I completely agree with bingaddick on this one. It's a terrible move by Cameron the other week and sadly one I feel is in response to the general feeling towards Europe in this country, which I don't believe is a healthy one. Will Hutton (an economist who's opinions I generally respect) was saying that while it might seem a 'victory' now, in 10, 20 years time this could seriously diminish the UK's position in the global market. Europe, including us, is definitely stronger together and if we take ourselves out of that picture (as we already are), we will gradually become less relevant, businesses will move their headquarters out of the UK, etc.
Every time I see a politician going into talks with EU and saying 'I'm protecting British interests' I get really annoyed, because they're not. British interests are the interests of the EU as a strong, unified body. And saying that is not only pandering to the Daily Mail and general feeling towards Europe, but also breeding and encouraging a feeling that the EU is always out to 'get something from us'. We can't expect to enjoy the benefits without any kind of compromise on the way that we do things. Yes, there's plenty about it that could be better, but I still strongly believe that we are better for it.
Oh, and Farage is an opportunistic, self-serving twat, 'IMHO'.
Just checking this is the Nigel Farage, who through wanting us to be no part of the EU, has claimed over £2m in 'expenses' from the EU ?
Like everything in politics, every man is only in it for himself.
No politician is an angel but NF has only taken what he is "entitled" to and freely admits that as distinct to those MPs and MEPs who fraudulently lied to obtain more and have been criminally convicted in some cases.
Furthermore he has been one of the few MEPs to vote for reductions and greater accountability.
Of course the EU is far from perfect and much of that is down to individuals who, almost invariably, are out to feather their own nest. Tell me of a single government and elected members to which the same could not be applied. Fraud? Well our own MPs and Lords showed their contempt for this electorate by scamming their expenses. The one thing all posters agree upon is that the future is desperately uncertain, whether we remain in the EU and if so to what extent, or whether we seek to withdraw. My personal preference is to be part of Europe. To be outside weakens our influence enormously and has been noted, the idea that Cameron's use of the veto has protected the City is an illusion. Financial institutions will go where their interests are best served and if means out of the square mile, that will happen and it will happen far faster than it took our manufacturers to re-locate to the Far East.
......" We can't expect to enjoy the benefits without any kind of compromise on the way that we do things. Yes, there's plenty about it that could be better, but I still strongly believe that we are better for it."......
Please tell me what these benefits are given the costs of being in it?
I am not a fan of the EU but we are deluded if we think we can prosper without being an integral part of it. Our choice was to go along with its considerable walts and all or be isolated. Not two great choices but the only ones open to us and the first was the only sensible one. In my opinion the EU should always have been a united friendly trading block and no more. The problem is, if the vast majority want something more you are better positioned arguing against it from within than jumping ship. Cameron achieved nothing last week - the EU can still impose what it wants on us - it is now harder to argue for things that are in our interest and we run the danger of more malicious policies. What a mess - I'm glad the majority of people in the country are happy with that - I'm worried.
The UK needs out out out of the EEC NOW .. Germany and France in coalition have got what they have wanted since the days of Charlemagne .. a European empire. What Napoleon and Hitler failed to achieve by force of arms, a bunch of 'bankers' has achieved by use of increasingly worthless coins and paper. The other EEC members are either too small, politically and economically or too broke and corrupt to resist domination by the Germo/Franco axis. The French have always hated us politically speaking and the Germans have always been envious of us. The most prosperous nations in Europe are Norway and Switzerland, neither EEC members. The sting in the tail for England/UK though is that the government needs to invest in manufacturing industries and massive training programmes. This means that there will be no room for stay at home on the playstationers/sit in the pub or park all day drinking cider or puffing dopers, it means people taking a pride once again in being English and working hard for both personal and national pride and good wages once immigration is brought under control.
There you go, problem solved.
When you say "being English" could you define that please or shall I just Google it......?
