THE EU - IN OR OUT AND SHOOTING MATTERS

[FalconFN]

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?

[oowee]

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?

The EU’s standard decision-making procedure is known as 'Ordinary Legislative Procedure’ (ex "codecision"). This means that the directly elected European Parliament has to approve EU legislation together with the Council (the governments of the 28 EU countries).

[FalconFN]

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.

[Granett]

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.

Your point's unclear - do you object to the operation of the EU council (comprising the heads of all member states)? What's your problem with it? You don't want the guy we voted in as PM representing us at that table?

[anser2]

No Falcon, the EU commision suggests not decides a law .

 

How EU decisions are made

The EU’s standard decision-making procedure is known as 'Ordinary Legislative Procedure’ (ex "codecision"). This means that the directly elected European Parliament has to approve EU legislation together with the Council (the governments of the 28 EU countries).

Drafting EU law

Before the Commission proposes new initiatives it assesses the potential economic, social andenvironmental consequences that they may have. It does this by preparing 'Impact assessments' which set out the advantages and disadvantages of possible policy options.

The Commission also consults interested parties such as non-governmental organisations, local authorities and representatives of industry and civil society. Groups of experts give advice on technical issues. In this way, the Commission ensures that legislative proposals correspond to the needs of those most concerned and avoids unnecessary red tape.

Citizens, businesses and organisations can participate in the consultation procedure via the websitePublic consultations.

National parliaments can formally express their reservations if they feel that it would be better to deal with an issue at national rather than EU level.

Review and adoption

The European Parliament and the Council review proposals by the Commission and propose amendments. If the Council and the Parliament cannot agree upon amendments, a second reading takes place.

In the second reading, the Parliament and Council can again propose amendments. Parliament has the power to block the proposed legislation if it cannot agree with the Council.

If the two institutions agree on amendments, the proposed legislation can be adopted. If they cannot agree, a conciliation committee tries to find a solution. Both the Council and the Parliament can block the legislative proposal at this final reading.

So the democratic elected MEPs have the final say.

That just shows what a pack of lies Boris and the leave side have been saying for weeks. Unless he is the buffoon he seems to be at times Boris knows only to well how the system works , but what the hell why let the truth get in the way . The leave side are just trying to pull the wool over the public's eyes. One of the big problems are that Nigel Farage who is of German decent, not English and UKIP MEPs do nothing but obstruct the European parliament so we are making it much harder to put the British point of view across ,. Never the less the vast majority of laws have British government approval I think its around 80% which is similar to most other countries.

Edited June 17, 2016 by anser2

[islandgun]

thanks for that anser2 forgive my ignorance but that seems a very long winded way of making a law (if ever) as all the EMP's will only agree to something that benefits their own country, if it is a majority vote ultimately, then that must leave some disgruntled EMP's who then must answer to their own parliament . The more countries that join must result in even less accord and a more protracted decisions.

 

given my deep distrust of politicians I would prefer to have to listen to less rather than more, I'm out

[FalconFN]

Your point's unclear - do you object to the operation of the EU council (comprising the heads of all member states)? What's your problem with it? You don't want the guy we voted in as PM representing us at that table?

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.

Edited June 17, 2016 by FalconFN

[Granett]

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.

I am not an expert and I'm learning a lot as the subject's discussed but it seems the Commission Head is nominated by the European Council, which itself is made up of the heads of all member states. So our representative is whoever we've elected as PM. The nominations are then voted for by MEPs. Again, the people we have voted for to represent us. The Commission is then put together with one commissioner from each member state.

 

Their work is put to the MEPs to vote on and here is one demonstrable example of when a commission was forced out:-

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santer_Commission#Resignation

 

I haven't seen the efforts or results of lobbyists in Europe to know whether there's any more or less than in the UK.

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 don't. And that sounds like a media soundbite. It may or may not have outgrown its original role, but I have yet to be shown an area in which this has been a negative.

