Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by RingoMcCartney » Tue Jul 16, 2019 11:56 pm

aggi wrote:I see Ringo is still struggling with the adult conversation. It's weird he's so anti-EU whilst knowing so little about it.
I see aggi is still struggling to accept the result of the largest single expression of democracy this country has ever witnessed.

Adults find it an easy to process to come to terms with.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Tue Jul 16, 2019 11:59 pm

Elizabeth wrote:Thank you Aggi.

The thing that sticks out for me is that the campaign ignored Parliamentary democracy.
It started before Parliament had the chance to vote on the deal. We know what that vote became but in my opinion the timing was all wrong.
The soundbites were elitist, things like leave voters didn't know what they were voting for.
Given that the Brexit side had gone to court to try and avoid Parliament having a say I think that ship had well and truly sailed.

May very quickly allied herself with a much harder Brexit than you would expect given the close result (personally I feel that's why we haven't left the EU yet, she sidelined all those she'd need to get the vote through). As such it's hardly a surprise that people very quickly pushed back.

I agree there was some elitist elements, although I do believe that a lot of people didn't think they were voting for this. The Brexit narrative has managed to shift from the unparalleled opportunities to we're hopeful no-one will die.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:02 am

aggi wrote:A lot of these complaints appear to be about UK democracy though. Not the EU's fault.
I wasn't apportioning blame. I maintain that no country had more influence over how the EU ended up than the UK.

I'm saying there's a vast democratic deficit in the EU. Who made it thus isn't relevant. I, unlike others, have never blamed the Germans or the French for the EU's flaws. Quite the opposite - I am firmly of the view it's our fault the EU is so ****!

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:07 am

aggi wrote:Given that the Brexit side had gone to court to try and avoid Parliament having a say I think that ship had well and truly sailed.

May very quickly allied herself with a much harder Brexit than you would expect given the close result (personally I feel that's why we haven't left the EU yet, she sidelined all those she'd need to get the vote through). As such it's hardly a surprise that people very quickly pushed back.

I agree there was some elitist elements, although I do believe that a lot of people didn't think they were voting for this. The Brexit narrative has managed to shift from the unparalleled opportunities to we're hopeful no-one will die.
There should never have been any need for Gina Miller to go to court to force Parliament to have its say. Parliament (especially with the Speaker on the Brexit side) would have been able to have its say anyway, and to have votes on all the issues it has had votes on, and presumably to fail to pass any of them, in the same way without the court case as it would with the court case. All the court case really did was to force Parliament to have its say, rather than to allow it to have its say - presumably Ms. Miller was afraid that Parliament would lie down and do nothing. (As opposed to standing up and agreeing nothing.)

Miller's case did at least have the benefit of stopping May's deal. Something which both Brexit and Remain can be grateful for, because nobody liked it.

CrosspoolClarets
Posts: 5229
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
Been Liked: 1623 times
Has Liked: 397 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by CrosspoolClarets » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:09 am

If it be your will wrote:I appreciate labels like 'democratic' and 'undemocratic' are loose terms open to interpretation, but however far the UK is from a 'pure' democracy, there's no doubt the EU is substantially further away than that.
That sums it up perfectly for me.

The democratic deficit is a huge chunk of the problem, the further decisions are from the people, the more the people feel impotent and that their lives are no purpose. There is no “common good” that they are living for. Take away national solidarity, you take away a hell of a lot from many people.

The new President’s speech today, saying that EU law should sit above domestic law, hasn’t been lost on people.

I wasn’t a fan of no deal before, I’d have taken May’s deal (after agonising about it) but the EU is heading so far downhill we need to get out now, whatever the cost. It will end in tears, mark my words.
This user liked this post: tiger76

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:24 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:That sums it up perfectly for me.

The democratic deficit is a huge chunk of the problem, the further decisions are from the people, the more the people feel impotent and that their lives are no purpose. There is no “common good” that they are living for. Take away national solidarity, you take away a hell of a lot from many people.

The new President’s speech today, saying that EU law should sit above domestic law, hasn’t been lost on people.

I wasn’t a fan of no deal before, I’d have taken May’s deal (after agonising about it) but the EU is heading so far downhill we need to get out now, whatever the cost. It will end in tears, mark my words.
I can say this with complete sincerity: other than mindlessly trying to influence domestic policy, when I vote in European elections I see it as an entirely pointless act. It makes absolutely no legislative difference whatsoever. Interestingly, I have never voted for the winning candidate in a GE either, but it still feels a whole lot less pointless than the EU elections do.

(I'm more pessimistic than you on the EU's future, by the way. I think it'll stumble on, fudging it's way through the quagmire indefinitely!)
This user liked this post: Damo

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:25 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Remain have spent the last few years deciding the vote result was a given, in their favour of course, to it was wrong, the winners didn't understand what they were voting for, to they were stupid and now it wasn't what they voted for.