Dont talk bollocks .. if you dont know what being English and proud of it means .. google will not give you the answer
Sense of humour FAIL
the answer was not 'humorous', rather sarcastic i thought ... well OK, sarcasm has been referred to as the lowest form of humour
I make no apologies for using the Little Englander jibe here, but I do it in absolute despair at some of the things that English people (interestingly, not usually Scottish people) come out with when talking about Europe. Maybe it is because I have lived in "Europe" for so long, and have no intention of returning to live in the UK, even if it means missing most Charlton games :-) I don't include you in this jibe, nevertheless you still see things through a very narrow English, and it seems, right wing prism. When asked, swords alive was able to immediately list some benefits of the EU. You then dismissed them by saying "There is nothing to stop an independent UK government cherry picking "the good bits" from the EU but rejecting all the dross". I think that is called having your cake and eating it. Anyway, one man's dross is another man's valuable protection. Lots of anti EU types don't like the working time directive. I think that if I worked in some dross call centre that the UK specialises in, I would like it a lot.
If you really believe that you are the open-minded one, and we Europhiles are the blind fanatics, then may I recommend you this blog. The interesting thing about the writer is that he declares himslef to be a former Eurosceptic. What you will find there is a lot of inconvenient truth. As a small sample, this, from his most recent post
"Referenda have a decidedly unclear position within the UK constitution. The people are not and never have been sovereign in the UK – sovereignty rests with Parliament (technically the Crown in Parliament), and anything that threatens parliamentary sovereignty could easily be challenged as unconstitutional. Direct democracy bypasses Parliament, therefore it easily falls into this category.It always surprises me that anti-EU types don’t realise this, considering one of their key arguments against the EU is that it is unconstitutional for anyone/anything to be able to overrule Parliament (usually they quote the 1689 Bill of Rights – this has little/no actual legal weight, but the theory is still there)."
I know Farage fairly well. It's genuinely funny reading some of the above comments.
Most ironic statement this week came from, of all people, Gerry Adams. He came out and slated Eire for signing the new agreement, saying it will be bad for their long term prospects!
I'm sure Cameron would welcome Adams's indirect endorsement...
I don't agree that the only options are in fully or isolated.
We've had an EU where some members were in the Euro and others not.
It may not be an option but I still suspect that the "core" United States of Europe" group (France, Benelux, Germany, Italy?) still see the benefit of having the UK and the scandavians with some form of trading group.
So a two stream Europe with the UK, maybe Ireland along with Sweden and a few others in a trading block but with less political and financial union (which suits most parties in the UK) and a "hard core" centre with most closer financial union.
But that will all take time and negotiation. Cameron will sit around the table and Clegg will be the middle man to hold Dave back and say "leave it, he's not worth it".
Just one example of EU benefits is the work with consumer legislation and the ability to take on multi-national corporations. For example consumers across Europe now have a Europe wide two-year guarantee on things like washing machines. Curiously, the UK has refused to implement it! great opt out there, really benefits you. So when your PC breaks down after 18 months, you will have to pay, whereas I will not. Then there is the bloody telcos and there outrageous roaming charges. Only the EU can do this because multinational companies by definition have to be taken on at multi-national level. These companies are adept at "lobbying" (which in this country means paying off) politicians, but in a multinational EU organisation that is harder to do. Ask Microsoft and Intel customers whether the EU is "useless".
Just one practical example. We can't do it alone. We're not big enough
I know Farage fairly well. It's genuinely funny reading some of the above comments. Most ironic statement this week came from, of all people, Gerry Adams. He came out and slated Eire for signing the new agreement, saying it will be bad for their long term prospects! I'm sure Cameron would welcome Adams's indirect endorsement...
The UK needs out out out of the EEC NOW .. Germany and France in coalition have got what they have wanted since the days of Charlemagne .. a European empire. What Napoleon and Hitler failed to achieve by force of arms, a bunch of 'bankers' has achieved by use of increasingly worthless coins and paper. The other EEC members are either too small, politically and economically or too broke and corrupt to resist domination by the Germo/Franco axis. The French have always hated us politically speaking and the Germans have always been envious of us. The most prosperous nations in Europe are Norway and Switzerland, neither EEC members. The sting in the tail for England/UK though is that the government needs to invest in manufacturing industries and massive training programmes. This means that there will be no room for stay at home on the playstationers/sit in the pub or park all day drinking cider or puffing dopers, it means people taking a pride once again in being English and working hard for both personal and national pride and good wages once immigration is brought under control.
There you go, problem solved.
When you say "being English" could you define that please or shall I just Google it......?
