MegaSack DRAW - 6pm Christmas Eve - LIVE on our YouTube Channel
MOAR HERRING!
Have I missed anything?
Yes you missed out the word ‘RED-’
Unelected bureaucrats….this has always been a nonsense throwaway tagline to get the gammons frothing. We have always had elected officials as our representatives in the EU:
Just to add to this, the "unelected bureaucrats" this slur refers to are the EU equivalent of Parliament's Civil Service, only working for 28 27 countries rather than just one. There are ~33,000 "unelected bureaucrats" in the EU Commission; by way of comparison, the UK alone employs over 400,000.
Now, about that red tape...
Also, you may say that this place is an anti-Brexit echo chamber, but equally so are the areas of the web that are pro-brexit, there is a motorbike forum that I pretty much no longer post on, as the pro-brexit ramblings/send them home/I'm not racist but "darkies" rhetoric makes me reconsider whether I even want to be in the virtual company of those kinds of people.
Just to add to this, the “unelected bureaucrats” this slur refers to are the EU equivalent of Parliament’s Civil Service, only working for 28 27 countries rather than just one. There are ~33,000 “unelected bureaucrats” in the EU Commission; by way of comparison, the UK alone employs over 400,000.
we had to hire 20,000 just after the brexit vote alone
we need an extra 50,000 !!!!!!!! extra just to fill out all the customs declarations!
https://www.ft.com/content/3c1ae9bd-97e0-4131-b7e6-b4d0d5b8f4ff
Ah, here. Read this.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lseupr/2019/02/19/is-the-european-union-governed-by-unelected-bureaucrats/
TL;DR:
the idea that ‘the EU is governed by unelected bureaucrats” exhibits a very strong misunderstanding of how the EU is governed,
Four years ago this would have been a reasonable, understandable argument. Many things about the EU were poorly understood by the vast majority of the population at the time, myself included. Because, why would you have any reason to know? (Reason #471 why the referendum was a bloody stupid idea, one of the most popular Google searches at the time was "what is the eu?")
Anyone having discussions in public who is still asserting this today, they're doing it because they want to believe it's true. They've had four years to learn something, it's now wilful ignorance.
Pah you lot and your facts 🙂
Must admit though I'm pretty sure i've never heard an answer to the old "well what will you be able to do after brexit that the EU is currently preventing you from doing now".
Ironically dougiedogg is just as echoey, it's just that the echoes are from right at the start of brexit.
I do agree N.I will most likely remain under EU regs after the 5 year period.
We all will to some degree, but yes, you even more so that side of the sea. Now, how do we help set those regs now that we’ve fully surrendered control over them in exchange for… er… um… er…
sobriety
Also, you may say that this place is an anti-Brexit echo chamber, but equally so are the areas of the web that are pro-brexit, there is a motorbike forum that I pretty much no longer post on, as the pro-brexit ramblings/send them home/I’m not racist but “darkies” rhetoric makes me reconsider whether I even want to be in the virtual company of those kinds of people.
lol it wasn't the HUBB was it?
Ah, here. Read this.
Unfortunately that article has a number of shortcomings, rather neatly illustrated by the result of the most recent European Elections where the "elected" head of commission was overlooked because they didn't like the cut of his jib and so they appointed Von der Leyen instead.
Anyway this thread is full of bullshit. An example of which being the whole sale of the NHS Brexit amendment which was just a PR stunt by the SNP and Greens. The Trade Bill is purely a technical bill to manage the rollover of some existent deals and multilateral agreements. They love it because it makes its way onto TheyWorkforYou site and suckers the idiots, who want to believe anything negative. Then we get the disaster capitalists, paymaster crap routinely discussed as a reasonable hypothesis. It really is very funny.
An example of which being the whole sale of the NHS Brexit amendment which was just a PR stunt by the SNP and Greens.
Do you mean clause 4 proposed by a Conservative MP? (See back two pages in this thread).
The Trade Bill is purely a technical bill to manage the rollover of some existent deals and multilateral agreements.
No, it isn’t. Try again.
Shame the selling of the NHS and the lowering of food standards are prerequisites for a us trade deal. Read what the Americans have written on it
Brexit has already cost billions
It really is very funny.
You have a very strange sense of humour.
Anyway this thread is full of bullshit
Which bits specifically, other than the bit you've already been shown to have got wrong?
