Brexit again...

[Regal Beagle]

This is a good video which breaks down the democracy (or supposed lack thereof) of the EU and its governance:

 

Nice and simple, and really professional.

 

There is definite flaws in the EU, such as the Parliament's lack of power to propose laws, but if you gave them that power you would cede some power from the Council, which is made up of Theresa May and all the other Member States' leaders. As with any successful large scale political system, it is a compromise. The Commission is undoubtedly questionable and the most controversial, but the choice is made by the leaders of the Member States and has to be ratified by the Parliament, of which we both have direct elections for.

 

Of course, with 27 other states represented and their views needing to be heard, it isn't just Britain's decision, but in my view that is part of the compromise of a globalised world we enjoy and profit from so much (despite the current negativity). We can't have it both ways; if we want full sovereignty, we withdraw quite substantially from the globalised world which bring us such prosperity and wealth (relative to historical comparisons). If we want full access to prosperity and wealth, we concede sovereignty, which, in our heart of hearts, isn't really that big of a deal unless you're a legal expert, or have some vague notion of British exceptionalism. Sometimes, you have to make decisions in partner with others in order to reap the most benefits.

 

People will disagree, and see Britain's ability to solely make all the laws that affect it of paramount importance. I disagree. Its really not that important, and no one has pointed out an EU law which directly damages us in any substantial way (please don't come at me with fishing arguments, which are both tenuous and impacting approx 0.12% of our economic output. Get over the fisherman)

 

We either directly or indirectly elect the people in the EU. Its not perfect, but reclaiming some vague notion of sovereignty is, in my opinion, really not the worth risking the economy and existing trade deals we have with nations via the EU.

 

Fair enough if that's your opinion and I respect the fact that you recongise that there are issues within the EU.

 

But two issues for me with your post.

 

1. The EU is not global. Being outside of the EU will allow us to think global.

 

2. It's not a vague notion of sovereignty. You either have sovereignty or you don't. At the moment we don't because our laws have to comply with the EU otherwise they will punish us (evidenced by their own website which confirms that in plain English).

 

Like I say, fair enough if you don't believe that sovereignty is important, or that giving it up is a price worth paying for EU membership, that's obviously where mine and your opinion differs.

[For Us All]

I listened to one of the opponents among parents at this school. He said "God made man, and then he made woman for the pleasure of man". On a TV News programme. I am minded that those sort of views, with all the much deeper bigotry that must flow from them, has to be challenged via the state education system.

 

It will certainly test Section 28?

[Regal Beagle]

This is a good video which breaks down the democracy (or supposed lack thereof) of the EU and its governance:

 

Nice and simple, and really professional.

And in relation to the video specifically, I've not watched it although I will (might not have time tonight).

 

Does it address the wildly different levels of influence one vote has across the member states?

 

Only French and Spanish voters have less influence in EU elections than UK citizens based on the MEPs per capita.

 

So we are massive net contributors, we get the third lowest say despite that. We are outside of the Eurozone and therefore I believe we are likely to be at best ignored and at worst discriminated against by future EU policy.

 

One MEP per 840k voters. How is that democracy?

 

How many people in this country even know who represent them in in the EU parliament?

 

It's a democratic sham. They give us a vote because it doesn't really make any difference. We've had UKIP holding seats for 20 years. The people who elect Sir Nige know full well that he has no power to actually do anything the EU. That's not democracy.

 

As a UK citizen I don't want to be outvoted on laws and policies which directly affect me by people who are not UK citizens, have a completely different culture and different priorities and who literally receive billions of pounds from the EU.

[Joe B]

And in relation to the video specifically, I've not watched it although I will (might not have time tonight).

 

Does it address the wildly different levels of influence one vote has across the member states?

 

Only French and Spanish voters have less influence in EU elections than UK citizens based on the MEPs per capita.

 

So we are massive net contributors, we get the third lowest say despite that. We are outside of the Eurozone and therefore I believe we are likely to be at best ignored and at worst discriminated against by future EU policy.

 

One MEP per 840k voters. How is that democracy?

 

How many people in this country even know who represent them in in the EU parliament?

