• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

EU Elections 2019

Status
Not open for further replies.

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
I think you have just described the EU, provided the toothless European Parliament can be considered as 50% of the say.

I always wonder how brexiters think the EU works. In a nutshell, the Commission is appointed every five years by the member states and the parliament. It proposes legislation, which can be amended and must be passed by the European Parliament (elected directly by citizens of the member states) and the European Council (made up of the leaders of the member states, elected by the rules of those states).

Seems pretty democratic, right?
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

A Challenge

Established Member
Joined
24 Sep 2016
Messages
2,823
It may be something of a forlorn hope, but you've already declined to propose a better way out of this crisis so your criticism of mine doesn't impress me much.
Revoking Article 50 (even after a remain vote in a second referendum) would be very controversial (either as it was ‘one all’ or against the one referendum result) and upset Leavers; whereas May’s deal is unpalatable to not just Remainers but to quite a lot of (politicians especially) Leavers as they don’t like it either (shows the split in Vote Leave) and so won’t get through; the EU has refused to renegotiate so there won’t be a ‘Boris deal’ (other Conservative leadership candidates are available, though it didn’t seem like it if you saw the front page of The Sun last Saturday) by the new prime minister; meaning the only other option is a no deal Brexit, which would upset Remainers, even more than a deal Brexit.

The Miller case [R (Miller) v Secretary of State for leaving the European Union] causes a bit of headache for both sides in the Brexit debate – that you need to get a majority for whatever happens in parliament, between all of the 642 MPs to reach an agreement (with at least a majority for) on Brexit, although they were just upholding the rights of parliament I’m sure has been a bit of a headache for the government.
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
Revoking Article 50 (even after a remain vote in a second referendum) would be very controversial (either as it was ‘one all’ or against the one referendum result) and upset Leavers; whereas May’s deal is unpalatable to not just Remainers but to quite a lot of (politicians especially) Leavers as they don’t like it either (shows the split in Vote Leave) and so won’t get through; the EU has refused to renegotiate so there won’t be a ‘Boris deal’ (other Conservative leadership candidates are available, though it didn’t seem like it if you saw the front page of The Sun last Saturday) by the new prime minister; meaning the only other option is a no deal Brexit, which would upset Remainers, even more than a deal Brexit.

The Miller case [R (Miller) v Secretary of State for leaving the European Union] causes a bit of headache for both sides in the Brexit debate – that you need to get a majority for whatever happens in parliament, between all of the 642 MPs to reach an agreement (with at least a majority for) on Brexit, although they were just upholding the rights of parliament I’m sure has been a bit of a headache for the government.

So you are ruling out all options, on the grounds they won't get through parliament or they will upset someone, right?
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,916
Location
Nottingham
Revoking Article 50 (even after a remain vote in a second referendum) would be very controversial (either as it was ‘one all’ or against the one referendum result) and upset Leavers; whereas May’s deal is unpalatable to not just Remainers but to quite a lot of (politicians especially) Leavers as they don’t like it either (shows the split in Vote Leave) and so won’t get through; the EU has refused to renegotiate so there won’t be a ‘Boris deal’ (other Conservative leadership candidates are available, though it didn’t seem like it if you saw the front page of The Sun last Saturday) by the new prime minister; meaning the only other option is a no deal Brexit, which would upset Remainers, even more than a deal Brexit.
I do agree all of these would be controversial, but the likes of Farage will find some way to scream betrayal even if they get exactly what they are currently asking for. The only argument anyone uses these days in favour of Brexit is that people voted for it in 2016. A more recent vote on a proposal with the consequences clearly set out would override 2016. If referendums could never be challenged then we'd still be bound by 1975.
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,133
The idea of any kind of coalition involving the SNP fills me with horror.
I wonder what proportion of the SNP are simply content to glibly sit out a chaotic no deal Brexit in order to better facilitate the primary goal of winning a future independence referendum ?
 
Last edited:

A Challenge

Established Member
Joined
24 Sep 2016
Messages
2,823
So you are ruling out all options, right?
I was pointing out to the complaint that I had ruled out their option (which I think is the one that would cause the most uncertainty of the lot, with revoke we just stay in and with no deal we just leave and then we're out) that none of the options are going to be easy and widely-supported! I can't come up with a better option, except by saying that the new prime minister should go and try to renegotiate with the EU and the EU (who as a body want us to stay, and so they aren't going to be particularly) let us. We also shouldn't set out any red lines, as I said before they are only good for British politicians furthering themselves, you shouldn't publicly go in saying we won't do X, Y or Z or A, B and C must be done.

I do agree all of these would be controversial, but the likes of Farage will find some way to scream betrayal even if they get exactly what they are currently asking for. The only argument anyone uses these days in favour of Brexit is that people voted for it in 2016. A more recent vote on a proposal with the consequences clearly set out would override 2016. If referendums could never be challenged then we'd still be bound by 1975.
The 1975 referendum wasn't on the EU it was on the common market (EEA) so is on a different thing, as John Major blackmailed Conservative MPs to vote for the Maastrict Treaty, which formed the EU, and there wasn't a public vote then was there?
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,297
Location
Fenny Stratford
Can the Green's vote be considered anti-Brexit as Green parties across the EU did well, not because they had a position on Brexit that was popular in their countries but because of the climate change crisis?

