Reply to: Britain is very leftie liberal

[Rantor]

Remove bureaucracy? How complicated would it be if every county had its own tax rates and tax rules? Employ somebody from the next town over 10 miles away but in a different county, and you'd have all sorts of issues over which rate to pay, who collects the money, transferring money between authorities, etc. etc. It'd be a nightmare of paperwork for business and government alike.



Which unelected government are we talking about now? The EU has an elected parliment of MEPs (the fact hardly anybody bothers to vote for them is a different issue). You can cynically say the important decisions are taken by non-elected officials, but that's no different from our civil servants, House of Lords, judicary or (increasingly it seems) police.

The EU bureaucracy is fairly well run but the institution seems to me to be in a lot of trouble in the medium term. As a instrument of government it is entirely unfit for purpose and it is a waste of time worrying about the eussr superstate stuff - it simply ain't going to happen.

Everything that the happens within the eu is driven by the interests of individual member states and this where britain has always failed to play the eu game to our advantage. Its all very well negotiating opt outs, rebates etc. but this is not the same thing as simply get what you want out of it. We play by the rules wheras others do not (ECB regs flouted, compliance with basic eu law on a piecemeal basis.) Others play the game and take what suits them while playing at being good europeans. Even federalism was driven by blatant national(ist) self-interest though this is now being replaced by the 'europe of region' drivel spouted by the various ethnic nationalists.

The underlying financial structures of the EU are untenable and will doom eurpe to decline. Why is CAP funding not being allocated elsewhere to give incentives for R&D in altzernate energy sources, biotech or summit that might make some cash? No, much easier to pay of bunch of sheep-humpers from dumping their ex-girlfriends on place Schuman.

More importantly, the core role of a state is to defend its territorial integrity and the well-being of its citizens. That is not going to happen - the British and French woul not want (rightly) to cede control, the germans wont take part and everyone else postures. Meanwhile they all whinge about the american imperialists who they rely on 100% perecent on to stop vlad's mob marching in and taking what they want. No economic power in history has ever survived without being able to defend itself.

EU - bag o' w@nk.

[DodgyAgent]

Remove bureaucracy? How complicated would it be if every county had its own tax rates and tax rules? Employ somebody from the next town over 10 miles away but in a different county, and you'd have all sorts of issues over which rate to pay, who collects the money, transferring money between authorities, etc. etc. It'd be a nightmare of paperwork for business and government alike.



Which unelected government are we talking about now? The EU has an elected parliment of MEPs (the fact hardly anybody bothers to vote for them is a different issue). You can cynically say the important decisions are taken by non-elected officials, but that's no different from our civil servants, House of Lords, judicary or (increasingly it seems) police.

So why doesnt each county have one supermarket? Small countries such as Latvia, Switzerland etc manage to run their economies as well as the UK without benefitting from huge economies of scale that the UK "enjoys"

In fact I would go so far as to suggest that many more schools should be built in every area and give the consumers choice about where they send their children. It may not sound efficient but it would certainly sharpen up the quality of service.

Also my local station often has cubicles tha are shut at busy times and ticket machines that you cannot read without straining your neck. It would much more efficient if there were two rival sellers of tickets; apart from anything else there would be no warning signs to people about threatening staff.

[VectraMan]

Ever heard of the concept of competition? It would be fantastic if most taxes were levied at local level. The lines of accountability would be short removing layers of bureaucracy. Local councils and service providers would be entirely at the service of the market and quite right so.

Remove bureaucracy? How complicated would it be if every county had its own tax rates and tax rules? Employ somebody from the next town over 10 miles away but in a different county, and you'd have all sorts of issues over which rate to pay, who collects the money, transferring money between authorities, etc. etc. It'd be a nightmare of paperwork for business and government alike.

It is an astonishing naivety to presume that an unelected government is going to look after its people.

Which unelected government are we talking about now? The EU has an elected parliment of MEPs (the fact hardly anybody bothers to vote for them is a different issue). You can cynically say the important decisions are taken by non-elected officials, but that's no different from our civil servants, House of Lords, judicary or (increasingly it seems) police.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Why?

I agree that New Labour tries to exert far too much control on our day to day lives, but the problem there is New Labour, not that it's central. Seems to me if we had, for example, more local control resulting in different levels of income tax by county, it'd create all sorts of problems of inconsistency and "postcode lotteries", and restrictions of trade. And the EU isn't any different, just on a larger scale.

I don't really understand why people think being ruled by idiots you didn't vote for in Brussels is so much worse than being ruled by idiots you didn't vote for in London. Interesting how people are very quick to criticise New Labour (no argument there from me), but as soon as the subject of the EU comes up they start waving the flag and hold up our politicians in high esteem all because they happen to come from the same island as us.

And that's the key: the British are islanders, and we have an island mentality. I think that's a bit embaressing.

Careful - you're talking sense - never a good idea on here.

Next you'll be pointing out that in spite of most posters on here claiming New Lie (for whom I also have zero time) kill and eat babies on a regular basis, the Tories actually centralised most of local government because people kept electing Labour Councils (eg Red Ken on his first go). They also signed the two most significant treaties extending European Influence.

[DodgyAgent]

Why?

I agree that New Labour tries to exert far too much control on our day to day lives, but the problem there is New Labour, not that it's central. Seems to me if we had, for example, more local control resulting in different levels of income tax by county, it'd create all sorts of problems of inconsistency and "postcode lotteries", and restrictions of trade. And the EU isn't any different, just on a larger scale.