I'm well aware Leave are having to change how we leave, but it's partly in response to Remainers throwing up road blocks and the EU doing the same.

No Deal always had to be on the table, whether people liked the idea or not and it still is because we can't just keep kicking the departure date down the road every few months.
I don't disagree with all of your first paragraph but the way the narrative is being shifted to a harder and harder Brexit because other parties won't just roll over so we can have the Brexit that was promised is an illustration of how what people are getting isn't what they voted for.

If we really "held all the cards" then I'm sure these road blocks would have been surmountable.

I've always said that having no deal on the table was pointless as it was clear that we hadn't actually prepared for it.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14562
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:29 am

aggi wrote:I don't disagree with all of your first paragraph but the way the narrative is being shifted to a harder and harder Brexit because other parties won't just roll over so we can have the Brexit that was promised is an illustration of how what people are getting isn't what they voted for.

If we really "held all the cards" then I'm sure these road blocks would have been surmountable.

I've always said that having no deal on the table was pointless as it was clear that we hadn't actually prepared for it.
The fact we aren't prepared for no deal is the fault of our weak, spineless and useless government.
It's also the fault of both Brexiteers and remainers but neither side will accept any blame.

We've never held all the cards and were never going too, but neither do the EU.

As for what people voted for, the result was leave, the finer details were down to the government to negotiate for but as shown this shower of turds would struggle to negotiate their way round a spaghetti junction.
This user liked this post: tiger76

RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by RingoMcCartney » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:34 am

I heard the other day that, constitutionally, the prime minister that is leaving (May) must be able to tell the Queen that she has confidence in any potential new prime minister in maintaining the integratory and existence of United Kingdom. May, the contributor claimed, could attempt to claim that Boris, by going for no deal , threaten the break up of the Union (back stop). Dominic Grieve has already admitted that cross party talks are taking place with a view to labour calling for a vote of no confidence. The contributor said that it was assumed that this would automatically lead to a general election.

That assumption is wrong, he said. If it can be agreed, that a new leader can be chosen by a cross party "government of national unity" a new prime minister can be installed without the need for a general election.

I've not heard anybody else mention it since ( about a week ago) and perhaps events have moved on to make what was claimed, redundant........

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:44 am

If it be your will wrote:But you could say that about UK democracy. Or any democracy. That voters don't really know what they're doing. Yet we wouldn't allow a UK system where the cabinet was composed of unelected officials, appointed by the PM, and were the only people that could decide what MPs voted on. And even when MPs pass these laws, another set of unelected officials (appointed by elected councillors, say) could veto it anyway. And all the proposed laws have to comply with treaties most of the current EU population didn't even vote for. All on account that voters don't really know what they're doing.

What you are doing is pointing out a well known flaw of democracy - that voters can never be truly fit to vote. That's fine. But in order to avoid the uninformed public voting for something stupid, the EU has put an awful lot of barriers in the way of electoral will. For good or ill, there really is a profound democratic deficit in the EU. It is undeniably very difficult for voters, via the European Parliament, to get their voice represented in what actually happens to them. The thing is, I can sort of understand why the EU is set up like it is. It wouldn't work if it was democratic. But as a result it requires an exceptionally loose definition of 'democracy' to faithfully declare: The EU is a democratic institution.

It's clear you, like me, have made a concerted attempt to unpick how the EU functions. Honestly speaking, would you really agree with the statement The EU is a democratic institution, or words to that effect?
Analogies with the UK don't really work as we have a two party system. I guess the closest analogy would be that each county in the UK elects a mayor, those mayors would then select a cabinet that is best for the job and it's then approved by a parliament that's been elected.

Personally I wouldn't be too worried by that compared to our current system where a fraction of a percent of the population choose a leader and they'll choose a cabinet mainly from people you also didn't vote for.

I'd say the EU could be more democratic but it's a difficult balancing act to balance the collective interests of 28 countries with their individual interests.

Although the collective drives the general direction the checks and balances are all at the individual country interest level which I think is correct. (Admittedly the UK is probably overly powerful relatively in this area with some of its vetoes but that's an advantage we have).

I'd say that the EU is pretty democratic for an institution of its nature. The checks and balances are based on elected officials for instance. For an institution spanning 28 countries and hundreds of millions of people I expect that my individual impact will be small and even the UK impact is only a part of the whole.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:52 am

dsr wrote:There should never have been any need for Gina Miller to go to court to force Parliament to have its say. Parliament (especially with the Speaker on the Brexit side) would have been able to have its say anyway, and to have votes on all the issues it has had votes on, and presumably to fail to pass any of them, in the same way without the court case as it would with the court case. All the court case really did was to force Parliament to have its say, rather than to allow it to have its say - presumably Ms. Miller was afraid that Parliament would lie down and do nothing. (As opposed to standing up and agreeing nothing.)

