Just when you thought this outrageous person could not get any worse

Commissioners draft EU legislation based on recommendations from the member states and the EU Parliament. The MEPs (that we elect) have the ability to adopt, amend or reject proposed legislation. Isn't that the same as our MPs now just with named people drafting legislation rather than unnamed civil servants?

Is it our fault that ~1/4 of our MEPs (UKIP) only show up when there is something in it for them?

https://www.out-law.com/page-7766

 

Just so we are clear.

Europe is a land mass consisting of multiple countries who all have their own identities and cultures.

The European Union is the organisation that wants to assimilate these countries into one state without the approval of the nation states.

The organisation that has by stealth,political force and blackmail changed Europe. And not for the better.

I cannot beleive the number of people who want the exit from the EU to fail just so they can scream told you so.

 

However the EU has just confirmed the nomination of Donald Tusk against the express wishes of his own Government .

 

It was 42 years ago and the world's a fundamentally different place?

 

In your opinion

 

Ok to answer your points. Firstly why do I see it as a disaster, look at how the EU actually functions between the individual EU states, each must meet certain economic targets which are driven mainly by the German powerhouse (and partly us). Countries like Greece, Spain, Portugal and the other considered poorer nations simply cannot stand up to these conditions hence the bailouts. People moan about the governments austerity programme, this is also ultimately driven by the powers across the EU. Should we further integrate, we pretty much then rely on the only people we can elect which are a handful of MEP's all with differing agendas based on their own party politics. We have no clear EU policy because of our domestic party politics, this is why real EU reform will never happen. We have much greater influence over our domestic MP's than we would ever have as a voice in Europe. Our highest courts can be overuled by some judge on the continent who doesn't really understand our domestic issues and why should they be able to when dealing with so many member states. Essentially the EU is failing because of the amount of power it currently has. Citizens across virtually all member states are in some way revolting against either the austerity pushed by the EU agenda or other domestic issues which they no longer can influence. Are the EU listening? No, their only answer is to push for more integration. They will never be content until a United States of Europe with a single ruling government is formed, then our publics voice will be virtually ignored completely. We are better off out of that car crash before it happens, it is probably the number one thing which could push to massive civil unrest across member states and I really fear it could end up pitting state v state and we know how that can end up. Anyone who doesn't really believe that Germany pull all the strings in the EU is kidding themselves, you have only to look at today's meeting where the PM held a meeting with the EU president, who else had to be there?? Angela Merkel. No other heads of state just Merkel. In truth the only economic merger which would even remotely work would be the UK and Germany because we are the only country in the EU block who could match up to the output etc. I've said it before, all that is needed is a good relationship sharing security benefits such as criminal intelligence and a free trade deal which would benefit both the UK and the EU. We do not need to entangle political integration with this simple trading relationship, it will never work.

Our potential benefits after leaving will be that any political decision can be based on our own countries national interest without for instance having to tiptoe around the countries who benefit from something different, maybe because of cultural or geographical differences. If we secure a good trading relationship with the EU (hopefully a free trade deal) which mus not include freedom of movement. I'm certainly not saying pull up the drawbridge like some are suggesting. We just need to establish where we have skill gaps be-it nurses, scientists, labourers, how many people we may need to bring into the country from around the world and not just the EU. But we need to stop uncontrolled numbers from entering the country. It must be for the good of the country, otherwise our national infrastructure (housing, NHS, welfare, schools) will be stretched beyond capacity as it is now. I'm not pointing at migrants as the only reason but they do play a part in stretching our capacity to cope. Obviously other factors need to be looked at such as government investment and policy. I'm just trying to provide a balanced view and not point the finger at single issues, that cannot be the answer.

We can also adopt trade deals to benefit our country which wouldn't have been possible whilst part of the EU because of their restrictions on such deals. We will see a better share of the global market this way and open up new opportunities. People may say that most of our exports etc are to the EU, well of course this is true because we face restrictions on deals if it is not an EU wide agreement. We will be free of these restrictions and free to trade with a much wider scope of businesses. I can only see this as a good thing for a forward looking economy and may create new business opportunities in this country.

Another argument is our reliance on EU migrants to work in certain fields of work. This is someway giving our government an easy out rather than investing in our young people etc, giving them the skills to perform these jobs especially in manual trades. Leaving the EU should give us the opportunity to force the government to provide more opportunities and training.

