Hurrah! Ireland!!! Thank you!

[Moscow Mule]

We either become like the USA or this project fails. I say kick out the states which don't want to progress in that direction. What we have now is a make-work project for fat cats which want to look important. It isn't and will never work.

The UK's problem is that, IMHO, it is half in and half out. it wants a strong viable europe. yet it opts out of so many things as to think "why bother". Its like a Yes Minister episode..where it was explained that in order to bugger the project up, it was best to join and bugger it up from within..while pretending to want it to work.

So in that sense, the UK should get out.

What is wrong with some parts of Europe speeding to "political union" and some going at a snails pace (or even deciding they don't want to bother)?

I'm not saying it's easy to create a two-tiered Europe, but with the disparity of opinions across Europe it seems the most pragmatic approach.

[Lucy]

Is that any different to quoting ideas/opinions from other people's heads?

I'm sorry that I and probably the rest of this board are inferior to you Lucy. One day we may reach the zenith of your insight.

Next you'll be calling me a Nazi.

Oh, I forgot, you've already done that.

I used to wonder why such an attractive witty 'intelligent' man was single.

[Bagpuss]

I used to wonder why such an attractive witty 'intelligent' man was single.

Yes I too have often wondered about SAS

[Lucy]

Yes I too have often wondered about SAS

I don't think he is that way inclined.

[DodgyAgent]

To be honest, most of the key points seemed to make sense to me.

But these ones strike me as particularly appealing.

The reduction in the size of the european commision
The introduction of a European council president or figurehead, and also creation of high rep for foriegn affairs
The obliged mutual solidarity in event of natural dissastor
The ability to enlarge the union further to include more of europe
The ability of citizens to petition the EU directly for change (with 1mill plus signatures)
The greater role expected of national parliments in the legislative process
Introduction of general qualified majority voting, with opt opts in key areas for member countries deeming it improtant (including uk and ireland)

are these the actual words of the treaty or are they your spin (highly likely as they are no more than cliched aspirations) as to the transfer of more power to the EU?

[DodgyAgent]

We either become like the USA or this project fails. I say kick out the states which don't want to progress in that direction. What we have now is a make-work project for fat cats which want to look important. It isn't and will never work.

The UK's problem is that, IMHO, it is half in and half out. it wants a strong viable europe. yet it opts out of so many things as to think "why bother". Its like a Yes Minister episode..where it was explained that in order to bugger the project up, it was best to join and bugger it up from within..while pretending to want it to work.

So in that sense, the UK should get out.

Just because some parts of Europe are beneficial it does not mean all parts of the EU are beneficial. Your argument is like a boss saying "if you dont agree then leave the job."

[Pickle2]

are these the actual words of the treaty or are they your spin (highly likely as they are no more than cliched aspirations) as to the transfer of more power to the EU?

Obviously they are not the actually words of the treaty, but there is no "spin" there either. It covers some of what the treaty is about. Its a fairly straight forward vote imho. You can be anti EU, fine. But given that we are not leaving the EU anytime soon (all 3 major parties are committed to UKs membership of EU), I dont see why we would not want europe to function better, with more efficiancy and accountability?

I am not saying there is nothing wrong with the EU as it stands. Of course there is. However, the treaty does try to address some of those problems . It doesnt try to make those problems worse.

Heres a run down of what it covers and what it is trying to achive:

http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/glance/index_en.htm

Or the much drier wiki page on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon

[sasguru]

Obviously they are not the actually words of the treaty, but there is no "spin" there either. It covers some of what the treaty is about. Its a fairly straight forward vote imho. You can be anti EU, fine. But given that we are not leaving the EU anytime soon (all 3 major parties are committed to UKs membership of EU), I dont see why we would not want europe to function better, with more efficiancy and accountability?

I am not saying there is nothing wrong with the EU as it stands. Of course there is. However, the treaty does try to address some of those problems . It doesnt try to make those problems worse.

Heres a run down of what it covers and what it is trying to achive:

http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/glance/index_en.htm

Or the much drier wiki page on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon

Don't waste your breath. Some on here are under the fond impression that Britain is a powerful imperial power who can go it alone instead of the 2nd rate European country we have become.
The reason why all 3 political parties are for the EU to some extent, is because the better minds recognise this and realise that Britain's future is within the EU.
Whether the current EU is a democratic and efficient institution is a different point.
This country has indeed become the "Fantasy Island".

[DodgyAgent]

Obviously they are not the actually words of the treaty, but there is no "spin" there either. It covers some of what the treaty is about. Its a fairly straight forward vote imho. You can be anti EU, fine. But given that we are not leaving the EU anytime soon (all 3 major parties are committed to UKs membership of EU), I dont see why we would not want europe to function better, with more efficiancy and accountability?

I am not saying there is nothing wrong with the EU as it stands. Of course there is. However, the treaty does try to address some of those problems . It doesnt try to make those problems worse.

Heres a run down of what it covers and what it is trying to achive:

http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/glance/index_en.htm

Or the much drier wiki page on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon

You see what worries me is that the treaty has been spun into presenting itself as a facilitator for good, which is why it has listed these "worthy" aspirations behind the treaty. The problem is in getting behind and understanding what extra powers are being bestowed upon the EU. Once this is understood we can then judge for ourselves as to whether or not their aspirations are likely to be even pursued let alone achieved.

Unfortunately, and there is no one on this board who benefits more from the EU than me, there is no evidence to suggest that the EU has any intention or ability to use their extra powers to meet their aspirations. Given that the EU has a track record of incompetence, corruption and self aggrandisement it would be very stupid of us to give them any more power. In fact until the EU is run efficiently and honestly it should be gradually stripped of its powers.

[sasguru]

l

Pigs with their snouts in the trough... on the gravy train <toot toot>