Corbyn - A Serious Question

If you’re ever unsure who the bad guys are, ask yourself what would you be thinking if it was France or Spain who voted to leave, took 3 years arguing with themselves about it, were threatening to withhold €39bn they had promised us, were insulting us in every interview and saying how desperate we are for them and how much they don’t need us and never have. I’m sure Jedi etc. would be praising their actions and condemning us for trying to punish them unreasonably. If not, then he needs to accept that we are in the wrong here.

 

That's what you get on here mate, the fact you dislike the commie more than the the tories and as you have never voted for the tories it really gets people on here searching for a safe space and going into meltdown

 

Don’t care what macron said tbh just as much as i don’t care what Boris says .
They can only implement measures which have been agreed in the past measures which we were part of forming o if there’s any “punishment “ (which there certainly isn’t ) then we are also responsible for it.
And it isn’t a simple Buisness negotiation whatsoever that’s the right wing trying to simplify something to sell to the public just as the household budget isn’t a reflection on the country’s finances.
No deal should be taken off the agenda for the good of our country ,noses spite and face and all that.

 

The only reasons the EU want the UK to remain is our money & somewhere for their criminals to visit.

 

Thank goodness it isnt just me.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree on that. If it wasn't a negotiation, why send negotiators.. It's not the divorce element that I refer to it is the future arrangements which have nothing to do with any treaties. You're right it isn't a simple business negotiation it is a massive one.

 

So few people got to vote in Boris Johnson, yet far fewer people had a choice about Ursula von der Leyen.

 

I Never said it wasn’t a negotiation I said it wasn’t a simple buisness negotiation.
The future arrangements are not on the table until we fulfil our obligations .

 

As far as i'm aware the European Council consult and agree candidates til they have agreement. That means our Prime Minister has a say.

Seeing as our media are all largely anti EU and regular activities and decisions go unreported, I can't see any value in a UK electorate being asked to vote on people they've never heard of.

Elect a leader for your country, let them assist in selecting the best candidate they perceive. If it isn't going well, I believe the directly elected European Parliament can look to dissolve the commission.

 

They detest us, but they love the queens shilling, if it was Malta/ Romania/ Bulgaria or other similar countries then not an eyelid would have been blinked

 

Without the Falklands the Tories would have lost the next election. Thatcher was one of the most disliked MPs we had up to that time.

 

Council decide who they want in a delightful behind closed doors Parliament vote. She got in 11 clear of what is required for a voting majority.

Not bad considering she was the only name on the ballot paper!

To get shut, you need a 2/3 majority in Parliament.

 

Seems more democratic than how our prime ministers are chosen, don’t you think?

 

My new boss Priti Patel worked for tobacco manufacturers before entering politics . We try and stop over supply of tobacco goods. She's lobbied for years for them, how can we have confidence that our customs functions aren't a pointless exercise?

 

A behind closed doors selection policy which ended up with a candidate nominated who wasn’t even on the original list, being the only person on the list compared to the quite transparent leadership elections of the major UK political parties..

I see what you mean.

 

They are tiny countries in terms of GDP, so yes, you are right.

 

An elected bunch of national leaders selecting who they believe is best person to represent them with a separate commission and parliament.

Of course we could ask 27 nations to choose and then have accusations of country bias based on electoral sizes.

I’ve no issue with how the commission president is chosen at all.

When you compare the labour clique of unelected Milne and McCluskey, the unelected right wing media influencing brexit opinion and the highly dubious donations set ups... not to mention the lords... I don’t think UK can say jack **** off the back of an illegal referendum based on lies.

 

The Council select A candidate in a behind closed doors, secretive meeting to decide who they want to put forward. There’s no option other who they propose to elect or reject.


The Commission isn’t about member states, it’s members swear an oath to the EU.

The Parliament is the only Publically elected body within Brussels.

If the Council put forward a selection of candidates and allowed a transparent review of each persons politics, personality etc and allowed a vote this way either by FPTP or PR I’d be a bit less concerned other the way things have been done.

If the 1922 committee sat in a board room without no outside communication with a list of potential candidates... say BJ, JRM, Truss and Rory Stewart couldn’t come to a conclusion who they fancied, came out and put Harriet Baldwin forward as the sole candidate there would be uproar. Some of the die hard Labour types on here would spontaneously combust over the selection methods regardless of who was in power.

Milne is Corbyns head of communications, it’s entirely up to him who he chooses for that role. McCluskey is a high powered union secretary. He has no powers within parliament only influence.

Newspapers regardless of political stance do not get elected, again they attempt to exert influence.

All parties follow the same rules for donations, including PayPal.. unless labours removed the link from their official site!

I agree with the HOL.

There was a lot of fault with the referendum on both sides.

Amusingly though, the Electoral Commission just had their case against Darren Grimes shelved on appeal.

He was one of the leave campaign ‘big fish’ accused of breaching spending rules.

 

It is done by PR. In Europe, not in our country, when we have a status quo (not the ******* band), that ensures a 2 party state. Whilst being a member of the Labour Party in also a member of the Society for Electoral Reform.

 

Many things I could reply to, but not sure there is much reason to.

I’m content with EU process, it’s much more open than the uk in my view. I’m not content with the loose and allowed violations by all parties in this country on donations, expenses, registers of interests, breaches of confidentiality, cronyism, collusion and how people without authority are gifted it and use it accordingly, most unknowingly to the public.