Forum menu
It's narcissism - pure and simple - and a disgrace. Far worse than the depths that Alex Salmond stooped to, which is some hurdle to cross.
The £2.4bn in extra payments to the EU budget which Leave are speaking of today is just a small part of the £10's of billions whuch are coming. Even the £20bn Vote Leave ate speaking of is a very low estimate. I see Umana is saying we have a veto over budget increases so lets here from Labour and Conservatives that they will [b]100% guaranty to veto any and all EU budget increase[/b]
The additional money above is already required to fund the migrant mismanagement fiasco the EU faces, the Government is well aware of this as is the EU the payment deamnd is just being pushed till after the Referendum. We will not veto this payment demand
Careful, you will be accusing Remain of scaremongering next.
The additional money above is already required to fund the migrant mismanagement fiasco the EU faces,
Remind me again, was the UK one of the instrumental countries in some of the military action down there that triggered the migrant crisis?
So Jambas on this latest bit of hyperbole, please help us out.
If, as you say, there is going to be an increase in the money paid into the EU budget, how does that work? Who approves this? Can the budget and it's ceilings be approved without agreement of all member states?
This is another important issue - you have raised it in the vital category like Greece - so straight answers would be appreciated if not expected.
If anyone's got access to a telly, put on BBC News 24 now. There's a hilarious pitch-forks at the ready 'debate' going on about the EU on the Victoria Darbyshire show. The idiots are taking over.
Quite glad I moved all my SIPP investments out of UK stocks last week, pound has fallen again on last poll...
Shame I didn't move my ISAs (yet).
The £2.4bn in extra payments to the EU budget which Leave are speaking of today is just a small part of the £10's of billions whuch are coming. Even the £20bn Vote Leave ate speaking of is a very low
#jambyfact
you are just making things up now and blatantly so.
he has already answered that 🙄If, as you say, there is going to be an increase in the money paid into the EU budget, how does that work? Who approves this? Can the budget and it's ceilings be approved without agreement of all member states?This is another important issue - you have raised it in the vital category like Greece - so straight answers would be appreciated if not expected.
Well done Jamby you made me and THM be on the same side, your skills are literally world-class
Chapeau.
I'm not going to react to polls anymore, Footflaps. It's too close to call and shifting investments on the basis of polls is like shifting form red to black in roulette. The people with extreme views know where they stand and tell the poll people. UKIP scored exactly what the polls predicted in the last elections. It's the middle ground that the polls fail on. In the last election they put Labour and Conservative neck and neck but the Conservatives had a clear win.
Jamby and the Leavers are just playing "think of a number" now. Heaven knows what the impact that on future political discussion in the country will be if this strategy proves successful.
Still undecided here however the more I see of Boris and Gove the more I'm inclined to vote stay.
[i]UKIP scored exactly what the polls predicted in the last elections. It's the middle ground that the polls fail on. In the last election they put Labour and Conservative neck and neck but the Conservatives had a clear win. [/i]
No, as pointed out previously it's those that give an opinion and then don't vote that 'upsets' the polls' predictions.
Good to see this hasn't gone the usual route of extreme Googling for facts and people calling each other racist while claiming not to read each others posts.
I see this being close, the referendum that is but back in the UK from Thursday for a week so would be good to get the feel for what people are thinking.
Good to see this hasn't gone the usual route of extreme Googling for facts
Facts? that's so [i]vieux jeu, mon ami[/i]. We're in post-truth politics now. Just think of a number(*), double it, and repeat until people who don't know any better believe it's true.
(*) this number could be an amount of money, a number of rapists, anything you like!!
back in the UK from Thursday for a week so would be good to get the feel for what people are thinking.
As a summary, every single problem we have is the fault of immigrants. Now that they are allowed to entertain and express their darker instincts and blame a convenient scapegoat, the general pubic is suddenly massively concerned about the shortage of school places, under-funding of the NHS, falling wages, lack of social housing and other public services which they weren't very interested in a year ago when they voted for a tory government. After we vote to leave, we can look forward to Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and IDS, ushering in a new era of social justice and responsibility where the money saved from EU wastefulness will be spent on schools, hospitals, council houses. They'll probably create a new bank holiday too to celebrate our independence from the evil empire.
