Brexit - whats the difference.....

[geordiecolin]

I couldn't help but laugh out loud at David Dimbleby's rant about Boris. Its so obvious that he is salty about Brexit and the threat to the defunct and bias BBC

 

[Playford7]

As a side note, Priti Patel looks like she could literally eat your soul just by gazing at you.

This is a woman who accepts that the immigration rules she is now supporting would have prevented her own parents from making their home in the UK.

She’s actually attractive... unlike jess Phillips, Diane abacus, Angela the slapper reyner and any other labour female MP, conservative women are always much more intelligent and attractive than liberal loonies.
just a pointless observation folks, do carry on moaning about a passport... (doing eye rolls)

 

[Kroffe]

She’s actually attractive... unlike jess Phillips, Diane abacus, Angela the slapper reyner and any other labour female MP, conservative women are always much more intelligent and attractive than liberal loonies.
just a pointless observation folks, do carry on moaning about a passport... (doing eye rolls)

Hey, we call them Harry-rolls round these parts, partner!


Also, i think women from all over the political-spectrum can be beautiful.
Like i can afford to just write off 50ish % of the women just because of their political views.

 

[sufferinsilence]

Hey, we call them Harry-rolls round these parts, partner!


Also, i think women from all over the political-spectrum can be beautiful.
Like i can afford to just write off 50ish % of the women just because of their political views.

It's been written on this forum more than once that conservative women are much more beautiful compared to "those liberal ones". And as you know the rule is when it's on the internet it's true.

 

[Kroffe]

It's been written on this forum more than once that conservative women are much more beautiful compared to "those liberal ones". And as you know the rule is when it's on the internet it's true.

Not everything on the internet is true.
These videos for example are not really true to their description.
All the videos on his channel seems to be all star by smashmouth.
Its a pretty great channel tho.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

You know what would have been a really good idea? To have this realisation before leaving the EU, entering a dangerously short transition period, and refusing to even countenance the possibility of an extension.

Still, interesting to see that we've gone from 'People are tired of experts' to, 'Holy fuck, we really need some experts on this one.'

I mean, I was saying basically this, in this very thread, nearly a year ago. i.e. You know what the EU are really fucking good at? Negotiating trade deals. We haven't done it for 40 years.

Why is IDS only now articulating what I was saying nearly a year ago?

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

He told BBC Radio 5 Live: "I think there are problems ahead for the UK.

"One of them is the quality of the people now working on this. If you haven't negotiated for 40 years you need to reach out to all those people that are involved in negotiations, really good transactional lawyers that exist in the City of London. Proper trade economists. We've got very good ones at the moment but we need to bring them in from outside."

The former Tory leader explained that expertise from outside the civil service might now be needed to help battle with the European Union's skilled negotiators.

"The chief negotiator is fine. All I would say is behind them you need people who are looking through absolutely everything with an understanding of what to look for. This is the key bit.

"We are up against the EU and the EU has been negotiating trade deals for 40 years. So we need to make sure we draw upon the talents of anybody that has skills in this area".

 

[ChopleyIOM]

UK farmers getting thrown under the bus.

There will be far more of this to come.

 

[mack341]

sciencemag.org

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

After the United Kingdom leaves the European Union at the end of the month, it will sever ties with Europe’s farm subsidy policies—and to many researchers, that is a good thing. This week, the U.K. government proposed radical changes to £3 billion a year in agricultural spending that will focus the money on benefits to climate, ecosystems, and the public. “It’s dramatic and utterly critical,” says Dieter Helm, an economist at the University of Oxford. “This is an agricultural revolution.”

“It certainly could have really positive benefits for the environment,” says Lynn Dicks, an animal ecologist at the University of Cambridge who studies wild pollinator conservation.

After the destruction and starvation of World War II, European tariffs helped protect farmers from foreign competition and subsidies boosted their yields. “It was just about production, it didn’t matter what you did to the environment,” says Ian Bateman, an environmental economist at the University of Exeter

New lands were brought under the plow and hedgerows were ripped up, leading to erosion. Excessive fertilizer and pesticides polluted air and water. And the loss of habitat harmed pollinators and other wildlife. The cost of the EU common agricultural policy (CAP) wasn’t just environmental: Up through the 1990s, the subsidies consumed 80% of the EU budget. Even today, the €59 billion CAP represents about 40% of EU public spending.

