** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
Psamathe
Posts: 11384
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby Psamathe » 5 Jun 2018, 12:32pm

thirdcrank wrote:I see that things are so bad that the decision over the third runway at Heathrow is being spun as a distraction
Heathrow Airport: Cabinet set for new runway decision
However I see it's all being announced by Failing Grayling:
Transport Secretary Chris Grayling will outline the expansion plans in the House of Commons at 12:30 BST - although a vote is not expected until later in the month.

...

At least it's keeping him indoors rather than out car-dooring cyclists.

Ian

stu1102
Posts: 108
Joined: 24 Jun 2013, 8:38pm
Location: Beeston, Nottignham

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby stu1102 » 5 Jun 2018, 1:37pm

Psamathe wrote:[quote="
At least it's keeping him indoors rather than out car-dooring cyclists.

Ian


Indeed as Former Brit diplomat, most recently Amb. in Paris, before that first UK National Security Advisor Peter Ricketts has indicated;


'deft handling by Grayling and team of the new rail timetable boosts my confidence they’ll make an equal success of the much tougher feat of keeping the 8.5m vehicles a year flowing smoothly across the channel, esp since the new customs plans will be clear so far in advance!'


As a rabid supporter of brexit, Graylings Brexit logic perhaps flows like this;


Leave a EU Free Trade Area to trade more freely

Leave EU trade agreements to get new trade agreements

Weaken influence to become stronger

Turn inward to be more global

Opt out by opting in

Welcome people by being hostile

Keep access to the single market by leaving the single market

Maintain an invisible border by installing infrastructure

Cut red tape by adding to it

Boost investment by creating uncertainty

Help workers by removing guarantees of rights

Put people first by making them poorer

Save the NHS by driving doctors and nurses away

Bolster public services by reducing tax-take

Save money by recreating the present at substantial cost

Bring clarity by creating confusion


attributation Steve Bullock

pwa
Posts: 12930
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby pwa » 5 Jun 2018, 2:44pm

bovlomov wrote:
pwa wrote:An attractive EU would have direct elections for the top jobs, not anonymous nobodies sprung on us from nowhere.

Do you mean directly elected? By the people?

If I take it how I think you mean it, I disagree. Just like I disagreed with having directly elected city mayors or directly elected police commissioners. It turns democracy into showbiz.

On the other hand, I'm sure there are ways to improve accountability. For the most part, what my MEP does and what goes on in the EU is a mystery to me. There is next to zero reporting on day to day EU matters, and very little understanding of the processes. I imagine it's a similar story throughout the EU, and that lack of engagement is bad for democracy. Mind you, it's a similar story in local government, where the lack of proper local papers allows councils to do more or less what they like, without scrutiny.

The point being, democracy is under threat everywhere, from ignorance, misinformation and lack of engagement. That's the same for the EU, Westminster and the local council. I don't see the EU as being a special case of unaccountable policy making.


If I took a dislike to the top bod in the EU and sought their removal from office, which voting procedure could I turn out for to get rid of them? At best I would be voting for someone who might in turn vote for someone else. That may satisfy some of you, but if the EU wants to tempt people like me back in they have to come up with a mechanism that is more direct and gets me involved.

If I don't like a PM or UK Government I know that I will get a vote on the party that put that individual in power. I want that sort of choice at all tiers of government. Upto and including the top of the EU. And before anyone points out the Lords, I'm not content with that either.

mikeonabike
Posts: 194
Joined: 20 Jun 2016, 8:22am

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby mikeonabike » 5 Jun 2018, 2:51pm

pwa wrote:If I took a dislike to the top bod in the EU and sought their removal from office, which voting procedure could I turn out for to get rid of them? At best I would be voting for someone who might in turn vote for someone else. That may satisfy some of you, but if the EU wants to tempt people like me back in they have to come up with a mechanism that is more direct and gets me involved.

There were some suggestions a few years ago for direct elections for the top job. But it all sounded too much like the United States of Europe so didn't get support. Interesting that you think the EU should become more centralised instead of remaining a club of independent nations.

roubaixtuesday
Posts: 3326
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby roubaixtuesday » 5 Jun 2018, 2:53pm

At best I would be voting for someone who might in turn vote for someone else.

This is an accurate description of UK representative parliamentary democracy.

Our future head of state is designated at birth (!)

