view we are better off out and away
We voted for most of the EU rules!! It's not as if we were very 'late to the table'; the UK, Ireland and Denmark were the first three countries to leave EFTA and join the six founder states of the EEC (Germany, France, Italy and Benelux) in 1973. 19 more countries have since joined.
I've always thought that having an unelected Commission is a very bad feature of the EU; an executive should be elected. However, the UK has had 40 years to object and I've never heard any really adverse comments, possibly because the UK politicians didn't mind this 'democratic deficit'. As for the 'politicians' in the European Parliament, at least they *are* democratically elected.
To a point I agree. We the people in the 75 referendum voted for Economic union not in any shape or form what we have now. Since that time we the electorate have just been treated as "white noise" by the EU and to a point the left wing.
Any right wing or even centre dissension was considered a major split in that party rather than a healthy debate. The BBC just couldn't help itself in this regard and exploited consistently even the slightest comment to emphasise a split on the right of the political spectrum. That's the same BBC that receives considerable subsidies of course from none other than the EU.
EU = FIFA it all but name.0 -
Listening to Liz Kendall on Marr was so depressing. Didn't answer the questions and just talked platitudes. This was the first time I have seen her interviewed and had expected a much better impression in view of the recent media comments. Just didn't see it. Labour are going nowhere with the present leadership candidates.0
-
Your party political point on UK fragmentation here is weak. You may blame Labour for helping provide the "how" via devolved govt, but you should look to the Tories for having provided and to continuing to provide the "why".Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jonathan, the gerrymandering tomfoolery of Labour is partly to blame for that, with institutionalising political division through ill-conceived, narrow-minded, short-sighted devolution.
.
0 -
See what I mean, not only are a bunch of people in the UK opposed to specific steps to a more democratic EU, a lot of them believe in a pop-sociological theory according to which it's a priori impossible.JEO said:The idea of a more democratic EU does not work because there is no such thing as an EU demos. There would be no more solidarity and sense of shared nationhood between the different European nations than there would be between the different peoples of Yugoslavia when that state attempted to be democratic. And they at least had a majority mother tongue language.
0 -
Right on Que. on Sky News
SNP MP demanding a double lock on the EU referendum so one "country" ie Scotland cannot be forced out of the EU against their will. Fine. It was perfectly ok though for Scotland to vote all on its own to break up a successful Union that's lasted for well over 300 years with no reference to the other members?
No having your cake and eating it there... Oh no sireee !!
Actually just listening to and reading some comments elsewhere it looks like had they asked the other members they probably would be independent by now.0 -
Those with more BetFair experience:
Will BetFair remove some of the Lab leadership betting options before the winner is selected? It's just that the cash out option is best for me (given <£2 implied stakes) but it wants to equalise my return on people who aren't running.0 -
A democratic EU is for all intents and purposes an impossibility, quite independent of any "pop-sociological theory". At present, a vote in Malta for the European Parliament is worth twelve times as much as a vote in Germany. Hence the German Federal Constitutional Court has held the European Parliament is not representative of the peoples of Europe, but of the member states of the EU (Re Ratification of the Lisbon Treaty [2010] 3 CMLR 13, 348-350). Given that the small countries have a veto on changing this (see article 48 of the Treaty on the European Union) and there is no realistic prospect that they will agree to such an amendment, there is no realistic possibility of a democratic legislature representing the peoples of the Europe.edmundintokyo said:See what I mean, not only are a bunch of people in the UK opposed to specific steps to a more democratic EU, a lot of them believe in a pop-sociological theory according to which it's a priori impossible.
That is enough to dispose of the argument, without the necessity to consider the Commission's monopoly on the proposal of legislation (TFEU, arts 289(1) & 294(2), or the Byzantine and secretive practices of the Council of Ministers, etc.0 -
Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage Jun 5
Forty years ago the British people voted for a Common Market. The label on the tin was wrong.
Not only wrong, a lie! The sort of BIG LIE that Hitler used to come up with (pre war) and was believed by the mischlings ruling Britain and France. Naturally Germany and a Gaulist France were and are the leaders and promotors of the undemocratic EU. The BIG LIE is second nature to them.
I agree with @Moses that the EU is as corrupt as FIFA, probably more so as it never publishes it's accounts and hence it's accountabilty.0 -
If you think that's bad, Vermont voters have 30 times as much senator per person as New York next door. Is US democracy impossible as well?Life_ina_market_town said:
A democratic EU is for all intents and purposes an impossibility, quite independent of any "pop-sociological theory". At present, a vote in Malta for the European Parliament is worth twelve times as much as a vote in Germany. Hence the German Federal Constitutional Court has held the European Parliament is not representative of the peoples of Europe, but of the member states of the EU (Re Ratification of the Lisbon Treaty [2010] 3 CMLR 13, 348-350). Given that the small countries have a veto on changing this (see article 48 of the Treaty on the European Union) and there is no realistic prospect that they will agree to such an amendment, there is no realistic possibility of a democratic legislature representing the peoples of the Europe.edmundintokyo said:See what I mean, not only are a bunch of people in the UK opposed to specific steps to a more democratic EU, a lot of them believe in a pop-sociological theory according to which it's a priori impossible.
That is enough to dispose of the argument, without the necessity to consider the Commission's monopoly on the proposal of legislation (TFEU, arts 289(1) & 294(2), or the Byzantine and secretive practices of the Council of Ministers, etc.0 -
Good to see momentum building on PB for Priti to lead the out campaign.
On Liz, my other half thought she was great - ignoring Marr's trivial questions to address what she felt was important. If Liz is winning over the Green vote then she is doing OK.0 -
Farron being given the 3rd degree by Niel.
Shows him up to be a complete idiot.0 -
Farron interviewed by Neil is even worse than Kendall on Marr. Cameron can't believe his luck at the quality of opposition0
-
Neil doing Lamb's dirty work for him.MikeK said:Farron being given the 3rd degree by Niel.
Shows him up to be a complete idiot.0 -
There is no momentum for Priti to lead the OUT vote.SandyRentool said:Good to see momentum building on PB for Priti to lead the out campaign.
0 -
Not to mention more than 3million UKIP voters represented by a single MP.edmundintokyo said:
If you think that's bad, Vermont voters have 30 times as much senator per person as New York next door. Is US democracy impossible as well?Life_ina_market_town said:
A democratic EU is for all intents and purposes an impossibility, quite independent of any "pop-sociological theory". At present, a vote in Malta for the European Parliament is worth twelve times as much as a vote in Germany. Hence the German Federal Constitutional Court has held the European Parliament is not representative of the peoples of Europe, but of the member states of the EU (Re Ratification of the Lisbon Treaty [2010] 3 CMLR 13, 348-350). Given that the small countries have a veto on changing this (see article 48 of the Treaty on the European Union) and there is no realistic prospect that they will agree to such an amendment, there is no realistic possibility of a democratic legislature representing the peoples of the Europe.edmundintokyo said:See what I mean, not only are a bunch of people in the UK opposed to specific steps to a more democratic EU, a lot of them believe in a pop-sociological theory according to which it's a priori impossible.
That is enough to dispose of the argument, without the necessity to consider the Commission's monopoly on the proposal of legislation (TFEU, arts 289(1) & 294(2), or the Byzantine and secretive practices of the Council of Ministers, etc.
0 -
Kippers always wrong, the EU publish their accounts. http://bit.ly/1JA6IUyMikeK said:Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage Jun 5
Forty years ago the British people voted for a Common Market. The label on the tin was wrong.