The Greens picked up lots of UK votes because in the quasi referendum on Brexit that was the Euro elections they were VERY clear they were anti Brexit. Why they did well across Europe is of little interest to me.

Most (and I mean almost all) voters voted in this election on the following 2 points:

a) the handling of brexit
b) whether we should leave or not

Votes were not cast on policy issues at this election. This election was entirely about Brexit.
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
the new prime minister should go and try to renegotiate with the EU and the EU (who as a body want us to stay, and so they aren't going to be particularly) let us. We also shouldn't set out any red lines, as I said before they are only good for British politicians furthering themselves, you shouldn't publicly go in saying we won't do X, Y or Z or A, B and C must be done.

What should we propose to change in the withdrawal agreement? When Gove goes to Brussels the first question will be "what do you want?". Also I'm not clear if you are suggesting that we negotiate to leave or negotiate to remain.
 

A Challenge

Established Member
Joined
24 Sep 2016
Messages
2,823
What should we propose to change in the withdrawal agreement? When Gove goes to Brussels the first question will be "what do you want?". Also I'm not clear if you are suggesting that we negotiate to leave or negotiate to remain.
Negotiate to leave, the government could revoke this evening it wanted, but couldn't leave (even no deal) until the June date and realistically not until the second date at Halloween. I'm not sure what to change, something to make it more palatable to the point of got getting it through. The other options I set out above are still options, even if I'm not sure they would work either!

edited to correct typo
 
Last edited:

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,297
Location
Fenny Stratford
Sturgeon is a hate-filled nationalist. Much of what emanates from the SNP is an attempt to promote a “us and them” culture between Scotland and the rest of the UK. The SNP at Westminster behave like a bunch of naughty schoolchildren,

is this taken directly from the Daily Mail comments page? Scottish independence is a large possibility because of Brexit. That would be the Brexit Scotland voted against in large numbers.................

I suspect many elsewhere in the UK turn off when they see the latest angry hysterical outburst from Blackford at PMQs.

Blackford is one of the better leaders at questioning the PM. He is certainly more effective and has a greater impact than Corbyn!

I’ve never been able to reconcile the fact that Sturgeon hates one union with a passion, but seems to love another union. I guess someone would have to prop up an independent Scotland, and by definition it wouldn’t be English taxpayers like at the moment.

Perhaps they feel the EU to be a more democratic institution than Parliament and an institution more inclined to listen to and act on their views? I suspect that consideration of views is more of the issue than any professed "hate".

In any event we all know the Scottish are simply jealous that they are not English ;)
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
I'm not sure what to change, something to make it more palatable to the point of got getting it through.

Maybe the EU and Theresa May could make a big cake including ingredients from all the EU states and serve it to MPs. That might be palatable enough to get them to vote for the withdrawal agreement.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,916
Location
Nottingham
The 1975 referendum wasn't on the EU it was on the common market (EEA) so is on a different thing, as John Major blackmailed Conservative MPs to vote for the Maastrict Treaty, which formed the EU, and there wasn't a public vote then was there?
And the 2016 referendum was, according to many of the Leavers, about staying in the single market and leaving the political institutions. Now it's about leaving everything. All the more reason for a referendum on the specific proposal.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,916
Location
Nottingham
Maybe the EU and Theresa May could make a big cake including ingredients from all the EU states and serve it to MPs. That might be palatable enough to get them to vote for the withdrawal agreement.
Having your cake and eating it?
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
I was pointing out to the complaint that I had ruled out their option (which I think is the one that would cause the most uncertainty of the lot, with revoke we just stay in and with no deal we just leave and then we're out) that none of the options are going to be easy and widely-supported! I can't come up with a better option, except by saying that the new prime minister should go and try to renegotiate with the EU and the EU (who as a body want us to stay, and so they aren't going to be particularly) let us. We also shouldn't set out any red lines, as I said before they are only good for British politicians furthering themselves, you shouldn't publicly go in saying we won't do X, Y or Z or A, B and C must be done.

The 1975 referendum wasn't on the EU it was on the common market (EEA) so is on a different thing, as John Major blackmailed Conservative MPs to vote for the Maastrict Treaty, which formed the EU, and there wasn't a public vote then was there?
The 1975 referendum was on the EC not EEA, but in any case, it's not being respected and we're being dragged out of both EC and EEA by these self-harmers.
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
I always wonder how brexiters think the EU works. In a nutshell, the Commission is appointed every five years by the member states and the parliament. It proposes legislation, which can be amended and must be passed by the European Parliament (elected directly by citizens of the member states) and the European Council (made up of the leaders of the member states, elected by the rules of those states).

Seems pretty democratic, right?
And 100% of the European Parliament is elected.

Less than 50% of the UK Parliament is elected by the public.

So which is undemocratic?
 

