Voted Brexit party?

You’re either a very bad troll or ‘kin moron

I think that’s more than just bureaucracy though Chewkw. Unless you live in a utopia, you need to have that admin chain behind your government structure. Someone, some group, has to do the turning of strategic direction into usable actions.

The problem is when that tail starts wagging the dog, when admin becomes the reason for admin. That’s when it gets out of control.

I just checked the dictionary definition of the word and yes, one of the definitions does say pretty much what you say: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/bureaucracy. Wikipedia (sorry) does give a slightly more tempered version though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracy

Historically, a bureaucracy was a government administration managed by departments staffed with non-elected officials.

I think we, as a country’s electorate, should of course hold our politicians to account for things that extend bureaucracy more than is required to function well. But claiming that bureaucracy in itself is bad goes against the very structure of a government.

the cycle now, for me, is to anti-bureaucracy

You do realise, don’t you, that centralising “bureaucracy” reduces it? You can’t really be that daft naive?

If you have 28 countries that, oh I don’t know, need to control the level of lead in paint say, does it make more sense to have one department doing that or 28 all duplicating effort? If you work at a company that has multiple sites you don’t have Accounts and HR departments at each one, you have it all centralised. It’s simpler, considerably cheaper, and more effective.

You said yourself, we’re a nation of bureaucrats. The EU employs something like 45,000 people, 25,000 of which are the EU Council. This sounds a lot, but for comparison Birmingham City Council alone employs 33,000 people. The UK Civil Service is 332,800 people – ten times the EU’s equivalent. And you want to move more admin from the EU to the UK? You’ve thought about this, haven’t you.

If we leave the EU, we’ll have so much red tape to deal with it’ll look like a bomb went off in Hallmark. For your deity of choice’s sake, don’t whatever you do look at what WTO involves.

Keep it simple Cougar, you need it on the level of “EU good, Brexit bad”.

Non-sequitur coming in three….two…one…

I was going to write a long-ish reply about how this is a bit of an echo chamber and so our resident brexiteers are probably trolls looking to get a rise but then i remembered i live in Spain. I’m off to take the dog to the beach, don’t feed the trolls anything too disagreeable 😉

That’s a low bar to reach

Yet here we all are waiting to see who it is going to be.

pretends to be a man of the common people

I personally he’s very well aligned with the common people or perhaps it is he can align them with him, wether he is duplicitous or not I cant see how he is any worse of the other two who will use whatever nefarious tactic they deem fit to get the top spot.

If you are fine with that, fill your boots

I didn’t say I was fine with anything Just pointing out the march to power candidate.

How will Brexit benefit me and my family?

Unfortunately YOU and YOUR FAMILY are irrelevant in THEIR grand vision especially if your not on board.

From the looks of things, some of you are in danger of falling into a hole filled with non-sequitur and poorly-informed irrational nonsense. In that case, I strongly recommend the Killfile to preserve your sanity.

And some of us think killfile will make whats happening in the real world go away, oh dear.

personally he’s very well aligned with the common people or perhaps it is he can align them with him

I think there’s two factors at play here.

First, credit where it’s due, he can talk the talk. Doesn’t matter if what he talks is bollocks because no-one ever calls him on it, so he can make up any old nonsense that people want to hear. People like that.

Second, take a look at those “common people” who like him so much.

Unfortunately YOU and YOUR FAMILY are irrelevant in THEIR grand vision especially if your not on board.

Hang on – so these Brucie Bonus Brexie Benefits we’ve been asking about for the last three years will only be available to people who agree with it? When did that happen?

Unless of course you’re talking about Farage and his ilk. In which case, you’re quite right, YOU are indeed irrelevant to them unless YOU share THEIR grand vision of tearing down public services, doing away with human rights, moving all your money offshore, quietly getting a (red) German passport, and possibly owning a newspaper or two.

Agree that I dont believe with the killfile but @philxx1975 if you could translate what chewy is saying that’d be great!

as for farage being no worse than the others…….. hes certainly clever- hes set up a party (well a PLC) with no internal democracy whatsoever, with a completely opaque funding system with no manifesto so people can project whatever they like onto it & people are voting for him, even tho last time they voted for him it just left everyone dissapointed & the country divided

as I said before hes found his marks & he will keep milking them

so if May announces shes pulling her vote & resigns today

what do we think happens in the voting tomorrow?

will that help or hinder farage?

on the one hand many brexiteers might hope that Johnson or someone will takeover & deliver their unicorns, or will they just see it as more shambles & go full snake oil salesaman farage?