Not only wrong, a lie! The sort of BIG LIE that Hitler used to come up with (pre war) and was believed by the mischlings ruling Britain and France. Naturally Germany and a Gaulist France were and are the leaders and promotors of the undemocratic EU. The BIG LIE is second nature to them.
I agree with @Moses that the EU is as corrupt as FIFA, probably more so as it never publishes it's accounts and hence it's accountabilty.
The issue is that they are seldom signed off by the auditors.
Now UKIP = FIFA?
Nigel Farage has shifted ground on an offer to allow an independent audit of his spending of European parliamentary allowances, denying he ever accepted the suggestion.
In an interview with the Guardian, the Ukip leader instead claims it would be wrong for him to be singled out for a spending audit as it would put him in a different position to every other British MEP.
http://bit.ly/1gYtsw90 -
That point is entirely tenuous and was answered by the Federal Constitutional Court. Such disparities in representation are only considered acceptable in a federal state in the second chamber. You will no doubt be aware that seats in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College in the United States are apportioned according to population. The second chamber in the EU, according to traditional theory, is the Council of Ministers, which represents the governments of the member states. It is difficult not to conclude you are being deliberately disingenuous.edmundintokyo said:If you think that's bad, Vermont voters have 30 times as much senator per person as New York next door. Is US democracy impossible as well?
0 -
Precisely the same is true of the United States - the Senate is ludicrously disproportionate with respect to the size of its equally-represented states (indeed much more so than the EU). Do you consider the United States to be undemocratic?Life_ina_market_town said:
A democratic EU is for all intents and purposes an impossibility, quite independent of any "pop-sociological theory". At present, a vote in Malta for the European Parliament is worth twelve times as much as a vote in Germany. Hence the German Federal Constitutional Court has held the European Parliament is not representative of the peoples of Europe, but of the member states of the EU (Re Ratification of the Lisbon Treaty [2010] 3 CMLR 13, 348-350). Given that the small countries have a veto on changing this (see article 48 of the Treaty on the European Union) and there is no realistic prospect that they will agree to such an amendment, there is no realistic possibility of a democratic legislature representing the peoples of the Europe.edmundintokyo said:See what I mean, not only are a bunch of people in the UK opposed to specific steps to a more democratic EU, a lot of them believe in a pop-sociological theory according to which it's a priori impossible.
That is enough to dispose of the argument, without the necessity to consider the Commission's monopoly on the proposal of legislation (TFEU, arts 289(1) & 294(2), or the Byzantine and secretive practices of the Council of Ministers, etc.
A reasonable answer to that is "Yes, to some extent, but not enough to prevent it being a functioning democracy". That is a reasonably achievable objective for the EU as well. Direct election of the Commission President would be a good start.0 -
The EU never publishes full accounts.TheScreamingEagles said:
Kippers always wrong, the EU publish their accounts. http://bit.ly/1JA6IUyMikeK said:Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage Jun 5
Forty years ago the British people voted for a Common Market. The label on the tin was wrong.
Not only wrong, a lie! The sort of BIG LIE that Hitler used to come up with (pre war) and was believed by the mischlings ruling Britain and France. Naturally Germany and a Gaulist France were and are the leaders and promotors of the undemocratic EU. The BIG LIE is second nature to them.
I agree with @Moses that the EU is as corrupt as FIFA, probably more so as it never publishes it's accounts and hence it's accountabilty.
The issue is that they are seldom signed off by the auditors.
Now UKIP = FIFA?
Nigel Farage has shifted ground on an offer to allow an independent audit of his spending of European parliamentary allowances, denying he ever accepted the suggestion.
In an interview with the Guardian, the Ukip leader instead claims it would be wrong for him to be singled out for a spending audit as it would put him in a different position to every other British MEP.
http://bit.ly/1gYtsw9
0 -
EU auditors refuse to sign off more than £100billion of its own spendingMikeK said:
The EU never publishes full accounts.TheScreamingEagles said:
Kippers always wrong, the EU publish their accounts. http://bit.ly/1JA6IUyMikeK said:Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage Jun 5
Forty years ago the British people voted for a Common Market. The label on the tin was wrong.
Not only wrong, a lie! The sort of BIG LIE that Hitler used to come up with (pre war) and was believed by the mischlings ruling Britain and France. Naturally Germany and a Gaulist France were and are the leaders and promotors of the undemocratic EU. The BIG LIE is second nature to them.
I agree with @Moses that the EU is as corrupt as FIFA, probably more so as it never publishes it's accounts and hence it's accountabilty.
The issue is that they are seldom signed off by the auditors.
Now UKIP = FIFA?
Nigel Farage has shifted ground on an offer to allow an independent audit of his spending of European parliamentary allowances, denying he ever accepted the suggestion.
In an interview with the Guardian, the Ukip leader instead claims it would be wrong for him to be singled out for a spending audit as it would put him in a different position to every other British MEP.
http://bit.ly/1gYtsw9
Critics attack the EU for demanding that David Cameron pays a £1.7 billion bill despite an official audit failing to give a clean bill of health to more than £100 billion of Brussels spending.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/11209248/EU-auditors-refuse-to-sign-off-more-than-100billion-of-its-own-spending.html0 -
The electoral college is hardly a great example. 700k voters per elector in CAL vs under 200k in WYOLife_ina_market_town said:
That point is entirely tenuous and was answered by the Federal Constitutional Court. Such disparities in representation are only considered acceptable in a federal state in the second chamber. You will no doubt be aware that seats in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College in the United States are apportioned according to population. The second chamber in the EU, according to traditional theory, is the Council of Ministers, which represents the governments of the member states. It is difficult not to conclude you are being deliberately disingenuous.edmundintokyo said:If you think that's bad, Vermont voters have 30 times as much senator per person as New York next door. Is US democracy impossible as well?
0 -
Our electoral system returns representatives for constituencies of equivalent population. Although I happen to have voted for the winner in my constituency, I would be represented by her whether or not I had voted for her, and whether or not I supported her party (which I do not). It follows every UKIP voter is represented in the House of Commons. An analogous situation to the way the European Parliament works would be if Northern Ireland had, say, five times more constituencies in the House of Commons than it does now, which would rightly be seen as anti-democratic and absurd.Jonathan said:Not to mention more than 3million UKIP voters represented by a single MP.
0 -
“European Union STILL wasting billions every year as auditors refuse to sign off accounts for 18th year in a row… Court of Auditors refuses to give accounts a clean bill of health… again”
Daily Mail, 6 November 2012
“Audit ‘seriously undermines credibility’ of EU spending”
Daily Telegraph, 6 November 2012
The Mail and the Telegraph this morning bemoaned the accounts behind the European Union’s €130 billion annual budget. According to the papers, auditors have refused to sign off the EU’s accounts for the 18th year in a row.
This claim isn’t new. Last year the same claims – for the 17th year at the time – were being made in the media and in Parliament.
Yet it contrasted starkly with the European Commission’s own press release on the same matter a year ago:
“Another clean bill of health for EU accounts; auditors find improvements in many payment areas.”
And still contrasts almost as starkly today:
“Overall error rate for EU spending below 4% for third year in a row: Court of Auditors’ annual report.”