Dont talk bollocks .. if you dont know what being English and proud of it means .. google will not give you the answer
Sense of humour FAIL
the answer was not 'humorous', rather sarcastic i thought ... well OK, sarcasm has been referred to as the lowest form of humour
I know Farage fairly well. It's genuinely funny reading some of the above comments. Most ironic statement this week came from, of all people, Gerry Adams. He came out and slated Eire for signing the new agreement, saying it will be bad for their long term prospects! I'm sure Cameron would welcome Adams's indirect endorsement...
Why surprise ? Adams is an Irish Nationalist
Surprise that he'd agree on anything with Cameron.
I make no apologies for using the Little Englander jibe here, but I do it in absolute despair at some of the things that English people (interestingly, not usually Scottish people) come out with when talking about Europe. Maybe it is because I have lived in "Europe" for so long, and have no intention of returning to live in the UK, even if it means missing most Charlton games :-) I don't include you in this jibe, nevertheless you still see things through a very narrow English, and it seems, right wing prism. When asked, swords alive was able to immediately list some benefits of the EU. You then dismissed them by saying "There is nothing to stop an independent UK government cherry picking "the good bits" from the EU but rejecting all the dross". I think that is called having your cake and eating it. Anyway, one man's dross is another man's valuable protection. Lots of anti EU types don't like the working time directive. I think that if I worked in some dross call centre that the UK specialises in, I would like it a lot.
If you really believe that you are the open-minded one, and we Europhiles are the blind fanatics, then may I recommend you this blog. The interesting thing about the writer is that he declares himslef to be a former Eurosceptic. What you will find there is a lot of inconvenient truth. As a small sample, this, from his most recent post
"Referenda have a decidedly unclear position within the UK constitution. The people are not and never have been sovereign in the UK – sovereignty rests with Parliament (technically the Crown in Parliament), and anything that threatens parliamentary sovereignty could easily be challenged as unconstitutional. Direct democracy bypasses Parliament, therefore it easily falls into this category. It always surprises me that anti-EU types don’t realise this, considering one of their key arguments against the EU is that it is unconstitutional for anyone/anything to be able to overrule Parliament (usually they quote the 1689 Bill of Rights – this has little/no actual legal weight, but the theory is still there)."
Prague
As I (and later redcarter) pointed out many of swords_alive's "benefits" were there pre common market so are not benefits that we could not have by remaining an independent nation.
If desire for democratic accountability means seeing ....." things through a very narrow English, and it seems, right wing prism".... then guilty as charged but tell that to Tony Benn, Bob Crowe, Lord Stoddart and others whom have all previously complained of democratic deficit within the EU and even suggested we would be better off out. You would probably regard me as right wing in that my personal instincts are libertarian rather than authoritarian but, on the other thread, I've probably been as, if not more, scathing of Cameron as anyone and his actions have been derided as "right wing."
I took a look at the blog you linked (thanks for that) and found this: ....."
This is the perfect illustration of just why supranational organisations are so vital – had the EU had the power (and will) to stand up to the national politicians and stick to its rules, this coordination could have been imposed. With the current set up, as no one can agree, nothing can be done. (We still wouldn’t have known what to do if we’d got more powerful supranational institutions, but at least we’d all have been doing it together… That concerted unity alone could well have proved enough to give the markets back their confidence – it’s the uncertainty that’s killing us as much as the lack of direction.)......"
Please tell me where the democratic accountability comes from under this model? Someone (I forget who ) said something along the lines of democracy has its faults but the people can remove their governments peacefully. Without democracy governments can only be removed by violence. ***
In essence that is why I vehemently oppose the EU. Successive governments of all colours have dragged us further in by deceit.
You of all people should know the power of democracy since you were instrumental in exploiting it to save our club for which belated thanks if I've not thanked you previously.
*** Karl Popper:
You can choose whatever name you like for the two types of government. I personally call the type of government which can be removed without violence "democracy", and the other "tyranny".
As quoted in Freedom: A New Analysis (1954) by Maurice William Cranston, p. 112
Am I alone in being deeply peturbed as to the consequences for democracy of the EU parachuting its own unelected placemen into the Greek and Italian governments?
The people who are saying we're better off in the EU are probably the same people who a couple of years ago were insistent that the U.K. should obtain the euro. 250 billion a year saved.
