Brexit

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Duty281 wrote:He doesn't have to 'prove his innocence', that's not how the justice system in this country works.

But it's how the world intends it to work.................... it's probably called neo-socialism - ooh, sex-Y!.  
Anti establishment thought crimes to be punishable by no trial and a bullet down some cavernous prison complex dedicated to 're-education' of political dissidents.

Sex crimes as well? I don't see many people one here leaping to Weinstein's defence.

Yep. I would, until and unless he's convicted. Otherwise it's just hearsay and rumour.

So would Arron Banks

Meaning?

Pr4wn wrote:Julius, there's no point. Apparently a referendum two years ago, a GE in which the only pro-leave party didn't win a single seat and the somewhat pro-leave government lost its majority and "further research" - whatever that means - are concrete proof that the majority of people want to leave the EU...

What has any of this got to do with it? There was a referendum, the country voted 'out' at the time ergo the majority of people wanted to leave. End of. There's no new referendum coming and the numbers wanting to leave hasn't noticeably shifted such anyone could justify another referendum.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Julius, there's no point. Apparently a referendum two years ago, a GE in which the only pro-leave party didn't win a single seat and the somewhat pro-leave government lost its majority and "further research" - whatever that means - are concrete proof that the majority of people want to leave the EU...

What has any of this got to do with it? There was a referendum, the country voted 'out' at the time ergo the majority of people wanted to leave. End of. There's no new referendum coming and the numbers wanting to leave hasn't noticeably shifted such anyone could justify another referendum.

It was a direct response so Duty's previous post. Keep up.

Pr4wn wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Julius, there's no point. Apparently a referendum two years ago, a GE in which the only pro-leave party didn't win a single seat and the somewhat pro-leave government lost its majority and "further research" - whatever that means - are concrete proof that the majority of people want to leave the EU...

What has any of this got to do with it? There was a referendum, the country voted 'out' at the time ergo the majority of people wanted to leave. End of. There's no new referendum coming and the numbers wanting to leave hasn't noticeably shifted such anyone could justify another referendum.

It was a direct response so Duty's previous post. Keep up.

Calm down.

What you posted was irrelevant whataboutery. What does the fact a pro-leave party not winning a seat at a GE have to do with how people voted in the referendum? What does the fact the Tories lost their majority at the GE have to do with people's feelings on the single issue re. the EU? Plenty of Labour GE voters voted 'out' in the referendum, for example, as Duty pointed out. The referendum is the only thing you have to go by and a majority voted 'out'. Sorry you don't like that, but I'm afraid that's the way it is.

Duty281 wrote:Of course you can keep the common travel area, which predates CU and SM membership. Certain non-EU countries (e.g. South Africa) already have different visa requirements with Eire than they do with the UK, and no one complains about that in keeping with the common travel area.

This is all old hat, anyway. Read the below paper from the European Parliament to see how there is no need for a hard border between the UK and ROI.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596828/IPOL_STU(2017)596828_EN.pdf

I don't think you have read that paper. What they describe doesn't exist yet:

6.3.3 What is required for a Smart Border 2.0 solution?
- A bilateral EU-UK agreement regulating advanced customs cooperation avoiding duplication and with possibility to carry out tasks on each other;
- Mutual recognition of Authorised Economic Operators (AEO);
- A Customs to - Customs technical agreement on exchange of risk data;
- Pre-registration of Operators (AEO) and People (Trusted Commercial Travellers programme in combination with a Certified Taxable Person programme) ;
- Identification system by the border;
- A Single Window with one - stop - shop - elements;
- A Unique Consignment reference number (UCR);
- Simplified Customs declaration system (100% electronic) with re-use of export data for imports;
- Mobile Control and Inspection Units;
- Technical surveillance of the border (CCTV, ANPR, etc).

And anyone who has any clue knows that CCTV etc. wouldn't last two minutes on the British border in Ireland. It also doesn't seem to realise that there are approx. 200 border crossing between NI & ROI.
What people don't realise as well is that 60% of Northern Ireland exports go through the port of Dublin. That means they are going to have to do a couple of checks anyway and make it extremely costly for NI exporters.

Duty281 wrote:Eire isn't a member of Schengen, which is why we're not having a hard border and keeping the common travel area.

You expect Ireland to do your border control for you? That is not taking back control!

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Julius, there's no point. Apparently a referendum two years ago, a GE in which the only pro-leave party didn't win a single seat and the somewhat pro-leave government lost its majority and "further research" - whatever that means - are concrete proof that the majority of people want to leave the EU...

What has any of this got to do with it? There was a referendum, the country voted 'out' at the time ergo the majority of people wanted to leave. End of. There's no new referendum coming and the numbers wanting to leave hasn't noticeably shifted such anyone could justify another referendum.

It was a direct response so Duty's previous post. Keep up.

Calm down.