So are these just two sides of a spinning coin or is there more to the figures?
https://fullfact.org/factchecks/has_eu_budget_rejected_auditors_18_years-285930 -
The Founding Fathers established a Republic and abhorred democracy. Although I would say the US is run in the interests of big political donors with the popular interest irrelevant.NickPalmer said:
Precisely the same is true of the United States - the Senate is ludicrously disproportionate with respect to the size of its equally-represented states (indeed much more so than the EU). Do you consider the United States to be undemocratic?Life_ina_market_town said:
A democratic EU is for all intents and purposes an impossibility, quite independent of any "pop-sociological theory". At present, a vote in Malta for the European Parliament is worth twelve times as much as a vote in Germany. Hence the German Federal Constitutional Court has held the European Parliament is not representative of the peoples of Europe, but of the member states of the EU (Re Ratification of the Lisbon Treaty [2010] 3 CMLR 13, 348-350). Given that the small countries have a veto on changing this (see article 48 of the Treaty on the European Union) and there is no realistic prospect that they will agree to such an amendment, there is no realistic possibility of a democratic legislature representing the peoples of the Europe.edmundintokyo said:See what I mean, not only are a bunch of people in the UK opposed to specific steps to a more democratic EU, a lot of them believe in a pop-sociological theory according to which it's a priori impossible.
That is enough to dispose of the argument, without the necessity to consider the Commission's monopoly on the proposal of legislation (TFEU, arts 289(1) & 294(2), or the Byzantine and secretive practices of the Council of Ministers, etc.
A reasonable answer to that is "Yes, to some extent, but not enough to prevent it being a functioning democracy". That is a reasonably achievable objective for the EU as well. Direct election of the Commission President would be a good start.
No surprise that 'British Future' don't want Farage to play a role in the out campaign. I Give this as much credibility as their debunked analysis of ethnic voting patterns.0 -
You're argument that th EU parliament is uniquely unrepresentative is absurd. All systems have weaknesses. Ours is arguably far worse.Life_ina_market_town said:
Our electoral system returns representatives for constituencies of equivalent population. Although I happen to have voted for the winner in my constituency, I would be represented by her whether or not I had voted for her, and whether or not I supported her party (which I do not). It follows every UKIP voter is represented in the House of Commons. An analogous situation to the way the European Parliament works would be if Northern Ireland had, say, five times more constituencies in the House of Commons than it does now, which would rightly be seen as anti-democratic and absurd.Jonathan said:Not to mention more than 3million UKIP voters represented by a single MP.
0 -
The House of Representatives is certainly apportioned according to population. The disparity in the Electoral College results from the fact that even the smallest state must have three representatives (1 Congressman + 2 Senators).Jonathan said:The electoral college is hardly a great example. 700k voters per elector in CAL vs under 200k in WYO
0 -
Stella speaking with passion. She looks like she really wants the job, and knows what she wants to do.0
-
The personal ratings are interesting, but I think fairly explicable.
Sturgeon and Farage are completely identified (outside Scotland at least) with a single cause. Respondents are assuming Sturgeon will say anything to further her aim of dissolving the Union (likewise Farage on leaving th EU) hence their comments aren't trustworthy in and of themselves.
However the Tories have basically said "we don't know, let's see what we can renegotiate) which strikes the non committed as a very reasonable position.
Blair is blair, Clegg is a toe rag, and the GBP saw through Harman years ago0 -
Can you give me an example of any democratic system where (1) votes for the lower house of the legislature in some areas of the jurisdiction which it is said to represent are worth 12 times more than votes cast in other areas, and (2) that the lower house cannot even propose legislation? I think not.Jonathan said:You're argument that th EU parliament is uniquely unrepresentative is absurd. All systems have weaknesses. Ours is arguably far worse.
0 -
I don't really want to get sucked in to a debate, but the idea of a European demos as a basis for a European democracy is quite a nuanced one. I think it's a useful way of describing the sort of common aims and sense of shared identity necessary to make the EU work. What you might say is that the EU desires to form that common identity more than rely on a pre-existing one. That is right as far as it goes, but I am increasingly convinced that the EU is failing on that measure. Since the crash we have seen a measure of resentment across the EU and I think it is feasible to suggest that the EU is doing more harm than good on this score when it comes to periphery and indeed the UK.0
-
In a nutshell.Charles said:The personal ratings are interesting, but I think fairly explicable.
Sturgeon and Farage are completely identified (outside Scotland at least) with a single cause. Respondents are assuming Sturgeon will say anything to further her aim of dissolving the Union (likewise Farage on leaving th EU) hence their comments aren't trustworthy in and of themselves.
However the Tories have basically said "we don't know, let's see what we can renegotiate) which strikes the non committed as a very reasonable position.
Blair is blair, Clegg is a toe rag, and the GBP saw through Harman years ago0 -
With leaders like her Cammo doesn't have to worry.SandyRentool said:Stella speaking with passion. She looks like she really wants the job, and knows what she wants to do.
0 -
Tories have no position because they are clueless, Cameron will come back waving the piece of paper claiming they have actually got something. They have no interest in getting better deal for the people it is purely a cosmetic exercise to promote themselves. Europe will tell them to F Off and wrap the merde up in a big bow which Cameron will try to sell as a victory.Charles said:The personal ratings are interesting, but I think fairly explicable.
Sturgeon and Farage are completely identified (outside Scotland at least) with a single cause. Respondents are assuming Sturgeon will say anything to further her aim of dissolving the Union (likewise Farage on leaving th EU) hence their comments aren't trustworthy in and of themselves.
However the Tories have basically said "we don't know, let's see what we can renegotiate) which strikes the non committed as a very reasonable position.
Blair is blair, Clegg is a toe rag, and the GBP saw through Harman years ago0 -
The U.S. system is uniquely designed to both represent the will of the people and temper it vs the will of states (particularly in the original constitution before direct election of senators). It is hardly the most 'representative-democratic' and I very much doubt was designed to be such. It attempts to give equal or near equal weight to various interests (government vs people, minority vs majority, states vs union, leadership vs bipartisanship, urban vs rural etc) as possible whilst still creating a (in theory) functioning system. It's a very commendable system, but flawed. But then as has been pointed out, all systems have flaws.
Although I have a lot against the EU system I think the democratic elements are moving in the right direction. The problem is that the EU has built up this wonky, technocratic system that nobody except the most fervent EU-watcher fully understands. The legislative process is positively labyrinthine in its complexity. And involves, as one would expect from the EU, bureaucratic involvement every step of the way.
If a pan-European 'democracy' is to fully emerge it must strip itself back to basics so that its electorate can be more fully informed of the process, what is at stake and what their part in it is. This will never happen under the current system because there are too many interested parties with too much to lose.0 -
The corruption in the EU makes FIFA look like rank beginners..100 Billion unaccounted for...that is a massive amount of austerity for the poor people in Erope0
-
Why is Diane Abbott, a woman on record as making racist comments, being used by the BBC to comment on community relations?0
-
Yes especially nice that we are all "In it Together", luckily the elite, bankers and politicians are well shielded as their wallets bulge ever larger whilst they make those nasty poor people that caused it stump up for all the "austerity".richardDodd said:The corruption in the EU makes FIFA look like rank beginners..100 Billion unaccounted for...that is a massive amount of austerity for the poor people in Erope
0 -
A Conservative PM coming back from Europe waving a piece of paper is nothing new. They have form on this matter.malcolmg said:
Tories have no position because they are clueless, Cameron will come back waving the piece of paper claiming they have actually got something. They have no interest in getting better deal for the people it is purely a cosmetic exercise to promote themselves. Europe will tell them to F Off and wrap the merde up in a big bow which Cameron will try to sell as a victory.Charles said:The personal ratings are interesting, but I think fairly explicable.
Sturgeon and Farage are completely identified (outside Scotland at least) with a single cause. Respondents are assuming Sturgeon will say anything to further her aim of dissolving the Union (likewise Farage on leaving th EU) hence their comments aren't trustworthy in and of themselves.
However the Tories have basically said "we don't know, let's see what we can renegotiate) which strikes the non committed as a very reasonable position.