Other countries will be watching closely, too, says Alan Matthews, an agricultural economist at Trinity College Dublin, who studies European agricultural policy. “If it’s been successful, that will be a very powerful argument for the Europeans to follow.”


--------

Don't you think possibly the EU gives farmers/land owners too much tax payer money? I'm in favour of extra support for small farmers and rural communities rather than factory farming.

The problem for the EU is they will find it hard to get all the states to agree change, they might carry on spending more and basically wasting money growing food that never gets eaten, spraying too much fertiliser and pesticides in the process [which obv the chemical company lobby like].

 

[steveh35]

CNN looking into how the Coronavirus opens up the EU and European countries in general to their problems with each other and how does the EU deal with a virus in individual EU countries when they don't trust each other.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Does the EU take charge of dealing with the virus in it's members or does it say it's down to each country nothing to do with us gov you decide your health policies.

Is the EU a force in the world that can take on disasters or does it just sweep them under the carpet and hide away in Brussels?

 

[goatwack]

Don't know about all that, just looking forward to getting my new future-proof, blue, environmentally-friendly and semi-British-made passport sometime next month

 

[steveh35]

Don't know about all that, just looking forward to getting my new future-proof, blue, environmentally-friendly and semi-British-made passport sometime next month

Same but I have to have an interview first

 

[mack341]

These are national issues so the EU finds itself a little bit irrelevant, the eu laws aren't in place [yet] telling each country how to run their health service.

I bet the EU do try and use this outbreak for their own gain, saying in future there needs to be a joined up EU decided response to health emergencies and potential pandemics, because of the open border argument.

Italy and the more nationalist countries are going to want to take a more stringent approach, the eu folk who favour loose immigration controls won't like that.

 

[steveh35]

These are national issues so the EU finds itself a little bit irrelevant, the eu laws aren't in place [yet] telling each country how to run their health service.

I bet the EU do try and use this outbreak for their own gain, saying in future there needs to be a joined up EU decided response to health emergencies and potential pandemics, because of the open border argument.

Italy and the more nationalist countries are going to want to take a more stringent approach, the eu folk who favour loose immigration controls won't like that.

i think they will just ignore it and hide like they did when there were the terror attacks in Brussels or the row between Spain & Gibraltar.

The EU only chirps up when it involves money or the rules.

 

[goatwack]

Same but I have to have an interview first

Me neither. Passport renewals are probably worse than dentist visits to have fillings done, and that takes some doing.

I'll try my best NOT to let any keywords slip during the interview, namely "Iran", "Trump" or "Bomb"

 

[steveh35]

Me neither. Passport renewals are probably worse than dentist visits to have fillings done, and that takes some doing.

I'll try my best NOT to let any keywords slip during the interview, namely "Iran", "Trump" or "Bomb"

I have never had a passport so all I know is I have to go Leeds (which is bad enough), go through a metal detector, strip searched and molested and interviewed.

 

[Kroffe]

I have never had a passport so all I know is I have to go Leeds (which is bad enough), go through a metal detector, strip searched and molested and interviewed.

Its not that bad getting a passport.

 

[steveh35]

Its not that bad getting a passport.

View attachment 124077

I think that's why I agreed to go

 

[steveh35]

Boris Johnson just announced that if trade talks are not progressing by June the UK is prepared to walk away from them.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

The UK's red lines for EU negotiations:

• The UK is prepared to walk away from talks in June unless a "broad outline" is drawn up
• Westminster will not agree to anything in which the UK does not have control of its laws and political life
• If not enough progress is made, the UK will rely on World Trade Organisation terms similar to Australia's relationship with the EU
• The transition period will not be extended beyond 31 December so the UK will leave the EU's single market and customs union by 1 January, 2020
• Access to British fishing waters will not be linked to access to EU markets.

 

[Kroffe]

These are national issues so the EU finds itself a little bit irrelevant, the eu laws aren't in place [yet] telling each country how to run their health service.

I bet the EU do try and use this outbreak for their own gain, saying in future there needs to be a joined up EU decided response to health emergencies and potential pandemics, because of the open border argument.