I could go on and on about what I think the positives of leaving are because I honestly believe in the long term it will be the best for the UK. I didn't vote leave on a single issue, I made a conscious choice based on how I see future issues.

Our currency may take a slight hit initially but it will recover. It will only take one more financial crisis in the Eurozone and their central banks could be in serious problems. If this happens, you just watch the pound surge. We are better off out on that basis.

Investment in this region people will argue has benefited from EU membership. Well yes on that point I agree that we have seen this but at the end of the day, the money being spent is only from the money we have been sending the EU in the first place. Overall as a country we receive less than we contribute. What we need to make sure is that this investment continues post Brexit by holding our own government to account. this money will still be their, we just need to force westminster to uphold the investment up North via the ballot box.

So yes I think we have made the right decision.

 

For over 2,000 years, Europe has consisted of sovereign countries in a semi-persistent state of war and unrest. For the past 150 years or so, a selection of states on a different continent with different agendas has worked together to overcome their differences and become the most powerful trading economy on the planet.

Repeatedly trying the same thing has not worked in Europe. Perhaps trying something different will give different results so that our kids can enjoy life with the opportunities that the entire continent has to offer..

 

Inevitable
A large multinational organisation just of your shores makes decisions that will have a direct impact on you and you are not involved I those decisions. What could go wrong

 

Still down to the Electorate in the end. if only they would exercise their votes.

I have always voted in European elections, it's a pity only 20-odd percent of us ever have. You can't complain about what they do if you don't vote.

 

A Conservative government will not invest in this region as it is a safe Labour area and they have no chance of winning any seats. A Labour government will not invest in this area as it is a safe Labour area and they do not need to invest money to win the seats. Without the EU, this area would still have soil heaps and old pit workings in every village without any of the opportunities offered by the EU investment into the region.

The jobs might not be the best, or highest paid, in the world, but paid work is better for people than a life on benefits with no way out.

 

And you seriously think that OUR Government would have spent any of that money on our region?

 

You do not know that without 'OUR' money which the EU partly gave us back after taking a large slice that this area would not have been re-generated. Civil unrest would have forced the governments hand.

So on your theory, we should all vote labour out of Barnsley and vote in a Tory council so we attract investment. Lets face it tgey couldn't do much of a worse job than Labour has over the years in neglected Barnsley.

 

In fact the best position a town can be in is to be one of those places where come an election the parties have to fight for their vote. I agree Tory government reluctant to spend money in Labour heartland like Barnsley and Labour take us for granted because they know people only vote Labour.. We need to make them fight for the seats in our area. If the government think they can steal the seat away, I bet we would see some investment.. But of course the tories shut the pits and that is enough of a single issue for many Barnsley voters not to make Labour fight for us, probably one reason why Labour refused to overturn the pit closures.

 

I think the council get way too much grief from people as the way a council is funded nowadays is completely different to how it used to be. Alot of councils relied on EU subsidies for investment, not just Barnsley. Will brexit change this, no. It will make things worse IMO.

 

That

That's what I am saying about making sure we start holding our own politicians to account. But those EU subsidies came from our payments to the EU hence the money will still be there, we just need to make sure that support continues via our ballot box.

 

Given that we are £1.5t in debt and our deficit is still in the £billions, do you think the government will continue with the investments, or give tax cuts to their mates and pay down some of the national debt so they can meet their manifesto promises?

 

The national debt has risen sharply since this shower got elected, year on year despite Austerity measures, brexit will be the excuse for it's continual rise. Austerity measures like never before to come. Divided country over brexit, government plods on unabaited.

 

The Tory (and coalition) government have a very one-dimensional view of reducing debt. To them, they must reduce spending (except on vanity projects like HS2) to the bare minimum. Whereas, anyone that has actually been in debt will tell you that while you can (and should) cut back the waste, you also need to maximize income. Tax raises might have hurt us all, but it would probably have left the country in a much better financial state than it is now.

 

Whilst I have always had an interest in railways (having cycled all round South Yorkshire in the early 70s looking for railway locations etc), I completely fail to see the logic of HS2. I think it's the biggest waste of money in the history of the UK. The money being lavished on it would be far better spent upgrading and repairing the current rail network which has been allowed to fall into a right sorry state by successive governments both right and left.

 

not just his,but many more,thats why the vote was to leave.