Miller's case did at least have the benefit of stopping May's deal. Something which both Brexit and Remain can be grateful for, because nobody liked it.
The indications though were that May was going to try her hardest not to let parliament have its say. (And given some of the newspaper headlines parliament having a say was looked on dimly).

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:00 am

aggi wrote:The indications though were that May was going to try her hardest not to let parliament have its say. (And given some of the newspaper headlines parliament having a say was looked on dimly).
And as subsequent events have proved, Parliament has no problem in overriding May. With Bercow on side (and in this respect - and this respect only - I am not criticising Bercow) Parliament can have its say on anything and the government can't stop it. As it should be, frankly. It's sad that Parliament needed Miller to wake it up, but it's better that Parliament should be awake than that it should be dozy. I didn't want Miller to win the case, and I think it sets a very dangerous precedent, but there are certainly good points about it that may even outweigh the bad..

Of course, the follow-up issue is that there are plenty of Parliamentarians willing to cause trouble for the government, but fewer who have the principles to carry that trouble to the limit - to vote down the government and force an election. We need more principled people in Parliament, and we have far too many placemen.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3948 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Wed Jul 17, 2019 5:04 am

RingoMcCartney wrote: That assumption is wrong, he said. If it can be agreed, that a new leader can be chosen by a cross party "government of national unity" a new prime minister can be installed without the need for a general election.

I've not heard anybody else mention it since ( about a week ago) and perhaps events have moved on to make what was claimed, redundant........
I put forward that very scenario on this board several weeks ago, (probably around the time that May resigned), and a few of us discussed it. (I seem to recall that dsr argued that it was highly unlikely since insufficient Conservatives would resign the Tory whip and vote against Johnson, but I still think it's a strong possibility.)
Ironically the question now appears to be how many Tories would vote with Labour in a "Vote of Confidence", and how many Labour MPs such as Flint and Champion would vote with the Tories!!!
Last edited by nil_desperandum on Wed Jul 17, 2019 10:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

JohnMcGreal
Posts: 2206
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:37 am
Been Liked: 1344 times
Has Liked: 438 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by JohnMcGreal » Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:22 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:The fact we aren't prepared for no deal is the fault of our weak, spineless and useless government.
It's also the fault of both Brexiteers and remainers but neither side will accept any blame.
I think it's important to point out that No Deal is not like some sort of natural disaster than can just happen to us, nor is it something that can be inflicted on us by some other body.

We're able to revoke article 50 right up to the point of exit, so No Deal only happens if we want it to happen.

And not enough people want it to happen. Parliament doesn't want it to happen, neither does most of the country. It would be an act of suicide.

It hasn't been prepared for because firstly it's pretty much impossible to fully prepare for, such is the magnitude of the rupture that will occur should we leave with no deal, and secondly because it's unlikely that it will ever be allowed to happen by Parliament.

Burnley Ace
Posts: 3525
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
Been Liked: 651 times
Has Liked: 2879 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Burnley Ace » Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:35 am

dsr wrote:And as subsequent events have proved, Parliament has no problem in overriding May. With Bercow on side (and in this respect - and this respect only - I am not criticising Bercow) Parliament can have its say on anything and the government can't stop it. As it should be, frankly. It's sad that Parliament needed Miller to wake it up, but it's better that Parliament should be awake than that it should be dozy. I didn't want Miller to win the case, and I think it sets a very dangerous precedent, but there are certainly good points about it that may even outweigh the bad..

Of course, the follow-up issue is that there are plenty of Parliamentarians willing to cause trouble for the government, but fewer who have the principles to carry that trouble to the limit - to vote down the government and force an election. We need more principled people in Parliament, and we have far too many placemen.
I don’t think that’s quite correct. Before the Miller case the Government would have been able to agree, using its executive powers (The Crown Prerogative) the terms of our leaving. There would have been no need for a vote by all MPs.

summitclaret
Posts: 3891
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 826 times
Has Liked: 1307 times
Location: burnley

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by summitclaret » Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:59 am

There is going to be a deal. At last someone is putting pressure on the EU and our pathetic mps to take no deal seriously. Even Hunt understands. Some Labour mps get it.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by martin_p » Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:32 am

summitclaret wrote:There is going to be a deal. At last someone is putting pressure on the EU and our pathetic mps to take no deal seriously. Even Hunt understands. Some Labour mps get it.
Not unless something gives and that doesn’t look like the EU at the moment. One possibility is that the backstop is dropped and replaced by something pretty much identical in all but name. Boris can then claim that he’s got rid of the backstop. One possibility is an open ended transition period until such time as the Irish border issue is resolved. Of course the difficulty with that will be the same as the backstop, what agreement from whom is needed for the transition period to end?

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Imploding Turtle » Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:45 am

Farage says that getting 52% of the vote means the winner has no legitimacy.

Image

AndrewJB
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1159 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by AndrewJB » Wed Jul 17, 2019 10:57 am

CrosspoolClarets wrote:That sums it up perfectly for me.

