Who is in and who is out?

[Grahamshed]

It's interesting how nearly everyone seems to be vehemently convinced either one way or the other. Am I the only one who thinks that it probably won't be the end of the world which ever way it goes? I can see pros and cons of both sides, and at the end of the day we will still have the same snivelling bunch of politicians in downing st.
On balance i will vote (have already voted by post) to stay in, based more than anything else on the type of people who are telling me to leave, but again I don't really see that much changing either way except for a probable slump in the economy if we leave.
And to those who complain that the eu is undemocratic, take a long hard look at our own "democracy" - an unelected second chamber and head of state, and a first post the post system which effectively makes huge numbers of votes meaningless.

Sums up my position as well.

 

[Claymore]

This is interesting,
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClI2EceVYAAbqBW.jpg

Apparently the story that he shouted Britain First was first circulated on Twitter within minutes by a female Labour MP called Maria Eagle. Forgot to mention she deleted the Twitter message once it had circulated....why?

 

[RobinBHM]

It's interesting how nearly everyone seems to be vehemently convinced either one way or the other. Am I the only one who thinks that it probably won't be the end of the world which ever way it goes? I can see pros and cons of both sides, and at the end of the day we will still have the same snivelling bunch of politicians in downing st.
On balance i will vote (have already voted by post) to stay in, based more than anything else on the type of people who are telling me to leave, but again I don't really see that much changing either way except for a probable slump in the economy if we leave.
And to those who complain that the eu is undemocratic, take a long hard look at our own "democracy" - an unelected second chamber and head of state, and a first post the post system which effectively makes huge numbers of votes meaningless.

Sums up my position as well.

I also agree, people do seem to have polarized views, but the reality is there are strengths and weaknesses on both options.

I fall in the exit camp mostly because I dont find any large organisation to be efficient or honest, EU included. It has so much money pumped into it that those working for the EU are going to be inward looking.

 

[MIGNAL]

This is interesting,
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClI2EceVYAAbqBW.jpg

Apparently the story that he shouted Britain First was first circulated on Twitter within minutes by a female Labour MP called Maria Eagle. Forgot to mention she deleted the Twitter message once it had circulated....why?

Probably because she first heard it from somewhere else. You would have to be one of the very few witnesses to be able to confirm, unlikely that any other MP would have been a witness. I don't even trust your link.
I do wish folk would put a fist in their mouth in relation to Twitter. Seems to me that some folk treat it like a rolling news report. Just let the authorities and the police release the official version of events then you can comment on it.

 

[Claymore]

So the shop owner is lying by putting the message in his shop window? if its there then its there......just because someone doesn't agree with it doesn't mean they are right.
Your right about Twitter posting rubbish and fake stories...... just look at all the fake ISIS and refugee stories circulating trying to get us to go to war with ASSAD ...... its happened before with Sadams WMD which were also fairy tails by Blair.

 

[MIGNAL]

Where did I state that they were lying? I said I didn't trust it. Were they at the actual scene at the very moment she was attacked? Were they present throughout the whole ordeal? If not it's hardly going to be an authoritative version of events. Once ALL the witnesses have been interviewed, perhaps then we will get the truth. Of course it might be a little different if 10 different witnesses had already told the media exactly what was said. I don't think that has happened yet. We'll find out soon enough.

 

[Claymore]

I agree BUT why is it ok for the media to plaster all the newspapers etc that the guy shouted "Britain First" if he didn't? surely it works both ways?
The guy at the shop was definitely there as it happened outside His shop so I think he has a right to let the world know what he saw/heard and not what the Media claims he said.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

It's interesting how nearly everyone seems to be vehemently convinced either one way or the other. Am I the only one who thinks that it probably won't be the end of the world which ever way it goes? I can see pros and cons of both sides, and at the end of the day we will still have the same snivelling bunch of politicians in downing st.
On balance i will vote (have already voted by post) to stay in, based more than anything else on the type of people who are telling me to leave, but again I don't really see that much changing either way except for a probable slump in the economy if we leave.
And to those who complain that the eu is undemocratic, take a long hard look at our own "democracy" - an unelected second chamber and head of state, and a first post the post system which effectively makes huge numbers of votes meaningless.

There is a fundamental difference in the ways the UK Parliament and the EU institutions are structured.

In Westminster, the decision-makers (the Government) are drawn from elected MPs. The second chamber may scrutinise legislation, may advise and may send back to the elected chamber for revision, but cannot propose or throw out legislation. The elected chamber thus has primacy. The head of state does not become involved in politics at all, but may advise ministers or request explanation.