What you posted was irrelevant whataboutery. What does the fact a pro-leave party not winning a seat at a GE have to do with how people voted in the referendum? What does the fact the Tories lost their majority at the GE have to do with people's feelings on the single issue re. the EU? Plenty of Labour GE voters voted 'out' in the referendum, for example, as Duty pointed out. The referendum is the only thing you have to go by and a majority voted 'out'. Sorry you don't like that, but I'm afraid that's the way it is.

You seem pretty grumpy these days, bud.

In answer to the bold points, nothing. That's not the point I was making. It was more to do with the sentiment around leaving the EU, not how people voted in the referendum. Remember that the GE was a year after the referendum. We'd had a whole year of the government doing absolutely nothing.

Of course it doesn't exist, yet, these are proposed solutions to solving the border issue. And, no, I expect the UK and ROI to work together on border control.

Duty281 wrote:

Keep the common travel area.

Unhappy with the general law-making process of the EU, from its overly bureaucratic nature to the unaccountability of its Commissioners. I support a far more localised system, with regular outbursts (if you like) of direct democracy, of referenda.

And I utterly despise the European Arrest Warrant.

The Commissioners are accountable to the (elected) heads of state of each EU country (in a similar way that Ollie Robbins reports to Theresa May). In fact, the Commission is more democratic than most Governments as the Commission is selected by the (elected) European Parliament. The European People's Party Grouping (which the Tories are members of) are actually selecting their candidate today in Finland to replace Juncker.

As for frequent referenda. That is up to the British Government. Over here in Ireland we have loads of them (which are binding unlike the British ones). You need to change how your system of government works for that (I actually think the British system could do with an overhaul).

Yours is the first complaint I've heard about the European Arrest Warrant. Only the other day the PSNI issued an EAW for the arrest of a republican who lives in the ROI for the murder of two UDR soldiers in 1972. He is in custody now in the ROI before being extradited to NI. What is your problem with it?

Duty281 wrote:Of course it doesn't exist, yet, these are proposed solutions to solving the border issue. And, no, I expect the UK and ROI to work together on border control.

Any sort of surveillance on the border is impossible (apart from the social implications, its just impractical because of the nature of the border and its 200 crossings). There is a video where border kids talk about the border on the Irish Times website. One of the kids says she crosses the border twice to get to school (and she only lives a couple of miles away from it) and another one said that in her family home, the living room is in the ROI and her bedroom is in NI.

Yep the Brexit Secretary has just recovered from the shock of realising that a lot of food gets delivered by boat..

Good to know he is on the ball..

Sin é wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Keep the common travel area.

Unhappy with the general law-making process of the EU, from its overly bureaucratic nature to the unaccountability of its Commissioners. I support a far more localised system, with regular outbursts (if you like) of direct democracy, of referenda.

And I utterly despise the European Arrest Warrant.

The Commissioners are accountable to the (elected) heads of state of each EU country (in a similar way that Ollie Robbins reports to Theresa May). In fact, the Commission is more democratic than most Governments as the Commission is selected by the (elected) European Parliament. The European People's Party Grouping (which the Tories are members of) are actually selecting their candidate today in Finland to replace Juncker.

As for frequent referenda. That is up to the British Government. Over here in Ireland we have loads of them (which are binding unlike the British ones). You need to change how your system of government works for that (I actually think the British system could do with an overhaul).

Yours is the first complaint I've heard about the European Arrest Warrant. Only the other day the PSNI issued an EAW for the arrest of a republican who lives in the ROI for the murder of two UDR soldiers in 1972.  He is in custody now in the ROI before being extradited to NI. What is your problem with it?

The Commissioners, however, are not directly accountable to the electorate, which is my quarrel. I would like a huge overhaul to the system of governance and the democratic mechanisms of the UK, so we might be in agreement there.

I utterly despise the European Arrest Warrant because it tramples over Magna Carta and Habeas corpus and poses a very grave danger to the liberty of UK citizens. Again, it is the EU presuming equality where no such equality exists, as it attempts to merge vastly different legal systems across the continent.

The most famous case of the EAW going wrong is, of course, Andrew Symeou, who was thrown into some Greek hellhole for about a year, without any evidence presented, before eventually being acquitted.

I wonder how many times the EAW has been used to fantastic effect.

The EAW has been reformed since that Symeou case.

..... His case showed that there were real problems with the way the EAW was operating and that things needed to change as a result. That is why we have taken action to fix them, both in Brussels and in Westminster.

We’ve changed the rules so that no-one will be extradited unless there is a clear intention on the part of the receiving country to bring the case to trial. That will mean people in Andrew’s situation won’t have to sit in jail for months waiting while their case is still being investigated. We have also legislated for a proportionality test, which will mean that our courts are able to consider whether extradition would have a disproportionate impact on the fundamental rights of the person who is being requested for extradition. And we will allow for video-conferencing to be used so that people can be questioned from abroad without leaving the UK.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/nick-clegg-farage-has-modern-justice-and-my-position-on-andrew-symeou-all-wrong-9219343.html#commentsDiv

Duty281 wrote:

The Commissioners, however, are not directly accountable to the electorate, which is my quarrel. I would like a huge overhaul to the system of governance and the democratic mechanisms of the UK, so we might be in agreement there.

