Current Politics in the United Kingdom

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

we want to negotiate and settle treaties for ourselves as a country and not have them settled and decided, against our interests, by foreigners in Brussels

So, does this mean there are no British MEPs, Commissioners, Judges, and Diplomats etc, in Brussels? No British lobbyists? Does it mean your government didn't agree with the treaties the EU made, but the EU forced them on you anyway? Didn't you get any opt-outs, rebates, etc?

Tell me something: what treaties went against British interests? Can you name any? Can you name a directive that goes against British interests?

Originally Posted by scoundrel

The Leave vote opposed the imposition of supra-national authority on matters which are rightfully the right and duty of the British people to decide.

Such as what?

As recently as the referendum just gone we were firmly assured that there is to be no single European Army

Correct, and there never will be one because their armies won't integrate. But there is a need for closer co-operation without the involvement and interference of the Americans. This is 2018, not 1948

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by palo5

So, does this mean there are no British MEPs, Commissioners, Judges, and Diplomats etc, in Brussels? No British lobbyists? Does it mean your government didn't agree with the treaties the EU made, but the EU forced them on you anyway? Didn't you get any opt-outs, rebates, etc?

Tell me something: what treaties went against British interests? Can you name any? Can you name a directive that goes against British interests?

Treaty of Maastrict 1992.

There are just under 10% British MEPs in the EU parliament and there are 2 British commissioners. All the rest represent 27 other member states and can collectively impose their will on us. We have seen in 43 years of experience that the British veto isn't worth shit.

The Leave vote opposed the imposition of supra-national authority on matters which are rightfully the right and duty of the British people to decide.

Originally Posted by palo5

Such as what?

Immigration.
Access to social housing and welfare benefits
Fisheries
Agriculture
Trade with non-member states

As recently as the referendum just gone we were firmly assured that there is to be no single European Army

Originally Posted by palo5

Correct, and there never will be one because their armies won't integrate. But there is a need for closer co-operation without the involvement and interference of the Americans. This is 2018, not 1948

Then why is it that we are eternally plagued with agitation from idiots such as Juncker and now Macron to demand a single European Army? Are we expected to just ignore it and assume it won't happen? Diesn't sound like a safe plan to me.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Treaty of Maastrict 1992.

There are lust under 10% British MEPs in the EU parliament and there are 2 British commissioners. All the rest represent 27 other member states and can collectively impose their will on us. We have seen in 43 years of experience that the British veto isn't worth shit

Yet your government agreed to it. Why? Because:

• The word 'federal' was removed from the Treaty
• Britain secured an 'opt-out' from the Social Chapter which covered area such as employment rights and health and safety
• Britain was not committed to monetary union
• Major was also able to argues that the Maastricht principle of 'subsidiarity' meant that more decisions could be devolved to the national level

Immigration.
Access to social housing and welfare benefits
Fisheries
Agriculture
Trade with non-member states

Immigration & benefits: your government has always had the right to deport people after 3 months if they don't have work. The strange position of Britain is that it pressed hard for new membership in Eastern Europe, but while a number of members, notably Germany, insisted that freedom of movement & labor should not apply to them for 6 or 7 years, Britain allowed them all in immediately. That's why you got an influx of Poles & others, and it was your fault. Btw, you don't think they went to Britain for the food and the weather do you, especially when they would have been much better paid in Germany?

Fisheries & agriculture: some things are better co-ordinated centrally, and food supply and safety is one of them. You pay less into the CAP than other members, and have less reason to complain, and the EU does pay your farmers quite a lot. As for fishing, your fishermen were so rampant, they even tried plunder Iceland's fish stocks with naval force, and the UN ruled against you. That tells you pretty much everything you need to know about Britain's competence in fishing policy, but it gets worse. Under the CFP your government allowed the sale of quotas to other members. Who do you blame for that?

Trade with non-member states: What? No one stops you trading with non-member states, except perhaps the Americans with their "sanctions". What countries can't you trade with?

Then why is it that we are eternally plagued with agitation from idiots such as Juncker and now Macron to demand a single European Army? Are we expected to just ignore it and assume it won't happen?

Yes, I recommend you ignore it, if that's what you think they're saying. What they mean is that it would be good to have plans for co-operation, and that a structure similar to Nato would assist this. The key point is that such a structure would be purely European, and would exclude the Americans. But there's no talk of merging armies, such as forming Danish & Romanian divisions, and no reason for you to worry, because you won't be a part of it

[Wendigo]

Of course all this is just fluff and nonsense.