The fact that the hedge funds which backed Johnson and Leave are making billions out of no deal, and the flood of dark money from Russia into Tory coffers has nothing to do with anything, right?
Do you mean the clause proposed by a Conservative MP?
If I had I meant that amendement I wouldn't have described as I did would I?
No, it isn’t. Try again.
It is, you can read it here.
Unfortunately that article has a number of shortcomings, rather neatly illustrated by the result of the most recent European Elections where the “elected” head of commission was overlooked because they didn’t like the cut of his jib and so they appointed Von der Leyen instead.
... rather neatly illustrating the answer to the continual accusation over the last half a decade that it's "undemocratic" because there's "only one name on the ballot." The Council (heads of state of 27/8 countries) puts forward their agreed candidate, the Parliament (democratically elected MEPs) vote on the nominee, and if the answer is "no" they go back and nominate someone else.
You can't have it both ways, complaining that there's only one candidate and then complaining when you find out there isn't. These two things are mutually exclusive, pick one.
It is
Does it apply to new deals and arrangements?
When does it expire?
Is not just for “the rollover of some existent deals and multilateral agreements“, and attempts to limit it to such were blocked (including amendments that passed before the election, and have now been removed).
Does it apply to new deals and arrangements?
Nope see Clause 2(3)
Also,
Anyone in the UK complaining about the nomination of the EU President being undemocratic either needs to take a good look at how we got our own Prime Minister or is a monumental hypocrite.
EU president - voted for by the heads of state of 28 countries and 750 MEPs democratically elected by their respective countries.
Boris - voted for by <200,000 Tory party members whose only qualification is that they've paid £25 for the right to do so.
Nope see Clause 2(3)
I'm not re-reading it... but my recollection is that it covers any deal or arrangement with any third party that has a deal or arrangement with the EU... so no new countries... but the deal or arrangement can take any form... it isn't just for a "rollover" on current terms... it includes new deals and arrangements... hence calls for those that differ (and aren't a "rollover") to be published and voted on.
Cougar, I think you need to familiarize yourself with the Spitzenkandidat process.
@mefty - can you please explain this...
Unfortunately that article has a number of shortcomings, rather neatly illustrated by the result of the most recent European Elections where the “elected” head of commission was overlooked because they didn’t like the cut of his jib and so they appointed Von der Leyen instead.
From Wikipedia...
On 2 July 2019, von der Leyen was proposed by the European Council as their candidate for the office of President of the European Commission.[2][3] She was elected President by the European Parliament on 16 July, with 383 to 327 votes.[4] She will be the first woman to hold the office[106] and the first German since the Commission's first president, Walter Hallstein.
Cougar, I think you need to familiarize yourself with the Spitzenkandidat process.
Which bit is wrong?
In any case, even if I've got the process slightly out the point stands, no? You can't complain that there's only one candidate and then complain when there's another one.
PrinceJohn, I think you need to familiarize yourself with the Spitzenkandidat process.
What do you lot think about the US election and its impact on Brexit? I'm hoping a Biden win will make a no-deal less palatable, given we've well and truly pissed off Beijing?
Little to no difference. You need to stop thinking about the damage to business of No Deal being something that this government want to avoid. They don’t. What happens in the USA has no bearing on that.
Two benefits for you guys
The extra civil service jobs you were talking about, job creation.
We won't have to pay into the EU recovery fund to which even the R.O.I are going to be net contributors.
Obama's trade aims for ttip were pretty much the same as trump's brexit trade aims
Including making $$$ out of the NHS & making sure we pay American pharma the prices they charge for the latest drugs in the USA 😬
As for unelected/unelected Ursula
She got more votes than Cummings, and Johnson seems unable to do anything without big Dom's permission !
someone please throw a stick for dougiedogg to chase before he utters any more guff
So are we all happy the Trade Bill has got nothing to do with selling the NHS to the US?
The extra civil service jobs you were talking about, job creation.
So more unelected bureaucrats? I thought the vote for Brexit was for less of those?
The extra civil service jobs you were talking about, job creation.
And who do you think will be paying for that?
We won’t have to pay into the EU recovery fund to which even the R.O.I are going to be net contributors.
The recovery fund set up to provide loans and grants to help areas decimated by coronavirus? Like, y'know, disaster relief aid? Money that the way we're going we might well be needing ourselves at some point? That recovery fund? The fact that we're no longer obliged to help people who are dying is a net benefit?