I don't really understand why people think being ruled by idiots you didn't vote for in Brussels is so much worse than being ruled by idiots you didn't vote for in London. Interesting how people are very quick to criticise New Labour (no argument there from me), but as soon as the subject of the EU comes up they start waving the flag and hold up our politicians in high esteem all because they happen to come from the same island as us.

And that's the key: the British are islanders, and we have an island mentality. I think that's a bit embaressing.

Ever heard of the concept of competition? It would be fantastic if most taxes were levied at local level. The lines of accountability would be short removing layers of bureaucracy. Local councils and service providers would be entirely at the service of the market and quite right so. So what if it creates a post code lotter. Giving people choice is far better than imprisoning them in a sink council estate for the rest of their lives with poor education poor health services and crime.

Secondly history is littered with complacent fools who take democracy and freedom for granted. It is an astonishing naivety to presume that an unelected government is going to look after its people. It is bad enough with an elected govt because at least we can get rid of them even if the alternative was not up to much.

I would be interested to hear one single shining example of a non democratic society.

[VectraMan]

We are already living in a society that is controlled far too much from the centre and STILL some of you demand that more laws and controls are centralised even more than they already are.

Why?

I agree that New Labour tries to exert far too much control on our day to day lives, but the problem there is New Labour, not that it's central. Seems to me if we had, for example, more local control resulting in different levels of income tax by county, it'd create all sorts of problems of inconsistency and "postcode lotteries", and restrictions of trade. And the EU isn't any different, just on a larger scale.

I don't really understand why people think being ruled by idiots you didn't vote for in Brussels is so much worse than being ruled by idiots you didn't vote for in London. Interesting how people are very quick to criticise New Labour (no argument there from me), but as soon as the subject of the EU comes up they start waving the flag and hold up our politicians in high esteem all because they happen to come from the same island as us.

And that's the key: the British are islanders, and we have an island mentality. I think that's a bit embaressing.

[DodgyAgent]

There's nothing like a good old Euro argument before tea

I have just read the law societies' summary of the Lisbon treaty and I cannot see what all the fuss is about. Most of the treaty is indeed pretty sensible and logical stuff. I am concerned as to what the next stage might be.

It is pretty disgraceful that the Lisbon treaty has been allowed to be "soiled" by the reputation of the EU. Having read the treaty I am disgusted that those who support it come from such untrustworthy institutions. It should have sailed through.

[BlasterBates]

I am on both sides of the fence myself

There's nothing like a good old Euro argument before tea

[DodgyAgent]

But in spite of all the arguments over the last 20 years we're still in the EU.

Europhiles 20 - Eurosceptics 0

I am on both sides of the fence myself

[BlasterBates]

But in spite of all the arguments over the last 20 years we're still in the EU.

Europhiles 20 - Eurosceptics 0

[DodgyAgent]

And Europhiles use it as an excuse to grandstand their facile viewpoints

Europhiles do not have viewpoints. They have threats (get out) , accusations of "little nationalists" and well meaning cliches to persuade everyone of their cause.

However when challenged on actuals such as what is the democratic process? why are the EU budgets not signed off? they revert to their cliches.

I have never seen any europhile commentator explain in simple terms how they envisage that the EU should be run, nor have I seen anyone explain the many awkward questions about the inadequacies of the EU. All I hear are high minded cliches and weasel words about "aspirations", "intentions" etc etc. On the other hand listen or read the Eurosceptics they put forward solid arguments, backed with examples and dealt with logically. My worry about these sceptics is that they may exaggerate and make up some of the facts on which their arguments are based.

So when these idiot Europhiles make their case can they please back it up with some sort of factual analysis.

[DodgyAgent]

Did you read that in the Daily Mail. ?

..and the "legally binding" and you mentioned is no different to the "legally binding" in the original Common Market in 1957, with the exception that veto is not allowed. That is governments still have to translate into law.

But what EU sceptics try to do, is give the impression this means laws are passed by the EU, which is of course complete garbage.

It is good to debate the pro's con's but sceptics use it as an excuse to grandstand their facile viewpoints

The Lisbon treaty from the BBC (pro EU) website lists:
How similar is Lisbon to the draft constitution?

It contains many of the changes the constitution attempted to introduce, for example:

A politician chosen to be president of the European Council for two-and-a-half years, replacing the current system where countries take turns at being president for six months
A new post combining the jobs of the existing foreign affairs supremo, Javier Solana, and the external affairs commissioner, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, to give the EU more clout on the world stage
A smaller European Commission, with fewer commissioners than there are member states, from 2014
A redistribution of voting weights between the member states, phased in between 2014 and 2017 - qualified majority voting based on a "double majority" of 55% of member states, accounting for 65% of the EU's population
New powers for the European Commission, European Parliament and European Court of Justice, for example in the field of justice and home affairs
Removal of national vetoes in a number of areas.

Removal of National vetoes in certain areas, seems to me that power is becoming more centralised into the EU. Granted the diplomay and military aspects have yet to officially devolp into a single force, but like everything else it is not a question of "if" but "when".

[BlasterBates]

An informed debate would be better than Xenophobic rants.

[KathyWoolfe]

It is good to debate the pro's con's but sceptics use it as an excuse to grandstand their facile viewpoints

And Europhiles use it as an excuse to grandstand their facile viewpoints

[BlasterBates]

The EU wants for example to have a single representative army, diplomatic corp.

Did you read that in the Daily Mail. ?

..and the "legally binding" and you mentioned is no different to the "legally binding" in the original Common Market in 1957, with the exception that veto is not allowed. That is governments still have to translate into law.

But what EU sceptics try to do, is give the impression this means laws are passed by the EU, which is of course complete garbage.

It is good to debate the pro's con's but sceptics use it as an excuse to grandstand their facile viewpoints