Italy and the more nationalist countries are going to want to take a more stringent approach, the eu folk who favour loose immigration controls won't like that.

"joined up EU decided response to health emergencies and potential pandemics"

Does that really sound like such a horrible thing?
And even if they would want to create laws about how the healthservice is run in all eu-member countries
(why would they?) what do you think would happen?

"Nooo, stop saving people, start using your healthservice to make people more dead, for we are eeeeevil" ?

 

[goatwack]

How does one make people more dead? I need this for......research purposes

 

[mack341]

I wonder what concessions Boris can make to sweeten the deal, I can't see the EU accepting this, I bet the individual countries and parliaments would just like to have a free trade deal with the uk as we're an importer, but many of the MEP's are more interested in the EU project and won't ratify a deal along the lines boris is asking for.

 

[Kroffe]

How does one make people more dead? I need this for......research purposes

Well, this is what half dead is.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Can you imagine crawling your way to the ICU in that state, and all they do is make you more dead.
The deadest some would say.

 

[mack341]

"joined up EU decided response to health emergencies and potential pandemics"

Does that really sound like such a horrible thing?
And even if they would want to create laws about how the healthservice is run in all eu-member countries
(why would they?) what do you think would happen?

"Nooo, stop saving people, start using your healthservice to make people more dead, for we are eeeeevil" ?

the bigger picture is called democracy, and it works best locally and then nationally

'why would they'? it's just about a gradual power grab, magine a graphic of all the power and sovereignty from each country going into brussels, wherein the technocrats and elites then decide what's best for everyone, that's the way things have been heading and will continue, what's europe going to be like in 100 years time?

We need to protect what we have in europe, but the EU leaders are mentalists like T.Bliar , you've got a few nutter politicians like him in sweden trying to unnecessarily change an already perfectly fine, decent admirable country.

 

[mack341]

Chop as you've become so fond of IDS pronouncements re the EU/brexit recently I thought you might enjoy this

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Today's brief episode of 'reality meets lies'.

 

[mack341]

Does that mean then, when the EU signed that deal with canada they also needed to hire thousands in each country to check the paperwork for imports and exports?

I'm starting to feel more confident that govey etc know what they're doing or thinking, they have some sort of plan/vision of the uk post brexit, I didn't get that feeling with theresa may as PM.

Barnier is not looking so super confident now either, adding things into the talks like the elgin marbles and gibraltar, just shows they're are all over the place. Those things are not to do with trade.

I do wonder though what item we are going to give as a sweetner, maybe it's the irish border but you don't hear the backstop get mentioned at all now. If no deal is agreed will border checks resume

 

[Matti]

Does that mean then, when the EU signed that deal with canada they also needed to hire thousands in each country to check the paperwork for imports and exports?

I'm starting to feel more confident that govey etc know what they're doing or thinking, they have some sort of plan/vision of the uk post brexit, I didn't get that feeling with theresa may as PM.

Barnier is not looking so super confident now either, adding things into the talks like the elgin marbles and gibraltar, just shows they're are all over the place. Those things are not to do with trade.

I do wonder though what item we are going to give as a sweetner, maybe it's the irish border but you don't hear the backstop get mentioned at all now. If no deal is agreed will border checks resume

I agree that Barnier don’t look confident. I think he is confused since the UK is not acting logical but taking decisions based on emotions instead. I’m not saying it’s wrong. Gut feeling can be the best. Hard to negotiate with though.

 

[steveh35]

I agree that Barnier don’t look confident. I think he is confused since the UK is not acting logical but taking decisions based on emotions instead. I’m not saying it’s wrong. Gut feeling can be the best. Hard to negotiate with though.

The UK is not acting logically??? We have asked for control of our laws why is that not logical? We have asked for control of our own fishing waters. Why is that not logical? We have said if talks are going nowhere we leave them. Why is that not logical?

It's the EU who have brought the bloody Elgin Marbles into the debate.

We ask for important issues to be discussed they want their marbles says it all really.

 

[Matti]

The UK is not acting logically??? We have asked for control of our laws why is that not logical? We have asked for control of our own fishing waters. Why is that not logical? We have said if talks are going nowhere we leave them. Why is that not logical?