 

It's a democratic sham. They give us a vote because it doesn't really make any difference. We've had UKIP holding seats for 20 years. The people who elect Sir Nige know full well that he has no power to actually do anything the EU. That's not democracy.

 

As a UK citizen I don't want to be outvoted on laws and policies which directly affect me by people who are not UK citizens, have a completely different culture and different priorities and who literally receive billions of pounds from the EU.

 

As I've said, flaws are everywhere.

 

However, the ability to have unlimited access to the largest free market in history, whilst being free of the Euro and the Schengen Area, is worth sacrificing complete control of our laws.

 

The world isn't perfect, but being in the EU makes things a bit easier for us, especially when things are changing so much.

[Joe B]

Also, in terms of the questionable legitimacy of Brexit Party/Nigel Farage funding, this guy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Cottrell) is a senior adviser to Farage and current Treasurer of the Brexit Party.

 

A man indicted with 21 counts "for conspiracy to commit money laundering, wire fraud, blackmail and extortion."

 

"Cottrell's indictment states how in 2014 he met with undercover federal agents in Las Vegas, where he conspired to launder millions of dollars worth of drug money using offshore bank accounts."

 

He served 8 months after a plea deal led to him pleading guilty to wire fraud in exchange for explaining how his money laundering was committed.

 

This is Farage's senior adviser, and in charge of the pennies of the Brexit Party. Carole Cadwalladr has exposed today that there are a lot of donations coming in from non-UK locations via Paypal to the Brexit Party, which obviously contravenes UK electoral law, unless all these donations are British nationals living abroad.

 

This is all an aside to his meetings with Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy, and his personal income from a man currently under investigation with the NCA for his supposed links to Russia.

 

I'm sorry, but Farage is a very, very questionable character, who associates with some even more questionable characters.

[Warren]

I see the Brexit Party as a tool (inviting lots of anecdotes). I want to express my annoyance at the way Brexit has not happened, not been well handled and just to swat the Maybot and to a lesser extent Labour. But the Brexit Party would have to show up with a really good manifesto in mainstream political thinking to ever get me to move to them in future.

[Warren]

And in relation to the video specifically, I've not watched it although I will (might not have time tonight).

 

Does it address the wildly different levels of influence one vote has across the member states?

 

Only French and Spanish voters have less influence in EU elections than UK citizens based on the MEPs per capita.

 

So we are massive net contributors, we get the third lowest say despite that. We are outside of the Eurozone and therefore I believe we are likely to be at best ignored and at worst discriminated against by future EU policy.

 

One MEP per 840k voters. How is that democracy?

 

How many people in this country even know who represent them in in the EU parliament?

 

It's a democratic sham. They give us a vote because it doesn't really make any difference. We've had UKIP holding seats for 20 years. The people who elect Sir Nige know full well that he has no power to actually do anything the EU. That's not democracy.

 

As a UK citizen I don't want to be outvoted on laws and policies which directly affect me by people who are not UK citizens, have a completely different culture and different priorities and who literally receive billions of pounds from the EU.

 

The real power in the EU is the Council of Ministers. When the big decisions are at hand, like granting the UK an extension or not, or dealing with an international situation, that is where the decisions get made. Indirectly, that is quite democratic, because the key high profile leaders are elected and accountable at home. And what they do gets them held to account. Even Merkel. But it's emerged rather than designed circumstance.

[Fosse69]

The real power in the EU is the Council of Ministers. When the big decisions are at hand, like granting the UK an extension or not, or dealing with an international situation, that is where the decisions get made. Indirectly, that is quite democratic, because the key high profile leaders are elected and accountable at home. And what they do gets them held to account. Even Merkel. But it's emerged rather than designed circumstance.

We of course were one of the big 3, sadly our prestige is now on the decline.

[Regal Beagle]

Also, in terms of the questionable legitimacy of Brexit Party/Nigel Farage funding, this guy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Cottrell) is a senior adviser to Farage and current Treasurer of the Brexit Party.

 

A man indicted with 21 counts "for conspiracy to commit money laundering, wire fraud, blackmail and extortion."

