[Politics] Brexit

[Stat Brother]

That's the point of a 'United States' though. To take policies that cover all 'members' and control them centrally. That's why Eurozone members gave away control on monetary policy to the ECB when they joined the Euro. The items I list are controlled centrally in the USA, Australia and were in the USSR. What would be the point of heading towards an USE if it isn't to provide a consistant policy on those items ?

But we didn't join the Euro mainly because the UK wanted to maintain a level of sovereignty.

I don't understand how can know future events with such certainly that you're prepared to make the country less well off financially

Yes I do claim Brexit is better than remaining - I don't believe being part of the eventual United States of Europe would be good for us. I've never said we would be better off financially though ..... and we certainly won't be in the immediate future.

 

[Stat Brother]

We're saying exactly the same thing [MENTION=15363]Plooks[/MENTION].

Can I just respectfully ask the rest of the thread participants to keep this civil for as long as possible, I genuinely would like to attempt to understand Westdene position, which is opposite to my own.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I don't understand how can know future events with such certainly that you're prepared to make the country less well off financially

Yes, I am. Since we've joined the EEC/EU has made more and more progress towards it's aim of an 'ever closer political and fiscal union' with the electorate here having little say in it. We all know that's the EUs stated aim - it's well known. So it's taken over 40 years for the UK voters to have a meaningful say. So do I think "Well, the policy might change so I'll vote remain and see what happens." or do I take my probable once in a lifetime chance of a vote on our relationship with the EU ? I'll probably be dead in 40 years so I'm hardly going to wait around for another chance. Unless of course we get to vote on it say every 10 years ?

 

[Stat Brother]

Yes, I am. Since we've joined the EEC/EU has made more and more progress towards it's aim of an 'ever closer political and fiscal union' with the electorate here having little say in it. We all know that's the EUs stated aim - it's well known. So it's taken over 40 years for the UK voters to have a meaningful say. So do I think "Well, the policy might change so I'll vote remain and see what happens." or do I take my probable once in a lifetime chance of a vote on our relationship with the EU ? I'll probably be dead in 40 years so I'm hardly going to wait around for another chance. Unless of course we get to vote on it say every 10 years ?

I don't see the first part as a bad thing, if nothing else it's simple 'bulk buying' economics, simpler trade with near neighbours, with the bonus of free movement around an entire continent.

Why do we only have very little say?
We have our government, we have MEP's, the UK sitting (sat) at the top table.

Before Brexit can you tell me what the UK has actually given away to Europe that has been detrimental to the country going forward?

 

[Gwylan]

Yes, I am. Since we've joined the EEC/EU has made more and more progress towards it's aim of an 'ever closer political and fiscal union' with the electorate here having little say in it. We all know that's the EUs stated aim - it's well known. So it's taken over 40 years for the UK voters to have a meaningful say.

That's not true though, is it? There was a referendum in 1975 when we had a say (and that was just 18 years after the Treaty of Rome and its call for an ever-closer union). We also had a meaningful choice in 1983 when one of our two major parties had a manifesto commitment to leave the EU. It's true that there's been explicit vote to leave the EU until 2016 but we did have those two chances and chose to stick to Europe.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

So, you just admited that all those things would be controlled. We would still have control over them as they "are controlled centrally". You do realise that country would be ours? WE, the people who live in the country, would have the power to elect whoever we wish to control them on our behalf.
You seem to be suggesting some unified state where the old UK has zero voting rights? Why do you assume such a bizzare dystopian future?

I haven't said anything of the sort. As a member of the USE we would of course have voting rights as we do now. BUT the policies would be controlled at EU level not at UK level. We would of course have a say. At the moment, in the UK, UK voters have a 100% of a say through our 650 MPs. In the EU we have around an 18% say depending if a simple majority or qualified majority is used. As more members join the EU our vote percentage becomes less. I'll stick with our 650 MPs thank you rather than adding yet another level of political ineptness above them that we only have an 18% say in.

EDIT for clarity - and just to stop you twisting my words. The policies I'm talking about are the ones in the areas I've already listed which at the moment the EU don't have the rights to completely overrule national government policy.

I don't see the first part as a bad thing, if nothing else it's simple 'bulk buying' economics, simpler trade with near neighbours, with the bonus of free movement around an entire continent.

Why do we only have very little say?
We have our government, we have MEP's, the UK sitting (sat) at the top table.

Before Brexit can you tell me what the UK has actually given away to Europe that has been detrimental to the country going forward?

I think you've misunderstood my 'we have little say' - I was talking about the ever closer union which voters haven't had a meaningful say on since 1975. We were promised a vote on the Treaty of Lisbon ..... it didn't happen. I caveat this part of my post with except in 1983 which I will address below.

That's not true though, is it? There was a referendum in 1975 when we had a say (and that was just 18 years after the Treaty of Rome and its call for an ever-closer union). We also had a meaningful choice in 1983 when one of our two major parties had a manifesto commitment to leave the EU. It's true that there's been explicit vote to leave the EU until 2016 but we did have those two chances and chose to stick to Europe.

So once in 40 years a main political party offered a say. My original post said 'meaningful' say. I'd suggest some casual promise in a manifesto doesn't really count as a meaningful say. Especially given Foot had about as much chance of winning that election as I do of waking up with a naked Kelly Brook in my bed tomorrow. And that doesn't even take into account the idiot voters that always vote for X party, because they always have and their Dad always did, regardless of policies.