The democratic deficit is a huge chunk of the problem, the further decisions are from the people, the more the people feel impotent and that their lives are no purpose. There is no “common good” that they are living for. Take away national solidarity, you take away a hell of a lot from many people.

The new President’s speech today, saying that EU law should sit above domestic law, hasn’t been lost on people.

I wasn’t a fan of no deal before, I’d have taken May’s deal (after agonising about it) but the EU is heading so far downhill we need to get out now, whatever the cost. It will end in tears, mark my words.
Maybe because I'm Canadian (in addition to being British) I don't find there to be any internal tension on identifying as European and British at the same time. My sense of being an EU citizen doesn't take away from my British citizenship, but it's another level of citizenship that sits alongside it (just like my Canadian citizenship is).

If you feel alienated from EU politics, then surely you can't tell me you're not also with British national politics?

As for the EU going downhill, what evidence do you have for this? Here is Von Der Leyen's speech: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SP ... 230_en.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; What you describe as her demanding the dominance of EU law, is simply her restating the importance of the rule of law (a central tenet to British society). Read her speech and tell me what you find objectionable. Even in the passage relating to Britain leaving, there is nothing negative or bellicose.

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:09 am

AndrewJB wrote:Maybe because I'm Canadian (in addition to being British) I don't find there to be any internal tension on identifying as European and British at the same time. My sense of being an EU citizen doesn't take away from my British citizenship, but it's another level of citizenship that sits alongside it (just like my Canadian citizenship is).

If you feel alienated from EU politics, then surely you can't tell me you're not also with British national politics?

As for the EU going downhill, what evidence do you have for this? Here is Von Der Leyen's speech: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SP ... 230_en.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; What you describe as her demanding the dominance of EU law, is simply her restating the importance of the rule of law (a central tenet to British society). Read her speech and tell me what you find objectionable. Even in the passage relating to Britain leaving, there is nothing negative or bellicose.
All through that speech, she has ignored the distinction between "Europe" and "the EU". She talks as if they are the same thing, and they aren't.

Being European, I can understand. This will not change after Brexit - I will still be European, just as Norwegians, Swiss, Channel Islanders, Russians, Ukrainians, Icelanders are European. I can well understand people identifying as European. But being European is not the same thing as being a citizen of the EU.
This user liked this post: If it be your will

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:36 am

RingoMcCartney wrote:I see aggi is still struggling to accept the result of the largest single expression of democracy this country has ever witnessed.

Adults find it an easy to process to come to terms with.
If it was down to me we'd have left by now. It's the hardliners who are working so hard at keeping us in.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:39 am

If it be your will wrote:I wasn't apportioning blame. I maintain that no country had more influence over how the EU ended up than the UK.

I'm saying there's a vast democratic deficit in the EU. Who made it thus isn't relevant. I, unlike others, have never blamed the Germans or the French for the EU's flaws. Quite the opposite - I am firmly of the view it's our fault the EU is so ****!
Your argument, so far as I can tell, seems to be that you want the EU to give you a second say because you don't think that the current ruling party of the UK's views necessarily align with your own.

But your solution seems to be to get rid of that second say altogether rather than try and reform how the UK takes account of your views.

AndyClaret
Posts: 1349
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:08 pm
Been Liked: 217 times
Has Liked: 543 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by AndyClaret » Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:42 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Farage says that getting 52% of the vote means the winner has no legitimacy.

Image
In a one horse race...

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Imploding Turtle » Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:44 am

AndyClaret wrote:In a one horse race...
"Yes" or "No" is not a one horse race.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:46 am

dsr wrote:And as subsequent events have proved, Parliament has no problem in overriding May. With Bercow on side (and in this respect - and this respect only - I am not criticising Bercow) Parliament can have its say on anything and the government can't stop it. As it should be, frankly. It's sad that Parliament needed Miller to wake it up, but it's better that Parliament should be awake than that it should be dozy. I didn't want Miller to win the case, and I think it sets a very dangerous precedent, but there are certainly good points about it that may even outweigh the bad..

Of course, the follow-up issue is that there are plenty of Parliamentarians willing to cause trouble for the government, but fewer who have the principles to carry that trouble to the limit - to vote down the government and force an election. We need more principled people in Parliament, and we have far too many placemen.
I'm fairly sure that Parliament could have been side-stepped entirely though. They could have had their say but not necessarily stopped it (at least without a no confidence vote, a GE and new session of parliament).

Personally I've always thought it ludicrous that the most important decision that this country will make in generations is being done on short-term, partisan, party-political lines. It's been too much about points-scoring and party politics and not enough about the future of the country. As you say though, we need more principled people in Parliament and that needs to start from the very top.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:53 am

dsr wrote:All through that speech, she has ignored the distinction between "Europe" and "the EU". She talks as if they are the same thing, and they aren't.