Because you at the same time are shooting yourself in the foot multiple times to achieve those things you mention.

 

[steveh35]

Because you at the same time are shooting yourself in the foot multiple times to achieve those things you mention.

Sigh, sigh, sigh, why would we want to leave the EU if we continue to let them run our laws?

We don't want the EU having any influence in our rules why is that so difficult to understand?

 

[mack341]

I think for once we are being very logical, it's madness for the EU to expect us just to follow all the future EU rules, we might as well not had the vote to leave.

standards can be very similar but we will do things differently to arrive there; the EU really don't like anyone being sovereign [as much as you can these days] and making the decisions other than them.

making unreasonable demands as the EU are has got to be a sign of weakness, like a house of cards that cannot cope with one card being moved.

 

[steveh35]

I think for once we are being very logical, it's madness for the EU to expect us just to follow all the future EU rules, we might as well not had the vote to leave.

standards can be very similar but we will do things differently to arrive there; the EU really don't like anyone being sovereign [as much as you can these days] and making the decisions other than them.

making unreasonable demands as the EU are has got to be a sign of weakness, like a house of cards that cannot cope with one card being moved.

The EU are complete hypocrites they want to control all the 27 countries but as soon as a crisis arises like Coronavirus or illegal immigrants its for the countries to deal with nothing to do with us.

So far all the EU have done with Coronavirus is give £10m of our money to research, no EU wide plan to deal with it or any united front from them they have crawled back inside the EU building to hide behind their desks, while Italy is left all alone by them.

What has been the only decision the EU has made so far about Coronavirus? We are not closing the schengen borders.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I think Barnier is looking bemused because the sheer idiocy and contradictory nature of the UK's position makes his actual functioning brain short circuit. Plus the fact we're reneging on promises made just a few months ago.

It's like an adult trying to have a reasonable discussion with a petulant toddler.

A good piece from Ian Dunt this week:

They're all over the place. It's like a moral lesson in what happens if you're foolish enough to hand the keys to the country to a blithering clown. And the damage he'll do will stay with us for decades.

We barely see Boris Johnson. He doesn't really deign to emerge anymore. It's all very funny, apparently, the bumbling jester act. Until there's floods, or a coronavirus. And then it's not so funny anymore.

But even behind the scenes, you can sense Johnson's responsibility for what is happening. It's in that tell-tale sign of laziness and ineptitude with which government operations are conducted.

Yesterday the No.10 confirmed it was pulling out of the unified patent system. This new arrangement, which operates half-in and half-out of the EU, aims to replace the disparate national patent arrangements in Europe with a streamlined single-issue patent and associated court functions.

With Britain on board, the new system would have covered 400 million consumers, including four G8 economies, with a GDP close to that of the US. Many experts believed it would make Europe a major patent jurisdiction, possibly overtaking the US.

Even David Cameron, an afterthought of a prime minister who nevertheless appears an intellectual titan next to what we have now, recognised the opportunities. He made sure British judges were involved in developing the court's procedure. He fought to establish the pharmaceutical and life science division of the court in London - part of a plan to turn the UK, which at the time had the European Medicines Agency as well as the Francis Crick Institute and the Wellcome trust, into a global life sciences hub.

Theresa May knew it made sense to stick to this system even after Brexit. Johnson himself ratified it in 2018. But now we are pulling out. Why? Because the patent court will refer back to the European Court of Justice on matters of EU law.

This is such a tiny thing, such an inconsequential detail, as to be beyond comprehension. The European Court of Justice wouldn't decide cases. It would simply be asked to make rulings on matters of EU law. But even that apparently is too much. 'That's not Brexit', or whatever word it is we're supposed to use for Brexit now that MPs have been told never to utter it.

"Participating in a court that applies EU law and bound by the

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

European Court of Justice is inconsistent with our aims of becoming an independent self-governing nation," the PM's office told the website IAM yesterday. They had to be approached to find out. There was no official statement.

Britain loses and Europe loses. And there's really no reason for it. It's doubtful that a single individual in this country voted to leave in 2016 on the basis of EU law on patents.

It doesn't make the headlines, because it is an act of vandalism against something which would exist, rather than something which already does. But this is what it looks like when a country dismantles its own future.