Wether you support old Nige or not or UKIP for that matter, it is pure comedy gold watching the faces of the other delegates in the background when he lets rip in the Parliament on Youtube. He is an utter irritant to them although it is quite plain to see that whatever he says will not change the EU jaggernaut, it is just funny.
It is early days as yet in the negotiation process, and Cameron has taken a gamble, but one that could work or could fail.
The treaty put on the table was never going to be acceptable to the UK, everybody knew this and a veto of the offending parts was expected. Cameron one-upped the French and German expectations by vetoing the whole thing. Now the negotiations start and it will be month before we truly know whether it has succeeded or failed.
For those who don't know, the biggest bone of contention was the financial regulations included within the treaty. Amongst other things this would have included a tax on all financial transactions, possibly a good thing, but with the US, Hong Kong and Japan not adopting similar policies it would have put London at a server disadvantage and cost the country potentially billions of pounds and thousands of jobs.
Germany, obviously, want Frankfurt to be Europe's financial centre. The regulations were in part created to help with this aim. Best case scenario it put Frankfurt on a level playing field with London, most likely it gave Frankfurt an advantage.
So there was no way the UK was ever going to ratify that part of the treaty. However, it was possible to agree the rest and simply veto that section, but Cameron, rightly or wrongly, has chosen to veto the entire treaty.
Interesting times ahead, which I'm lead to believe is a curse in Chinese.
The UK needs out out out of the EEC NOW .. Germany and France in coalition have got what they have wanted since the days of Charlemagne .. a European empire. What Napoleon and Hitler failed to achieve by force of arms, a bunch of 'bankers' has achieved by use of increasingly worthless coins and paper. The other EEC members are either too small, politically and economically or too broke and corrupt to resist domination by the Germo/Franco axis. The French have always hated us politically speaking and the Germans have always been envious of us. The most prosperous nations in Europe are Norway and Switzerland, neither EEC members. The sting in the tail for England/UK though is that the government needs to invest in manufacturing industries and massive training programmes. This means that there will be no room for stay at home on the playstationers/sit in the pub or park all day drinking cider or puffing dopers, it means people taking a pride once again in being English and working hard for both personal and national pride and good wages once immigration is brought under control.
There you go, problem solved.
When you say "being English" could you define that please or shall I just Google it......?
Dont talk bollocks .. if you dont know what being English and proud of it means .. google will not give you the answer
Sense of humour FAIL
the answer was not 'humorous', rather sarcastic i thought ... well OK, sarcasm has been referred to as the lowest form of humour
But you've still missed the point!
righto .. enlighten me
Interesting times ahead, which I'm lead to believe is a curse in Chinese... Confucius say: may you live in interesting times .. the master of understatement .. the Chinese went for that .. until they started to make some serious serious money ..
I completely agree with bingaddick on this one. It's a terrible move by Cameron the other week and sadly one I feel is in response to the general feeling towards Europe in this country, which I don't believe is a healthy one. Will Hutton (an economist who's opinions I generally respect) was saying that while it might seem a 'victory' now, in 10, 20 years time this could seriously diminish the UK's position in the global market. Europe, including us, is definitely stronger together and if we take ourselves out of that picture (as we already are), we will gradually become less relevant, businesses will move their headquarters out of the UK, etc.
Every time I see a politician going into talks with EU and saying 'I'm protecting British interests' I get really annoyed, because they're not. British interests are the interests of the EU as a strong, unified body. And saying that is not only pandering to the Daily Mail and general feeling towards Europe, but also breeding and encouraging a feeling that the EU is always out to 'get something from us'. We can't expect to enjoy the benefits without any kind of compromise on the way that we do things. Yes, there's plenty about it that could be better, but I still strongly believe that we are better for it.
Oh, and Farage is an opportunistic, self-serving twat, 'IMHO'.
If we was to pull out of Europe does that mean that every person wanting to enter Britain would need to obtain a visa putting and end to the open doors and slowing down the influx of eastern Europeans, or would they still be able to come here in there millions flooding this tiny country
If we was to pull out of Europe does that mean that every person wanting to enter Britain would need to obtain a visa putting and end to the open doors and slowing down the influx of eastern Europeans, or would they still be able to come here in there millions flooding this tiny country
I hope so. Then the Czechs can impose visas on the British twats who come out here for weekends, get drunk in Irish owned pubs for six times the price they'd pay in a Czech pub, throw up outside, go to a brothel where they shag a poor trafficked Moldovan girl, throw up outside again, trash their hotel room, and piss off everyone else on the flight home.