I utterly despise the European Arrest Warrant because it tramples over Magna Carta and Habeas corpus and poses a very grave danger to the liberty of UK citizens. Again, it is the EU presuming equality where no such equality exists, as it attempts to merge vastly different legal systems across the continent.

The most famous case of the EAW going wrong is, of course, Andrew Symeou, who was thrown into some Greek hellhole for about a year, without any evidence presented, before eventually being acquitted.

The Commissioners are accountable to the (elected) European Parliament and to the Council of Ministers in a similar way that British Civil Servants are accountable to the British Government and not the British electorate.

Pr4wn wrote:I wonder how many times the EAW has been used to fantastic effect.

Figures I've seen are 3,000 in 2004 rising to 15,000 in 2009 and about 10,000 in 2010.

That case about the IRA guy that was arrested the other day - there is a court hearing in the next 2 weeks on whether he should be extradited to NI or not.

To me auld pal Sin.....

In a Union of Sovereign States - that Commission is by no means more democratic than the local National methods.  No bloody way is it more 'democratic' - a twisting of meaning.  

We are not a United States of Europe - we are a Union of Sovereign Nations - allegedly, when we're lied to.  There is a difference in the meaning.  

Only in a United States of Europe might a system that is in place in the EU now be approaching a democratic process.  And even then it's in my opinion a far off example of it

- ask Americans, who have recently fought each other on the theories of one total electorate Nationwide (that would have elected Hillary Clinton) v the college based system that saves smaller populated States from eternal bondage in representational terms to the largely populated coasts.  

The Large Populated coasts do not speak for the Heartlands in terms of economic or social beliefs.  To impose a 'representative' Coastal mindset on them - eternally - would not be democratic.............. but even then, they are still Legally more a single 'Nation' than the EU currently is.

A small Nation like Ireland can never have democratic representation at EU level (ie, an equal voice within a collective of 28 separate equal voices) when their MEPs form only tiny sections of the existing 'European' Parties.  
Like you say, it is these Parties, stuffed with many hundreds more politicians from all the other largely populated Nations, that call the shots on Commissioners and therefore calls the shots on continuing overall EU policies. (common Foreign affairs opinion?, common Army?  common police force? declared common economic enemies - [currently USA?])

To suggest that Irish National concerns within Europe can have a fair hearing against German or French or Spanish concerns at EU level is not logical.  We simply don't have the numbers to threaten or shift any direction the majority want to go in.  You'll say that's democracy, I'll say it's back to Empire; the thing our grandfathers and  great grandfathers fought to escape.  

As the grip of this EU increased in Ireland with every referendum... hidden in the fine print behind the carrot inducement of 'more funding' .... we had Irish politicians saying Ireland's National interests wouldn't be swamped by our small size...that the smaller Nations would stick together for security.

Fantasy land rubbish and knowingly deceitful.  Small countries can be easily bought off to desert their fellow small nations when needed.  As a small Nation is vulnerable, they are obviously more inclined to accept 'safety' whispers from a Larger group of Nations than from one or two of their own size.  And that's what's been happening.  Ireland have been quick at times to side with the Big Nations of Europe when they've ganged up one of the little ones like for example Greece.

It's a corrupt circus of lobbying self-interest and Ireland are no angels in using the Big Structure to hide inside ("don't blame us local politicians for trouble blame Europe - they're telling us to do it" ) - and they're no angels in exploiting it..... legally or vice versa.

Sin é wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:I wonder how many times the EAW has been used to fantastic effect.

Figures I've seen are 3,000 in 2004 rising to 15,000 in 2009 and about 10,000 in 2010.

That case about the IRA guy that was arrested the other day - there is a court hearing in the next 2 weeks on whether he should be extradited to NI or not.

What about Kin...ah...hans?  In Spain I believe, some of them.  Do you know if the Irish government has issues any EAWs?  Or are all those Irish gangsters over in Spain and places all innocent chaps who like the sun?

So Fly, do you think a small country like Ireland would be treated anyway better or do better outside the EU?

As for Greece - its an irresponsible country and relatively poor countries like Ireland, Spain and Portugal should not have to pay for their spendtriff ways, especially if they continue to spend more than their means and don't bother to sort out corruption and collect tax.

SecretFly wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:I wonder how many times the EAW has been used to fantastic effect.

Figures I've seen are 3,000 in 2004 rising to 15,000 in 2009 and about 10,000 in 2010.

That case about the IRA guy that was arrested the other day - there is a court hearing in the next 2 weeks on whether he should be extradited to NI or not.

What about Kin...ah...hans?  In Spain I believe, some of them.  Do you know if the Irish government has issues any EAWs?  Or are all those Irish gangsters over in Spain and places all innocent chaps who like the sun?

I think they have all moved to Dubai now - out of the jurisdiction of the EWA.