Christ.
PrinceJohn, I think you need to familiarize yourself with the Spitzenkandidat process.
Can you not explain it to me please? I have time to quickly wiki things but not time to research things like that
Aside from which, I do broadly understand it, so no amount of Googling is going to tell me what mefty is specifically objecting to.
Nor, seemingly, is mefty.
NO mefty
It's all about preparing the ground for the us deal which means lowering food standards and selling the NHS as the Americans have made clear are prerequisites for a deal
The recovery fund set up to provide loans and grants to help areas decimated by coronavirus? Like, y’know, disaster relief aid? Money that the way we’re going we might well be needing ourselves at some point? That recovery fund? The fact that we’re no longer obliged to help people who are dying is a net benefit?
Yes thats the one, but I think it is aimed at economic recovery.
So more unelected bureaucrats? I thought the vote for Brexit was for less of those?
I wouldnt call AOs, EOs and Staff officers, unelected bureaucrats
someone please throw a stick for dougiedogg to chase before he utters any more guff
How rude 😀
It’s all about preparing the ground for the us deal which means lowering food standards and selling the NHS as the Americans have made clear are prerequisites for a deal
ROFL
Aside from which, I do broadly understand it, so no amount of Googling is going to tell me what mefty is specifically objecting to.
You don't, could you tell me which party Von der Leyen was the Spitzenkandidat for.
My bet is within five years there is an independent Scotland and a united Ireland both in the eu
England will be an impoverished failed state
So are we all happy the Trade Bill has got nothing to do with selling the NHS to the US?
They're not going to write into the deal YOU MUST SELL US THE NHS!
The deal will specify (as TTIP tried to do) that all services (and they will mean ALL) offered by the NHS must be opened up to competitve tender.
To find out what happens then, have a look what happened with Virgin healthcare, then multiply that by a squillion, as every single appointment or service interaction within our health system is then open to objections by corporate lawyers with bottomless pockets
Welcome to the post-Brexit future of the NHS
From Euronews
"It’s the first time the EU borrows money to give it as grants to countries. So it's really a game-changer in terms of how this monetary union, how this European Union works."
https://www.euronews.com/2020/07/21/eu-summit-deadlock-see-talks-stretch-into-sunday
I dont like the EU acting as a state, which is part of the reason I wanted out
My bet is within five years there is an independent Scotland and a united Ireland both in the eu
England will be an impoverished failed state
I agree with the first statement Uncle Jezza, but not the second.
England won't be a failed state, it will be a rogue state. A legally opaque, totally deregulated tax haven off the shores of Europe which has shredded workers' rights and environmental and food standards in order to undercut all its neighbours in a race to the bottom.
That's always been the plan. The EU is fully aware of this, which is why they won't even contemplate any compromise on signing up to EU standards as a prerequisite for any deal
I hear that echo again
Don't worry. The echo will be replaced with an exasperated 'we told you so' in 6 months time
I dont like the EU acting as a state, which is part of the reason I wanted out
So it shouldn't act to help those hit hardest by covid?
Considering how badly UK has handled crisis we'd probably be able to apply for loads of funding !
https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-council-calls-government-provide-4332686
I hear that echo again
Perhaps Dougie , lest it becomes an echo you could explain why Johnson chosen to move commitments on enviro & food standards from legally binding WA to political declaration ?
(There might be some clues if you check the USA trade demands those pesky Russians leaked)
You don’t, could you tell me which party Von der Leyen was the Spitzenkandidat for.
As I understood it the Spitzenkandidat process isn't mandatory. It was only ever used in 2014 and lots of people thought it unfair. Because of this, in 2019 the lead candidate wasn't an automatic shoe-in like Junker was and it turned out to be a bit complicated.
A meringue?
Perhaps Dougie , lest it becomes an echo you could explain why Johnson chosen to move commitments on enviro & food standards from legally binding WA to political declaration ?
(There might be some clues if you check the USA trade demands those pesky Russians leaked)
While you're at it, you could also have a think why so many Tory MPs blocked an amendment that would have kept the 'wonderful and cherished'* NHS off of the negotiating table when it comes to future trade fistings negotiations.
*Other meaningless blandishments are available.
And why he also removed committment on workers rights?