Press Conference at DCS a successful Stratford upon Avon based company today. As Boris said
[b]Cold hard facts. Cold hard cash[/b]
The EU want us in so we can pay the bills, they want their goods and services to have priority for a customer, the UK, who buys far more than we sell. There are direct powers in the Treaty which override any "opt outs" when it comes to the EU budget. As we have seen Cameron and Osbourne said they wouldn't pay the last budget demand (or as I call it the coke and hookers calculation) and of course we had to pay, in full. Ditto the stability fund demand where we where obliged to put in a further £ billion. The EU project stands at a financial precipice and they will require hundreds of bilions if they are to try and save it - for those that care they can read the drafts of the proposed €700bn rescue fund and the terms and conditons which require payment on demand with no ability to challenge. When the S hits the fan we will have to pay.
One last chance since you raise the stability fund
Have we contributed to the fund?
On what grounds did we participate in supporting Greece, if at all?
Was it collateralised?
Was it paid back in full?
Four very simple questions with equally simple answers. We will leave what happened in terms of legislation for another time.
We can read the documentation and the role of non EZ members is clear.
As with all this debate it is really a minefield in regard to reading the information and looking at threads on the net like this one, reading the heavily biased newspapers toward one way or the other depending on who the paper owner favours in out for there own self need. Then the general media as a whole one writer telling you this is a good idea and then another telling you its wrong because no doubt they have some vested interest in staying in (or out) Even down to some guy owning the local chip shop who serves 200 Polish workers a day with fish and chips and will be worried his profits will go down if no more Polish people are able to come from the local industrial estate and line his pockets.
Everyone seems to have a vested interest and the more sinister side is they will all try and brainwash you into why you should vote the way they want. Think why David Cameron wants you to vote the way he wants... there will be a vested interest for his family, close friends and party members he favours, as well as his own selfish reason! I would stake anything you like on that it will be down to 'money' in one way, shape. or form for him and the his ilk
Why can't people just vote on things with there own mind and judgement and also on own experiences. Mine is simple I don't even listen to a word of what anyone wants me to hear or see in this debate my mind was made up over the years of living where I do and what I see and hear and experience in real life. I;m not interested the David Cameron take on it or The Daily Mail and the Sun for that... all biased with a vested interest on it. Vote from your own experience in life not the elites experience or someone that has no baring on your life at all.
Three very simple questions with equally simple answers,
You haven't really got the hang of this game, have you THM?
😀
On the contrary, it's important to repeat the fact that the BSers can't answer simple questions. It's very telling that every question has been bypassed so far despite the fact that they relate to issues that they deem important.
This is a campaign based on deceit and blatant lies. They are at it again today since they have no shame.
But another 😀 anyway
Has the 'un-democratic' EU been discussed yet?
People complain about the EU being undemocratic, but we do still vote for EU MPs, so is there some constitutional objection or what?
molgrips - MemberHas the 'un-democratic' EU been discussed yet?
it pops up ever other page i reckon.
it's really quite annoying, all of a sudden, lots of people are desperately keen on 'democracy', but come the next GE, the same people won't even mention our unjustifiable FPTP system, or the house of lords, or the monarchy, etc.
teamhurtmore - Member
One last chance since you raise the stability fundHave we contributed to the fund?
On what grounds did we participate in supporting Greece, if at all?
Was it collateralised?
Was it paid back in full?
Sooner or later you will have to contribute to the fund whether you like it or not coz that is the game of the EU bureaucrats. Although they have not demand all EU members to contribute at this stage they are merely playing the waiting game as the biggest fish (you lot) is not in the net yet ... still swimming around the net. The big fish needs to be lured into the net slowly. Once the big fish (UK) is in the net it will be too late to wiggle out of the net. It's time to dissect the fish, cutting of the fins, to make sure it will never swim again. As the moment the EU will try to sweep the matter under the carpet or at least keep it as quiet as possible with their intention.