MOB boss Daniel Kinahan is effectively living in an “air-conditioned prison in the desert”, according to gardai who say the gangster has surrounded himself with ex-special forces bodyguards and has not left Dubai for more than a year.

“Gardai are continuing to monitor his movements and are satisfied that Daniel has not left the United Arab Emirates for well over a year,” a senior source told Independent.ie

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/crime/daniel-kinahan-living-in-airconditioned-desert-prison-as-hes-afraid-to-leave-dubai-37326467.html

Sin é wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

The Commissioners, however, are not directly accountable to the electorate, which is my quarrel. I would like a huge overhaul to the system of governance and the democratic mechanisms of the UK, so we might be in agreement there.

I utterly despise the European Arrest Warrant because it tramples over Magna Carta and Habeas corpus and poses a very grave danger to the liberty of UK citizens. Again, it is the EU presuming equality where no such equality exists, as it attempts to merge vastly different legal systems across the continent.

The most famous case of the EAW going wrong is, of course, Andrew Symeou, who was thrown into some Greek hellhole for about a year, without any evidence presented, before eventually being acquitted.

The Commissioners are accountable to the (elected) European Parliament and to the Council of Ministers in a similar way that British Civil Servants are accountable to the British Government and not the British electorate.

Yes, a truly horrendous system that needs 21st century reform. In a digital age, citizens should have far greater say in the legislation that effects their lives rather than the wasteful, elongated and complicated bureaucracy that is the European Union - one of those is the future, and it isn't the system which relies on an unelected commission to propose legislation before being passed down to an inefficient parliament

The EAW may have had meagre reforms since the Symeou case, but it's clearly not far enough.

Duty281 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

The Commissioners, however, are not directly accountable to the electorate, which is my quarrel. I would like a huge overhaul to the system of governance and the democratic mechanisms of the UK, so we might be in agreement there.

I utterly despise the European Arrest Warrant because it tramples over Magna Carta and Habeas corpus and poses a very grave danger to the liberty of UK citizens. Again, it is the EU presuming equality where no such equality exists, as it attempts to merge vastly different legal systems across the continent.

The most famous case of the EAW going wrong is, of course, Andrew Symeou, who was thrown into some Greek hellhole for about a year, without any evidence presented, before eventually being acquitted.

The Commissioners are accountable to the (elected) European Parliament and to the Council of Ministers in a similar way that British Civil Servants are accountable to the British Government and not the British electorate.

Yes, a truly horrendous system that needs 21st century reform. In a digital age, citizens should have far greater say in the legislation that effects their lives rather than the wasteful, elongated and complicated bureaucracy that is the European Union - one of those is the future, and it isn't the system which relies on an unelected commission to propose legislation before being passed down to an inefficient parliament

The EAW may have had meagre reforms since the Symeou case, but it's clearly not far enough.

Why is it clearly not good enough?

You are making some mighty big claims there about inefficiency. I wouldn't base the working of the European Parliament on what Nigel Farage gets up to?

A small constituency has bugger all say in how things are run at a national level i.e. does not have any effective democratic representation in Westminster, especially if in opposition.
The reality is that as individuals we have sod all say in what goes on Government, either locally, at Westminster or the EU.
Why shouldn't we be arguing for our own local areas to break away from Westminster? I mean, what is the ideology that stops us from wanting that (and thus gaining more control over our lives), but wanting Brexit? None - it's just the practicality of it, so we live with it. But I can't believe that somehow the UK is magically just the right size, with just the right population, that it should remain unchanged.
Anyway, why do people think that the 'British' have more in common with each other than with 'foreigners'? And even if we do, is that a good thing?
Personally, I'd like to see a United States of Europe, or even of the world. (Hell, I'd like to see a United States of America!)

Sin é wrote:So Fly, do you think a small country like Ireland would be treated anyway better or do better outside the EU?

As for Greece - its an irresponsible country and relatively poor countries like Ireland, Spain and Portugal should not have to pay for their spendtriff ways, especially if they continue to spend more than their means and don't bother to sort out corruption and collect tax.

You speak like a true Imperialist, sin.  Shame, I had you down as a proud Republican (peaceful kind).

Ireland would control its OWN destiny outside the EU.  Our Politicians would have nowhere to run and would be accountable for their OWN actions.  
I love Europe.... I love the individual nations within it...most especially the hot blooded ones that I can kinda identify with - Spain, Italy.  I love the idea of all of us, together - as a DIVERSE collection of cooperating Sovereign Nations, thriving and travelling and doing business with each other

................................... for that, you do NOT need a Common Administrative Government, MEPs, COMMISSIONERS, a Common Foreign Policy, a Common Army or common declared 'enemies'.  

I don't regard either the USA or Russia as an enemy of this Nation.  And I don't regard the UK as an enemy either.  Yet, when we're sucked into this pan-EU concept, so readily Irish politicians get cocky and start sneering two Nation (USA and UK) that have done so much more for Ireland than any of our neighbour partners in Europe.  A Europe of Sovereign Nations, doing business together.... that's enough and with all this new technology, more than doable to maintain prosperity without the claws.

