FalconFN

I used to think the same when, as a teen, I was paid to walk wheat fields pulling wild oats. It was crude but very effective, although not sure how effective it would be with black grass now.

That's excellent in so many ways

Granett, re the commission, they are by proxy the EU government elected by the elected, but as we see in our domestic politics that different tiers of government are elected by us in different ways - the way we vote for local government is not the same as we vote nationally, and again our votes for MEPs don't mirror that of MPs, quite starkly in fact. Would you be happy to only have a vote for your local county Councillor and then have the council nominate your MP for you? Of course not, so why is it ok for the most powerful executive body in Europe to be the same? Your Gill quote is interesting, but as an argument for remaining in a political union it is redundant - just as redundant as using Napoleon, the Amadas or the Nazis as an opposing example as all of these things were borne well before the EU was even considered. I am European, I share history, art, culture and DNA with many parts of Europe, I like Europe, I work in Europe and I don't ever want to not be European, but leaving the EU does not mean leaving Europe, it does not even mean cutting ties or stopping working closely with the other members, what it means is that we forge a different path that will not only have our fellow Europeans as close allies but also other parts of the world that share an historical and cultural link - Canada, India and Australia to nae just a few. I did see leaving as a narrow-minded little-Englander mindset, but it can equally be seen as a freeing to expand and reach out to many other parts of the world, a bold and groundbreaking way of remaining nimble and economically agile in the future. Every coin has two sides. Edit. Re-reading this makes me sound like I'm entrenching myself in the out camp, I'm not, I'm just expressing where I am at the moment and any info that counters my thoughts will be great. One last thought. In the UK we have only had full democracy for all for less that 100 years, it isn't perfect but it is the culmination of at least 700 years toil, death and struggle, is the EU's form of democracy better than what we have and is it worth giving up full democratic control for one seat at a table of 28?

No, I object to the Commission and it's place as the instigator of legislation. They are unelected, and therefore unaccountable. Much of the desicion making seems to be done behind closed doors and with such a small number of people, open to suggestion, coercion and corruption from large multinational business. The elected representatives only seem to enable or reject what the Commission offers, so that it is the Commission that is the de facto EU government, not the elected MEPs. As I have said, much of what the EU does is good, but even staunch supports must acknowledge that the EU is a vast, cumbersome and at best obtuse institution that has outgrown it's original role. I am only just on the side of brexit, but nobody has given me any convincing reason why membership gives us anything we could not do as a close EU partner rather than member. Edit to say, I'm open to be converted to a stay vote, my heart says stay but logic suggests otherwise so far.

Thanks oowee, so in a nutshell: The Commission decide the law. The Parliament approve, amend or reject it. The Council listen to the Parliament but are under no obligation abide by their desicion.

I think that the 47% is related to youth unemployment - and 21% overall unemployment is bad. Secondly, the undemocratic part is not a lie, the power lies with the unelected commissioners, for example, even if MEPs amend laws they cannot be implemented if the commission don't agree. To me it is like our system of parliament but back to front, ie the unelected house of lords proposing the laws and the elected commons there to sign them off or amend them, then the lords putting them on the statute only if they agree - polar opposite to how it should be in my opinion. There is lots that is positive about the EU but it cannot possibly serve the best interested of all of the people of Europe equally and the continued political, geographical and ideological expansion is only ever going to work for the lowest common denominator. The question is, will that work for the UK in 10, 20 or 50 years?

Perhaps we should have some sort of public vote to see what the people think...... Dave G, on this occasion I think you are well off piste.

Utterly shocking. I feel for her children and husband. Reading between the lines, it appears that the perpetrator may have had psychological issues. That's no comfort to her family but it at least starts to throw light on such a senseless attack.

Is it true that the EU will force our womenfolk to stop shaving and all bikes will be sold with stripey jumpers and a beret?

It's good to question and challenge your own beliefs, otherwise you become close minded and dogmatic I was an inny then an outy. I'm now an outy but with inny leanings. I can see the economic benefits, and the benefits of having someone 'at the table', but the insurmountable issues for me are the lack of democratic process and the what the future EU will become if unchecked, so I'm crrently more likely to vote out I see it as not so much a choice between which path we take as which vehicle we choose to ride on. Remember though, there is not a right or wrong vote, just a vote as to which is marginally better.

I could add hoopoe to that list too

........subject to the agreements we make with the EU to remain part of the EEA, that is.

Beat me to it.

Undoubtedly true oowee, there'll be some relieved remainers tonight.

I think you'll find the blame lies squarely with the environment agency.....

I'm afraid it isn't, it is a ruling over a challenge started several years ago and nothing to do with the recent renegotiations. In reality it has very little to do with the referendum other than setting a precedent that we have the right, in some cases, to give national interests priority over EU laws. It will give DC some evidence that we are not always dictated to by the EU and that we can chalkenge EU laws.

Just wanted to resurrect this thread as earlier I visited a local permission with my bino's to look for pigeons, of which there were very few, but after a few minutes I saw an osprey flying over the farm. I watched it for about 10 minutes as it was mobbed by a crow, then a buzzard and then another crow. I drove to where it was heading and watched it turn back and head towards a local reservoir. It was never closer than about 500 yards but it was unmistakably an osprey. Unfortunately it was one of those rare occasions when I didn't have a camera, but I'm heading back that way later so I'll see if it's still there ad get some footage to compare to jdogs sighting!

They will, any incident is counted even if you don't claim anything. Sometimes it's better just to keep quiet and fix it yourself - although they'll probably count that as a breech of contract if they found out too...

Nice offer!

I assume you mean it's pasture as arable means it is growing crops. If so then pigeons do feed on clover and if large numbers are present then they can be an agricultural past, but if there are surrounding farms with cereals, rape etc then you'll probably not find many where you are. Rabbits, however, could well be a bigger problem for the farmer.

I imagine it's a lower percentage that actively want in, but many more that fear leaving. I also think many people would never vote out because the associate that with Farage, UKIP, EDL and generally the far right.

Errrr, I think you'll find that it is the UN, not the EU.

Ha, beat me to it..

'm sure it'd make anyone's blood boil, but it has nothing to do with the EU or shooting so not sure why it was brought up on this thread.

Perhaps you could vote for Corbyn next time? :😉: