Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

VinLieger · 11-09-2019 03:54PM

dublinjock wrote: »

I did vote yes thats correct.
The leave vote won.
The house of commons dont want to leave the EU. They are a total disgrace and as i have said im learning that the saying i was told is so true.

Do you think you should leave with no deal, the negotiated WA, a norway deal , a canada deal, a + style deal of either of the previous two options, stay in the SM, stay in the CU, end free movement, allow a NI backstop or make it a complete UK backstop?

Is "leave" or "remain" a reasonable question to ask when considering all of the above options that are still not all of the ones available or anything close to all the questions that need to be answered.

johnnyskeleton · 11-09-2019 03:58PM

dublinjock wrote: »

What a total mess brexit has become.
I was asked to vote in a referendum and i did, i voted to leave the EU and i have to admit i was a little surprised when the leave vote won.

Then we had a general election with both the main parties telling us they would deliver brexit and do as the people had instructed.
All i am able to do is vote to change things, now it seems that what i was told is true.
"If democracy was to change anything then it would be got rid of"

I really do worry about the state of Democracy in the EU, hence i voted to leave. Now im worried about Democracy in the UK and house of commons.

With respect, what you are looking for is not democracy, but a less complicated and nuanced world.

Democracy in the EU is just fine. 27 of the 28 EU member states have functioning parliamentary democracies that co-operate with each other.

As for the 28th, while it may seem like its not functioning at the moment, in reality it is grappling with the difficult problem of trying to appease three irreconcilable groups of people (hard leavers, soft leavers and remainers), no two of which can agree. Its problems are compounded by the first past the post electoral system that only works when there are two clear main parties to vote for, based on clear policy differences. Thats what has broken down, not UK democracy

prawnsambo · 11-09-2019 03:59PM

dublinjock wrote: »

The house of commons dont want to leave the EU. They are a total disgrace and as i have said im learning that the saying i was told is so true.

The HoC can't make up their minds how the UK is to leave. The instruction in the referendum result didn't specify it. So that means that it is up to the HoC to decide how and they can't. It's as simple as that.

Zubeneschamali · 11-09-2019 04:00PM

dublinjock wrote: »

I did vote yes thats correct.
The leave vote won.
The house of commons dont want to leave the EU. They are a total disgrace and as i have said im learning that the saying i was told is so true.

Well, yes, but you said "How do I vote to get rid of the EU?" as if that was some sort of problem with democracy in the EU. But in fact, you voted to leave and the EU said "Okey dokey, there's the door". No problem at all voting leave and the EU is not stopping you.

The problem you have identified is a problem in London, not Brussels, so why bring it up when someone asks what is wrong with EU democracy?

briany · 11-09-2019 04:01PM

The 2016 referendum was the equivalent of a fairly simple musical lead sheet that the politicians and public of the UK have been improvising increasingly complex and daring jazz solos around.

In or out of the EU. Seems like a simple enough question. The problem is that Leave and Remain literally cannot even agree on what the EU is. You cannot hold a constructive argument unless each side has some common truths to work from.

dublinjock · 11-09-2019 04:01PM

VinLieger wrote: »

I mean if your serious with these questions, which by the way don't really seem to have anything to do with you saying the EU is undemocratic or you having problems with how it is run. If anything they show a complete and utter misunderstanding of the EU or the entire brexit debacle.

To get rid of the EU? do you mean to kill it entirely? If so then id also ask how to you vote to get rid of the UK?

If its how do you leave the EU? Then your government submits a letter under article 50 and understands how that process works and realistically what is possible/not possible in its specific circumstances or what it even wants to achieve in its negotiations for leaving.

The UK did submit article 50 letter but then had no idea what it wanted to do next when confronted with the reality that leaving isnt as simply as walking out the door for various logical reasons.

You want to vote for commissioners? Do you understand what commissioners are or do? Do you also want to vote for UK civil servants? Because thats effectively what you are asking to do.

I agree the reality of leaving isnt simple its a nightmare.

So im correct im not able to vote for the commiionersss who in turn vote for the EU President.
So who would the commissioners be accountable to?
These are genuine questions because its only the last few years i have started to read up learn about the EU and what it does.

trellheim · 11-09-2019 04:01PM

As BC said we are kind of wrapped up here in minutia.

to Dublinjock

Conservatives AND Labour's stated position is to LEAVE. Libdems and SNP are Remain.

Now it gets difficult.

Nobody knows what Leave means. This is what has caused all the fuss for THREE YEARS . There is a majority in the House of Commons to resolve this issue by postponing (not cancelling ) leave, running a much more detailed referendum with exact choices for people to vote on and then implementing the result of a second referendum.

The most likely outcome right now if this does not happen is an extremely damaging no-deal exit.

And if you think it will all stop after a no-deal I have news because the very first thing after a no-deal will be mini deals 1,2,3,4 with the EU

With regard to european commissioners and their accountability, 4.5 seconds googling finds

The president of the Commission leads a cabinet of Commissioners, referred to as the college, collectively accountable to the European Parliament.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_European_Commission

Varta · 11-09-2019 04:03PM

VinLieger wrote: »

Do you think you should leave with no deal, the negotiated WA, a norway deal , a canada deal, a + style deal of either of the previous two options, stay in the SM, stay in the CU, end free movement, allow a NI backstop or make it a complete UK backstop?

Is "leave" or "remain" a reasonable question to ask when considering all of the above options that are still not all of the ones available or anything close to all the questions that need to be answered.

Surely that's the role of the elected representatives? The public made a decision to leave and representative democracy should have decided on what terms were best to leave on. Obviously leaving was an insane decision, but it was a democratic decision. On another note, I think it was a big mistake to give them an extension and I just wish they were gone at this stage. Bring on a hard border, I'm sure the good people in NI stuck under the UK yoke can endure for a while longer knowing that freedom will come all the sooner as a result.

jimmycrackcorm · 11-09-2019 04:06PM

Bit cynical wrote: »

Rerunning a referendum is unsatisfactory from a democratic point of view, yes. Not the only perspective; there are other considerations. But from the perspective of democracy, problematic I think.

That's why they're should not be a rerun.
Instead, a new referendum should ask specifically about preferred options.

To be really democratic, it should use STV.

prawnsambo · 11-09-2019 04:08PM

dublinjock wrote: »

So im correct im not able to vote for the commiionersss who in turn vote for the EU President.

No, you're wrong. The Commissioners don't vote for anyone.

dublinjock wrote: »

So who would the commissioners be accountable to?
These are genuine questions because its only the last few years i have started to read up learn about the EU and what it does.

Think of the Commissioners as the heads of the civil service departments. That's basically what they are at EU level. And nobody votes for heads of civil service departments either here or in the UK.

dublinjock · 11-09-2019 04:10PM

VinLieger wrote: »

Do you think you should leave with no deal, the negotiated WA, a norway deal , a canada deal, a + style deal of either of the previous two options, stay in the SM, stay in the CU, end free movement, allow a NI backstop or make it a complete UK backstop?

Is "leave" or "remain" a reasonable question to ask when considering all of the above options that are still not all of the ones available or anything close to all the questions that need to be answered.

This a good question, i would not be able to answer at the moment because ive not up on all the above deals.But i would be more in the area of the Norway deal.

I dont have all the answers and dont pretend to. This why we have elected politicians, but they seem to have any idea of what to do.

Professor Moriarty · 11-09-2019 04:11PM

trellheim wrote: »

As BC said we are kind of wrapped up here in minutia.

to Dublinjock

Conservatives AND Labour's stated position is to LEAVE. Libdems and SNP are Remain.

Now it gets difficult.

Nobody knows what Leave means. This is what has caused all the fuss for THREE YEARS . There is a majority in the House of Commons to resolve this issue by postponing (not cancelling ) leave, running a much more detailed referendum with exact choices for people to vote on and then implementing the result of a second referendum.

The most likely outcome right now if this does not happen is an extremely damaging no-deal exit.

And if you think it will all stop after a no-deal I have news because the very first thing after a no-deal will be mini deals 1,2,3,4 with the EU

With regard to european commissioners and their accountability, 4.5 seconds googling finds

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_European_Commission

The European Parliament is sitting this week. It will sit next week. Anyone know if the House of Commons is sitting? Stormont still going strong?

gmisk · 11-09-2019 04:13PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The European Parliament is sitting this week. It will sit next week. Anyone know if the House of Commons is sitting? Stormont still going strong?