Being European, I can understand. This will not change after Brexit - I will still be European, just as Norwegians, Swiss, Channel Islanders, Russians, Ukrainians, Icelanders are European. I can well understand people identifying as European. But being European is not the same thing as being a citizen of the EU.
This really annoys me too. I really like Europe.

They do it all the time. Remember in the Euro crisis, and all the EU politicians were saying "Europe needs to decide: do we want more Europe, or less Europe?" It became a sort of rallying cry.

They didn't say "Europe needs to decide: do we want more EU, or less EU?"

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:58 am

aggi wrote:Your argument, so far as I can tell, seems to be that you want the EU to give you a second say because you don't think that the current ruling party of the UK's views necessarily align with your own.

But your solution seems to be to get rid of that second say altogether rather than try and reform how the UK takes account of your views.
That makes no sense at all, so far as I can tell.

I said the EU was undemocratic, you said this was the UK's fault, not the EU's, then I said "Yes, I know". No idea how you've reached the above from that.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:00 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:"Yes" or "No" is not a one horse race.
It was "Do you want this one? If not we'll choose someone else for you to vote for"

One and a half horses, maybe?

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Imploding Turtle » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:06 pm

If it be your will wrote:It was "Do you want this one? If not we'll choose someone else for you to vote for"

One and a half horses, maybe?
No.
This user liked this post: If it be your will

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:06 pm

aggi wrote:Your argument, so far as I can tell, seems to be that you want the EU to give you a second say because you don't think that the current ruling party of the UK's views necessarily align with your own.

But your solution seems to be to get rid of that second say altogether rather than try and reform how the UK takes account of your views.
Oh, by the way, you listed the EU's handling of Nike, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, VW etc., seemingly as examples of why the EU is not run in the corporate interests. I asked if these companies, in your view, had been suitably constrained by the EU. I don't think you've answered yet.

Take VW, say. VW maliciously rigged their engines. This killed people throughout Europe. Let's look at their profits:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/272 ... ince-2006/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bit of a dent, there, in 2015, probably due to the very heavy sanctions in the US. At record levels again now though.
Last edited by If it be your will on Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:14 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:The fact we aren't prepared for no deal is the fault of our weak, spineless and useless government.
It's also the fault of both Brexiteers and remainers but neither side will accept any blame.

We've never held all the cards and were never going too, but neither do the EU.

As for what people voted for, the result was leave, the finer details were down to the government to negotiate for but as shown this shower of turds would struggle to negotiate their way round a spaghetti junction.
Let's be realistic, being prepared for No Deal would have cost huge amounts and couldn't really be done in the time frame. Recruiting hundreds of thousands of people, new IT systems, massive amounts of infrastructure, etc Any politician who authorised that would be slated.

The finer details were down to the government but when the politicians have been promising the moon on a stick prior to the negotiation it is difficult to match that in the negotiation.
This user liked this post: CombatClaret

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:19 pm

If it be your will wrote:That makes no sense at all, so far as I can tell.

I said the EU was undemocratic, you said this was the UK's fault, not the EU's, then I said "Yes, I know". No idea how you've reached the above from that.
I didn't say it was the UK's fault, more that your complaints about why you thought it was undemocratic were the UK's fault.

It was in response to your I was in the majority that didn't vote for May, yet May gets to choose representation on the Commission, and also May chooses who represents the UK on The Council of the EU.

I'm of the view that the PM is a good proxy for the overall will of the British people whereas your issue seems to be that as you didn't vote for May you want another say in the EU rather than have her represent you.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:35 pm

If it be your will wrote:Oh, by the way, you listed the EU's handling of Nike, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, VW etc., seemingly as examples of why the EU is not run in the corporate interests. I asked if these companies, in your view, had been suitably constrained by the EU. I don't think you've answered yet.

Take VW, say. VW maliciously rigged their engines. This killed people throughout Europe. Let's look at their profits:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/272 ... ince-2006/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bit of a dent, there, in 2015, probably due to the very heavy sanctions in the US. At record levels again now though.
I think they have been constrained by the EU. I'd say they've done better with the technology companies, probably because the US is more inclined to give them a freer rein, with some substantial cases. Arguably the EU vs Microsoft paved the way for Google for instance (although whether that would now be viewed as a good thing is debatable). Some of Apple's tax avoidance has been halted, etc

In terms of VW I think the case is still ongoing and other car manufacturers have been drawn in. New legislation came in at EU level to try and prevent it happening again (and interestingly to try and stop individual nations turning a blind eye to it).

I wouldn't disagree that business interests are prioritised in the EU. However, I'm not sure what you'd expect from an alliance of capitalist countries. I wouldn't expect the EU to be anti-corporate. I believe though that the best way to get enforcement on these things is collectively, individual countries trying to push their enforcement is a struggle in this global world.