Meanwhile, Michael Gove was in the Commons, delivering a standard-issue machine gun round of untruth. "We will respect the withdrawal agreement, implement the Northern Ireland protocol," he said, mentioning a document which makes it clear there will be a customs border between Britain and Northern Ireland. And then: "There will be no border down the Irish Sea".

It is a lie. That border will exist as point of fact due to the contents of the agreement. And it will take place in a heightened way due to country-of-origin checks if there is a trade deal with the EU.

What he could confirm is that the UK is going to have to employ up to 50,000 people for customs checks. It is extraordinary. We are eradicating growth where we could have been world leaders, only to replace it with growth in an area dedicated to demolishing our own trading networks. As the FT calculated, that's "four times more people to fill in customs forms than the 12,000 people working as fishermen in the UK - the industry that is supposedly one of the big beneficiaries of Brexit". Actual madness, on an industrial scale.

This government, which seemingly has no interest in the job and no understanding of how to do it, is then going to negotiate the two most important trade deals in this country's history. And it is going to negotiate them at the same time.

The UK published its mandate for the EU talks this week. In it, Johnson rejected the commitment to level-playing field requirements which he signed in his future relationship deal with the EU, just as he is undermining the commitments he made in the Northern Ireland protocol. He then asked the EU to trust him that those commitments were not required. It is like a perfectly illogical argument, one which refutes itself in the process of being uttered.

At the same time he is going to pursue an American trade deal, with the most aggressive nationalist president that country has had in its history. The mandate for that deal is expected on Monday. Liz Truss, the woman who whipped herself up into imbecile outrage over the fact Britain imports cheese, will be in charge there.

That's two simultaneous talks in which Britain is by far the junior partner, against seasoned negotiators, operating under an impossible time frame, with a ministerial team selected for cattle-like obedience, a leadership strategy based on deception, and no basic grounding in empirical reality or the consequences of our actions.

The sheer scale of the inadequacy and irresponsibility is mind-boggling. A clown-car, tottering down a high speed motorway, surrounded by heavy-duty vehicles travelling at speed. And we are going to have to live with the outcome of these decisions for years.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Another excellent piece here by one of those boring 'experts', bloody know-it-alls with their experience and knowledge. They just need to BELIEVE IN BRITAIN more.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

This seems fine, I mean, it'll only mean a few extra dead Brits, right?

This also seems fine. Brexit dividend!

 

[mack341]

There's nothing to stop the health departments of countries being in contact with our health department and vice versa re pandemics, or will it be 'we cannot tell you about the level of outbreak in italy because you're not part of the EWRS' how childish if that's the case...

Short of testing every traveller coming into the UK I can't see that we can do much now, there's no will in govt to take all the necessary actions in case it harms the economy, 'well if a few thousand die from this virus it's unforunate but not the end of the world' that's how some in govt will think.

I doubt there'll ever be a pandemic originating from europe, but coming from poorer areas/countries outside into europe, so an early warning system will always be about that movement/development; we knew this coronavirus was coming, but the EWRS didn't help Italy very much, and we know now Italy is an infection hotspot but armed with that info we do pretty much zip.

Italy's Civil Protection Authority reported the country now has 1,694 confirmed coronavirus cases, up from 1,128 confirmed cases on Saturday. Thirty-four people have died.

Italy has the most coronavirus cases of any country outside of Asia. [CNN]

And yet passengers from italy [regardless of nationality] arriving in the uk are probably not being checked for this deadly virus.

 

[dunover]

So my house is flooded, due to the worst piss-wet new year in memory, and Boris Johnson turns up - what fucking good will it do me? Will it suddenly dry up, create a massive anti-cyclone that keeps the UK sunny and dry for 5 weeks? Will the EU mop it up?

EWRS? So, outside the EU the UK couldn't make preparations for a pandemic? Would we not be aware of it outside the EU? In fact, being outside it grants us more draconian measures if necessary to avoid the spread.

The reamoaners are totally irrational, clutching at straws and relying on quotes form the commentariat to back-up their ill-founded and illogical arguments.

The French are shitting themselves because their fisherman won't be able to plunder UK waters and the French government, already weak, will face some orange vests and burning roadblocks afterwards.