I think Mefty's point (as regards the NHS) is that the bill just passed isn't about a USA FTA... because as regards FTAs, it's for countries we currently have an FTA with. But we won't be constricting the USA with anything as restrictive (for them) as an FTA... it'll be other deals and arrangements... which this bill does allow the government to sign up to, without further, er, hindrance, from MPs or members of any of our other elected bodies for that matter.
I hear that echo again
Was that echo "post Brexit the UK will be successful, just not in a way that benefits you or me"... because if so, I'd like to add to that echo. Brexit and the deregulation it will enable will make some people very rich, and some of them will even stay in the UK where we can tax them. But it will trap and disadvantage many more... and those parts of the UK given a way out of that are more and more likely to take that option (sadly for those of us that want the UK to stay together).
Hmmm so one of the specific benefits of Brexit is the state paying people to do jobs that wouldn't have been necessary had we stayed in the EU. Makes no sense to me.
Makes no sense to me.
It never did to anyone if they spent more than 30 seconds thinking about it.
Well quite.
At the point where we're creating jobs for the sake of creating jobs, we might as well just give people free money. But the brexies really don't like us doing that either.
"Makes no sense"
It never did mate.
I still cannot fathom the stupidity of it. We've gone from Norway+ to No-Deal. It's incredible.
I agree Scotland will probably go and I'm actively hoping they will as I'll claim ancestry and regain EU citizenship.
As for "echo chamber,"
If you're in a room with a dozen people, you're asserting that the carpet is grey and everyone else is telling you it's green, how long will it take before you consider the notion that it might be you who is colour blind?
I dont like the EU acting as a state, which is part of the reason I wanted out
You mean you don't like the idea of helping people. Imagine co-operating internationally to help solve an international crisis. Sickening.
As a Scot based up here, my additional fear is I dependence following Brexit. Again, the argument is based on emotion over rationality with a load of unidentifiable 'benefits'. I look at the pain, uncertainty and cost of the EU break up and fear the possibility of breaking apart something far more tightly integrated...
I think you're right about the emotion part holmesy but the arguments are sort of different - because Scotland really doesn't have sovereignty unlike the UK which really does, and Scottish independence isn't all about not liking people who talk funny with different coloured skin.
There would definitely be a lot of hassle in leaving though.
And why he also removed committment on workers rights?
Ah, it was a bargaining tool, you see.
Even if you think brexit is a great idea; even if you hate the EU for whatever bullshit reasons you've been told about unelected bureaucrats / a state army / Turkey joining / bendy bananas / telling us what to do; even if you're a closet (or not-so-closet) racist; even if blue passports freedom democracy sovereignty no deal is better than a bad deal red white and blue brexit leave means leave two world wars and one world cup doo dah; blah blah frikkin' blah;
SURELY anyone with a jot of sense that's been paying the blindest bit of attention for the last four years can see that what you've been sold is not what you've bought?
You've seen a market trader selling brown-box laptops, got it home and opened it to find two breeze blocks and a dead cat. It's a con, a heist, a scam, a swindle. You've been lied to, distracted, misdirected and manipulated at every turn. Rich people have been pulling your strings from the start because they stand to get exponentially richer.
Why are you still defending this? Why are you still supporting it? Why aren't you angry about it? If I were you I would be absolutely incandescent at this point. You've been sold a pup, it stinks to high heaven, and it is blindingly obvious.
Are you that desperate for the promises to be true that you cannot, just cannot countenance the notion that you've been swindled?
Grum - yeah I just cannot imagine the cost of breaking apart and duplicating the beaurocracy .
As someone who is no fan of Boris et al it also seems a bit harsh on most of rUM as it sort of abandons them to be governed by the Tory goons
anyway I shouldn't hijack the thread!
XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION
77. Given the Union and the United Kingdom's geographic proximity and economic
interdependence, the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition,
encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field. The precise nature of
commitments should be commensurate with the scope and depth of the future relationship
and the economic connectedness of the Parties. These commitments should prevent
distortions of trade and unfair competitive advantages. To that end, the Parties should
uphold the common high standards applicable in the Union and the United Kingdom at the
end of the transition period in the areas of state aid, competition, social and employment
standards, environment, climate change, and relevant tax matters.
Is this what you meant Kimbers? This is from the political declaration from which the trade agreement will be drawn.
It was in the legally binding WA when May was PM, and was shifted into the PD by Johnson, so that, as Kimbers suggested, it can be a 'bargaining chip' for a FTA... or far more likely, dropped like a stone if no FTA [hint... that's always looked like PlanA not PlanB for the current government]. Feel that your rights are safe after this year? Really? Actually, yours might prove to be safer over that side of the sea... we'll see..