Obvious is obvious ... I can see them coming to be honest.
Good to see this hasn't gone the usual route of extreme Googling for facts
I love the fact [ see what I did there] we have reached a point where folk are mocked for having views based on actual verifiable claims termed facts.
the UK, who buys far more than we sell.
about 50% of our trade/GDP about 4 % of theirs - Well done for doing spin rather than outright BS though. they can lose all our trade we cannot lose theirs. Anyone who can do maths or works in finance can tell you that.
There are direct powers in the Treaty which override any "opt outs" when it comes to the EU budget. As we have seen Cameron and Osbourne said they wouldn't pay the last budget demand (or as I call it the coke and hookers calculation) and of course we had to pay, in full.
That is ****ing disgusting you mean they applied the rules we had signed up to and presented us with the bill.... then the bullying bastards actually made us pay it all and in full... I wish they were inept and just ignored the fact we did not pay....I am sure you would admire them if they did this - this is the beauty of jamby land whatever way the facts go its the EU who get the blame.
Ditto the stability fund demand where we where obliged to put in a further £ billion. The EU project stands at a financial precipice and they will require hundreds of bilions if they are to try and save it -
You did not even get the name correct never mind the sum
We are not even a member of it 🙄
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Financial_Stability_Facility
which also states
As part of the second bailout for Greece, under a retroactive Collective action clause, 100% of the Greek-jurisdiction bonds were shifted to the EFSF, amounting to €164 billion (130bn new package plus 34.4bn remaining from Greek Loan Facility) throughout 2014.[
And we are not a member of this
Back to you to ignore the facts and rant about something else and get it all wrong.
But to save Molgrips reading back:
The Council decides what the parliament debates and votes on. If the parliament votes the way the council wants then the Council agrees and the law is passed. If the parliament decides something the Council doesn't like the Council can block it. Call that democracy if you wish, I call it sham or puppet democracy.
I can see them coming to be honest.
Anything else in that crystal ball of yours?....
mrlebowski - Member
I can see them coming to be honest.
Anything else in that crystal ball of yours?....
Yes, the EU is playing a game of slowly slowly catchy monkey. Guess who is the monkey.
If the parliament decides something the Council doesn't like the Council can block it.
Do they do that?
Anything else in that crystal ball of yours?....
Only that if my balls were crystal you would hear me coming...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36456277
[b]Cold hard lies. Bare faced cheek[/b]
The Council decides what the parliament debates and votes on. If the parliament votes the way the council wants then the Council agrees and the law is passed. If the parliament decides something the Council doesn't like the Council can block it. Call that democracy if you wish, I call it sham or puppet democracy.
Will anyone ever get anything correct?
Commissioners propose legislation. To become law it needs to be passed by both the MEPS and the council of ministers a process termed co-decisions. the l;ter being the heads of state or the finance minister or whomever depending on the issue.
The council of ministers gets votes based on population size[simple majority] with some areas of veto where it needs to be unanimous.
If the council wants some legislation the MEPS can block it but you did not mention this aspect did you
one sides, misleading and false account of the democracy
In the uk we need the passing of the elected commons and the unelected lords for a bill to be passed then signed by an unelected head of state.
I could type an equally misleading description of that "sham democracy"
Yes, Molgrips. You'll find examples of council members using their veto to block things, the parliament voting against things and the Council going its own merry way even when the parliament wants soemthing else. Sometimes the European Court steps in to sort out the mess:
[url= http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2015/12/16/bisphenol-a-phtalates-pesticides-bruxelles-condamnee-pour-son-inaction_4833090_3244.html ]Bispehnol A: Council found guilty by court[/url]
Edit to add a concrete example of how the democratic process doesn't work:
Poland vetoes any attempt to restart trade with Russia. Russia is a major buyer of European milk products. Reduced demand for milk leads to a fall in the milk price. Milk farmers throughout Europe are in financial difficulty. As a milk farmer you can lobby your Euro MP, who is absolutely powerless in this situation.
Edit for Junkyard. You've just stated the same as me in different words.
