Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

If you think recent governments have been in any way strong let alone stable, I would suspect you are living somewhere other than the UK.

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

My point exactly. We have had coalition governments recently and they don't work very effectively.

Fortunately in the UK we normally get strong governments with a decent majority in Parliament.

The Blair and Thatcher governments are good examples of administrations with large majorities being able to get things done and make a real difference.

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

I hope you're not defying the will of the people, Hugh. :)

---------- Post added at 20:33 ---------- Previous post was at 19:53 ----------

Good find. But the two points I raised - the UK would never agree to incorporation in a United States of Europe and that that is not on the agenda are not disproved by this.

---------- Post added at 20:52 ---------- Previous post was at 20:33 ----------

Yes. Switzerland, Israel, Belgium and Denmark are all weak countries doing badly economically. ;)

---------- Post added at 20:57 ---------- Previous post was at 20:52 ----------

More confusion on this point today.

https://www.ft.com/content/04aa7766-...5-54197280d3f7

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

For the avoidance of doubt that Juncker is advocating centralised control, here is a small extract from his address (my italics):


A STRONGER UNION

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I want our Union to be stronger and for this we need a stronger single market.
When it comes to important single market questions, I want decisions in the Council to be taken more often and more easily by qualified majority – with the equal involvement of the European Parliament. We do not need to change the Treaties for this. There are so-called “passerelle clauses” in the current Treaties which allow us to move from unanimity to qualified majority voting in certain cases – provided the European Council decides unanimously to do so.

I am also strongly in favour of moving to qualified majority voting for decisions on the common consolidated corporate tax base, on VAT, on fair taxes for the digital industry and on the financial transaction tax.

Europe has to be able to act quicker and more decisively, and this also applies to the Economic and Monetary Union.

The euro area is more resilient now than in years past. We now have the European Stabilisation Mechanism (ESM). I believe the ESM should now progressively graduate into a European Monetary Fund which, however, must be firmly anchored in the European Union's rules and competences. The Commission will make concrete proposals for this in December.

We need a European Minister of Economy and Finance: a European Minister that promotes and supports structural reforms in our Member States. He or she can build on the work the Commission has been doing since 2015 with our Structural Reform Support Service. The new Minister should coordinate all EU financial instruments that can be deployed if a Member State is in a recession or hit by a fundamental crisis.
I am not calling for a new position just for the sake of it. I am calling for efficiency. The Commissioner for economic and financial affairs – ideally also a Vice-President – should assume the role of Economy and Finance Minister. He or she should also preside the Eurogroup.

The European Economy and Finance Minister must be accountable to the European Parliament.

…...

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

185-days 2-Hrs 47-Min 10-Seconds . :D

Man it's getting close and already super excited. :) I'v got my Union Jack flags,socks,t-shirts,hoodys and all i'm waiting on now is me nan making me Union Jack pants and I'm all sorted . :)

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

He may well be, but that's not in dispute. But is it on the EU agenda? Nope.

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

A speech from the unelected president of the unelected EU Commission. Even if it was on the “agenda” and you didn’t agree with it. What powers as an electorate would you have to do anything about It!???????

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

No, we have had coalitions of convenience. Not chosen by the positive PR vote, but by the negative "alternative is worse" voting that FPTP forces voters to make.

Over 64% of the votes cast at the last general election made no difference to the outcome. With PR those votes would actually make a positive difference because people could vote for what they genuinely want. It would teach politicians to negotiate and compromise, rather than dictate and destabilise.

FPTP only works in 2 party situations, it creates political parties that lack conviction. When one main side lurches one way, the other lurches in the opposite direction.

This is why we have ended up with remain leader May trying to negotiate to leave the EU, whilst also trying to keep all the people in her group together, when really they are pulling in different directions, undermining May at every turn.

Cameron started the whole issue with the EU referendum, in attempting to keep the Tories together by the will of the people vote. Sadly May then went to the electorate again, with a strange manifesto including things people really do not want

We are where we are, with a government that really is still not listening to the population, voted for out of fear of the alternative, but not by a sufficient majority of constituencies.

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Using your logic, the British PM is "unelected" and the Cabinet is also "unelected". Good to know ...

http://www.democraticaudit.com/2016/...d-bureaucrats/

Here's some bedtime reading for you:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/about-...slative-powers

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

But I don't want to vote for a party, I want to elect my local MP.

And you can't say that n% of votes didn't count. They all did, they elected their local MP who (should) represent them.

Too much in Europe is divorced from the electorate. How can we affect outcomes individually against a wider majority if our representation is elected more widely? This isn't to say minority issues should overrule but they should be heard.

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

But your local MP will only represent, in political terms, a part of his constituency. If your MP gets 55% of votes then 45% of the voters are not represented and their votes did not count.

The party affects your future far more than your local MP does so it makes no sense to vote for your local MP as an individual.

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Well while Corbyn has the current anti Brexit stance and calling of a general election.

I will never vote Labour ever again.

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Nice try. Keep drinking the cool aid.

The Prime Minister and the cabinet are elected members of parliament

http://www.democraticaudit.com/2016/...d-bureaucrats/

from your link, thanks for researching it for me.

Re: Brexit Discussion (Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Nice try but no cigar.

MP's are elected to represent their constituencies and their party. They are not elected to become PM or to serve in Cabinet. You can even have the case of a MP becoming PM that did not lead the party and win the General Election.

If Boris becomes PM, no one voted for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson with the corresponding change in policy & direction that such a appointment would bring.