 

In terms of something membership of the EU offers that might appeal mre than being a partner, is better put by A A Gill:-

 

"I am part of this culture, this European civilisation. I can walk into any gallery on our continent and completely understand the images and the stories on the walls. These people are my people and they have been for thousands of years. I can read books on subjects from Ancient Greece to Dark Ages Scandinavia, from Renaissance Italy to 19th-century France, and I don’t need the context or the landscape explained to me. The music of Europe, from its scales and its instruments to its rhythms and religion, is my music. The Renaissance, the rococo, the Romantics, the impressionists, gothic, baroque, neoclassicism, realism, expressionism, futurism, fauvism, cubism, dada, surrealism, postmodernism and kitsch were all European movements and none of them belongs to a single nation.

 

There is a reason why the Chinese are making fake Italian handbags and the Italians aren’t making fake Chinese ones. This European culture, without question or argument, is the greatest, most inventive, subtle, profound, beautiful and powerful genius that was ever contrived anywhere by anyone and it belongs to us."

 

I don't want to be a small island and close partner to that - I want to be a leading member of the richest (in every sense of the word) alliance in the history of man. That is what I want.

Edited June 17, 2016 by Granett

[anser2]

The out people are saying instead of worrying about trade with Europe we should aim at trading with other countries such as the US or china. In the short term maybe , but in 30-40 years time fuel is not going to get any cheaper and a oil becomes scarce and harder to get its price is going to rocket and the cost of transporting goods half way around the world is going to make goods very expensive. Trading with countries close to you is going to be far cheaper and more profitable. Another factor is we cant reley on still being able to trade with some of these countries. There has been no mention from the leave side about the cat and mouse the Chinese and Americans are playing in the South China sea over territorial claims that other Asian countries with US backing are also claiming . It may come to nothing , but it may end in sanctions for China which in turn the UK will have to respect so at least one major trading power is looking very dubious for UK trade.

Edited June 17, 2016 by anser2

[FalconFN]

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?

Edited June 17, 2016 by FalconFN

[hawkfanz]

my postal vote has already gone in to leave so that will cancel grannets vote to stay so come guys vote leave.

[B25Modelman]

I am not sure either way but my pension portfolio is taking a bashing over this.

[Dave-G]

EDIT: Wrong place and time I guess.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Dave-G

[achosenman]

I am not sure either way but my pension portfolio is taking a bashing over this.

 

I think everyone is in the same boat. Pots go up and down as a matter of course. Unless you're about to retire I don't think it matters that much short term.

 

Atb

[B25Modelman]

Politicians or the like lie....naaaaa, that's hear say.

 

Back in April we had one of our local councilors totting for business on precisely the same day Peter Skinner was jailed for expenses fraud. Said councilor went off into their patter and I stopped them dead saying 'have you read the news today ref Peter Skinner', No was the reply, 'surely you must have', again No. So after that am I going to believe anything they say...certainly not.

 

6 years ago this very person lived in a house worth £400,000. He/she became prominent on the council and now lives in a house worth £1.5M.

[islandgun]

I am not an expert and I'm learning a lot as the subject's discussed but it seems the Commission Head is nominated by the European Council, which itself is made up of the heads of all member states. So our representative is whoever we've elected as PM. The nominations are then voted for by MEPs. Again, the people we have voted for to represent us. The Commission is then put together with one commissioner from each member state.

 

Their work is put to the MEPs to vote on and here is one demonstrable example of when a commission was forced out:-

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santer_Commission#Resignation

 

I haven't seen the efforts or results of lobbyists in Europe to know whether there's any more or less than in the UK.

I don't. And that sounds like a media soundbite. It may or may not have outgrown its original role, but I have yet to be shown an area in which this has been a negative.

 

In terms of something membership of the EU offers that might appeal mre than being a partner, is better put by A A Gill:-

 

"I am part of this culture, this European civilisation. I can walk into any gallery on our continent and completely understand the images and the stories on the walls. These people are my people and they have been for thousands of years. I can read books on subjects from Ancient Greece to Dark Ages Scandinavia, from Renaissance Italy to 19th-century France, and I don’t need the context or the landscape explained to me. The music of Europe, from its scales and its instruments to its rhythms and religion, is my music. The Renaissance, the rococo, the Romantics, the impressionists, gothic, baroque, neoclassicism, realism, expressionism, futurism, fauvism, cubism, dada, surrealism, postmodernism and kitsch were all European movements and none of them belongs to a single nation.