If we was to pull out of Europe does that mean that every person wanting to enter Britain would need to obtain a visa putting and end to the open doors and slowing down the influx of eastern Europeans, or would they still be able to come here in there millions flooding this tiny country
The Single European Act means that there is freedom of movement throughout the EU.
In other words the UK cannot stop anyone coming in from other EU countries although (for now) there is a block on unlimited immigration from Romania and Bulgaria but that will shortly expire.
We are not going to agree, but I respect your opinions,( and for sure in the past you've kindly mentioned me and the Valley Party.) Funny enough Michael Grade at the time likened the Valley Party to the revolutions in Eastern Europe. However being out here soon afterwards has taught me a lot about 'democracy'. It is not a universally similar concept. We Brits think it looks exactly like it is in Britain. It's not. Especially if its young. I learnt this the hard way in the early years in Prague. Made some big mistakes. Why? Because I failed to recognise that you don't just turn on the switch marked "democracy", and everyone - politicians, journalists, judges, police, citizens, behave exactly like they do in the UK. Now my point is that democracy in countries such as Spain Greece and Portugal is relatively young. And in most of Europe there is a different voting system which produces coalitions as a rule. It happens all the time that leaders get replaced without an election. It happened here too. The old bat was replaced by Major, and the neocon was replaced by Brown. That's why i don't get too upset when that useless corrupt clown Berlusconi, or Goldman Sachs man Papandreou get replaced, and I'd dispute that it was done "by the EU'.
Overall I think the problem with the EU is that it has been driven by hope over reason but those hopes were great things, and I believe in them. But I don't think it can work with either Greece or Italy in it. But Italy was a founder member. It cannot just be kicked out. When the EEC was formed, the war had ended only 12 years previously. Everyone's hopes were high. Germany and France were growing and progressing. Everyone 'hoped' that Italy would do the same. Unfortunately 40 years later we can see that it didn't. Italy has totally failed to get rid of the Mafia, or endemic corruption. I am not sure whether Berlusconi is linked to the Mafia, but sure as hell the average italian MP is not much like Clive Efford. It isnt changing, it cannot change and will continue to drag the EU down. I now believe that the EU would work much better if it comprised Germany, France, Benelux, Scandinavia. Plus UK, Poland Austria, Czech, Slovakia, Poland, Slovenia, if they all agree to behave like adults. Not sure about Spain and Portugal, dont understand them enough. But having learnt how Italy and Greece work, I would ideally kick them out. Ideally. I'm not sure it can be done. But you and I are old enough to understand the hopes on which the EU was born, and if you need any reminder, I'd urge you to take a holiday in the former killing fields of Alsace, and see how the French swing across the bridge to go to work in Germany while the Germans pile over in the other direction for a decent meal. Alsace will never again be a battleground. And that, my friend, is an achievement.
The more I listen to Nigel Farage the more I am beginning to become a UKIP voter from a Tory voter.
I want us out of the EU but everybody says 'If we pull out, it will be harder for UK companies to compete for business with say, France, vs say Italy' where do they get this from and what evidence can they prove to show this might be the case? If you take a look at countries like Switzerland, companies are trading successfully and Switzerland's ecomony is running smoothly compared to countries like Italy and Spain. The problem the Swiss have is that because the ecomony is strong that means the Swiss Franc is strong so if there busineses who want to trade with Europe will have to put the prices down. So what the Swiss goverment have done is downgrade the Swiss Currency to match the poor Euro and the pound. This obviously proves that with the Swiss out of the EU why the ecomony in Switzerland is doing well. You also don't hear countries like Norway close to going bust.
Nigel Farage explains further why trading won't be lost.
The UK needs out out out of the EEC NOW .. Germany and France in coalition have got what they have wanted since the days of Charlemagne .. a European empire. What Napoleon and Hitler failed to achieve by force of arms, a bunch of 'bankers' has achieved by use of increasingly worthless coins and paper. The other EEC members are either too small, politically and economically or too broke and corrupt to resist domination by the Germo/Franco axis. The French have always hated us politically speaking and the Germans have always been envious of us. The most prosperous nations in Europe are Norway and Switzerland, neither EEC members. The sting in the tail for England/UK though is that the government needs to invest in manufacturing industries and massive training programmes. This means that there will be no room for stay at home on the playstationers/sit in the pub or park all day drinking cider or puffing dopers, it means people taking a pride once again in being English and working hard for both personal and national pride and good wages once immigration is brought under control.