 

"Cottrell's indictment states how in 2014 he met with undercover federal agents in Las Vegas, where he conspired to launder millions of dollars worth of drug money using offshore bank accounts."

 

He served 8 months after a plea deal led to him pleading guilty to wire fraud in exchange for explaining how his money laundering was committed.

 

This is Farage's senior adviser, and in charge of the pennies of the Brexit Party. Carole Cadwalladr has exposed today that there are a lot of donations coming in from non-UK locations via Paypal to the Brexit Party, which obviously contravenes UK electoral law, unless all these donations are British nationals living abroad.

 

This is all an aside to his meetings with Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy, and his personal income from a man currently under investigation with the NCA for his supposed links to Russia.

 

I'm sorry, but Farage is a very, very questionable character, who associates with some even more questionable characters.

 

Doesn't make Sir Nige any less right on Brexit though.

[Mario]

I see the Brexit Party as a tool (inviting lots of anecdotes). I want to express my annoyance at the way Brexit has not happened, not been well handled and just to swat the Maybot and to a lesser extent Labour. But the Brexit Party would have to show up with a really good manifesto in mainstream political thinking to ever get me to move to them in future.

 

This is the problem,there would be no need for Nigel Farage and a Brexit party if a cross party committee had been set up at the outset and negotiated hard to leave,3 years for goodness sake it just shows the abilities of politicians.

 

Farage is filling a void, the same void after every Labour government that gets filled by the Tories who have to get the finances back on track.

 

If only Labour could balance the books there would be no need for a Maggie Thatcher or a Theresa May.

[geosname]

She said homosexual acts were morally wrong. Slight difference, and outrightly homophobic.

 

Whether you agree or not that gay marriage should exist, a gay man/woman loving another gay man/woman is not morally wrong.

 

Morals.

 

a person's standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do.

 

Morals are usually seen from the viewers perspective not the viewed...... from that perspective, as she sees it, how is it wrong for her to say it?...... it doesn't mean I agree with her.... or that she is correct.

Is it legally wrong is a different question altogether...... a lot more factors come into play.

Is it moraly wrong to berate her for her opinion?

Is it homophobic?............ I'm not sure it is.

[For Us All]

Morals.

 

a person\'s standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do.

 

Morals are usually seen from the viewers perspective not the viewed...... from that perspective, as she sees it, how is it wrong for her to say it?...... it doesn\'t mean I agree with her.... or that she is correct.

Is it legally wrong is a different question altogether...... a lot more factors come into play.

Is it moraly wrong to berate her for her opinion?

Is it homophobic?............ I\'m not sure it is.

 

It\'s just another method designed to try and close down debate,which seems to have backfired.It could result in more votes for Anne Widdecombe rather than less?

[Joe B]

Morals.

 

a person's standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do.

 

Morals are usually seen from the viewers perspective not the viewed...... from that perspective, as she sees it, how is it wrong for her to say it?...... it doesn't mean I agree with her.... or that she is correct.

Is it legally wrong is a different question altogether...... a lot more factors come into play.

Is it moraly wrong to berate her for her opinion?

Is it homophobic?............ I'm not sure it is.

 

Being gay is in no way morally wrong.

 

It doesn't matter that that's her opinion. Its homophobic, and its fully right to criticise her opinion for being as backwards.

[Joe B]

Doesn't make Sir Nige any less right on Brexit though.

 

Does it not make you question his motivations? That he isn't a leader of the people, reclaiming what has been taken by the evil EU bureaucrats, but more of a man using Brexit as a financial tool for his hedge fund pals (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/26/nigel-farage-remain-won-brexit-bloomberg)?

 

Its all conspiracy, I'm aware. I refuse to believe that a man who moves in the circles that Farage does, led Brexit as some sort of altruistic mass democracy movement.

[geosname]

Being gay is in no way morally wrong.

 

It doesn\'t matter that that\'s her opinion. Its homophobic, and its fully right to criticise her opinion for being as backwards.

 

That would depend on the morals of the person making the statement.

Of course it matters it\'s her opinion, it\'s not a crime to have an opinion.

Until about 1967 it was illegal for a male to have sex with a male but morals have little to do with legality.... morals are far more personal.