You mean you don’t like the idea of helping people. Imagine co-operating internationally to help solve an international crisis. Sickening
Grum, that aid is not international it is within the EU, the UK has a great history of providing aid internationally irrespective of the EU. The EU now acts as a state which is the reason some want to leave, hence the idea of sovereignty.
Useful tool for you... showing how EU bodies and member states (there is a filter to look at them in isolation rather than combined, use it if the distinction is so important to you) provide aid to others:
https://euaidexplorer.ec.europa.eu/content/explore/recipients_en
The EU now acts as a state which is the reason some want to leave, hence the idea of sovereignty.
Which shared areas did you object to, and in what ways are you looking forward to the UK acting differently alone (or indeed the EU acting without the UK having a say)?
And why wouldn't it work as a bargaining chip? What has everyone here so convinced that Boris is aiming for a WTO style no deal brexit? What would that achieve?
The UK has never been a fully committed member of the EU, the EU was only ever meant to be a trade deal, why is doing a deal with America such a bad thing? Do people on here really think that the population of the UK would willingly see an end to the NHS?
I know STW folk think the rest of the populace are morons, but that's not really the case.
the EU was only ever meant to be a trade deal
Untrue.
Still, there are benefits to having a trade deal... you tell us why we're going to end up without one... by design, or by failure? We were told that leaving the EU would result in a new deal... what are your thoughts on us not getting one... or getting a bare bones one?
Is this what you meant Kimbers? This is from the political declaration from which the trade agreement will be drawn.
Dougie you do know that (unlike the WA) the declaration has no legal weight at all?
Which is why Johnson moved it from wa to pd
I'm sure you trust the word of Boris, 'fired twice for lying, string of mistresses & illegitimate kids, won't ask for an extension, won't prorogue parliament, no customs border in Irish sea, lie in front of Heathrow bulldozers' Johnson
But the rest of us not so easily fooled
Most people wouldn't know sovereignty if it hit them in the face. In any case, sovereignty will be negatively impacted in either a deal or no deal situation:
No Deal: Crashing out will cause widespread and protracted economic damage. It will lessen our presence on the world stage. We will be vulnerable and have to accept poor quality trade deals compared to the ones which the EU brokered as 28 states and the largest, most affluent market in history.
Deal: We will have to accept EU policy without having a say.
The best situation was remaining within the EU and using our influence. If you want to talk about sovereignty, you're really talking about state power. Countries like Germany, China, France, etc. have sovereignty, because they are wealthy and powerful states. By damaging our economy, removing ourselves from an influential position as one of the 'big three' of the largest and most powerful trading bloc in history, I don't see how that will grant us more sovereignty. In any case, people moaning about this in a country with a dysfunctional FPTP, unelected HoL and Head of State that is hereditary is kinda barking up the wrong tree?
I know STW folk think the rest of the populace are morons, but that’s not really the case.
One small example:
In a survey of 1,000 people, weighted to represent the nation’s demographic profile in terms of age, gender, ethnicity and other factors, respondents claimed that, on average, 15 per cent of the UK population are EU immigrants. That would be 10.5m people. The correct figure is 3.5m. Those who intend to vote Leave in the referendum put the figure at 20 per cent. ‘Remainers’ put the figure at 10 per cent.
84 per cent of people think the UK is in the top three contributors to the EU budget. 23 per cent think it is the single biggest. In fact the UK is in fourth place, behind Germany, which pays 21 per cent, France (16 per cent) and Italy (12 per cent). The UK pays 11 per cent.
The EU spends 6 per cent of its budget on administration. The average guess was 27 per cent. Were this the case, the spend would be £30bn a year, instead of around £6bn.
Grum, that aid is not international it is within the EU
... which is International by definition. The word you're looking for here is "global."
the UK has a great history of providing aid internationally irrespective of the EU.
So you're saying you're happy to provide International aid, your objection is in giving it to a central body who will pool resources and coordinate efforts to direct it where it's most needed?
Eg,
The UK giving a billion quid to Italy, absolutely fine.
The UK giving a billion quid to the EU to give Italy, an outrageous notion, we must get out immediately.
The EU now acts as a state which is the reason some want to leave
I really don't know what "acts like a state" is supposed to mean.
hence the idea of sovereignty.