 

[Stat Brother]

I haven't said anything of the sort. As a member of the USE we would of course have voting rights as we do now. BUT the policies would be controlled at EU level not at UK level. We would of course have a say. At the moment, in the UK, UK voters have a 100% of a say through our 650 MPs. In the EU we have around an 18% say depending if a simple majority or qualified majority is used. As more members join the EU our vote percentage becomes less. I'll stick with our 650 MPs thank you rather than adding yet another level of political ineptness above them that we only have an 18% say in.



I think you've misunderstood my 'we have little say' - I was talking about the ever closer union which voters haven't had a meaningful say on since 1975. We were promised a vote on the Treaty of Lisbon ..... it didn't happen. I caveat this part of my post with except in 1983 which I will address below.



So once in 40 years a main political party offered a say. My original post said 'meaningful' say. I'd suggest some casual promise in a manifesto doesn't really count as a meaningful say. Especially given Foot had about as much chance of winning that election as I do of waking up with a naked Kelly Brook in my bed tomorrow. And that doesn't even take into account the idiot voters that always vote for X party, because they always have and their Dad always did, regardless of policies.

But what have we already given up to Europe that leads you to believe we will slowly lose our entire identify within the United States of Europe. (forgive me if that's a little too glib)

 

[Westdene Seagull]

But what have we already given up to Europe that leads you to believe we will slowly lose our entire identify within the United States of Europe. (forgive me if that's a little too glib)

Pretty sure we've done this to death on this thread already and each time someone makes a list as you're suggesting the answer is "oh yes, it's really worth leaving the EU because of <insert your own preference>, I'll go for bendy bananas.

But as you ask :

> Environmental policy
> Employment policy
> Immigration policy from the perspective of EU citizens
> Parts of farming policy
> Policies and standards around the sale of goods and services
> Some monetary policy
> Fisheries policy

 

[WATFORD zero]

Stop stalking me you nause

'Stalking you' ? Ah bless

Well if you stop posting complete bollocks on things about which you obviously have no understanding, I'll stop pulling you up on it and making you look foolish.

Deal ?

(I'm assuming you are using the term nause in the same way as Two profs. ie I don't have an answer to what you're asking so I'll say the word nause instead)

 

[Stat Brother]

Pretty sure we've done this to death on this thread already and each time someone makes a list as you're suggesting the answer is "oh yes, it's really worth leaving the EU because of <insert your own preference>, I'll go for bendy bananas.

But as you ask :

> Environmental policy
> Immigration policy from the perspective of EU citizens
> Parts of farming policy
> Policies and standards around the sale of goods and services
> Some monetary policy
> Fisheries policy

Ok fair enough, I shall leave I there.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Pretty sure we've done this to death on this thread already and each time someone makes a list as you're suggesting the answer is "oh yes, it's really worth leaving the EU because of <insert your own preference>, I'll go for bendy bananas.

But as you ask :

> Environmental policy
> Employment policy
> Immigration policy from the perspective of EU citizens
> Parts of farming policy
> Policies and standards around the sale of goods and services
> Some monetary policy
> Fisheries policy

I know that we have agreed to support certain EU policies throughout the time we have been members, but equally for over 45 years, British governments of all political hues have stopped EU policies where they have thought they weren't good for Britain.

In the 19 years of existence of the Euro, for instance, we have never been forced to join and, I think you would agree, that if we stayed in the EU it still wouldn't be forced upon us. And I would suggest that a lot of the things you are mentioning (single bank, single currency, single army) will go exactly the same way.

One of the biggest issues for me is that we are throwing away 45 years of hard negotiated benefits to Britain. (Before UKIP MEP's started getting elected and deciding not to turn up !)

*edit*

And stating that

We'd lose over control of the following areas :

> Fiscal and monetary policy
> National taxation
> Benefits
> Defence
> Environmental policy
> Immigration policy

To name but a few. The UK would have as much control of what happens in the UK as B&H Council does in Brighton and Hove.

Is just factually wrong. Do you really think the British Government would accept all of these things with no vetoes or opt-outs ? (Because EU history would suggest the complete opposite).

 

[Ernest]

Tories getting desperate appealing to Labour MP's to vote for May's deal, if their own party won't vote for it why should anyone else

Time to call that election.

 

[CHAPPERS]

I see the DUP even broke some pairings last night to vote against the government.

 

[nicko31]

TM today accusing EU teachers, doctors, nurses, carers ‘jumping the queue’ to make sure our public services function.

Desperate stuff to sell a dead duck.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Spain kicking off on TM's Brexit deal over Gibraltar - well there's a surprise

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I see the DUP even broke some pairings last night to vote against the government.

I read they abstained rather than voted against the government - that's why the government got the votes through.

 

[Ernest]

I read they abstained rather than voted against the government - that's why the government got the votes through.

Voted against in one vote and doing so again tonight

 

[Stat Brother]

I read they abstained rather than voted against the government - that's why the government got the votes through.

Was it not more to do with Labour Inc Corbyn not turning up for the vote?

 

[Giraffe]

Was it not more to do with Labour Inc Corbyn not turning up for the vote?

Yep lost by five votes because they weren't aware they could win. Corbyn amongst those that didn't know. Clueless opposition.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Voted against in one vote and doing so again tonight

Was it not more to do with Labour Inc Corbyn not turning up for the vote?

Seems strange that Labour hasn't ensured all it's MPs vote against in the hope of a government defeat.