 

There is a reason why the Chinese are making fake Italian handbags and the Italians aren’t making fake Chinese ones. This European culture, without question or argument, is the greatest, most inventive, subtle, profound, beautiful and powerful genius that was ever contrived anywhere by anyone and it belongs to us."

 

I don't want to be a small island and close partner to that - I want to be a leading member of the richest (in every sense of the word) alliance in the history of man. That is what I want.

 

That all sounds a bit elitist to me, the chinese were a civilisation while europeans were wearing skins, I prefer a Britain with a broad blend of nationalities from all over the world !

[sportsbob]

Here is the real question, if this vote was to join Europe with its broken currency and financially crippled mediterranean countries in imminent need of financial support and swathes of migrants invading Europe from the middle east then how would you vote? join on not?

[Savhmr]

What everyone seems to be missing in the whole "The EU is democratic as MEPs decide legislature" argument is that the UK simply no longer has a voice. Whilst we elect MEPs, ours number around 70 from over 770 total from 28 member states so unless we forge alliances, we're out-voted every time the UK objects to something they want to push through and therefore we do NOT have democracy for the UK population, we have forced legislation put upon us whether we want it or not. The reason we have no voice is because alliances are very hard to forge (everyone has differing agendas and the state of a nations own GDP and welfare reform goals from poorer Southern and Eastern countries can put them diametrically opposed to our views). It is an overweight, burdensome and very inefficient machine and despite the protestations of the IN crown, it is largely run by a handful of elitists who want to progress the EU towards a superstate with one army, one currency, tax harmonisation and the same set of rules for all. That used to be called a dictatorship didn't it?

 

The UK, if we stay will continue to lose our voice, and if we do vote "remain" we will have irrevocably weakened, not strengthened out position in the EU.

 

As mentioned in another thread, I detest most of the political parties today and the characters involved, and whilst not inclined to vote in another general election whilst we are in the EU (why bother...they're all the same despite being different colours) I shall be voting leave. It is not extremist or far right to vote out (I hold no far right views whatsoever and happen to have more empathy with some socialist policies geared towards the welfare of average bloke on the street but not the far left loony wing of socialism). It is, however, in my view, a vote of weakness and resignation to vote remain. The Brexit campaign only has one or two things right so far (if you ignore most of their drivel), and that is a vote to remain is a vote for the status quo, and that is a vote for a disastrous future the way things are.

 

Whatever way you dice it and however you wish to argue the exact figures, unemployment within the EU Bloc is generally a lot higher than here and rising steadily and the Euro and its central management tied to fudging the entry criteria for member states admitted more on the basis of creating a superstate to challenge Russia has been an unmitigated disaster. It is a disgraceful lie to argue against that fact. Italy and Greece both want out and have suggested that they may exercise their right to enacting Article 50 also.

 

The way I see it, the only real chance of any sort of democracy for the United Kingdom and a better, brighter future for my children is to vote out and work damned hard as a nation for the next decade to forge a new place within the WTO for ourselves. The cost has to be weighed against both the savings from leaving the EU and on regaining democracy where at least out vote counts for something. The sad thing is that Parliament has no obligation to honour a "leave" vote nor to enact Article 50 and the EU has no obligation to accept our vote and could in fact vote amongst themselves to keep us in. If that happens, Parliament has to default to the WTO position within 2 years and we forceably extract ourselves. It may yet come to that.

[anser2]

savhmr, Of course the UK has a voice , we have a vote at the table just the same as any other country. Only in a small number of cases are we out voted by the other countries in the EU , but thats how democracy works , the majority opinion wins. Your arguments fall down if you apply it with the UK. If the elected govenment in acts a law , but the people of one town object do the leave the UK. Of course they accept the majority opinion and move on. The likes of Boris and co are acting like spoiled brats who cant get their own way. In the long run you have to work with people and not turn your back on them if you want a secure future. We have a strong econmic country because of the EC not in spite of it.