Blair is blair, Clegg is a toe rag, and the GBP saw through Harman years ago
Nonetheless, I am on Cameron's side on this one. I will support IN whatever the circumstances. WE need to enlarge the EU and , yes, one day also include Russia.
We need peace, not war ! We have had peace. in the main, now for 70 years. The longest ever.0 -
Edmundintokyo,edmundintokyo said:
See what I mean, not only are a bunch of people in the UK opposed to specific steps to a more democratic EU, a lot of them believe in a pop-sociological theory according to which it's a priori impossible.JEO said:The idea of a more democratic EU does not work because there is no such thing as an EU demos. There would be no more solidarity and sense of shared nationhood between the different European nations than there would be between the different peoples of Yugoslavia when that state attempted to be democratic. And they at least had a majority mother tongue language.
There's nothing 'pop' about it: there is the clear evidence that the different peoples of Europe do not feel a sense of shared identity. The battles between northern and southern nations over austerity versus further loans reveal that quite starkly. It is not impossible for a new demos to be formed, but it would likely take more than a century, and would have to happen organically.
As a suggestion, it might be helpful if your posts were less sneering towards individuals that disagree with you. For me, that is the issue a lot of pro-EU people have: they treat eurosceptics as if we simply are incapable of an in-depth understanding of these matters.0 -
The Cons deserved their punishments in Scotland as they did in England in 1997. But what went beyond that was how the Labour party successfully and repeatedly tarnished the Conservative name in Scotland. To the point it was a dirty word. They tainted it so bad, that by only been seen to stand shoulder shoulder with the Tories with the referendum campaign seems to have poisoned them as well.
Reap what you have sowed couldnt have ever been more appropriate.
0 -
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-33038201
Philip Hammond's bottom line is now "treaty change would be needed to secure the changes the PM wants to achieve ahead of the referendum, including restricting EU migrants' welfare entitlement."
Note restricted movement across borders have been quietly dropped. I thought benefit cuts could be done right now as long as other EU citizens were not discriminated against.
Tories are saying that certain benefits will only be based on contributions put in. That's fine !
If it is such a good idea why restrict it to EU citizens, why not Brits ?
0 -
Rafal Trzaskowski, Poland's secretary of state for European affairs, said those who would vote in the UK referendum must be told the truth about the consequences of leaving the EU.
He told the Observer: "If you say you can leave and still be part of the internal market and keep your second houses, that you will still be free to travel, that there will be no customs duties, and so on and so forth - but that you will not have to accept free movement of workers, and you will not pay into the EU budget, of course people will vote to leave, but this is simply not true," he said.
"You cannot keep all the goodies and forget about the costs. Britain will still have to pay into the EU budget, just as the Swiss and Norwegians do," he added.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-330382010 -
Seldom?TheScreamingEagles said:
Kippers always wrong, the EU publish their accounts. http://bit.ly/1JA6IUyMikeK said:Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage Jun 5
Forty years ago the British people voted for a Common Market. The label on the tin was wrong.
Not only wrong, a lie! The sort of BIG LIE that Hitler used to come up with (pre war) and was believed by the mischlings ruling Britain and France. Naturally Germany and a Gaulist France were and are the leaders and promotors of the undemocratic EU. The BIG LIE is second nature to them.
I agree with @Moses that the EU is as corrupt as FIFA, probably more so as it never publishes it's accounts and hence it's accountabilty.
The issue is that they are seldom signed off by the auditors.
Now UKIP = FIFA?
Nigel Farage has shifted ground on an offer to allow an independent audit of his spending of European parliamentary allowances, denying he ever accepted the suggestion.
In an interview with the Guardian, the Ukip leader instead claims it would be wrong for him to be singled out for a spending audit as it would put him in a different position to every other British MEP.
http://bit.ly/1gYtsw90 -
There is indeed much delicious irony in what's happened to Labour in Scotland...notme said:
The Cons deserved their punishments in Scotland as they did in England in 1997. But what went beyond that was how the Labour party successfully and repeatedly tarnished the Conservative name in Scotland. To the point it was a dirty word. They tainted it so bad, that by only been seen to stand shoulder shoulder with the Tories with the referendum campaign seems to have poisoned them as well.
Reap what you have sowed couldnt have ever been more appropriate.
0 -
Some would say that's more due to the USA having some very large guns.surbiton said:
A Conservative PM coming back from Europe waving a piece of paper is nothing new. They have form on this matter.malcolmg said:
Tories have no position because they are clueless, Cameron will come back waving the piece of paper claiming they have actually got something. They have no interest in getting better deal for the people it is purely a cosmetic exercise to promote themselves. Europe will tell them to F Off and wrap the merde up in a big bow which Cameron will try to sell as a victory.Charles said:The personal ratings are interesting, but I think fairly explicable.
Sturgeon and Farage are completely identified (outside Scotland at least) with a single cause. Respondents are assuming Sturgeon will say anything to further her aim of dissolving the Union (likewise Farage on leaving th EU) hence their comments aren't trustworthy in and of themselves.
However the Tories have basically said "we don't know, let's see what we can renegotiate) which strikes the non committed as a very reasonable position.
Blair is blair, Clegg is a toe rag, and the GBP saw through Harman years ago
Nonetheless, I am on Cameron's side on this one. I will support IN whatever the circumstances. WE need to enlarge the EU and , yes, one day also include Russia.
We need peace, not war ! We have had peace. in the main, now for 70 years. The longest ever.0 -
The US should move to one person one vote for the Presidency. They do it for Senators !Life_ina_market_town said:
The House of Representatives is certainly apportioned according to population. The disparity in the Electoral College results from the fact that even the smallest state must have three representatives (1 Congressman + 2 Senators).Jonathan said:The electoral college is hardly a great example. 700k voters per elector in CAL vs under 200k in WYO
The rights of the smaller states are protected by the Senate being formed with 2 from each State. A brilliant idea from the founding fathers. Check and balance !0 -
France and Germany not quibbling over Alsace has nothing to do with how big the US guns are. The US guns have done sweet FA in the Middle East. Almost certainly contributed to it. Belgium could divide as did Czechoslavakia but because of EU protection [ or imminent membership all went peacefully ]. As will happen when Scotland leaves.notme said:
Some would say that's more due to the USA having some very large guns.surbiton said:
A Conservative PM coming back from Europe waving a piece of paper is nothing new. They have form on this matter.malcolmg said:
Tories have no position because they are clueless, Cameron will come back waving the piece of paper claiming they have actually got something. They have no interest in getting better deal for the people it is purely a cosmetic exercise to promote themselves. Europe will tell them to F Off and wrap the merde up in a big bow which Cameron will try to sell as a victory.Charles said:The personal ratings are interesting, but I think fairly explicable.
Sturgeon and Farage are completely identified (outside Scotland at least) with a single cause. Respondents are assuming Sturgeon will say anything to further her aim of dissolving the Union (likewise Farage on leaving th EU) hence their comments aren't trustworthy in and of themselves.
However the Tories have basically said "we don't know, let's see what we can renegotiate) which strikes the non committed as a very reasonable position.
Blair is blair, Clegg is a toe rag, and the GBP saw through Harman years ago
Nonetheless, I am on Cameron's side on this one. I will support IN whatever the circumstances. WE need to enlarge the EU and , yes, one day also include Russia.
We need peace, not war ! We have had peace. in the main, now for 70 years. The longest ever.0 -
As I've said before, the perfect figurehead for OUT would be Ed Balls - trained economist, political bruiser, sneakingly regarded by many on the right, non-Blairite and okay with the Left. I did try calling him to ask him to stand, but I couldn't get through. So if anyone else runs into him...0
-
Contrary to some of the comments below I thought Kendall was good on Marr.0
-
Though i would never vote for her because I am a partisan, however she is the only one who would make me consider it. She is a danger to the Tories.williamglenn said:Contrary to some of the comments below I thought Kendall was good on Marr.