We had a referendum, both sides had the same chances to get their point across, you would have thought with the inherent and healthy streak of Euro-scepticism within the UK over several decades that the big brains on the Remain side would have put up a much stronger positive case for the EU.

Britain never chose to be part of the EU, we joined the EEC which was the idea of a Common Market, what has gone on since has been successive British governments taking us deeper into a European Union. Yes we had opt outs but we never had a say on our EU membership.

When UKIP were formed (in the 2nd generation UKIP anyway) we actually had the chance to voice our opinions on the EU, all other parties supported remaining in the EU although the Conservatives did have a vocal anti-EU minority. In 2014 UKIP won the largest percentage vote in our EU election, all the signs were there but Remain could not come up with any good reasons why we should stay.

All these later arguments are therefore irrelevant to be honest, the case should have been made prior to the vote.

I have always argued for a negotiated deal as common sense dictates that is the best way to part, but in recent months the EU has hardened its stance, if the EU does not want to offer a one-off deal to Britain (and it is their prerogative not to) then we are wasting our time in largely meaningless talks.

March 2019 is getting nearer and a hard Brexit remains a distinct possibility.

[judy84]

Gunther Oettinger, the bloc’s finance chief and a close confidante of Angela Merkel, said his “dream” of a euro force will be achieved.
On Thurs 22 June 2017, the European Council approved the ‘European Defence Fund’, the ‘European Defence Industrial Development Programme’, and the ‘Permanent Structured Cooperation’ (PESCO) on defence.
The Council agreed that the deployment of EU Battlegroups should be borne as a common cost on a permanent basis.Mrs May approved this on that date.
Part of the extra costs will be funded out of an EU funding mechanism which does not appear as part of the normal EU budget, and therefore will not show up as part of the UK's net annual contributions to the EU. The EU defence fund budget is Euro1.5 bn in 2021.



https://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...create-EU-army


Integration of military has already taken place, in partic. between German and Dutch forces.


https://www.dw.com/en/changing-europ...ary/a-42555374

[Mal Hombre]

Hey,We've nothing against Denmark,One of the few countries in Europe we've never been to war with..We did destroy Their fleet though...Twice..

[judy84]

May must be removed, as she is trying to keep the UK in the EU by devious methods. There should be negotiations based on David Davis' DexEU dept. and Tusk's offer in Mar 2018:

UK wants to leave Single Market, Customs Union, and jurisdiction of the ECJ

• “Only possible model is a free trade agreement”
• Zero tariffs on goods, deal to include services
• Single Market – no compromises or ‘pick-and-mix’
• Full access to UK waters for EU boats to be guaranteed
• UK to continue to provide full security and defence cover for the EU
• No disruption of flights – side deal to be agreed
• other “areas of interest” such as access to public procurement markets, investments, and intellectual property protection including geographical indications.
• the UK to participate in EU programmes in the fields of research and innovation, as well as in education and culture.

There were of course several aspects to this offer which would be unacceptable to the UK, such as the full access to British waters of EU27 fishing vessels, and the question of UK defence forces being tied into EU structures, but any side in a negotiation always asks for more than it expects to get. These could be negotiated away.



http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/pr...p-with-the-uk/
https://www.lexology.com/library/det...0-e77cefee98b3


It has become clear that Theresa May and her No.10 Europe Unit have no interest in discussing President Tusk’s offer in March. Theresa May is planning to do a deal comprising a barely-fudged continuation of all the key EU components which Brexit was supposed to stop, then she has no need of a free trade deal because the UK will continue to be tied into what will amount to EU membership.

[Wendigo]

My you are an angry little sausage aren't you.

To use your own words

What was the 1975 referendum moko ??

Originally Posted by ********

A complete fucking joke. At best it was an advisory to try to join the Common Market, but none of the stuff we have found out since was on the table.

new balls please

[judy84]

Originally Posted by ********

Blah blah give us your solution to the Irish border. If you can fix that you can probably get most of the other stuff you want.

See posts 3856 and 3863.


Donald Tusk doesn't seem too worried with his offer.


http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/pr...p-with-the-uk/
https://www.lexology.com/library/det...0-e77cefee98b3

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by ********

Blah blah give us your solution to the Irish border. If you can fix that you can probably get most of the other stuff you want.

Rename the whole island xyzde69 and everyone will automatically live in vegan anarcho-communist harmony run by specially selected committees.

Common sense dictates there is no ONE solution to the Irish border problem, the border existed before we joined the EU
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republ...#Establishment

"Except during a brief period during World War II, it has never been necessary for Irish or British citizens to produce a passport to cross the border. However during the 1970s troubles, security forces regularly asked travellers for identification."

You could therefore say that joining the EEC/EU created this problem