Yeah, almost anyone who knows anything about anything says that if any country has done badly out of the EU its Ireland.

Christ alive! The council estates would still be full of toothless teenagers riding horses bareback while their parents participated in the twin national sports of growing eyebrows on their cheeks and dying in their late '40's if it wasn't for Ireland's membership of the EU.

JuliusHMarx wrote:A small constituency has bugger all say in how things are run at a national level i.e. does not have any effective democratic representation in Westminster, especially if in opposition.
The reality is that as individuals we have sod all say in what goes on Government, either locally, at Westminster or the EU.
Why shouldn't we be arguing for our own local areas to break away from Westminster? I mean, what is the ideology that stops us from wanting that (and thus gaining more control over our lives), but wanting Brexit? None - it's just the practicality of it, so we live with it. But I can't believe that somehow the UK is magically just the right size, with just the right population, that it should remain unchanged.
Anyway, why do people think that the 'British' have more in common with each other than with 'foreigners'? And even if we do, is that a good thing?
Personally, I'd like to see a United States of Europe, or even of the world. (Hell, I'd like to see a United States of America!)

It's all evolution, Julius, as I've stated before.  None of us can even help ourselves.  It's programmed into us.  I want my sense of space and freedom (whatever that means) and people of your opinion want us all together in a cohesive unity or love and cooperation.

Both are unreal expectations.  

Unfortunately.... we all still stick to these ideals.... and unfortunately wars develop out of them.  I think we can all agree that none of us would want war to break out to solve 'issues' - yet in truth, behind all the fun and games in the media in America and Europe regarding Trump and the Democrats.... that Nation is seriously skirting around the ideas of dividing up and a version of perhaps a civil war starting.  
It's that serious when you really read and listen to as much of the dialogue over there as you can...and I observe a LOT of it.  It's simply weird to be thinking about America possibly descending into a new Civil war in this early 21st century.... but............. the rumbling are there............

I would love us to genuinely learn the lessons of the last century, to stall the build up of this 'evolutionary' tension that seems to be just inevitable.  Politicians have to try to look beyond the immediate debates about immediate issues and think about the big picture.  
History can very much happen again.... a repeat....

everyone has to try to look at their own weakness..... and if the UK and the USA must look into their soul and try to contemplate their positions - so too must an entity like the EU.  But the EU continues to say all the problems are 'membership' problems.  I say it has to accept that another problem, a big one, is the direction the EU decided to go in.  So what would the EU do to lower tensions within it's member states?  How would it modify its structures to lower the friction?

superflyweight wrote:Yeah, almost anyone who knows anything about anything says that if any country has done badly out of the EU its Ireland.  

Christ alive!  The council estates would still be full of toothless teenagers riding horses bareback while their parents participated in the twin national sports of growing eyebrows on their cheeks and dying in their late '40's if it wasn't for Ireland's membership of the EU.  

?

You mean toothless teenagers aren't riding horses bareback?  Maybe selling drugs but still to be seen on horseback with bad teeth - as the EU harbours the kingpins in the lovely sunny resorts...  grand place the EU  

The EU..................... manna from Heaven..... expensive though as some of my neighbours found out when they committed suicide to prop up gangster European banks to save speculators that lost a race but still didn't lose their bet.

It's a lovely place.  We gave more in Fish stocks to the EU than we've ever got back from it...and now we're paying them back with interest for their largesse.  All Hail EU!

SecretFly wrote:

Sin é wrote:So Fly, do you think a small country like Ireland would be treated anyway better or do better outside the EU?

As for Greece - its an irresponsible country and relatively poor countries like Ireland, Spain and Portugal should not have to pay for their spendtriff ways, especially if they continue to spend more than their means and don't bother to sort out corruption and collect tax.

You speak like a true Imperialist, sin.  Shame, I had you down as a proud Republican (peaceful kind).

Ireland would control its OWN destiny outside the EU.  Our Politicians would have nowhere to run and would be accountable for their OWN actions.

Why do I sound like an imperialist?

As for our politicians - unlike in the UK, our politicians rightly get blamed when things go wrong, not the EU. Do I take it you think Ireland, Portugal and Spain should be writing off Greek debt, because that is what will have to happen for debt relief for Greece. So in the real world like Ireland, people get to retire at 67+, while they are retiring at 55 back in Greece.

I love Europe.... I love the individual nations within it...most especially the hot blooded ones that I can kinda identify with - Spain, Italy.  I love the idea of all of us, together - as a DIVERSE collection of cooperating Sovereign Nations, thriving and travelling and doing business with each other

................................... for that, you do NOT need a Common Administrative Government, MEPs, COMMISSIONERS, a Common Foreign Policy, a Common Army or common declared 'enemies'.  

We don't have a common administrative government - if that was the case Orban would not be misbehaving, Italy and Poland etc. etc. What we have is a common set of rules that ensures a level playing ground that we adhere to so that we can have a single market.