0 -
It's funny: pretty much the only thing the EU does, which can be regarded as better and more transparent than is done in the UK, is the work of the Court of Auditors and the work they do auditing the budget. (Wait: hold your horses before you indignantly reply, whoever you are...)nigel4england said:
Seldom?TheScreamingEagles said:
Kippers always wrong, the EU publish their accounts. http://bit.ly/1JA6IUyMikeK said:Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage Jun 5
Forty years ago the British people voted for a Common Market. The label on the tin was wrong.
Not only wrong, a lie! The sort of BIG LIE that Hitler used to come up with (pre war) and was believed by the mischlings ruling Britain and France. Naturally Germany and a Gaulist France were and are the leaders and promotors of the undemocratic EU. The BIG LIE is second nature to them.
I agree with @Moses that the EU is as corrupt as FIFA, probably more so as it never publishes it's accounts and hence it's accountabilty.
The issue is that they are seldom signed off by the auditors.
Now UKIP = FIFA?
Nigel Farage has shifted ground on an offer to allow an independent audit of his spending of European parliamentary allowances, denying he ever accepted the suggestion.
In an interview with the Guardian, the Ukip leader instead claims it would be wrong for him to be singled out for a spending audit as it would put him in a different position to every other British MEP.
http://bit.ly/1gYtsw9
The Court of Auditors - like any external company doing an audit - takes a sample of payments (i.e. things going in and out of the bank account) and makes sure they match what they are supposed to be, and that they are properly documented, and that match policy.
In doing this, as with every company or country, they find that certain payments have not been properly documented, or were not approved in the proscribed manner. Each year, around 4% of EU payments IIRC fail this test. The bulk of these issues are when payments are delegated to EU members (particularly Romania, IIRC), and are not documented properly.
As the CoA notes, this does not mean that every one of the c. 4% of payments is fraudulent: sometimes it will simply be that there is missing paperwork.
This does not mean that we should be handing over money to the EU to spend on our behalf (obviously). But I really think the "EU accounts not signed off by auditors" meme is tired and wildly innacurate.0 -
It's like Labour have learned absolutely nothing from their recent humiliation.numbertwelve said:Kendall stilted and robotic on Marr. Rather surprised.
Refusing to answer basic, simple questions will get them nowhere. The car crash over in-work benefits for EU migrants was embarrassing to watch. And I say that as someone who loves seeing Labour humiliation.0 -
Nick, the composition of the Senate is deliberate. Even in 1776, New York and Pennsylvania would have swallowed up Rhode Island or Delaware. The founding fathers were indeed correct to give the smaller states that protection having the HoR elected through population.NickPalmer said:
Precisely the same is true of the United States - the Senate is ludicrously disproportionate with respect to the size of its equally-represented states (indeed much more so than the EU). Do you consider the United States to be undemocratic?Life_ina_market_town said:
A democratic EU is for all intents and purposes an impossibility, quite independent of any "pop-sociological theory". At present, a vote in Malta for the European Parliament is worth twelve times as much as a vote in Germany. Hence the German Federal Constitutional Court has held the European Parliament is not representative of the peoples of Europe, but of the member states of the EU (Re Ratification of the Lisbon Treaty [2010] 3 CMLR 13, 348-350). Given that the small countries have a veto on changing this (see article 48 of the Treaty on the European Union) and there is no realistic prospect that they will agree to such an amendment, there is no realistic possibility of a democratic legislature representing the peoples of the Europe.edmundintokyo said:See what I mean, not only are a bunch of people in the UK opposed to specific steps to a more democratic EU, a lot of them believe in a pop-sociological theory according to which it's a priori impossible.
That is enough to dispose of the argument, without the necessity to consider the Commission's monopoly on the proposal of legislation (TFEU, arts 289(1) & 294(2), or the Byzantine and secretive practices of the Council of Ministers, etc.
A reasonable answer to that is "Yes, to some extent, but not enough to prevent it being a functioning democracy". That is a reasonably achievable objective for the EU as well. Direct election of the Commission President would be a good start.
The Electoral College was a step too far. I think the mistrust was such then that that was necessary. Today it should be universal franchise.
The EC actually distorts US democracy. A hugely disproportionate time during the Presidential election is spent on OH, PA, FL and MI. The rest hardly receives a cursory glance. Be it MT or WY or even. NY or CA0 -
@SunPolitics: Worried Labour MPs plot to halt Burnham http://t.co/Scq9k5jdCp http://t.co/LVqugXb9AC
Nooooooooooooooo!
@JGForsyth: Tories regard Burnham / Watson as their Labour dream ticket, think it would be v easy to run against ‘Len’s boys’ http://t.co/t61y2zHmTE0 -
Yes, why not leave? Britain only needs the IMF and their money when Labour are in power.foxinsoxuk said:
I think that the British taxpayers exposure to the Greek financial crisis comes from our involvement in the IMF rather than in the EU. Are you proposing that we leave the IMF too?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jonathan, you'd welcome British taxes propping up spendthrift Greeks?
During the Conservative good times it just costs us in loans to overseas basket cases.
Leaving would kick away one of the left's economic crutches.0 -
This site's has loads of people bitching about Scotland, and a key part of the governing party's victory was about what would happen if their representatives were involved in the government of the UK. Whether or not Scottish independence is advisable, I think UK democracy is still OK.JEO said:
Edmundintokyo,edmundintokyo said:
See what I mean, not only are a bunch of people in the UK opposed to specific steps to a more democratic EU, a lot of them believe in a pop-sociological theory according to which it's a priori impossible.JEO said:The idea of a more democratic EU does not work because there is no such thing as an EU demos. There would be no more solidarity and sense of shared nationhood between the different European nations than there would be between the different peoples of Yugoslavia when that state attempted to be democratic. And they at least had a majority mother tongue language.
There's nothing 'pop' about it: there is the clear evidence that the different peoples of Europe do not feel a sense of shared identity. The battles between northern and southern nations over austerity versus further loans reveal that quite starkly. It is not impossible for a new demos to be formed, but it would likely take more than a century, and would have to happen organically.
As a suggestion, it might be helpful if your posts were less sneering towards individuals that disagree with you. For me, that is the issue a lot of pro-EU people have: they treat eurosceptics as if we simply are incapable of an in-depth understanding of these matters.0 -
I'm more interested in how Morrison's has somehow become "distinguished" as I am unaware of it ever being distinguished academically or sportingly in it's entire history.calum said:
A little Englander speaks, I can live with the first insult, but blaming the SNP for purging cricket from the Morrison's curriculum is going to far. Anyway for anyone interested in why this distinguished public school is dropping cricket here's the background:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/11655837/Stumped-teachers-drop-cricket-due-to-complex-rules-and-wet-weather.html0 -
There is always a measure of resentment towards any established instituiton, cf. Scotland and the UK for a fairly drastic example. I think you understimate the degree of identification with the EU in most EU countries - exemplified, for instance, by the fact that despite everything the idea of leaving the Euro is regarded as dreadful by most Greek voters across the political spectrum.TheWhiteRabbit said:I don't really want to get sucked in to a debate, but the idea of a European demos as a basis for a European democracy is quite a nuanced one. I think it's a useful way of describing the sort of common aims and sense of shared identity necessary to make the EU work...Since the crash we have seen a measure of resentment across the EU and I think it is feasible to suggest that the EU is doing more harm than good on this score when it comes to periphery and indeed the UK.
