Brexit: the referendum
- Thread starter MikeG
- Start date
....and bear in mind that for some of us, some of those negatives are also positives. Personally I think that the European Court of Justice has been a net benefit for the people of the U.K. There have been a small number of apparently perverse rulings (but then again many of those have been through the filter of a largely Eurosceptic press) but then again there have been a much larger number of rulings where people's rights have been protected when national courts have failed them.
Likewise with the "A ridiculously expensive and intrusive bureaucracy". At least we have a single bureaucracy handling the affairs of 28 countries (as opposed to 28 ridiculously expensive and intrusive bureaucracies handling them in their uniquely inefficient ways).
Regarding loss of sovereignty, there's a continuum which at one end we have one world government and at the other Freemen on the Land. My personal view is that the larger the unit over which sovereignty is wielded, the less the risk of conflict, armed or otherwise (which is why instinctively I was anti Scottish independence (although an independent Scotland in a united Europe could have changed my mind).
That's one of the difficulties that the "In" campaign faces, they have to argue against the background of the (warts and all) current situation whereas the "Out" campaign has the freedom to construct whatever fantasy they want for the post-EU situation.
If I was pitching the vision it would be:
- Free trade with Europe
- Free movement of UK citizens to Europe (because we're trusted and whatnot) but no need to reciprocate
- No control or influence over British laws from the EU
- We can abandon ecological and workers' welfare legislation
- Reinstate the duty free allowances for booze cruises
- Repeal all the human rights legislation
Hang on a minute!
We've now got 28 individual bureaucracies PLUS the EU bureaucracy. Whitehall didn't just disappear when we signed up to the Common Market.
H'ethetheth
fishy rocket scientist
Okay, just a quick reply for now: It seems that many the objections are of a gradual kind, where the line is seemingly arbitrarily drawn at the UK for reasons I don't really understand.
What I mean is that layers of bureaucracy no doubt exist on multiple levels in the UK, and so will regulations regarding the properties of produce. Are European bureaucrats really more faceless than National bureaucrats, or is the problem that someone from outside the UK can influence the lives of the British?
And about sovereignty: What does that mean to an individual anyway? Does it make a difference when obeying laws (or not) where the bureaucrat sits?
In short, your post is helpful, but not for making me understand why it's so important that the UK leave the EU.
Bureaucracy wasn't the only thing on the list H'ethetheth.
The difference between EU bureaucracy and national arrangements is that voters can remove the (entirety of the) government which gives the bureaucrats their orders, and thus have a theoretical final say in how we are governed. There is no such democratic accountability with the EU.
The difference between EU bureaucracy and national arrangements is that voters can remove the (entirety of the) government which gives the bureaucrats their orders, and thus have a theoretical final say in how we are governed. There is no such democratic accountability with the EU.
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
While I understand the logic to this, given the frequency of wars in Europe prior to World War 2, I think I would give more credit to a variety of other factors such as modern cultural and political norms, liberal democracy, NATO, nuclear deterrents, better educated and politically empowered populations, and so on. The old saw that "democracies don't go to war against each other" isn't quite true, but it does seem that liberal democracies beyond a certain level of human development don't go to war against each other. It seems inconceivable for example that the United States would invade Canada today, for example, or that Sweden would invade Norway, which is not an EU member, or vice versa.
Russia OTOH . . .
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
Net contribution?
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
That's simply not true.
UK voters can only vote for their constituency representative same as the EU arrangement. The totality of voters may decide the government but that's no different at the EU level either.
When you were pulled up on sovereignty the last time you tried this nonsense you backtracked rather rapidly on it being important to you and now you have come back to it again.
Information Analyst
Penultimate Amazing
That might back-fire if they start bringing their kids with them. To me, paying full child benefit for kids who aren't consuming UK health and education resources is not necessarily a "bad thing."
Or did you mean ending pension payments to ex-patriates...?
H'ethetheth
fishy rocket scientist
Well, it isn't the only thing I responded to either, so there's that.
It's been a while since I learned this stuff, but don't we elect a European parliament? No not the entirety of it, but then, when I vote for my national parliament, I also can't elect the entire parliament. I can only elect as much of the parliament as there are voters who agree with me.
This is what I meant by gradual objections: Like several of the things you mentioned, representation in Europe functions quite similar to how it functions on a national level in many states. It's just a layer of government on top. Why is a UK government over a Scottish government okay, but not a European one over that?
And I'm not saying it's perfect, but I don't see how it's so terrible.
Lothian
should be banned
Yes, we do elect European parliament MPs. It is similar to the Scottish / UK government relationship in that the EU only deals with some matters. It is however a slightly different relationship in that Scottish people are subject to the laws set by both the Scottish and UK parliaments. UK people are not usually subject to EU laws in the same way. The EU laws apply to the UK as a country. The UK government generally has to change domestic law to give effect to EU law.
Last edited:
Information Analyst
Penultimate Amazing
The EU has been a convenient whipping boy for politicians and the media, and sadly much of their whining has infected the population at large. Neither of them ever big up the positives of being in the EU, and instead fostered a "we put more in than we get out" attitude, without actually defining the "what we get out" element. Anyone who travels ariound Europe will see signs proclaiming which particular new bit of infrastructure got EU funding; you just don't see that in the UK, or at least it's never as prominent, even when it is acknowledged.
It occured to me recently that a thousand years of never being invaded, but having resisted the threat - real or imagined - means a seige mentality comes easy to Brits. Most European countries, on the other hand, have been subject to invasion or occupation of one form or another, most of them fairly recently. For them it's, "maybe co-operation is much better," while for Brits it, "we can stand against all-comers."
Information Analyst
Penultimate Amazing
Sadly it seems that for a lot of people it's some vague indefinable idea that the EU is designed solely to screw the UK over.
Information Analyst
Penultimate Amazing
"The UK’s net contribution to the EU Budget in 2015 is estimated at £8.5 billion, up from £4.3 billion in 2009 and down from £9.8 billion in 2014. It is forecast to fluctuate between £11.1 billion and £7.9 billion a year between 2016 and 2020." [House of Commons Library]
Lothian
should be banned
You do know that these signs are like a red rag to some particular bulls? Why the hell should my taxes go to building new bridges in Spain or roads in Greece, or whatever.......is the argument. People who don't like the idea of subsidy, or of redistribution, find this an anathema. Don't assign this view to me.
A lot of British people seem to believe that the UK is god damn "special" that it must be treated exceptionally compared to all other countries in the EU. Unfortunately Britain isn't nearly as special as it once was. This is especially true now that the ex-communist central and eastern European countries are becoming increasingly developed.
Evidently they can't accept that the days of the British empire is long gone and not coming whether or they leave the EU.
Evidently they can't accept that the days of the British empire is long gone and not coming whether or they leave the EU.
That's it? That's the best you can do: trot out silly stereotypes....... Have you got nothing substantive to say?Information Analyst
Penultimate Amazing
Yeah, that as well.