The more I hear from these slithering, mealy-mouthed Eurocrats the more pleased I am we got out of the farce. Still waiting for this predicted outbreak of 'super gonorrhea' as a result of the leave vote by the way.

 

[Matti]

So my house is flooded, due to the worst piss-wet new year in memory, and Boris Johnson turns up - what fucking good will it do me? Will it suddenly dry up, create a massive anti-cyclone that keeps the UK sunny and dry for 5 weeks? Will the EU mop it up?

EWRS? So, outside the EU the UK couldn't make preparations for a pandemic? Would we not be aware of it outside the EU? In fact, being outside it grants us more draconian measures if necessary to avoid the spread.

The reamoaners are totally irrational, clutching at straws and relying on quotes form the commentariat to back-up their ill-founded and illogical arguments.

The French are shitting themselves because their fisherman won't be able to plunder UK waters and the French government, already weak, will face some orange vests and burning roadblocks afterwards.

The more I hear from these slithering, mealy-mouthed Eurocrats the more pleased I am we got out of the farce. Still waiting for this predicted outbreak of 'super gonorrhea' as a result of the leave vote by the way.

1. If you're house is flooded the EU will not mop it up. You are absolutely correct.

2. What draconical measures can the UK do that wasn't possible when you were in the EU?

3. French are ..... French..... What do you expect?

4. You will have you're own mealy-mouthed Londocrats. Good luck with them.

5. I don't now anything about super gonorrhea but the good old fashioned one was harder to get if you were in a monogamous relationship. Since you guys are now going to get fucked by many new partners I can understand why people predict an outbreak.

 

[mack341]

1. If you're house is flooded the EU will not mop it up. You are absolutely correct.

2. What draconical measures can the UK do that wasn't possible when you were in the EU?

3. French are ..... French..... What do you expect?

4. You will have you're own mealy-mouthed Londocrats. Good luck with them.

5. I don't now anything about super gonorrhea but the good old fashioned one was harder to get if you were in a monogamous relationship. Since you guys are now going to get fucked by many new partners I can understand why people predict an outbreak.

regarding 4 very true, but it's better to deal with one set rather than having the two pass the buck, also if they get too much we can vote in politicians who promise to get a grip on the bureaucrats, you don't have that option in the EU, that's why the president and other high positions should be elected, so the citizens can have a better say.

 

[Matti]

regarding 4 very true, but it's better to deal with one set rather than having the two pass the buck, also if they get too much we can vote in politicians who promise to get a grip on the bureaucrats, you don't have that option in the EU, that's why the president and other high positions should be elected, so the citizens can have a better say.

Why can't vote in politicians that can get a grip of the bureaucrats?

Democracy comes in many forms and shapes. I think the current system has it's flaws but I haven't seen any alternative that I think works better considering primarily language barriers and the difference in population between member states.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

77 things we're losing that weren't on the side of the Brexit bus.

Fortunately, we have a long list of cool stuff to replace them with. Such as 'sovereignty', blue passports, and getting bent over by the USA as we strike a hard bargain with them on a trade deal.

 

[mack341]

Why can't vote in politicians that can get a grip of the bureaucrats?

Democracy comes in many forms and shapes. I think the current system has it's flaws but I haven't seen any alternative that I think works better considering primarily language barriers and the difference in population between member states.

I think the strcture of the EU is unique and was deliberately set up to ignore the influence of the citizen's vote, I can't find the text or writer who put it best, but this is a good description of the reality:

[huffingtonpost.co.uk/matthew-ellery/eu-referendum etc]

The EU is a highly undemocratic organisation ratcheting more and more power with every passing day. It is impervious to public opinion. The people who matter in the law-making process are unelected and therefore unaccountable...

The EU's law-making process is fundamentally undemocratic. Power is vested in the unelected and unaccountable elite who make laws - in secret - to preserve the status of large multinationals at the expense of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Multinationals achieve their preferential status by spending enormous sums of money on lobbying. They create a complicated regulatory framework, which only large companies with their Human Resources departments can comply with. This drives small competitors out of business, destroys competition and encourages monopolies, forcing the consumer to pay a higher price for poorer quality goods and services.