There you go, problem solved.
When you say "being English" could you define that please or shall I just Google it......?
Dont talk bollocks .. if you dont know what being English and proud of it means .. google will not give you the answer
Sense of humour FAIL
the answer was not 'humorous', rather sarcastic i thought ... well OK, sarcasm has been referred to as the lowest form of humour
But you've still missed the point!
righto .. enlighten me
I already have!!!!
Ok, so I'll say it again. Type into to google "define an English person"
The more I hear of the outcome of the talks last week, the more I wonder what our PM was up to.
I listened this evening to the Swedish Finance Minister basically saying that Sweden hasn't yet agreed to sign up to this financial pact of 26.
It seems to me that far from there being one unified position of the 26, much is still left to be negotiated/ironed out.
He said that Sweden would like to be part of this pact but only on terms that are right for them. He talked specifically about rules only applying to Eurozone members (of which like Britain, Sweden is not a member).
So given that so much is yet to be clarified, why have our Government, in the shape of our Prime Minister, come back having claimed to have vetoed something that hasn't actually been finalised? All very odd, except if you consider his need to sound tough, placate his back-benchers and get a great headline in the Daily Fail.
As for the debate on here regarding "little Englanders" which I think I started, of course there is a legitimate argument for being out of the EU which is not driven by such jingoism. Unfortunately the siren voices of the Europhobe big beasts like Farage do in their rhetoric, play up to it in my view. Why? Well it's obvious to me - it plays to the gut instincts of many voters. Its a dog whistle issue.
Its the same reason that in most General Election campaigns, the Tories find a way of playing the race card. They are not being racist but they make dog whistle noises that arouse the sensitive ears of those who have issues with immigrants and race.
So like it or not, there is always an element of the English (or the Brits) against Johnny Foreigner. To some it is standing up for Britain, to others like me, at it worst it come across as a kind of arrogance which borders on nationalism of a not very pleasant kind.
Len and I have shared arguments on here about the EU right or wrong. I absolutely disagree with virtually everything he says but in true liberal terms, I defend his right to hold those views. What we both agree about though is the need to settle this argument for a generation. Whilst referenda are not particularly British, given the strength of feeling about this subject, we need one badly.
The person who wrote they found it strange that I would favour one, even though my side would probably lose, fundamentally misses the point. I am a democrat, and I believe that the people have a right to decide these things. Too often in our political system, things are kicked into the long grass because politicians only want to fight things that they think they can win. In my opinion, we have to be mature enough to debate the issues and then accept the verdict of the people.
Comments
No politician is an angel but NF has only taken what he is "entitled" to and freely admits that as distinct to those MPs and MEPs who fraudulently lied to obtain more and have been criminally convicted in some cases.
Furthermore he has been one of the few MEPs to vote for reductions and greater accountability.
http://www.theparliament.com/latest-news/article/newsarticle/parliament-publishes-secret-report-on-mep-expense-abuse/
and
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15458955
......" We can't expect to enjoy the benefits without any kind of compromise on the way that we do things. Yes, there's plenty about it that could be better, but I still strongly believe that we are better for it."......
Please tell me what these benefits are given the costs of being in it?
the answer was not 'humorous', rather sarcastic i thought ... well OK, sarcasm has been referred to as the lowest form of humour
Most ironic statement this week came from, of all people, Gerry Adams. He came out and slated Eire for signing the new agreement, saying it will be bad for their long term prospects!
I'm sure Cameron would welcome Adams's indirect endorsement...
We've had an EU where some members were in the Euro and others not.
It may not be an option but I still suspect that the "core" United States of Europe" group (France, Benelux, Germany, Italy?) still see the benefit of having the UK and the scandavians with some form of trading group.
So a two stream Europe with the UK, maybe Ireland along with Sweden and a few others in a trading block but with less political and financial union (which suits most parties in the UK) and a "hard core" centre with most closer financial union.