And herein lieth one of the root causes.
The "idea" of sovereignty.
Not, somewhat tellingly, the "definition" of sovereignty.
And why wouldn’t it work as a bargaining chip? What has everyone here so convinced that Boris is aiming for a WTO style no deal brexit?
Well, refusing to align with SM regs whilst still demanding access to SM would be a good clue
Also
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-deal-uk-giving-up-hope-eu-a4505131.html
Which shared areas did you object to, and in what ways are you looking forward to the UK acting differently alone (or indeed the EU acting without the UK having a say)?
I see from that that we "donate" nearly as much as the EU commission and are the 3rd largest donor. Maybe we can decide where that money goes ourselves as opposed to it being decided by a council of member states?
Untrue.
yes it evolved into more
What has everyone here so convinced that Boris is aiming for a WTO style no deal brexit?
Because.
That.
Is.
What.
Is.
Going.
To.
Happen.
His current angle is an "Australia style deal." Australia does not have a trade deal with the EU. They've been negotiating one - for over two years and counting now. This is simply "no deal" in a cork-dangling hat and Craghoppers. At the risk of repeating myself: you are being manipulated.
What would that achieve?
It'd make a lot of disaster capitalists even more obscenely rich for starters. I mean, Rees-Mogg's father literally wrote the book on this.
What has everyone here so convinced that Boris is aiming for a WTO style no deal brexit? What would that achieve?
you know the theories of how Disaster Capitalism works, right?
Ask Jacob Rees-Mogg. His dads a master. A large majority of the present cabinet have serious form on this front
The reason you’re not getting this, as are the vast majority of Brexit supporters, is that you’re still harbouring the quaint illusion that, in the long term, any of this lot give a flying **** what happens to the UK Economy.
They really couldn’t care less. Their motive is pure, naked greed and financial self-interest. The interests of the ‘little people’ don’t even figure in proceedings
yes it evolved into more
It was always more.
But still, we were told by Vote Leave that when we leave the EU we would do so with a replacement Trade Deal that gave us full access to a "free trade zone" that included the EU and the other European countries... one that stretches from Iceland to Turkey and to the Russian border. What are you thoughts on the notion, reported in the Telegraph, that the Vote Leave government is giving up on a new deal? Ignore those of us that suspect that they never wanted one... just let us know what you would think of that not happening? Would you not mind? Would you feel let down? Or would you look to blame those not part of the Vote Leave team?
The best situation was remaining within the EU and using our influence
As 6th largest GDP why do we lose influence outside of the EU?
Countries like Germany, China, France, etc. have sovereignty, because they are wealthy and powerful states
As is the UK
Yeah and UK have been a driving force on its evolution
As 6th largest GDP why do we lose influence outside of the EU?
Well as we're about 10x smaller we are about 10x less influential?
Look how easily Johnson caved to Varadkar on Irish Sea customs border!
Ireland got to dictate terms they'd wanted from day 1 & Johnson folded like a wet napkin !
They really couldn’t care less. Their motive is pure, naked greed and financial self-interest. The interests of the ‘little people’ don’t even figure in proceedings
Except during election time?
I don't understand the sustainable nature of "disaster capitalism" and why any party would base policy on it, even one with a Moog in it. The financial crash ended labour, why would it be any different for the current party?
It isn't sustainable. And, again, you think they are acting for the country, or even the party... they are not. Vote Leave have already 'ended' the Conservative party... or at least hollowed it out and made it their own.
Well as we’re about 10x smaller we are about 10x less influential?
Look how easily Johnson caved to Varadkar on Irish Sea customs border
Surely that had as much to do with the GFA as anything?
Maybe we can decide where that money goes ourselves as opposed to it being decided by a council of member states?
You genuinely don't see a benefit to coordinating aid?
We decide unilaterally to support, to continue my previous example, Italy as they are badly hit. So do a dozen other countries. Result, whoever is second most badly hit gets shit. Collating it into a central point means it can go out in a fairer distribution.
Besides, who are we to make that decision? We get to pick and choose based on, what, who's got the nicest holiday lets? Do you make donations to charity with a little note dictating that they can only spend it on research and not new office chairs?
As 6th largest GDP why do we lose influence outside of the EU?
We were the fifth largest three years ago. We're heading for 7th with India snapping at our heels.
Are we learning yet?