The Commission is made up of 28 unelected commissioners, who cannot be held to account. Each commissioner has a specific policy area in which to create laws. The Commission has a President (currently Jean-Claude Juncker); unlike the other 27 commissioners he is personally elected by the European Parliament, however his was the only name on the ballot paper, not exactly democratic. The Commission is advised by the Directorate General, which along with the Commission is heavily lobbied. Once the Commission proposes an EU law, this proposal is taken to the Parliament.

Additionally, once something becomes an EU law, the Parliament has no ability to propose a change to this law.

 

[Matti]

I think the strcture of the EU is unique and was deliberately set up to ignore the influence of the citizen's vote, I can't find the text or writer who put it best, but this is a good description of the reality:

[huffingtonpost.co.uk/matthew-ellery/eu-referendum etc]

The EU is a highly undemocratic organisation ratcheting more and more power with every passing day. It is impervious to public opinion. The people who matter in the law-making process are unelected and therefore unaccountable...

The EU's law-making process is fundamentally undemocratic. Power is vested in the unelected and unaccountable elite who make laws - in secret - to preserve the status of large multinationals at the expense of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Multinationals achieve their preferential status by spending enormous sums of money on lobbying. They create a complicated regulatory framework, which only large companies with their Human Resources departments can comply with. This drives small competitors out of business, destroys competition and encourages monopolies, forcing the consumer to pay a higher price for poorer quality goods and services.

The Commission is made up of 28 unelected commissioners, who cannot be held to account. Each commissioner has a specific policy area in which to create laws. The Commission has a President (currently Jean-Claude Juncker); unlike the other 27 commissioners he is personally elected by the European Parliament, however his was the only name on the ballot paper, not exactly democratic. The Commission is advised by the Directorate General, which along with the Commission is heavily lobbied. Once the Commission proposes an EU law, this proposal is taken to the Parliament.

Additionally, once something becomes an EU law, the Parliament has no ability to propose a change to this law.

This is just a blog and not an objective article. It's filled with bios opinions, insinuations and factual faults with some "deep state" twitch to it all.....You could just have sent a link to Breitbart or National Enquirer instead.

 

[goatwack]

This is much like my Sky membership. Years and years of paying into an over-priced package containing hundreds of channels, many of which I'd never watch. It seemed like expensive overkill. I even watched Britannia ffs

Now it's been abolished like an unwanted leper, one realizes just all the perks that TV package actually contained. Movies, series, and the oft-overlooked nature documentaries.

So now I'm 'better off' financially but stuck with Freeview, which essentially means ITV 3, Dave and RoK.

I'm waiting for the right time to re-join, albeit with likely a worse package overall. Bloody bureacrats

 

[dunover]

**********
5. I don't now anything about super gonorrhea but the good old fashioned one was harder to get if you were in a monogamous relationship. Since you guys are now going to get fucked by many new partners I can understand why people predict an outbreak.

Better fucked by many clean partners than the 27 dirty, corrupt and infected ones we had before....

 

[sufferinsilence]

Better fucked by many clean partners than the 27 dirty, corrupt and infected ones we had before....

If anyone does the fucking it's Boris, that man fucks. 5th child on the way or something?

 

[goatwack]

The language on this thread, honestly

If I hear 'Brexit' one more time I swear I'll

 

[mack341]

This is just a blog and not an objective article. It's filled with bios opinions, insinuations and factual faults with some "deep state" twitch to it all.....You could just have sent a link to Breitbart or National Enquirer instead.

Can you point me to an objective article on the same topic then, not from a blog or pro remain msm site?

 

[Matti]

Can you point me to an objective article on the same topic then, not from a blog or pro remain msm site?

I'm a bit confused. You stated that we in the EU can't vote in politicians that can get a grip of the bureaucrats. I asked you why we can't (since I believed your statement was wrong).

To support your information you then posted personal blog that was full of lies and factual faults. When I pointed that out you now ask me to point you to an article that support your view.

What am I missing here?

 

[Borgie]

I'm a bit confused. You stated that we in the EU can't vote in politicians that can get a grip of the bureaucrats. I asked you why we can't (since I believed your statement was wrong).

To support your information you then posted personal blog that was full of lies and factual faults. When I pointed that out you now ask me to point you to an article that support your view.

What am I missing here?

Aww come on spoil sport saves mack the leg work if you find the article lol. Such fun