It would in turn be helpful if you didn't put forward your opinions as established facts. The airy assertion that a sense of shared identity doesn't exist in Europe and is unlikely to do so for a century is an opinion, not a fact. The only evidence you give is disagreement over austerity, which is also present in the UK.JEO said:
Edmundintokyo,
There's nothing 'pop' about it: there is the clear evidence that the different peoples of Europe do not feel a sense of shared identity. The battles between northern and southern nations over austerity versus further loans reveal that quite starkly. It is not impossible for a new demos to be formed, but it would likely take more than a century, and would have to happen organically.
As a suggestion, it might be helpful if your posts were less sneering towards individuals that disagree with you. For me, that is the issue a lot of pro-EU people have: they treat eurosceptics as if we simply are incapable of an in-depth understanding of these matters.
Clearly one can give evidence by pointing to extremes - the average Greek farmer probably feels little in common with the average London banker. But British eurosceptics are unusual in thinking that the sense of common identity doesn't exist at all. It exists to a lesser extent than in most established countries; it has gradually developed since the 1950s, and has IMO gathered speed in recent years. Whether that's a good thing is something about which reasonable people can disagree, as well as whether it's inevitable. Personally I think it is, mainly because of free movement, which younger people are using to a considerable extent: a young Dane feels it's almost as viable an option to go and live permanently in Germany or Britain as to move to another part of Denmark: the differences in lifestyle and culture between Copenhagen and Berlin or London are actually smaller than between Copenhagen and rural Jutland.
0 -
Just watching Marr on iplayer. Has Yvette Cooper really made a speech saying that she knows how to stand up for people because as head prefect she organised a strike for someone who wasnt allowed to wear white socks???0
-
JEO said:
Edmundintokyo,edmundintokyo said:
See what I mean, not only are a bunch of people in the UK opposed to specific steps to a more democratic EU, a lot of them believe in a pop-sociological theory according to which it's a priori impossible.JEO said:The idea of a more democratic EU does not work because there is no such thing as an EU demos. There would be no more solidarity and sense of shared nationhood between the different European nations than there would be between the different peoples of Yugoslavia when that state attempted to be democratic. And they at least had a majority mother tongue language.
There's nothing 'pop' about it: there is the clear evidence that the different peoples of Europe do not feel a sense of shared identity. The battles between northern and southern nations over austerity versus further loans reveal that quite starkly. It is not impossible for a new demos to be formed, but it would likely take more than a century, and would have to happen organically.
As a suggestion, it might be helpful if your posts were less sneering towards individuals that disagree with you. For me, that is the issue a lot of pro-EU people have: they treat eurosceptics as if we simply are incapable of an in-depth understanding of these matters.
I'm not sure if I really buy this. If a brand is so incapable of defending itself from tarnishment, is it much of a brand in the first place?notme said:
The Cons deserved their punishments in Scotland as they did in England in 1997. But what went beyond that was how the Labour party successfully and repeatedly tarnished the Conservative name in Scotland. To the point it was a dirty word. They tainted it so bad, that by only been seen to stand shoulder shoulder with the Tories with the referendum campaign seems to have poisoned them as well.
Reap what you have sowed couldnt have ever been more appropriate.
Regardless of whether it's justified or not, there was and is in Scotland a deep antipathy to Thatcherism rather than Conservatism per se; the SCons suffered by association and Labour opportunistically took advantage. The wheels turn and now the SNP opportunistically takes advantage of Labour's association with the Tories. No doubt they also take some satisfaction from the jibe 'Tartan Tories' being defused for evermore.
With every passing day it looks like the Labour/SLab decision not to run a separate Indy referendum campaign was one of the major strategic blunders of the last decade.0 -
This zealous commitment to the absorption of sovereign nations into the European Union makes Europhiles thoroughly unattractive. The people and government of the Russian Federation have absolutely no interest in joining the European Union, and they are not destined to do so either. The reason there has generally been an absence of war in mainland Europe since 1945 was the fact that the two atomic alliances, NATO and the Warsaw Pact, knew it would be certain death. The current conflict in Ukraine is between former members of the latter, which disintegrated at the end of the Cold War. Peace had very little to do with the EU. Did the chance of Britain making war against the democratic and capitalist Federal German Republic suddenly drop when we entered the Common Market in 1973? The proposition only needs to be stated to reveal its absurdity.surbiton said:Nonetheless, I am on Cameron's side on this one. I will support IN whatever the circumstances. WE need to enlarge the EU and , yes, one day also include Russia.
We need peace, not war ! We have had peace. in the main, now for 70 years. The longest ever.0 -
Must be a Tory smear by those who want to anticipate a 'Labour led by posh girls' narrative.notme said:Just watching Marr on iplayer. Has Yvette Cooper really made a speech saying that she knows how to stand up for people because as head prefect she organised a strike for someone who wasnt allowed to wear white socks???
0 -
"free movement of labour, not free movement of benefits" Liz Kendall. A very good line. One the PM should run with...
0 -
Been plenty of conflicts in Europe since WWII, the commonality has been an ethnic group being denied political representation or indeed their own country. Ironically it was the US which insisted that the artificial borders of the defunct Soviet Union and Yugoslavia were sacrosanct thus guaranteeing conflict.notme said:
Some would say that's more due to the USA having some very large guns.surbiton said:
A Conservative PM coming back from Europe waving a piece of paper is nothing new. They have form on this matter.malcolmg said:
Tories have no position because they are clueless, Cameron will come back waving the piece of paper claiming they have actually got something. They have no interest in getting better deal for the people it is purely a cosmetic exercise to promote themselves. Europe will tell them to F Off and wrap the merde up in a big bow which Cameron will try to sell as a victory.Charles said:The personal ratings are interesting, but I think fairly explicable.
Sturgeon and Farage are completely identified (outside Scotland at least) with a single cause. Respondents are assuming Sturgeon will say anything to further her aim of dissolving the Union (likewise Farage on leaving th EU) hence their comments aren't trustworthy in and of themselves.
However the Tories have basically said "we don't know, let's see what we can renegotiate) which strikes the non committed as a very reasonable position.
Blair is blair, Clegg is a toe rag, and the GBP saw through Harman years ago
Nonetheless, I am on Cameron's side on this one. I will support IN whatever the circumstances. WE need to enlarge the EU and , yes, one day also include Russia.
We need peace, not war ! We have had peace. in the main, now for 70 years. The longest ever.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2015/02/20/how-the-badinter-commission-on-yugoslavia-laid-the-roots-for-crimeas-secession-from-ukraine/0 -
Nice jokeedmundintokyo said:
This site's has loads of people bitching about Scotland, and a key part of the governing party's victory was about what would happen if their representatives were involved in the government of the UK. Whether or not Scottish independence is advisable, I think UK democracy is still OK.JEO said:
Edmundintokyo,edmundintokyo said:
See what I mean, not only are a bunch of people in the UK opposed to specific steps to a more democratic EU, a lot of them believe in a pop-sociological theory according to which it's a priori impossible.JEO said:The idea of a more democratic EU does not work because there is no such thing as an EU demos. There would be no more solidarity and sense of shared nationhood between the different European nations than there would be between the different peoples of Yugoslavia when that state attempted to be democratic. And they at least had a majority mother tongue language.
There's nothing 'pop' about it: there is the clear evidence that the different peoples of Europe do not feel a sense of shared identity. The battles between northern and southern nations over austerity versus further loans reveal that quite starkly. It is not impossible for a new demos to be formed, but it would likely take more than a century, and would have to happen organically.