I don't regard either the USA or Russia as an enemy of this Nation.  And I don't regard the UK as an enemy either.  Yet, when we're sucked into this pan-EU concept, so readily Irish politicians get cocky and start sneering two Nation (USA and UK) that have done so much more for Ireland than any of our neighbour partners in Europe.  A Europe of Sovereign Nations, doing business together.... that's enough and with all this new technology, more than doable to maintain prosperity without the claws.

The only problem I have with the US or UK at the moment, is that they are unreliable under their current leadership. Russia isn't an issue for us, but I do feel a solidarity with countries that border them and who don't know whether the Russians are going to send tanks in over their border. I also don't condone the actions of the UK/US and Russia in the Middle East and am annoyed particularly with the yanks for their support for the Israeli Government over their treatment of Palestinians.

Sin é wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

The Commissioners, however, are not directly accountable to the electorate, which is my quarrel. I would like a huge overhaul to the system of governance and the democratic mechanisms of the UK, so we might be in agreement there.

I utterly despise the European Arrest Warrant because it tramples over Magna Carta and Habeas corpus and poses a very grave danger to the liberty of UK citizens. Again, it is the EU presuming equality where no such equality exists, as it attempts to merge vastly different legal systems across the continent.

The most famous case of the EAW going wrong is, of course, Andrew Symeou, who was thrown into some Greek hellhole for about a year, without any evidence presented, before eventually being acquitted.

The Commissioners are accountable to the (elected) European Parliament and to the Council of Ministers in a similar way that British Civil Servants are accountable to the British Government and not the British electorate.

Yes, a truly horrendous system that needs 21st century reform. In a digital age, citizens should have far greater say in the legislation that effects their lives rather than the wasteful, elongated and complicated bureaucracy that is the European Union - one of those is the future, and it isn't the system which relies on an unelected commission to propose legislation before being passed down to an inefficient parliament

The EAW may have had meagre reforms since the Symeou case, but it's clearly not far enough.

Why is it clearly not good enough?

You are making some mighty big claims there about inefficiency. I wouldn't base the working of the European Parliament on what Nigel Farage gets up to?

And neither would I. Follow European Parliament proceedings for a day, even a week, and you'll note the ludicrous inefficiency of the system. It makes the UK Parliament seem well-run! Even supporters of the EU think this area could be improved.

JuliusHMarx wrote:A small constituency has bugger all say in how things are run at a national level i.e. does not have any effective democratic representation in Westminster, especially if in opposition.
The reality is that as individuals we have sod all say in what goes on Government, either locally, at Westminster or the EU.

Which needs to change. There's no good reason, in a digital age, for why citizens cannot directly vote on legislation and, even, propose legislation if they are so-interested in doing.

Sin é wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Sin é wrote:So Fly, do you think a small country like Ireland would be treated anyway better or do better outside the EU?

As for Greece - its an irresponsible country and relatively poor countries like Ireland, Spain and Portugal should not have to pay for their spendtriff ways, especially if they continue to spend more than their means and don't bother to sort out corruption and collect tax.

You speak like a true Imperialist, sin.  Shame, I had you down as a proud Republican (peaceful kind).

Ireland would control its OWN destiny outside the EU.  Our Politicians would have nowhere to run and would be accountable for their OWN actions.

Why do I sound like an imperialist?

We don't have a common administrative government - if that was the case Orban would not be misbehaving, Italy and Poland etc. etc. What we have is a common set of rules that ensures a level playing ground that we adhere to so that we can have a single market.

I don't regard either the USA or Russia as an enemy of this Nation.  And I don't regard the UK as an enemy either.  Yet, when we're sucked into this pan-EU concept, so readily Irish politicians get cocky and start sneering two Nation (USA and UK) that have done so much more for Ireland than any of our neighbour partners in Europe.  A Europe of Sovereign Nations, doing business together.... that's enough and with all this new technology, more than doable to maintain prosperity without the claws.

The only problem I have with the US or UK at the moment, is that they are unreliable under their current leadership. Russia isn't an issue for us, but I do feel a solidarity with countries that border them and who don't know whether the Russians are going to send tanks in over their border. I also don't condone the actions of the UK/US and Russia in the Middle East and am annoyed particularly with the yanks for their support for the Israeli Government over their treatment of Palestinians.

Imperialists blames weak peoples for their own misfortune and always suggests that more influence from the Big Father/Mother figure (EU in this case) would help greatly, like putting in a EU chosen puppet Prime Minster - like happened in Italy? The grass is always greener when you give up more of your independence. One MEP berated Greece in the EU parliament on their energy policies... (green energy malarkey) - turns out he has vested interests in said technologies. Always prey on the wounded.... like happened Haiti.

The EU has a Commission that establishes policy and regulates much European wide legislation. It is an Administrative body.... a government in my eyes. It has a Foreign Affairs Representative - presumably telling the world what I agree with or don't agree with on the International stage. It's an authoritative administrative body - a government.