CombatClaret
Posts: 4381
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:09 pm
Been Liked: 1825 times
Has Liked: 929 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by CombatClaret » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:37 pm

aggi wrote: Personally I've always thought it ludicrous that the most important decision that this country will make in generations is being done on short-term, partisan, party-political lines. It's been too much about points-scoring and party politics and not enough about the future of the country. As you say though, we need more principled people in Parliament and that needs to start from the very top.
I can't see any other process which would not be labeled 'un-democratic', the one factor we could have altered is the short term part, firing the starting pistol so soon was needless. I don't think it's all TM's fault either, more people seem obsessed with when rather than how.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:48 pm

aggi wrote:I didn't say it was the UK's fault, more that your complaints about why you thought it was undemocratic were the UK's fault.

It was in response to your I was in the majority that didn't vote for May, yet May gets to choose representation on the Commission, and also May chooses who represents the UK on The Council of the EU.

I'm of the view that the PM is a good proxy for the overall will of the British people whereas your issue seems to be that as you didn't vote for May you want another say in the EU rather than have her represent you.
This messageboard can send anyone a bit mad, but it's not like you to ludicrously misrepresent to this extent, or surmise a conclusion for me that is so far removed from the reality of what was said as to be totally meaningless. Where on earth has the I want another say come from?? Let's look at what I said:
If it be your will wrote:That is true. I'll gladly concede that one. It is Major's fault we didn't get a say on Maastricht, and Blair's fault we had no say on Lisbon. Yet I, as a person, am still bound by them, and probably will be till I die. The Commission and ECJ are bound by them too.

I was in the majority that didn't vote for Major, and in the majority that didn't vote for Blair. I was in the majority that didn't vote for May, yet May gets to choose representation on the Commission, and also May chooses who represents the UK on The Council of the EU. My MEP does not get to choose the laws they vote on, nor can MEPs alter the treaties.

Wherever the fault lies, it doesn't obviously feel like I had my democratic say in this. Do you feel you have, in all honesty?
I suggested this wasn't very democratic, because at every stage I was actually in the majority, yet got the opposite. I got no say at all on the treaties either. Indeed, less than half the EU population got a say on Maastricht at the time, and nearly half of those voted 'no'. And of those that voted 'yes', about half of them are now dead. Nobody under the age of 45 had any say on Maastricht at all. And here we are, the EU churning out The Fourth Railway Package, State Aid laws, Public Procurement rules, etc etc, all based on the principles of Maastricht.

I don't want another say (I've no idea what you mean here at all). Once we were (finally) asked, we voted to leave. That's what I want.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:56 pm

aggi wrote:I think they have been constrained by the EU. I'd say they've done better with the technology companies, probably because the US is more inclined to give them a freer rein, with some substantial cases. Arguably the EU vs Microsoft paved the way for Google for instance (although whether that would now be viewed as a good thing is debatable). Some of Apple's tax avoidance has been halted, etc

In terms of VW I think the case is still ongoing and other car manufacturers have been drawn in. New legislation came in at EU level to try and prevent it happening again (and interestingly to try and stop individual nations turning a blind eye to it).

I wouldn't disagree that business interests are prioritised in the EU. However, I'm not sure what you'd expect from an alliance of capitalist countries. I wouldn't expect the EU to be anti-corporate. I believe though that the best way to get enforcement on these things is collectively, individual countries trying to push their enforcement is a struggle in this global world.
What seems to be happening now is the EU are going after member states:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-volk ... SKBN13W2UG" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That is, the taxpayer is on the hook because VW killed people. VW is now back to record profits. We - the taxpayers - will pay the fines. This might be partly due to VW being in the top ten spending lobbyists https://lobbyfacts.eu/articles/29-10-20 ... obbying-eu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And you choose VW as an example of the EU successfully reining in corporate interests? Jeez...

CombatClaret
Posts: 4381
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:09 pm
Been Liked: 1825 times
Has Liked: 929 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by CombatClaret » Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:17 pm

If it be your will wrote:What seems to be happening now is the EU are going after member states:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-volk ... SKBN13W2UG" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That is, the taxpayer is on the hook because VW killed people. VW is now back to record profits. We - the taxpayers - will pay the fines. This might be partly due to VW being in the top ten spending lobbyists https://lobbyfacts.eu/articles/29-10-20 ... obbying-eu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And you choose VW as an example of the EU successfully reining in corporate interests? Jeez...
We're not paying VW's fines though are we, it's separate fines for countries with big national interests in VW not properly holding them to account.

Under current EU law, national regulators approve new cars and alone have the power to revoke those licenses or impose penalties - although they can be sold across the bloc.
So far, despite probes revealing the use of defeat devices in Germany, Italy, France and Britain, no country has penalized the cars it licensed in what critics see as a sign of collusion.


Personally I think it a good thing that VW lobbies the EU but the EU still goes after it's interests in cases of wrongdoing. Surely If the EU was so influenced by VW none of this would be happening?