As with many complaints about the EU, leaving it does not improve the situation.

pwa
Posts: 12930
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby pwa » 5 Jun 2018, 3:02pm

BrianFox wrote:
At best I would be voting for someone who might in turn vote for someone else.

This is an accurate description of UK representative parliamentary democracy.

Our future head of state is designated at birth (!)

As with many complaints about the EU, leaving it does not improve the situation.

When I vote in a General Election I vote for a team with a few prominent individuals, one of whom will probably lead them. How involved did any of us feel with the election of any of the current top EU bods? Not at all is the only honest answer anyone can give. If none of you understand that feeling, all I can say is you are easily satisfied.

Ben@Forest
Posts: 2458
Joined: 28 Jan 2013, 5:58pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby Ben@Forest » 5 Jun 2018, 3:11pm

pwa wrote: And before anyone points out the Lords, I'm not content with that either.


The Lords is an odd beast. It has the 92 hereditary peers which is difficult to square with modern life and the representation of faith groups can either be seen as archaic or as providing a different perspective of life generally. It has its crop of time-served politicians. Some of those politicians do nothing or nothing useful, but others can represent a broader opinion because they are no longer so constrained by the party line or whip. And other life peers, such as Lord Winston, have long and rigorous practical or academic experience in their subject (such as fertility) which we are getting at a fraction of the price compared to if they were commissioned as part of a commercially run survey or report.

If the Lords was an elected upper chamber we wouldn't get that - and it'd just be another tier of politicians with their eyes on a prize. For those who clamour for an elected house - be careful what you wish for - you might get it.

pwa
Posts: 12930
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby pwa » 5 Jun 2018, 3:27pm

Ben@Forest wrote:
pwa wrote: And before anyone points out the Lords, I'm not content with that either.


The Lords is an odd beast. It has the 92 hereditary peers which is difficult to square with modern life and the representation of faith groups can either be seen as archaic or as providing a different perspective of life generally. It has its crop of time-served politicians. Some of those politicians do nothing or nothing useful, but others can represent a broader opinion because they are no longer so constrained by the party line or whip. And other life peers, such as Lord Winston, have long and rigorous practical or academic experience in their subject (such as fertility) which we are getting at a fraction of the price compared to if they were commissioned as part of a commercially run survey or report.

If the Lords was an elected upper chamber we wouldn't get that - and it'd just be another tier of politicians with their eyes on a prize. For those who clamour for an elected house - be careful what you wish for - you might get it.


Good points and I don't have a ready made formula for making up the Lords. But I would like the new entrants to be selected by a cross-party group, and I would like it to be very much secondary to the elected Commons. And membership should be of limited duration. No life peers and no hereditary peers. I don't need them to be elected directly because they would not be the government and would play second fiddle to the elected chamber.

I'm a Republican and don't support the notion of monarchy, but in practice the Queen serves a purpose and is far too popular to be replaced in the foreseeable future. Maybe Charles will change that when his turn comes, or maybe not.

What we can get rid of is the EU elite who most of us have not heard of until we find they are our new leaders.

User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby bovlomov » 5 Jun 2018, 3:29pm

pwa wrote:When I vote in a General Election I vote for a team with a few prominent individuals, one of whom will probably lead them. How involved did any of us feel with the election of any of the current top EU bods? Not at all is the only honest answer anyone can give. If none of you understand that feeling, all I can say is you are easily satisfied.

In a General Election you vote for a candidate in your constituency. The chosen person is one voice in Parliament. Even if you vote for the winning candidate in the winning party, you still have no choice over the PM or cabinet.

According to Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President ... Commission
The President of the European Commission is the head of the European Commission, the executive branch of the European Union. The President of the Commission leads a cabinet of Commissioners, referred to as the college, collectively accountable to the European Parliament, which is directly elected by EU citizens.

Historically, the Council appointed the Commission President and the whole body by unanimity without input from Parliament. However, with the Treaty on European Union in 1993, the European Parliament, the body elected directly by the citizens of the European Union,[16] gained the right to be 'consulted' on the appointment of the President and to veto the Commission as a whole. Parliament decided to interpret its right to be consulted as a right to veto the President, which the Council reluctantly accepted[17] This right of veto was formalised in the Amsterdam Treaty. The Treaty of Nice changed the Council's vote from a unanimous choice to one that merely needed a qualified majority. This meant that the weight of the Parliament in the process increased resulting in a quasi-parliamentary system where one group could be 'in government'.