In the EU, the only people able to propose legislation are the Commission (unelected). The elected MEPs cannot, nor can they throw out legislation. Overall guidance and direction are decided by the Council of Ministers (of which any country can elect only one out of currently twenty-eight), but they cannot propose legislation.

Overall, the Westminster system is far more accountable to us - the governed. Individually, none of us has more power than anybody else - one vote - but collectively, we decide the colour of government and periodically can hold it to account (provided we choose to register for and use our vote - and it's the individual's lookout if they don't). We have no influence at all on the direction of the EU, and none of us, in any country, can hold the decision-makers in the Commission to account. I don't see any meaningful effort to change that - hence, I'm voting to leave.

 

[MIGNAL]

I agree BUT why is it ok for the media to plaster all the newspapers etc that the guy shouted "Britain First" if he didn't? surely it works both ways?
The guy at the shop was definitely there as it happened outside His shop so I think he has a right to let the world know what he saw/heard and not what the Media claims he said.

You might be very surprised at what one does or does not actually witness. I was less than 25 yards from another recent gun killing. I clearly heard all the commotion, just after the event. I didn't hear one single gun shot, despite three shots being fired (according to reports). Maybe I did hear them but for some odd reason they did not stay in the memory. I have absolutely no recollection of any gun shots but I can clearly remember screams and shouting. Other people reported hearing gun shots, even though they were much further away from the event than I.

 

[RogerS]

I agree BUT why is it ok for the media to plaster all the newspapers etc that the guy shouted "Britain First" if he didn't? surely it works both ways?
The guy at the shop was definitely there as it happened outside His shop so I think he has a right to let the world know what he saw/heard and not what the Media claims he said.

You might be very surprised at what one does or does not actually witness. I was less than 25 yards from another recent gun killing. I clearly heard all the commotion, just after the event. I didn't hear one single gun shot, despite three shots being fired (according to reports). Maybe I did hear them but for some odd reason they did not stay in the memory. I have absolutely no recollection of any gun shots but I can clearly remember screams and shouting. Other people reported hearing gun shots, even though they were much further away from the event than I.

Not surprised at all. These sort of things are explained in great detail in this excellent book http://www.theinvisiblegorilla.com/overview.html

 

[Phil Pascoe]

^^^As above. I spent my 25th birthday in a coroners court at an inquest where it was debatable whether someone had been killed. I listened to about thirty people's version of events - the only ones that were the same were the people I knew to be liars.

 

[Inoffthered]

This is interesting,
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClI2EceVYAAbqBW.jpg

Apparently the story that he shouted Britain First was first circulated on Twitter within minutes by a female Labour MP called Maria Eagle. Forgot to mention she deleted the Twitter message once it had circulated....why?

The depths that some will sink to get exploit a tragedy is well put here:-

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClGkbxpVAAAaKoL.jpg:large

and here

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/06 ... -time-low/

 

[Rhossydd]

Your right about Twitter posting rubbish and fake stories...... just look at all the fake ISIS and refugee stories circulating trying to get us to go to war with ASSAD ...... its happened before with Sadams WMD which were also fairy tails by Blair.

Check your facts the Iraq war was in 2003, Twitter was founded in 2006.

 

[Jake]

There is a fundamental difference in the ways the UK Parliament and the EU institutions are structured.

Yes, there is. That is because it is a supranational organisation - i.e. an international treaty organisation. Its legitimacy is ultimately derived from the legitimacy of the governments of the member states, not from the MEPs.

In the EU, the only people able to propose legislation are the Commission (unelected). The elected MEPs cannot, nor can they throw out legislation. Overall guidance and direction are decided by the Council of Ministers (of which any country can elect only one out of currently twenty-eight), but they cannot propose legislation.

That's not accurate. For a start, MEPs or Member States can make the Commission come up with proposed legislation. MEPs do also have the power to veto legislation, which has to be approved both by the EP and by The Council of the European Union. Countries also do not elect representatives to the Council, they just attend in the person of a minister of the national government for the relevant policy area.

The draft legislation proposed by the Commission is scrutinised both by the European Parliament, and also by the Council initially through COREPER - the Committee of Permanent Representatives of the Member States. COREPER is comprised of ambassadors from the member states (i.e civil servants representing the national government of all the member states). COREPER then makes recommendations to the Council, generally in practice acting on a unanimous decision making basis. QMV in theory applies (to those treaty areas where it is applicable) but does not tend to be exercised. If COREPER has agreed unanimously, then the Council will usually approve, but if not there is a whole new process of examination and discussion and debate between government representatives of the member states at ministerial level in Council.