Er it definitely isnt sitting at the minute....

Bit cynical · 11-09-2019 04:14PM

prawnsambo wrote: »

The HoC can't make up their minds how the UK is to leave. The instruction in the referendum result didn't specify it. So that means that it is up to the HoC to decide how and they can't. It's as simple as that.

In fairness, of course, the referendum pretty much had to be a simple in out question since these are the only options in the UK government's power to deliver. Everything else is down to negotiation.

Zubeneschamali · 11-09-2019 04:14PM

dublinjock wrote: »

So im correct im not able to vote for the commiionersss who in turn vote for the EU President.

There is no EU President.

The commissioners are nominated by the EU28 governments. In your case, Sir Julian King, Security Union Commissioner, was nominated by your PM David Cameron, recommended for the Security Union Portfolio by Juncker, President of the Commission, and then approved by the EU Parliament and Council.

The Commissioners are answerable to the European Parliament, who can sack them en masse. They threatened that in 1999 causing Santers commission to resign.

The Commissioners do the job (roughly) of a minister in the UK government. You don't vote for them directly in the same way you didn't vote for Sajid Javid to be Chancellor of the Exchequer.

dublinjock · 11-09-2019 04:15PM

prawnsambo wrote: »

No, you're wrong. The Commissioners don't vote for anyone.

Think of the Commissioners as the heads of the civil service departments. That's basically what they are at EU level. And nobody votes for heads of civil service departments either here or in the UK.

Thanks for putting me right.
So who does vote for the EU president? How do they get this job.
I believe Ursula von der Leyen was elected as the new president.
Who was the other candidates?

Professor Moriarty · 11-09-2019 04:15PM

gmisk wrote: »

Er it definitely isnt sitting at the minute....

Oh dear. That's terrible news. People keep saying that the EU is undemocratic.

gmisk · 11-09-2019 04:17PM

dublinjock wrote: »

Thanks for putting me right.
So who does vote for the EU president? How do they get this job.
I believe Ursula von der Leyen was elected as the new president.
Who was the other candidates?

Google is your friend
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_European_Commission#Appointment

LuckyLloyd · 11-09-2019 04:17PM

dublinjock wrote: »

So i take it im not able to vote for either?

You get to vote to leave the EU, but that doesn’t imply that you get to leave in such a way that absolves your country of its financial obligations and commitments to an International treaty such as the GFA. The EU has concluded a withdrawal agreement. Your issue is with the British political system and its politicians imo.

trellheim · 11-09-2019 04:18PM

Boris Johnson has lied to every other woman in his life, why he'd make an exception for the queen seems unlikely.

Quote of the week so far from Jess Phillips lol

https://twitter.com/jessphillips/status/1171798472502235136

robinph · 11-09-2019 04:18PM

dublinjock wrote: »

I dont have all the answers and dont pretend to. This why we have elected politicians, but they seem to have any idea of what to do.

The question that was asked didn't provide a suitable definition to the politicians of what the public wanted and the people who agitated in order to get the unspecific question asked also didn't provide a definition of what it was that they were upset about, or what question should be asked, or what should be done once the answer to the random question was found. It's not the politicians fault that they can't answer the question that doesn't have an answer.

It is their fault for not asking a sensible question in the first place of course.

Itssoeasy · 11-09-2019 04:19PM

gmisk wrote: »

Er it definitely isnt sitting at the minute....

The only people sitting in stormont are the staff keeping the lights on and doing whatever work goes on regardless of whether there are assembly sittings.

Shelga · 11-09-2019 04:20PM

briany wrote: »

They don't have any interest in the consequences of a hard border

They don’t have any interest in Northern Ireland, full stop. Absolutely zero. My Brexity former colleagues have told me so. They think it is being used as an obstacle to thwart their democratic will, and could not care less if the NI economy is decimated.

gmisk · 11-09-2019 04:22PM

Itssoeasy wrote: »

The only people sitting in stormont are the staff keeping the lights on and doing whatever work goes on regardless of whether there are assembly sittings.