EDIT No you got how laws were proposed incorrect, you did not say both chambers needed to pass laws - you sad one lot "block" and you accused the council of "choosing" what they wanted to pass. Your language was deliberately misleading and you called it a "sham" its not. Unless the UK is a sham as well - is it ?
The process does work they have the right to veto and they exercise it- what you want to discuss is whether this is fair or not.
the process may be flawed - what democracy is not?- but its not inherently antidemocratic to listen to Polish concerns. Do you think the UK wants to give up its right to veto at the EU or in the UN security council? the later of which is far more anti democratic
I thought Russia boycotted trade with the EU in response to sanctions?
[url= http://neoskills.com/Le-conseil-europeen-ignore-le-vote.html?lang=fr ]An example of the European Council ignoring an almost unanimous parliamnt vote.[/url]
10 years ago
Please stop using such misleading emotive language. Its not ignoring anything its giving its view on the same issue which is what they are there to do. Two chambers disagree is the factual version of that. Do you want examples of the unelected lords ignoring the house of commons ? sometimes even on manifesto pledges? Shall I ?
Please strop posting French language links as you know its a minority language here.
He is correct it does happen but that is what checks and balances are for. if they never operated then we may be able to claim its just a rubber stamping process. When we can find examples of them disagreeing then we know it functions as designed
You can argue about the design if you like but it is doing what it say s on the tin
The GPA (surrogate mothers I think) debate is current, Lifer, and once again the council is overriding the parliament.
its not overriding its disagreeing with which is how the democracy works
you are just explaining how it works and using crap emotive descriptive words for the process
To get a law you need the ascent of both
When you don't it is not overriding it is giving its view- would you prefer it just always agreed with them on everything - is this somehow more democratic - seems t me its just rubber stamping
Please stop using such misleading emotive language
You're pulling my leg, right? Pot, kettle, black and all that.
You've accused me of getting my facts wrong (I'm being generous there) and when I prove I'm stating accurately how the system works you try to devalue what I say by accusing me of using emotive language.
Why not just admit I'm right and my examples prove it, Junkyard?
the process may be flawed - what democracy is not?- but its not inherently antidemocratic
This sounds fair....
its not inherently antidemocratic]null
In the same way as an atheist isn't necessarily anti-religion. But isn't religious either.
I'm not claiming Europe is anti-democratic (That's Le Pen and Farage). However, if you read through how decisions are made in the EU it's very hard to conclude it's democratic. You don't need to be able to read French to count how many times the word "democratic" or "democracy" appear [url= http://www.touteleurope.eu/l-union-europeenne/le-processus-decisionnel/synthese/le-processus-de-decision-dans-l-ue.html ]in the explanation[/url]. They don't, it's not a democratic process, it's a "decision making process".
The IFS has also taken objection to Gove [s]lying through his arse [/s] miss-representing its figures last week
http://www.ifs.org.uk/about/blog/346
NHS
Michael Gove claimed on Friday that the IFS had said that leaving the EU would free up £8 billion to spend on the NHS. We have not said that. We have looked carefully at the likely public finance implications. We conclude that the net UK contribution to the EU over the next few years is indeed likely to be about £8 billion a year, £8 billion which would become available for other things were we to leave. However we also point out that even a small negative effect of just 0.6% on national income from leaving the EU would damage the public finances by more than that £8 billion. There is virtual unanimity among economic forecasters that the negative economic effect of leaving the EU would be greater than that. That is why we conclude that leaving the EU would not, as Michael Gove claims we said, leave more money to spend on the NHS. Rather it would leave us spending less on public services, or taxing more, or borrowing more.
Please strop posting French language links as you know its a minority language here.
And that's the way some of us want to keep it!
The IFS has also taken objection to Gove [s]lying through his arse[/s] miss-representing its figures last week
Yeah, but the point is that he said it, people believed it, and only anal Google-dweebs are concerned with actually checking the facts.
We are reduced to a situation where public debate on an important issue is reduced to a level below the most inane internet forum, where anybody can say anything and readers select the most entertaining items to serve as "facts".