The UK and USA are not liked because they upset the well prepared plan for more open borders around the world, a loaded and profitable migration strategy to flood countries with people to water down National consensus when voting was required - increasing still more this lovely drive to create a one world government of love, harmony and all the other gushy lingo that allows major corporations to dream of the end of democracy and the end of citizen control over their actions.

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:A small constituency has bugger all say in how things are run at a national level i.e. does not have any effective democratic representation in Westminster, especially if in opposition.
The reality is that as individuals we have sod all say in what goes on Government, either locally, at Westminster or the EU.

Which needs to change. There's no good reason, in a digital age, for why citizens cannot directly vote on legislation and, even, propose legislation if they are so-interested in doing.

Digital security isn't strong enough.

DUP kicking off over May's deal.....Be glad when this Brexit palava is all done and dusted..

Govt Ministers, J Johnson, resigns saying Brexit turning into worst failure of public policy since Suez crisis. He's protesting against the awful prospect of MPs only having a choice between a very bad deal and a disastrous no deal. Realistically only a 2nd ref (or conceivably a Gen Election) on clearly delineated options, including Remain in EU, can enable politicians to find a way forward out of this horrendous mess.

Still think she will get Chequers through but for the first time I have doubts..

Unlike his brother this guy is a remainer..

Think she can cover a Brexiteer rebellion...Not sure she can cover too many from the remain side saying NO.

30 Labour mps is probably the most she can snag...

Corporalhumblebucket wrote: Realistically only a 2nd ref (or conceivably a Gen Election) on clearly delineated options, including Remain in EU, can enable politicians to find a way forward out of this horrendous mess.

Not realistic at all. Even if there were time for a second referendum, 'clearly delineated options' on a ballot paper wouldn't be able to achieve anything as the government may not be able to negotiate what the people would vote for (and they certainly couldn't it in time!). An option to remain is clearly a non-starter, as that choice was defeated in June 2016.

The only 'second referendum' approaching viability would be in March, with a choice between 'accept the deal and Leave' versus 'reject the deal and Leave', and even that would be a stretch.

We've had a General Election post-referendum, and 85%+ of votes went towards parties who pledged to honour the result correctly in their manifestos. The Lib Dems and Greens made zero traction at all.

We don't 'have' to leave in March...

May knows she is toast if we don't....This whole thing is fudge to keep her in Downing Street...Total self interest.

EU would be more than happy to go along with an exit date postponement while we sort this mess out.

In any other negotiation in life, if you dont make a deal you revert back to the postition you were in pre-negotiation, which in this case is remain.

The only democratically acceptable way to continue is a peoples vote between Leave with a deal, Leave with no deal, or Remain.

If anymore quit her Govt....I think that is what will happen...

It's all a big mess. Yet anyone who said 'it will all be a big mess' was accused of scare-mongering.

Samo wrote:In any other negotiation in life, if you dont make a deal you revert back to the postition you were in pre-negotiation, which in this case is remain.

The only democratically acceptable way to continue is a peoples vote between Leave with a deal, Leave with no deal, or Remain.

There's no way any further 'people's vote' with any form of 'remain' as an option will wash. It's too late. People already don't trust politicians. If that were to happen, it would poison our politics for decades to come. We voted out and we all have live with that, whatever it turns into.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Samo wrote:In any other negotiation in life, if you dont make a deal you revert back to the postition you were in pre-negotiation, which in this case is remain.

The only democratically acceptable way to continue is a peoples vote between Leave with a deal, Leave with no deal, or Remain.

There's no way any further 'people's vote' with any form of 'remain' as an option will wash. It's too late. People already don't trust politicians. If that were to happen, it would poison our politics for decades to come. We voted out and we all have live with that, whatever it turns into.

It's incredibly stupid though, isn't it? Allow everything to go to f**k in order not to offend some people who were repeatedly lied to. Democracy is only attractive because its better than all the other alternatives, but its wasted on a misinformed and/or ignorant electorate.

As someone who negotiates for a living there is a process that you need to go through before you start any negotiation in order to identify your BATNA ("best alternative to negotiated agreement"), i.e. what's the best thing we can do if we do if we can't negotiate an acceptable position. There's been a fundamental failure by this government to identify the BATNA and because of that they (a) have a weak negotiating position and (b) have made no practical and focussed steps to be able to implement an alternative solution should they not get to an acceptable negotiated position.

The polls show that these remarkably misinformed people would still vote the same way.....The only reason remain has a six point lead according to Survation is because more 18 year olds have come in to the "Electoral Market place"...

This is after Brexit has been exposed in many ways...

'Ignorant electorate' may be harsh....But it is a passionate subject to many..

superflyweight wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Samo wrote:In any other negotiation in life, if you dont make a deal you revert back to the postition you were in pre-negotiation, which in this case is remain.

The only democratically acceptable way to continue is a peoples vote between Leave with a deal, Leave with no deal, or Remain.