 

Dave the world has moved on since the days when we made most of our own goods. The cost of making aircraft is so high that we have to have joint projects to pool resources to make todays aircraft. We do not have the billions needed to develope these aircraft on or own. As for steel our main problem is China is undercutting world prices and dumping steel on the world market below the price it takes to make the stuff. And this is a country the leave camp want to forge stronger trading links with. China has already craped on us over steel and the closer we become tied with them in trade the more they will do it to us.

Edited June 18, 2016 by anser2

[TONY R]

my postal vote has already gone in to leave so that will cancel grannets vote to stay so come guys vote leave.

Dont fret we will be voting out here and thats three votes now from here.

I can see no evidence to make anyone bellieve that staying in the EU can not do anything but harm to Britain, Quite why anyone should chose to vote stay is rather strange .

I think the obvious Government scare mongering has had such an adverse effect on some they can not think for themselves any more and will just vote like sheep.

I know one thing what with this awefull murder in Leeds and the Outfall from that clouding the water we will need all hands to the pumps on this one to save the day, Encourage all you know do your bit because it will be laid back appathetic attitudes from people not voting that looses us this referendum. Vote out or repent at your leisure in the years to come, its our chance for change and we need change .

[Savhmr]

savhmr, Of course the UK has a voice , we have a vote at the table just the same as any other country. Only in a small number of cases are we out voted by the other countries in the EU , but thats how democracy works , the majority opinion wins. Your arguments fall down if you apply it with the UK. If the elected govenment in acts a law , but the people of one town object do the leave the UK. Of course they accept the majority opinion and move on. The likes of Boris and co are acting like spoiled brats who cant get their own way. In the long run you have to work with people and not turn your back on them if you want a secure future. We have a strong econmic country because of the EC not in spite of it.

 

Dave the world has moved on since the days when we made most of our own goods. The cost of making aircraft is so high that we have to have joint projects to pool resources to make todays aircraft. We do not have the billions needed to develope these aircraft on or own. As for steel our main problem is China is undercutting world prices and dumping steel on the world market below the price it takes to make the stuff. And this is a country the leave camp want to forge stronger trading links with. China has already craped on us over steel and the closer we become tied with them in trade the more they will do it to us.

 

Sorry but you miss the point completely. We do not have a voice if what we mean by that is that we have any power to control things in Europe as far as law making goes. We dont. The EU parliament makes the law and "we" as in 77 of our MEPs have to either vote pass or vote to reject those laws or directives. The EU parliament doesn't even have to abide by the decision of what the MEPs vote for and are free to overturn it, basically at the whim of the EU parliament, and you call that democracy? Where do you get the bit about we've only been over-ruled a few times from? That's pure fantasy! We don't make the rules so how can we be over-ruled? We have however objected to many draft proposals and been ignored, as the majority of the other 28 member states has voted against our wishes. There are so many agendas and wheels within wheels whirring away within the EU that it is simply eye watering. It has become too big, complex and unwieldy. I know that you are just repeating what you may fervently believe, but the truth is far from you've tried to paint it. The EU does NOT operate in the same way as UK democracy and we have NO real voice within the EU. All this about us needing to be at the table nonsense...we are at the table and have been since the start and because the whole thing is going in a direction that the majority seem to think is unacceptable to us in the UK, then time has come to leave. Don't you get it? It is a ship that is not for turning and is not for reform. We don't need to fall out with anyone, just leave so that we don't get dragged into ever closer federal union which is NOT what we signed up for.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Savhmr

[anser2]

Why strange , the EU has dragged us up from a poor broken country in the 1970s to the rich country we have today. Its sheer madness to turn your back on that.

 

Just think back to the days when we had a 3 day working week and power cuts almost weekly , for one spell daily. Our country was deeply in the red , very high unemployment , high taxes , very high inflation. Now we have good wages, low inflation , full employment . Are a very grumbles we have with the EU worth the risk of returning to that. Even the wildfowling is better than it was back in the 1970s. Though the EU cant take any credit for that, or perhaps the money that went into Special areas of Conservation and special protection areas all funded by the EU have assisted in the improvment in our sport.