In fairness they were probably the only ones that did any work there in the first place

ElectronVolt · 11-09-2019 04:22PM

prawnsambo wrote: »

No, you're wrong. The Commissioners don't vote for anyone.

Think of the Commissioners as the heads of the civil service departments. That's basically what they are at EU level. And nobody votes for heads of civil service departments either here or in the UK.

They're more or less parallels of the US cabinet only with the added check that each one is nominated by a member state and their line of accountability is to the parliament as there's no elected executive "president of Europe."

Also the term "president" does not mean US President or France's president de la republique or our president. It simply means the head of a particular unit.

I don't know how many times I've seen comments about how such and such is an unelected president. It just seems to be willful ignorance of the English language and the far broader meaning and use of the term president. I mean is the president of a chamber of commerce, a bank, a university or a school somehow now also doing the same role as the US President? The term has broad meaning.

The president of the commission is just that - heads the European Commission. The president of the Council of the EU was created because the council is made up of either the 28 national ministers for a particular department or the 28 heads of government. The President of the Council is effective just a role that works as the convener and coordinator of the council so that there's a permanent point of contact. They actually have no executive function. That's entirely reserved for the elected governments.

And the president of the European Parliament is just that. Again, they have no executive function.

Bit cynical · 11-09-2019 04:22PM

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

That's why they're should not be a rerun.
Instead, a new referendum should ask specifically about preferred options.

To be really democratic, it should use STV.

They could ask a whole load of questions, but as I said in an earlier post each of them need to be deliverable by the State. If people voted for a Canada++ or whatever deal, it could not necessarily deliver on that because that outcome only occurs through negotiation with other States who may (justifiably) have other priorities. For example, we in Ireland, quite understandably, might object to a Canada style deal on the basis that it creates a border on the Island and we don't want a border. Other countries might have other objections and so on.

prawnsambo · 11-09-2019 04:23PM

dublinjock wrote: »

Thanks for putting me right.
So who does vote for the EU president? How do they get this job.
I believe Ursula von der Leyen was elected as the new president.
Who was the other candidates?

The EuCo select and decide candidates. That's the elected heads of state of each of the EU28 member states. And there are two presidents. The Commission president and the president of the Council. Neither have any real power other than as titular heads.

The EuCo decide on policy, the Commission drafts (and lots of other housekeeping functions) the policy and the Parliament votes on it. That's (a very short synopsis of) how it all works.

dublinjock · 11-09-2019 04:23PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

There is no EU President.

The commissioners are nominated by the EU28 governments. In your case, Sir Julian King, Security Union Commissioner, was nominated by your PM David Cameron, recommended for the Security Union Portfolio by Juncker, President of the Commission, and then approved by the EU Parliament and Council.

The Commissioners are answerable to the European Parliament, who can sack them en masse. They threatened that in 1999 causing Santers commission to resign.

The Commissioners do the job (roughly) of a minister in the UK government. You don't vote for them directly in the same way you didn't vote for Sajid Javid to be Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Thanks this is very interesting and appreciate the explanation.
Can you tell me Sir Julian King was he an MEP voted in by his constituency or just picked as im not sure.Im going to look into this a bit more.

Sajid Javid was elected as a MP then given the job as Chancellor of the Exchequer as an elected member of parliament.

SeaBreezes · 11-09-2019 04:26PM

Bit cynical wrote: »

Rerunning a referendum is unsatisfactory from a democratic point of view, yes. Not the only perspective; there are other considerations. But from the perspective of democracy, problematic I think.

But this is the SECOND referendum.. the first was wether or not to join the EU. The second was shall we leave? And the THIRD should be.. These are our current choices, stay, leave on these terms, or hard Brexit. With agreements published online and all versions of Yellow Hammer published.. that would be democratic..

Zubeneschamali · 11-09-2019 04:26PM

dublinjock wrote: »

Can you tell me Sir Julian King was he an MEP voted in by his constituency or just picked as im not sure.

Just picked by the UK Government, he was previously a career diplomat, Ambassador to France and Ireland, head of the Northern Ireland Office, that sort of stuff.

Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Comments