As a suggestion, it might be helpful if your posts were less sneering towards individuals that disagree with you. For me, that is the issue a lot of pro-EU people have: they treat eurosceptics as if we simply are incapable of an in-depth understanding of these matters.0 -
Like the plight of the Sudeten Germans in the 1930s?FalseFlag said:Been plenty of conflicts in Europe since WWII, the commonality has been an ethnic group being denied political representation or indeed their own country. Ironically it was the US which insisted that the artificial borders of the defunct Soviet Union and Yugoslavia were sacrosanct thus guaranteeing conflict.
0 -
A bit of googling. It is an interview given to the Mirror.Stark_Dawning said:
Must be a Tory smear by those who want to anticipate a 'Labour led by posh girls' narrative.notme said:Just watching Marr on iplayer. Has Yvette Cooper really made a speech saying that she knows how to stand up for people because as head prefect she organised a strike for someone who wasnt allowed to wear white socks???
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/yvette-cooper-wanted-tap-dancer-58362220 -
When were they last signed off then? And how much does that 4% amount to?rcs1000 said:
It's funny: pretty much the only thing the EU does, which can be regarded as better and more transparent than is done in the UK, is the work of the Court of Auditors and the work they do auditing the budget. (Wait: hold your horses before you indignantly reply, whoever you are...)nigel4england said:
Seldom?TheScreamingEagles said:
Kippers always wrong, the EU publish their accounts. http://bit.ly/1JA6IUyMikeK said:Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage Jun 5
Forty years ago the British people voted for a Common Market. The label on the tin was wrong.
Not only wrong, a lie! The sort of BIG LIE that Hitler used to come up with (pre war) and was believed by the mischlings ruling Britain and France. Naturally Germany and a Gaulist France were and are the leaders and promotors of the undemocratic EU. The BIG LIE is second nature to them.
I agree with @Moses that the EU is as corrupt as FIFA, probably more so as it never publishes it's accounts and hence it's accountabilty.
The issue is that they are seldom signed off by the auditors.
Now UKIP = FIFA?
Nigel Farage has shifted ground on an offer to allow an independent audit of his spending of European parliamentary allowances, denying he ever accepted the suggestion.
In an interview with the Guardian, the Ukip leader instead claims it would be wrong for him to be singled out for a spending audit as it would put him in a different position to every other British MEP.
http://bit.ly/1gYtsw9
The Court of Auditors - like any external company doing an audit - takes a sample of payments (i.e. things going in and out of the bank account) and makes sure they match what they are supposed to be, and that they are properly documented, and that match policy.
In doing this, as with every company or country, they find that certain payments have not been properly documented, or were not approved in the proscribed manner. Each year, around 4% of EU payments IIRC fail this test. The bulk of these issues are when payments are delegated to EU members (particularly Romania, IIRC), and are not documented properly.
As the CoA notes, this does not mean that every one of the c. 4% of payments is fraudulent: sometimes it will simply be that there is missing paperwork.
This does not mean that we should be handing over money to the EU to spend on our behalf (obviously). But I really think the "EU accounts not signed off by auditors" meme is tired and wildly innacurate.0 -
Exactly Versailles guaranteed conflict by denying Germans self determination giving Hitler both purpose and support.Life_ina_market_town said:
Like the plight of the Sudeten Germans in the 1930s?FalseFlag said:Been plenty of conflicts in Europe since WWII, the commonality has been an ethnic group being denied political representation or indeed their own country. Ironically it was the US which insisted that the artificial borders of the defunct Soviet Union and Yugoslavia were sacrosanct thus guaranteeing conflict.
0 -
I think you're underestimating the geopolitical importance of anchoring the FRG in the Western camp during the Cold War. Without the early phase of the EU project it's easy to imagine alternative histories in which the idea of Britain joining a peaceful Common Market in 1973 were equally absurd.Life_ina_market_town said:
This zealous commitment to the absorption of sovereign nations into the European Union makes Europhiles thoroughly unattractive. The people and government of the Russian Federation have absolutely no interest in joining the European Union, and they are not destined to do so either. The reason there has generally been an absence of war in mainland Europe since 1945 was the fact that the two atomic alliances, NATO and the Warsaw Pact, knew it would be certain death. The current conflict in Ukraine is between former members of the latter, which disintegrated at the end of the Cold War. Peace had very little to do with the EU. Did the chance of Britain making war against the democratic and capitalist Federal German Republic suddenly drop when we entered the Common Market in 1973? The proposition only needs to be stated to reveal its absurdity.surbiton said:Nonetheless, I am on Cameron's side on this one. I will support IN whatever the circumstances. WE need to enlarge the EU and , yes, one day also include Russia.
We need peace, not war ! We have had peace. in the main, now for 70 years. The longest ever.0 -
There are a good few of these extremely dodgy types on here for sure, it is ironic that people so bigoted can come out with such tripe and not see how funny it is.calum said:
I think whatever the EU referendum result, if Cameron can hold the Tory party together that will likely go down as his greatest achievement. Already cracks are starting to appear, not only in the Tory party but the right wing MSM.foxinsoxuk said:
The Tory party splitting over Europe? What's not to like?edmundintokyo said:
Yes, I don't think she could serve under Cameron, because he'd be saying his "renegotiation" was the bee's knees and she'd be saying it was a bit rubbish.OldKingCole said:
The top isn’t, generally speaking. Woudn’t she have to leave her (semi) Cabinet job?edmundintokyo said:
It would improve her standing in the party, the grass-roots are BOO.OldKingCole said:
Won’t do anything which will damage her standing in the `Party. IMHO, anywayedmundintokyo said:Got it, Priti Patel.
But in the mean time she'd be the de-facto faction leader of the large part of the Conservative Party that's currently having to make do with David Davis. That would probably be enough to get her into the run-off to succeed Cameron, and she'd be well placed to win the membership vote. Even if somebody else followed Cameron they'd probably want to give her a bigger job than she'd have had otherwise, to get her side of the party back in the tent.
And that's the worst-case scenario, which assumes "out" lose the referendum. If they win she could go directly to Number 10.
But the problem is, what if she jumps, then Boris or some other big beast jumps on top of her?
Casting my eye over last nights thread I came across this post:
" We are just seeing the Scottish Nazi Party in their real colours. I see that the cultural purging of Scotland is also getting up a head of steam, with cricket being dropped by one of Scotland's most distinguished schools, Morrison's Academy. "
A little Englander speaks, I can live with the first insult, but blaming the SNP for purging cricket from the Morrison's curriculum is going to far. Anyway for anyone interested in why this distinguished public school is dropping cricket here's the background:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/11655837/Stumped-teachers-drop-cricket-due-to-complex-rules-and-wet-weather.html0 -
You should be called @Stark_Raving if you think Balls would be the ideal leader for the OUT campaign.Stark_Dawning said:As I've said before, the perfect figurehead for OUT would be Ed Balls - trained economist, political bruiser, sneakingly regarded by many on the right, non-Blairite and okay with the Left. I did try calling him to ask him to stand, but I couldn't get through. So if anyone else runs into him...
0 -
But you would say that, wouldn't you.rcs1000 said:
It's funny: pretty much the only thing the EU does, which can be regarded as better and more transparent than is done in the UK, is the work of the Court of Auditors and the work they do auditing the budget. (Wait: hold your horses before you indignantly reply, whoever you are...)nigel4england said:
Seldom?TheScreamingEagles said:
Kippers always wrong, the EU publish their accounts. http://bit.ly/1JA6IUyMikeK said:Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage Jun 5
Forty years ago the British people voted for a Common Market. The label on the tin was wrong.