The same article goes on to explain lack of transparency, and efforts by some MEPs to challenge that. Perhaps this can be compared with the Westminster parliament's failure to hold the government to account, or to hold it to due process.

I agree that there are problems with the nominations for President, but I think your view exaggerates the accountability of Westminster model while sweepingly dismissing that of the EU. Having a big chief elected by the people isn't in itself more democratic than having one chosen by elected representatives.

pwa
Posts: 12930
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby pwa » 5 Jun 2018, 4:24pm

bovlomov wrote:
pwa wrote:When I vote in a General Election I vote for a team with a few prominent individuals, one of whom will probably lead them. How involved did any of us feel with the election of any of the current top EU bods? Not at all is the only honest answer anyone can give. If none of you understand that feeling, all I can say is you are easily satisfied.

In a General Election you vote for a candidate in your constituency. The chosen person is one voice in Parliament. Even if you vote for the winning candidate in the winning party, you still have no choice over the PM or cabinet.

According to Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President ... Commission
The President of the European Commission is the head of the European Commission, the executive branch of the European Union. The President of the Commission leads a cabinet of Commissioners, referred to as the college, collectively accountable to the European Parliament, which is directly elected by EU citizens.

Historically, the Council appointed the Commission President and the whole body by unanimity without input from Parliament. However, with the Treaty on European Union in 1993, the European Parliament, the body elected directly by the citizens of the European Union,[16] gained the right to be 'consulted' on the appointment of the President and to veto the Commission as a whole. Parliament decided to interpret its right to be consulted as a right to veto the President, which the Council reluctantly accepted[17] This right of veto was formalised in the Amsterdam Treaty. The Treaty of Nice changed the Council's vote from a unanimous choice to one that merely needed a qualified majority. This meant that the weight of the Parliament in the process increased resulting in a quasi-parliamentary system where one group could be 'in government'.


The same article goes on to explain lack of transparency, and efforts by some MEPs to challenge that. Perhaps this can be compared with the Westminster parliament's failure to hold the government to account, or to hold it to due process.

I agree that there are problems with the nominations for President, but I think your view exaggerates the accountability of Westminster model while sweepingly dismissing that of the EU. Having a big chief elected by the people isn't in itself more democratic than having one chosen by elected representatives.


My "influence" on the selection and deselection of top EU bods is through my UK Government, so it starts with all that fuzzy process you describe for choosing an MP who aligns with a party who chooses a leader who becomes PM, but it then goes on to wheeling and dealing with all the other states and God knows what else, largely behind closed doors, so by the time the selection is made it has next to nothing to do with how you or I feel about it. You can call that satisfactory if you like, and the EU seem content to keep it, but it is hardly any less involving than the "election" of the head of the Chinese Government. We end up being told "Oh, by the way, this is your new President". There is absolutely no sign that anything will ever be done to change this situation. I wish it were different.

User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby bovlomov » 5 Jun 2018, 4:57pm

pwa wrote:My "influence" on the selection and deselection of top EU bods is through my UK Government, so it starts with all that fuzzy process you describe for choosing an MP who aligns with a party who chooses a leader who becomes PM, but it then goes on to wheeling and dealing with all the other states and God knows what else, largely behind closed doors, so by the time the selection is made it has next to nothing to do with how you or I feel about it. You can call that satisfactory if you like, and the EU seem content to keep it, but it is hardly any less involving than the "election" of the head of the Chinese Government. We end up being told "Oh, by the way, this is your new President". There is absolutely no sign that anything will ever be done to change this situation. I wish it were different.

MEPs in the European Parliament have a role, approving or vetoing nominations, and they have the power to dismiss the Commission.

I don't call it satisfactory, any more than Westminster or Barnet Council are satisfactory models of democracy. Yes, things could certainly be improved (though it'll be complicated). But to walk away from the whole project seems a bit of an over-reaction, and mightily foolish if there is no other credible option.

roubaixtuesday
Posts: 3326
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby roubaixtuesday » 5 Jun 2018, 5:21pm

How involved did any of us feel with the election of any of the current top EU bods? Not at all is the only honest answer anyone can give.


Those bods will still be there when we leave.

We will, you note, have "regulatory convergence" to maintain market access.