A Challenge

Established Member
Joined
24 Sep 2016
Messages
2,823
Less than 50% of the UK Parliament is elected by the public.
The House of Lords doesn't have the power to block legislation from being passed under the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949, only to refine the legislation and make amendments that the Commons doesn't have to listen to.
 

dgl

Established Member
Joined
5 Oct 2014
Messages
2,412
And 100% of the European Parliament is elected.

Less than 50% of the UK Parliament is elected by the public.

So which is undemocratic?
Well it depends who you have in the European Parliament, if it's people like Farage then you might as well have no vote for the good it will do.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,994
Location
Yorks
I was pointing out to the complaint that I had ruled out their option (which I think is the one that would cause the most uncertainty of the lot, with revoke we just stay in and with no deal we just leave and then we're out) that none of the options are going to be easy and widely-supported! I can't come up with a better option, except by saying that the new prime minister should go and try to renegotiate with the EU and the EU (who as a body want us to stay, and so they aren't going to be particularly) let us. We also shouldn't set out any red lines, as I said before they are only good for British politicians furthering themselves, you shouldn't publicly go in saying we won't do X, Y or Z or A, B and C must be done.

The 1975 referendum wasn't on the EU it was on the common market (EEA) so is on a different thing, as John Major blackmailed Conservative MPs to vote for the Maastrict Treaty, which formed the EU, and there wasn't a public vote then was there?

There certainly should have been, but we are where we are.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,226
Location
No longer here
As hinted at the top of this page, SNP and Plaid sit in an interesting position on this scale, as they're certainly advocates of localism / nativism in their calls for independence, yet are ardently in favour of EU membership.

As do Sinn Fein, although none of the three parties are exactly ideologically honest!
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
As do Sinn Fein, although none of the three parties are exactly ideologically honest!

This is nonsense. Does being in favour of power at one level mean you have to be in favour of power at every level?
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,226
Location
No longer here
This is nonsense. Does being in favour of power at one level mean you have to be in favour of power at every level?

No, and I didn't suggest otherwise. I'm suggesting these nationalist parties aren't truly European or internationalist in outlook but rather use being in favour of the EU as a vehicle to attract moderate voters at a domestic level.
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
No, and I didn't suggest otherwise. I'm suggesting these nationalist parties aren't truly European or internationalist in outlook but rather use being in favour of the EU as a vehicle to attract moderate voters at a domestic level.

Provide some evidence for that.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,226
Location
No longer here
Provide some evidence for that.

Provide evidence of a political opinion? It's an opinion; you don't evidence an opinion.

Here is my rationale, not evidence:

These nationalist parties are shapeshifters - every single one was Eurosceptic until the realisation that this wasn't winning them voters in the EU wave of the 1980s and 1990s. Sinn Fein's dropping of Euroscepticism came latest of all.

None of them are truly internationalist alliance-builders. Every single one is nativist with no true care for the EU. The SNP don't care for the EU beyond using it as a vehicle to prop up a potentially independent Scotland!
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,916
Location
Nottingham
None of them are truly internationalist alliance-builders. Every single one is nativist with no true care for the EU. The SNP don't care for the EU beyond using it as a vehicle to prop up a potentially independent Scotland!
That could equally well be read as deciding that the Westminster government, especially if a Tory one, will essentially play to their base and ignore what Scotland needs or wants. The EU has much less influence on its members but provides the security of a large trading bloc and the support when something goes wrong (such as sticking up for Ireland on Brexit). Nine EU members have less population than Scotland.
 

hooverboy

On Moderation
Joined
12 Oct 2017
Messages
1,372
The domestic policy agenda as expressed (badly) by Corbyn is quite close to Scandinavian ideas. What is different is the maturity and competence of the leaders involved and the obsession with Palestine expressed by Corbyn and his clique.
if you would have told me that was frank field's position, I would have believed you....but corbyns??????

if labour want a decent leader,then frank field is absolutely a guy I respect
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,297
Location
Fenny Stratford
if you would have told me that was frank field's position, I would have believed you....but corbyns??????

if labour want a decent leader,then frank field is absolutely a guy I respect

read it. I don't like the man but there is no need to invent things about him. His views alone offer enough ammunition!
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,045
Location
North Wales
Nine EU members have less population than Scotland.
To take one as an example: The Republic of Ireland, with a population of ~4.8 million, has 11 seats in the EU Parliament.
Scotland, with a population of ~5.3 million, has 6 seats as a constituency of the UK.
 

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
Provide evidence of a political opinion? It's an opinion; you don't evidence an opinion.

Evidence is not a verb.

Here is my rationale, not evidence:

These nationalist parties are shapeshifters - every single one was Eurosceptic until the realisation that this wasn't winning them voters in the EU wave of the 1980s and 1990s. Sinn Fein's dropping of Euroscepticism came latest of all.

None of them are truly internationalist alliance-builders. Every single one is nativist with no true care for the EU. The SNP don't care for the EU beyond using it as a vehicle to prop up a potentially independent Scotland!

You could provide evidence for those claimed policy positions, if they are correct.

I am not necessarily supporting any of those parties, but you claimed they were being dishonest. That's a factual claim, so it deserves to be factually justified. Otherwise it's like something said by a brexiter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top