Both the Council and the Parliament have to agree before legislation is passed. if they do not, there is a conciliation process between the two, but if that does not result in agreement, the draft proposed legislation dies on the vine.

Overall, the Westminster system is far more accountable to us - the governed. Individually, none of us has more power than anybody else - one vote - but collectively, we decide the colour of government and periodically can hold it to account (provided we choose to register for and use our vote - and it's the individual's lookout if they don't).

The Westminster system is what controls the EU through the above process, and so does the EP. So there is both directly elected accountability, and indirect accountability.

We have no influence at all on the direction of the EU, and none of us, in any country, can hold the decision-makers in the Commission to account.

Anyone might complain that we do not have enough influence given that 100% influence would be a British dictatorship over Europe which we do not have and hopefully do not want, but it is plainly wrong to say we have no influence. There is also accountability, which may not be perfectly designed, but it is difficult to do so within the constraints of not supplanting national government entirely by creating a federal superstate. That means that the accountability of the EU as a supranational organisation (and not a federal superstate) is primarily exercised through the national governments from which it primarily derives its legitimacy.

The same is true for the very many international treaty organisations to which the UK adheres.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

None of that alters the fact that we (ordinary people) can vote for the people that make the decisions at Westminster, and we can hold them to account at a general election. If enough of us feel that the UK government isn't working as it should, we can change it - as happened in 1979, 1997 and 2010.

We can't in any way change the EU decision makers through the ballot box. We can't change it's direction if we don't like it.

Ultimately, the Westminster parliament is more accountable to the people over whom it governs than the EU is.

 

[Claymore]

Your right about Twitter posting rubbish and fake stories...... just look at all the fake ISIS and refugee stories circulating trying to get us to go to war with ASSAD ...... its happened before with Sadams WMD which were also fairy tails by Blair.

Check your facts the Iraq war was in 2003, Twitter was founded in 2006.

Sorry I should have said the Internet and other forms of social media plus the newspapers of course, either way they have still to prove he had WMD. One of my best friends was killed in Iraq and I had to witness his wife and kids and his elderly parents try and cope with his loss, our lovely government have been terrible to them over the years with lies and even more lies and eventually last January they finally found out the truth that he had been butchered while on patrol by a gang of teens who not only killed him but mutilated his body........ the MOD tried to cover it up due to the fact they had cut back on safety equipment etc and radio equipment that was useless in certain areas (they only found out about his capture/death due to another soldier using a mobile)
As you may guess this has had a big impression on what I feel for any politician which is zero.
Anyway sorry to move away from the thread and I will keep out of future posts, my apologies if I have offended anyone on here.

 

[Jake]

We can't in any way change the EU decision makers through the ballot box. We can't change it's direction if we don't like it.

Ultimately, the Westminster parliament is more accountable to the people over whom it governs than the EU is.

Did you even read it? Do you even acknowledge that your earlier post was inaccurate?

We do control the decision makers, as they are either the MEPs, or representatives from national goverments - i.e. Westminster, who we can change at will in the usual way.

 

[Rhossydd]

Another interesting and unbiased opinion of the referendum from a respected USA paper.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/opini ... ef=opinion

 

[RogerS]

Another interesting and unbiased opinion of the referendum from a respected USA paper.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/opini ... ef=opinion

'Respected' by whom? Those who agree with its editorial line ?

 

[Cheshirechappie]

We can't in any way change the EU decision makers through the ballot box. We can't change it's direction if we don't like it.

Ultimately, the Westminster parliament is more accountable to the people over whom it governs than the EU is.

Did you even read it? Do you even acknowledge that your earlier post was inaccurate?

We do control the decision makers, as they are either the MEPs, or representatives from national goverments - i.e. Westminster, who we can change at will in the usual way.

I stand by what I wrote. The European Commission is the body that proposes EU law. Commissioners are appointed, not elected. In Westminster, government Ministers are the proposers of laws, and they are elected. If we, the electorate, vote in enough numbers, we can change the direction of government. We can't do that with the EU.

(I don't doubt that there are mechanisms for minor legislation to be proposed by MEPs, just as there are mechanisms for back-benchers to propose legislation in Westminster. That, however, is something of a side-issue; the important business is conducted as described.)