Not only wrong, a lie! The sort of BIG LIE that Hitler used to come up with (pre war) and was believed by the mischlings ruling Britain and France. Naturally Germany and a Gaulist France were and are the leaders and promotors of the undemocratic EU. The BIG LIE is second nature to them.
I agree with @Moses that the EU is as corrupt as FIFA, probably more so as it never publishes it's accounts and hence it's accountabilty.
The issue is that they are seldom signed off by the auditors.
Now UKIP = FIFA?
Nigel Farage has shifted ground on an offer to allow an independent audit of his spending of European parliamentary allowances, denying he ever accepted the suggestion.
In an interview with the Guardian, the Ukip leader instead claims it would be wrong for him to be singled out for a spending audit as it would put him in a different position to every other British MEP.
http://bit.ly/1gYtsw9
The Court of Auditors - like any external company doing an audit - takes a sample of payments (i.e. things going in and out of the bank account) and makes sure they match what they are supposed to be, and that they are properly documented, and that match policy.
In doing this, as with every company or country, they find that certain payments have not been properly documented, or were not approved in the proscribed manner. Each year, around 4% of EU payments IIRC fail this test. The bulk of these issues are when payments are delegated to EU members (particularly Romania, IIRC), and are not documented properly.
As the CoA notes, this does not mean that every one of the c. 4% of payments is fraudulent: sometimes it will simply be that there is missing paperwork.
This does not mean that we should be handing over money to the EU to spend on our behalf (obviously). But I really think the "EU accounts not signed off by auditors" meme is tired and wildly innacurate.
0 -
Quite. Far from not answering the question, she came up with the best soundbite in support of the idea while at the same time attacking David Cameron for diminishing the terms of the debate.notme said:"free movement of labour, not free movement of benefits" Liz Kendall. A very good line. One the PM should run with...
0 -
Boris clearly offers the best chance for an Out win if he leads the Out campaign as this poll shows, with Farage probably the best result for Out is a reasonably close In (though ironically that may be the best result for UKIP)0
-
Astronomer Royal: If we find aliens, they will be machines
Prof Lord Rees told the Cheltenham Science Festival the first contact with aliens will be through robots
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/11657267/Astronomer-Royal-If-we-find-aliens-they-will-be-machines.html?WT.mc_id=e_DM23177&WT.tsrc=email&etype=Edi_FAM_New&utm_source=email&utm_medium=Edi_FAM_New_2015_06_07&utm_campaign=DM23177
Something like TSE then. 0 -
FPT
How would creating a separate Labour Party in Scotland magically change Labour's fortune ?TCPoliticalBetting said:Previous thread. The elephant in the room for Labour is how are they going to win all the lost seats in Scotland, the country where they suffered their biggest defeat losing 98% of their seats.
That Guardian article sums it up with .....what they are not going to do..... Just clueless.
"Burnham has clarified his position on having a separate Scottish Labour party and said he is opposed to the idea. At one point earlier in the campaign he suggested he was open to the suggestion. Cooper also said she was opposed to the proposal, and Kendall and Mary Creagh suggested having a separate party was not the solution to Labour’s problems in Scotland."
Surely, policies is what is needed.
The reason Labour lost as did every other Party was because the Scottish people [ OK half of them ] are on a mission. They want an independent Scotland. They will send representatives to Westminster to look after Scotland's interests - that is paramount for them above all else.
A separate Labour party will emerge once Scotland is elected anyway. In fact, the SNP will not remain as it is today as it is really a very broad church.
In PB for example. malcolmg and Dair both strong Nats but I think from different ideological positions.0 -
Housing benefit for under 25s and child tax credits face welfare axe but Osborne unlikely to hit his target of £12 billion of welfare cuts, government instead hoping economic growth will lessen the need for cuts
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/Politics/article1565796.ece
0 -
The problem with Versailles was not that it was too harsh, but too lenient. There would have been no Second World War had Germany been partitioned in 1919.FalseFlag said:Exactly Versailles guaranteed conflict by denying Germans self determination giving Hitler both purpose and support.
0 -
Quite. And even more importantly, what share of the EU money is spent fraudulently after it has been handed over to the Greeces and Romanias of this world?
When were they last signed off then? And how much does that 4% amount to?
Then there is the question of whether the non-fradulent money is well spent. Corporate welfare to Nestle and bridges to nowhere are almost as bad, in my opinion, and that must be a good half of EU spending.0 -
Burnham best bet for Labour says Blair's flatmate Lord Falconer. Burnham and Cooper now have 35 MPs needed to go through to party members ballot, Kendall not far behind on 33
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article1565795.ece0 -
From the article...notme said:
A bit of googling. It is an interview given to the Mirror.Stark_Dawning said:
Must be a Tory smear by those who want to anticipate a 'Labour led by posh girls' narrative.notme said:Just watching Marr on iplayer. Has Yvette Cooper really made a speech saying that she knows how to stand up for people because as head prefect she organised a strike for someone who wasnt allowed to wear white socks???
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/yvette-cooper-wanted-tap-dancer-5836222
"And [Cooper's] charisma shines through as she recalls the pivotal moment in 1988 that set her off on the journey to Westminster."
Huh? She was already doing a PPE degree at Oxford by 1988.
0 -
I am not sure Balls would be EU OUT. Definitely, Euro OUT, no doubt. He , above all, made sure we did not get into the Euro. Of course, with Brown's support but EdB provided the intellectual basis.MikeK said:
You should be called @Stark_Raving if you think Balls would be the ideal leader for the OUT campaign.Stark_Dawning said:As I've said before, the perfect figurehead for OUT would be Ed Balls - trained economist, political bruiser, sneakingly regarded by many on the right, non-Blairite and okay with the Left. I did try calling him to ask him to stand, but I couldn't get through. So if anyone else runs into him...
0 -
Anachronistic nonsense. Remember that the United States, the United Kingdom and France were entitled to occupy West Germany by right of conquest. There was never any real chance of West Germany leaving the Western camp in any event, and any chance that had existed had evaporated by the date the Treaty of Rome was signed. West Germany was not and was never going to be the Western equivalent of Yugoslavia.williamglenn said:I think you're underestimating the geopolitical importance of anchoring the FRG in the Western camp during the Cold War. Without the early phase of the EU project it's easy to imagine alternative histories in which the idea of Britain joining a peaceful Common Market in 1973 were equally absurd.
0 -
Surbiton Yes, the Scots so want independence they voted it down by a 10% margin just months ago, what they actually want is more powers, starting with the implementation of the Smith Plans, which is occurring anyway, and ultimately FFA0
-
TCPB Labour can still win even if they just win back a few seats from the SNP, there was an above average swing in English and Welsh marginals to the Tories to stop Miliband only coming to power through the SNP, next time if voters want a Labour government and prefer the Labour leader to the Tories there could be an equally big swingback to Labour in the marginals to ensure a Labour majority or at least a Labour deal with Farron's LDs0
-
NickPalmer,
In the very post you criticize me for stating opinions as facts, you stated your opinions as facts. It is not the disagreement over austerity that demonstrates the difference but the fact its an entirely differenct conversation. The entire narrative in Germany and Greece is completely different, with not a single party there supporting the position of the Greek government. In fact, the gap between the EU elite and the Greek people was so large that every one of the parties trying to straddle the gap was washed away by a new party on the scene. To take another example, all four large parties in the UK opposed Juncker and yet he got in as President. The young people you describe are mainly limited to university graduates, and the better ones at that. Denmark is also a small country prone to such a mindset, when most people in the EU live in bigger countries.0 -
Surbiton A better system would be the German system where you get more based on insurance contributions for a year, then for those who have still not found a job there is a lower basic benefit0