[Rewulf]

Why strange , the EU has dragged us up from a poor broken country in the 1970s to the rich country we have today. Its sheer madness to turn your back on that.

 

Just think back to the days when we had a 3 day working week and power cuts almost weekly , for one spell daily. Our country was deeply in the red , very high unemployment , high taxes , very high inflation. Now we have good wages, low inflation , full employment . Are a very grumbles we have with the EU worth the risk of returning to that. Even the wildfowling is better than it was back in the 1970s. Though the EU cant take any credit for that, or perhaps the money that went into Special areas of Conservation and special protection areas all funded by the EU have assisted in the improvment in our sport.

 

I seem to remember a couple of other poor broken countries during the late 40s into the 50s.

Hard times and adversity made the populace work harder to rebuild their shattered countries and economies.

Although Japan is not the big shot it was in the 80s and 90s ,Germany goes from strength to strength, even whilst bank rolling some of the EU.

 

Whilst joining the EU has had a negative impact on countries like Greece,Portugal and Spain,the Euro effectively killed their economies,tourism in particular.

To say that being part of the EEC in the 70s repaired Britain is stretching it somewhat,Im not saying it didnt help..a bit..but I think when your backs against the wall ,you fight that bit harder.

[anser2]

 

Sorry but you miss the point completely. We do not have a voice if what we mean by that is that we have any power to control things in Europe as far as law making goes. We dont. The EU parliament makes the law and "we" as in 77 of our MEPs have to either vote pass or vote to reject those laws or directives. The EU parliament doesn't even have to abide by the decision of what the MEPs vote for and are free to overturn it, basically at the whim of the EU parliament, and you call that democracy? Where do you get the bit about we've only been over-ruled a few times from? That's pure fantasy! We don't make the rules so how can we be over-ruled? We have however objected to many draft proposals and been ignored, as the majority of the other 28 member states has voted against our wishes. There are so many agendas and wheels within wheels whirring away within the EU that it is simply eye watering. It has become too big, complex and unwieldy. I know that you are just repeating what you may fervently believe, but the truth is far from you've tried to paint it. The EU does NOT operate in the same way as UK democracy and we have NO real voice within the EU. All this about us needing to be at the table nonsense...we are at the table and have been since the start and because the whole thing is going in a direction that the majority seem to think is unacceptable to us in the UK, then time has come to leave. Don't you get it? It is a ship that is not for turning and is not for reform. We don't need to fall out with anyone, just leave so that we don't get dragged into ever closer federal union which is NOT what we signed up for.

Of course we do not have the power to control things in Europe we have a the same say as the other 27 nations and thats how democracy works.

 

This would suggest that something in the region of 10-20% would be a fair guess for the UK as well (a range that has the added benefit of being backed up by the British Chambers of Commerce’s recent study of regulations).No one agrees on how much legislation and regulation stems from the EU. The 9.1% figure stated by the House of Commons Library is too low, as it only covers Statutory Instruments, not ALL laws; the higher figures of 84%, 75% and even 50% claimed by the likes of Hannan, Farrage and Cameron are based on miscalculations, misunderstandings, or sources unknown, and often derive from parts of the EU other than just the UK – and so with no hard evidence to support them must be dismissed as either too high or inapplicable to the British situation.

What is the true figure? No one knows. So any claims that state hard and fast percentages should – if we’re being intellectually honest – be treated with equal suspicion.

Not that any of this is likely to change the opinions of those eurosceptics convinced of the malicious and all-pervading influence of the EU on our daily lives, of course. But still. I’ve looked for the evidence, and this is what I’ve tracked down. . http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2009/06/what-percentage-of-laws-come-from-the-eu/

Edited June 18, 2016 by anser2

[anser2]

Rewolf both those countries had massive backing from the US and other countries of billions of aid to get them up and standing on their own two feet. As for Greece their problems come from very left wing internal policy and then when things go wrong they then expect the EU to bail them out which they are doing , but only with strings attached to make sure they do not return to their old ways.