But that will all take time and negotiation. Cameron will sit around the table and Clegg will be the middle man to hold Dave back and say "leave it, he's not worth it".
Prague
As I (and later redcarter) pointed out many of swords_alive's "benefits" were there pre common market so are not benefits that we could not have by remaining an independent nation.
If desire for democratic accountability means seeing ....." things through a very narrow English, and it seems, right wing prism".... then guilty as charged but tell that to Tony Benn, Bob Crowe, Lord Stoddart and others whom have all previously complained of democratic deficit within the EU and even suggested we would be better off out. You would probably regard me as right wing in that my personal instincts are libertarian rather than authoritarian but, on the other thread, I've probably been as, if not more, scathing of Cameron as anyone and his actions have been derided as "right wing."
I took a look at the blog you linked (thanks for that) and found this: ....."
This is the perfect illustration of just why supranational organisations are so vital – had the EU had the power (and will) to stand up to the national politicians and stick to its rules, this coordination could have been imposed. With the current set up, as no one can agree, nothing can be done. (We still wouldn’t have known what to do if we’d got more powerful supranational institutions, but at least we’d all have been doing it together… That concerted unity alone could well have proved enough to give the markets back their confidence – it’s the uncertainty that’s killing us as much as the lack of direction.)......"
Please tell me where the democratic accountability comes from under this model? Someone (I forget who ) said something along the lines of democracy has its faults but the people can remove their governments peacefully. Without democracy governments can only be removed by violence. ***
In essence that is why I vehemently oppose the EU. Successive governments of all colours have dragged us further in by deceit.
You of all people should know the power of democracy since you were instrumental in exploiting it to save our club for which belated thanks if I've not thanked you previously.
*** Karl Popper:
Am I alone in being deeply peturbed as to the consequences for democracy of the EU parachuting its own unelected placemen into the Greek and Italian governments?
The treaty put on the table was never going to be acceptable to the UK, everybody knew this and a veto of the offending parts was expected. Cameron one-upped the French and German expectations by vetoing the whole thing. Now the negotiations start and it will be month before we truly know whether it has succeeded or failed.
For those who don't know, the biggest bone of contention was the financial regulations included within the treaty. Amongst other things this would have included a tax on all financial transactions, possibly a good thing, but with the US, Hong Kong and Japan not adopting similar policies it would have put London at a server disadvantage and cost the country potentially billions of pounds and thousands of jobs.
Germany, obviously, want Frankfurt to be Europe's financial centre. The regulations were in part created to help with this aim. Best case scenario it put Frankfurt on a level playing field with London, most likely it gave Frankfurt an advantage.
So there was no way the UK was ever going to ratify that part of the treaty. However, it was possible to agree the rest and simply veto that section, but Cameron, rightly or wrongly, has chosen to veto the entire treaty.
Interesting times ahead, which I'm lead to believe is a curse in Chinese.
righto .. enlighten me
Interesting times ahead, which I'm lead to believe is a curse in Chinese... Confucius say: may you live in interesting times .. the master of understatement .. the Chinese went for that .. until they started to make some serious serious money ..
This
The Single European Act means that there is freedom of movement throughout the EU.
In other words the UK cannot stop anyone coming in from other EU countries although (for now) there is a block on unlimited immigration from Romania and Bulgaria but that will shortly expire.
In 2014 in fact. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/8910935/Restrictions-on-Romania-and-Bulgaria-to-stay-in-place.html
So to answer your question YES.
I want us out of the EU but everybody says 'If we pull out, it will be harder for UK companies to compete for
business with say, France, vs say Italy' where do they get this from and
what evidence can they prove to show this might be the case? If you take a
look at countries like Switzerland, companies are trading successfully
and Switzerland's ecomony is running smoothly compared to countries like
Italy and Spain. The problem the Swiss have is that because the ecomony is strong that means the Swiss Franc is strong so if there busineses who want to trade with Europe will have to put the prices down. So what the Swiss goverment have done is downgrade the Swiss Currency to match the poor Euro and the pound. This obviously proves that with the Swiss out of the EU why the ecomony in Switzerland is doing well. You also don't hear countries like Norway close to going bust.
Nigel Farage explains further why trading won't be lost.
I already have!!!!
Ok, so I'll say it again. Type into to google "define an English person"