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:18 pm

Just checked, only the peoples of France, Ireland and Denmark got to vote on Maastricht, and they were all close results. France scraped through by the skin of it's teeth, and Demark scraped through at the second attempt. So basically, of the current living population of the EU, only a vanishingly small number actually voted for the most powerful of powerful EU treaties, constructed in a completely different era, 27 years ago, to the one we live in now. Yet it is still fundamental in guiding what laws the EU Parliament can and can't pass, or even get the chance to vote on.

Something to consider for those wanting a second UK referendum, 3 years after the last one.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:21 pm

CombatClaret wrote:We're not paying VW's fines though are we, it's separate fines for countries with big national interests in VW not properly holding them to account.

Under current EU law, national regulators approve new cars and alone have the power to revoke those licenses or impose penalties - although they can be sold across the bloc.
So far, despite probes revealing the use of defeat devices in Germany, Italy, France and Britain, no country has penalized the cars it licensed in what critics see as a sign of collusion.


Personally I think it a good thing that VW lobbies the EU but the EU still goes after it's interests in cases of wrongdoing. Surely If the EU was so influenced by VW none of this would be happening?
That's exactly it. We're being held to account because VW killed people. They're hardly going after VW at all. Hence their record profits last year.

So honestly, you think the corporate interests of VW have been suitably curtailed by the EU? I don't, but then I guess it's a matter of opinion.

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:34 pm

If it be your will wrote:That's exactly it. We're being held to account because VW killed people. They're hardly going after VW at all. Hence their record profits last year.

So honestly, you think the corporate interests of VW have been suitably curtailed by the EU? I don't, but then I guess it's a matter of opinion.
Do you think it is less likely or more likely that we will be willing and able to curtail corporate interests post-Brexit?

Your argument - on this particular front - seems to be that the EU isn’t perfect so we should jack it in and leave. I’m not sure that’s a fair and logical stance to take, tbh.

The question shouldn’t be “has the EU curtailed corporate interests as much as I would like them to?”, but “have corporate interests been curtailed more or less than they would have been had the EU never existed (or included the UK)?”
These 2 users liked this post: AndrewJB CombatClaret

CombatClaret
Posts: 4381
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:09 pm
Been Liked: 1825 times
Has Liked: 929 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by CombatClaret » Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:20 pm

If it be your will wrote:That's exactly it. We're being held to account because VW killed people. They're hardly going after VW at all. Hence their record profits last year.

So honestly, you think the corporate interests of VW have been suitably curtailed by the EU? I don't, but then I guess it's a matter of opinion.
Do you think the UK has suitably curtained the corporate interests of VW?

EU fine: $1.2 paid (actual fine was larger), potential $2b fine in 2021 if new emissions test failed.
US fine: $25b
UK fine: $0

U.S. authorities have extracted $25 billion in fines, penalties and restitution from VW for the 580,000 tainted diesels it sold in the U.S. In Europe, where the company sold 8 million tainted diesels, VW has not paid a single Euro in government penalties. If you want to see VW corporate interest curtailed and it seems like you do then you should support the EU for it's willingness to do things the UK, Germany, Italy etc wont even whilst being lobbied by the very same company.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14562
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:41 pm

CombatClaret wrote:Do you think the UK has suitably curtained the corporate interests of VW?

EU fine: $1.2 paid (actual fine was larger), potential $2b fine in 2021 if new emissions test failed.
US fine: $25b
UK fine: $0

U.S. authorities have extracted $25 billion in fines, penalties and restitution from VW for the 580,000 tainted diesels it sold in the U.S. In Europe, where the company sold 8 million tainted diesels, VW has not paid a single Euro in government penalties. If you want to see VW corporate interest curtailed and it seems like you do then you should support the EU for it's willingness to do things the UK, Germany, Italy etc wont even whilst being lobbied by the very same company.
VW/Audi have recently been caught again fitting cheat devices to some Audi models, two years after they got caught the first time.
They've been nailed on one and given the option to voluntarily remove the other two devices.

Clearly VAG aren't arsed about some of these fines and they'll keep trying to get away with it.

I think BMW and Mercedes are also in trouble.

Burnley Ace
Posts: 3525
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
Been Liked: 651 times
Has Liked: 2879 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Burnley Ace » Wed Jul 17, 2019 3:10 pm

dsr wrote:And as subsequent events have proved, Parliament has no problem in overriding May. With Bercow on side (and in this respect - and this respect only - I am not criticising Bercow) Parliament can have its say on anything and the government can't stop it..
That’s just not correct. If the Government has used, as it said it was going to, The Crown Prerogative- powers held by Government Ministers that may be used WITHOUT the consent of the Commons or Lords - then Parliament, unless there was a vote of no confidence, couldn’t have stopped them.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 17, 2019 3:17 pm

If it be your will wrote:This messageboard can send anyone a bit mad, but it's not like you to ludicrously misrepresent to this extent, or surmise a conclusion for me that is so far removed from the reality of what was said as to be totally meaningless. Where on earth has the I want another say come from?? Let's look at what I said:

I suggested this wasn't very democratic, because at every stage I was actually in the majority, yet got the opposite. I got no say at all on the treaties either. Indeed, less than half the EU population got a say on Maastricht at the time, and nearly half of those voted 'no'. And of those that voted 'yes', about half of them are now dead. Nobody under the age of 45 had any say on Maastricht at all. And here we are, the EU churning out The Fourth Railway Package, State Aid laws, Public Procurement rules, etc etc, all based on the principles of Maastricht.