There's no way any further 'people's vote' with any form of 'remain' as an option will wash. It's too late. People already don't trust politicians. If that were to happen, it would poison our politics for decades to come. We voted out and we all have live with that, whatever it turns into.

It's incredibly stupid though, isn't it?  Allow everything to go to f**k in order not to offend some people who were repeatedly lied to.  Democracy is only attractive because its better than all the other alternatives, but its wasted on a misinformed and/or ignorant electorate.  

As someone who negotiates for a living there is a process that you need to go through before you start any negotiation in order to identify your BATNA ("best alternative to negotiated agreement"), i.e. what's the best thing we can do if we do if we can't negotiate an acceptable position.  There's been a fundamental failure by this government to identify the BATNA and because of that they (a) have a weak negotiating position and (b) have made no practical and focussed steps to be able to implement an alternative solution should they not get to an acceptable negotiated position.    

I don't disagree with you, and this whole thing is indeed very stupid. Until, and unless, some charges stick to the pro-Leave campaigns and/or politicians, I don't think there are any grounds for saying that the previous referendum outcome should be declared null and void. It's not 'some people' who'll be p!ssed either; it's likely to be more than half the population of the UK, including some who voted 'remain'. Is it worth the long-term political fallout to override the referendum result of 2016? Especially when we don't actually know the outcome of this, even if we think we do.

Presumably, the waste of space that is our Government didn't have to trigger Article 50 as fast as they did either. Was there anything (other than Rees-Mogg et al rabble rousing, that is) that dictated how long we had before we triggered Article 50? They lit the fuse re. the actual divorce didn't they, making everything as fraught as it now is. Utter ****wits. I hope Cameron has trouble sleeping...

navyblueshorts wrote:

Samo wrote:In any other negotiation in life, if you dont make a deal you revert back to the postition you were in pre-negotiation, which in this case is remain.

The only democratically acceptable way to continue is a peoples vote between Leave with a deal, Leave with no deal, or Remain.

There's no way any further 'people's vote' with any form of 'remain' as an option will wash. It's too late. People already don't trust politicians. If that were to happen, it would poison our politics for decades to come. We voted out and we all have live with that, whatever it turns into.

Our politics is already poisoned and the country is already cut in two. Politicians need to decide which half their going to piss off. The half were most of them will be dead in a generation, or the half that are going to have to live with a decision they didnt vote for for generations.

We would probably all agree that next time we have a referendum in the UK you prepare for all options before it..instead of after it..

Cameron/Osborne is most to blame for this mess..

Arrogantly took the 'win' for granted..and it has been policy on the hoof ever since..

Samo wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Samo wrote:In any other negotiation in life, if you dont make a deal you revert back to the postition you were in pre-negotiation, which in this case is remain.

The only democratically acceptable way to continue is a peoples vote between Leave with a deal, Leave with no deal, or Remain.

There's no way any further 'people's vote' with any form of 'remain' as an option will wash. It's too late. People already don't trust politicians. If that were to happen, it would poison our politics for decades to come. We voted out and we all have live with that, whatever it turns into.

Our politics is already poisoned and the country is already cut in two.  Politicians need to decide which half their going to piss off.  The half were most of them will be dead in a generation, or the half that are going to have to live with a decision they didnt vote for for generations.  

A harsh choice. Your latter group either didn't vote, lost the vote, or were too young to vote. That's the way it goes I'm afraid, and I'm one of them.

Survation GE Polling....

18-24s....Lab 65...Con 13........

The above line is why if the Tories if they have any sense ditch May after March 29.....Get a new Leader and go to the Country next year....on the new Leader's Honeymoon period..

If they wait till 2022......3 million will have turned 18 between now and then while their most profitable group the over 75s will be checking out at a steady rate.....

If you are 74 now and voting Labour my guess is you won't have a damascene conversion on your next birthday..

Hmmm

...older people tend to be more conservative and more cautious and less trusting of schmaltz.

...younger people tend to be idealistic, more impressionable, be more competitive politically and love the excitement of big movements.

That's just going on the general mood of people in these forums and further afield.

But no matter how you try to stall it - older people are older for a reason. Time.  The slack assed old boys of today were the rebellious rockers of yesteryear.  Their parents thought them a bit too radical for their more Victorian sensibilities but there you go.  The young aren't going to stay young forever and without a shadow of a doubt many of them will have the usual Pauline conversions later in life.  And that change can happen much sooner than some of the youngsters think.

So that'll be nice when many of the current young crop realise they've become their parents and grandparents and inevitable cynicism has replaced innocent excitement.  But what camp will they be in then by then?  An EU they want out of - again?  Or already out of an EU they're delighted their parents and grandparents got them out of?

Labour leads in all sections below 54 years of age...

While I agree young people are more idealistic they are more likely to vote Labour straightaway...You can't say that people who are 54 now will wake up in the morning and go "right I am voting Tory now.."

Not to be patronising..

Like I said sooner is better..