In other words, we will have *less* control over them than before, but still follow them.

Leaving will make the issue of EU accountability worse, not better.

pwa
Posts: 12930
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby pwa » 5 Jun 2018, 6:53pm

bovlomov wrote:
pwa wrote:My "influence" on the selection and deselection of top EU bods is through my UK Government, so it starts with all that fuzzy process you describe for choosing an MP who aligns with a party who chooses a leader who becomes PM, but it then goes on to wheeling and dealing with all the other states and God knows what else, largely behind closed doors, so by the time the selection is made it has next to nothing to do with how you or I feel about it. You can call that satisfactory if you like, and the EU seem content to keep it, but it is hardly any less involving than the "election" of the head of the Chinese Government. We end up being told "Oh, by the way, this is your new President". There is absolutely no sign that anything will ever be done to change this situation. I wish it were different.

MEPs in the European Parliament have a role, approving or vetoing nominations, and they have the power to dismiss the Commission.

I don't call it satisfactory, any more than Westminster or Barnet Council are satisfactory models of democracy. Yes, things could certainly be improved (though it'll be complicated). But to walk away from the whole project seems a bit of an over-reaction, and mightily foolish if there is no other credible option.


I can understand your point, but for me the "nuclear button" was pressed when it became clear that the EU is totally set in its ways and will not be doing anything at all to appeal more to those of us who don't like it. Nothing has happened since the referendum to change that impression. I wish I could say otherwise.

User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby bovlomov » 5 Jun 2018, 7:21pm

pwa wrote:I can understand your point, but for me the "nuclear button" was pressed when it became clear that the EU is totally set in its ways and will not be doing anything at all to appeal more to those of us who don't like it. Nothing has happened since the referendum to change that impression. I wish I could say otherwise.

This is a respectable position to take, but I think it should come with an understanding that our economy will most likely take a huge hit - precisely the opposite of what Brexit promoters were saying. Now, many are admitting as much, but they are saying they think it will be worth it. One regular tweeter is even saying that, as the UK (sic) has survived the Black Death, Civil War and two world wars, we will survive Brexit.

That's it. Brexit is better than the Black Death.

We can anticipate some civil unrest when those people who voted Brexit to become richer, become poorer. Cognitive dissonance is a great thing, but there's a limit to how many times they can tell themselves that they were voting for sovereignty when there's no dinner on the table.

Psamathe
Posts: 11384
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby Psamathe » 5 Jun 2018, 7:21pm

pwa wrote:
bovlomov wrote:
pwa wrote:An attractive EU would have direct elections for the top jobs, not anonymous nobodies sprung on us from nowhere.

Do you mean directly elected? By the people?

If I take it how I think you mean it, I disagree. Just like I disagreed with having directly elected city mayors or directly elected police commissioners. It turns democracy into showbiz.

On the other hand, I'm sure there are ways to improve accountability. For the most part, what my MEP does and what goes on in the EU is a mystery to me. There is next to zero reporting on day to day EU matters, and very little understanding of the processes. I imagine it's a similar story throughout the EU, and that lack of engagement is bad for democracy. Mind you, it's a similar story in local government, where the lack of proper local papers allows councils to do more or less what they like, without scrutiny.

The point being, democracy is under threat everywhere, from ignorance, misinformation and lack of engagement. That's the same for the EU, Westminster and the local council. I don't see the EU as being a special case of unaccountable policy making.


If I took a dislike to the top bod in the EU and sought their removal from office, which voting procedure could I turn out for to get rid of them? At best I would be voting for someone who might in turn vote for someone else......

In the 2015 General Election you voted on the basis that Cameron was to be PM ... but then suddenly May becomes PM and you didn't get any vote for any party about that switcherooo (democratic?).

But if you don't want a particular head honcho (European Parliament) then lobby your MEPs. EU big white chief is chosen by our democratically elected representatives and if they don't listen to your input then ... just like our Westminster MPs (at least those with safe seats in our First Part The Post System). If you don't like the Head of the European Council - then you actually did get a vote deciding the UK representative on the European Council (though not everybody realised they got a vote on that one). Head of European Commission - again you got a vote deciding the UK representative appointing that "head honcho" (but again, not everybody realised they got a vote deciding UK representative making that appointment).

(Hopefully my memory got the above appointment procedures correct, but memory not always 100%)

Ian