I don't want another say (I've no idea what you mean here at all). Once we were (finally) asked, we voted to leave. That's what I want.
I may have misinterpreted you, easy to do in writing.

By want another say I mean you want to have your own vote for appointments to things such as the Council of Europe, EU Commission, various treaties, etc rather than have whoever is leading the UK at that time decide for you.

Is that what you're saying?

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Wed Jul 17, 2019 3:33 pm

If it be your will wrote:What seems to be happening now is the EU are going after member states:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-volk ... SKBN13W2UG" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That is, the taxpayer is on the hook because VW killed people. VW is now back to record profits. We - the taxpayers - will pay the fines. This might be partly due to VW being in the top ten spending lobbyists https://lobbyfacts.eu/articles/29-10-20 ... obbying-eu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And you choose VW as an example of the EU successfully reining in corporate interests? Jeez...
Well that's part of it, and personally I don't have an issue with countries being taken to task when they aren't enforcing regulations that result in this kind of thing. Do you think enforcing these rules will help or hinder VW's interests? If the countries had done their job properly in the first place would this have been an issue?

There is nothing to stop individual countries taking action over VW. As others have pointed out, you're complaining that the EU is doing nothing (even though it's doing something) whilst ignoring the fact that individual countries did nothing until the EU forced them to. It's a balancing act. You complain that the EU aren't getting involved enough and then other posters complain that they get involved too much.

Also, this isn't over yet. There's another case at the moment which may result in a few more billion of fines for VW.

keith1879
Posts: 865
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 1:28 pm
Been Liked: 262 times
Has Liked: 363 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by keith1879 » Wed Jul 17, 2019 3:58 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:I see aggi is still struggling to accept the result of the largest single expression of democracy this country has ever witnessed.

Adults find it an easy to process to come to terms with.
https://bathforeurope.com/2018/12/10/wa ... s-history/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by martin_p » Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:07 pm

I’ve pointed these things out to Wrongo before and he replies with a very specific definition of ‘single expression of democracy’ to mean the most people that have voted for a single thing. It’s not a definition that anyone else would recognise of course, but facts and words mean different things on planet Wrongo.

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:20 pm

There was an American city (as they call it) a few years back that had an electorate of 14, and the two candidates got 7 votes each. (It was decided on toss of a coin.) But the turnout was 100%, so it was a bigger democratic exercise than the Brexit vote, if turnover is the criterion.

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:24 pm

dsr wrote:There was an American city (as they call it) a few years back that had an electorate of 14, and the two candidates got 7 votes each. (It was decided on toss of a coin.) But the turnout was 100%, so it was a bigger democratic exercise than the Brexit vote, if turnover is the criterion.
You didn’t read the link did you?

Here’s the opening paragraph for you:-

“Update: January 25th 2019. Since this piece was published some people have pointed out on Twitter that the 2016 referendum didn’t even have the highest number of voters, let alone the highest turnout. This is true. In the 1992 general election 33,614,074 people voted; in the 2016 referendum it was 33,577,342. Thus 36,732 more people voted in 1992 than in 2016. So even though the Prime Minister and Jacob Rees-Mogg were careful not to mention ‘turnout’ they were wrong even in terms of the numbers of voters.”

dsr
Posts: 15132
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4548 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:31 pm

Greenmile wrote:You didn’t read the link did you?

Here’s the opening paragraph for you:-

“Update: January 25th 2019. Since this piece was published some people have pointed out on Twitter that the 2016 referendum didn’t even have the highest number of voters, let alone the highest turnout. This is true. In the 1992 general election 33,614,074 people voted; in the 2016 referendum it was 33,577,342. Thus 36,732 more people voted in 1992 than in 2016. So even though the Prime Minister and Jacob Rees-Mogg were careful not to mention ‘turnout’ they were wrong even in terms of the numbers of voters.”
Of course I read the link. How could I have talked about what was in the link if I hadn't read it? That doesn't make any sense.

I was commenting on the poster's idea that turnout is the measure of the size of an election; not actual votes. Obviously the number of voters was only the second highest in history in the UK.

Incidentally, the poster draws what to him is the obvious inference that when Rees-Mogg and may said that it was the biggest ever in terms of votes, were liars; but he himself, when he said it was the biggest ever in terms of votes, was mistaken. Why does he think that he can be wrong and they can't?

Locked