Doesn’t matter if what he talks is bollocks because no-one ever calls him on it,

Not entirely accurate. He does get called on it but just ignores it or handwaves it away normally blaming the “establishment”, “elites”, “remainers”.
Look at how channel 4 have challenged him or Marr for that matter.
The lesson he has learnt though is so long as you are brazen about it and just throw some chaff around rather than apologising you may well get away with it.
Although I suppose it depends which crowd you are appealing to.

what do we think happens in the voting tomorrow?

My guess would be any impact if minimal. Not enough time to figure out the repercussions.

will that help or hinder farage?

I would swap this for brexit supporters. At the moment the brexiteers are winning the narrative around them having the lead. Whereas if its brexiteer parties vs remain vs unknown then its a lot more messy

Scotroutes / Yourguitarhero

ON tactical antibrexit voting in Scotland “Cable was in Edinburgh on Wednesday for the final campaign push before tomorrow’s European election, with his party in an intense three-way battle between the Tories, the Lib Dems and the Scottish Greens for the sixth and final Scottish regional seat.”

AS greens were polling higher than the lib dems they might well have the best chance. Still not convinced tho.
Its looking like snp get 3, labour 1, brexit 1 and the last one between lib dem/ green / tory. I shall try to find the most up to date polling I can find to confirm this but it looks like your antibrexit tactical vote choice is between lib dems and Greens – with a possible side helping of SNP to ensure their 3rd seat.

Vote early. vote often! I want more than one vote!

So May gone by tonight according to some news sources. This whole spectacle is about to enter a very dangerous phase, as tory leadership contenders queue up to out-Farage eachother. Boris seems like a shoe-in. Time for another no confidence vote?

Roll Up Roll Up

Pick yer Poison.

Time for another no confidence vote?

Is it possible to have a NC vote on the entire party?

Is it possible to have a NC vote on the entire parliament?

If she resigned tonight, am I right in thinking it would have to wait till Friday to be discussed on the tv/radio? That (ie tomorrow) would be a weird old day wouldn’t it?

You do realise, don’t you, that centralising “bureaucracy” reduces it? You can’t really be that daft naive?

Centralisation reduces bureaucracy? 🤣
Let’s say if I were to answer this point in my 1st year Uni exam I would fail instantly.
I can say that in all my years at Uni in UK I have never taught this argument, you are the first.

I have written a long winded explanation but decided not to post it …

Anyway tomorrow will be a good day.

Stay healthy everyone.

So May gone by tonight according to some news sources.

Radio 4 are reporting that she’s point-blank refusing any meetings with anyone. One minister is quoted as saying “it’s like she’s got the furniture up against the door”

Are we all looking forward to being accidental extra’s in the absolute horror show that will be the Tory leadership contest? and the absolute nightmare its ‘winner’ will visit on us all

If we actually had an opposition party, imagine the fun they’d be having with this? Seeing their poll lead open up to Blair-esque landslide proportions? Instead of being beaten into 3rd or 4th in the EU elections behind the Lib Dems and Farage, and possibly the Greens

So May gone by tonight according to some news sources.

Woohoo! 👍 😀

Aye… Think I’ll chuck my vote in for the greens. I like em and the more they get legitimised the more their electoral gravity pulls the discourse/zeitgeist in that direction

Chewy an explanation would be great because you are talking nonsense

UK civil service 340,000 (at least 20k extra added since Brexit vite)

EU civil service 46,000

Which is more bureaucratic ?

As I said don’t agree with the killfile but when you refuse to explain how this fits with your rhetoric it points to trolling.

Aye… Think I’ll chuck my vote in for the greens. I like em and the more they get legitimised the more their electoral gravity pulls the discourse/zeitgeist in that direction

Check the polls carefully – It may be that lib dem or snp are a better bet to keep the tories out. I will laugh if they fail to get a seat in scotland and strong SNP vote is also a strong signal.

I think Greens are most likely to get a seat tho

4000 people at British steel, I do wonder if Farage will be getting their vote.

Chewy an explanation would be great because you are talking nonsense

Are you unfamiliar with his earlier work?

Better to remember the old adage: Never wrestle with a pig. You both get covered in shit, but the pig enjoys it

Look at his posts as a sort of Edinburgh fringe abstract comedy performance, and they’re quite amusing

4000 people at British steel, I do wonder if Farage will be getting their vote.

Probably. Because despite British Steels loss being the fault of the English, your typical English window licker prefers to blame others.

4000 people at British steel, I do wonder if Farage will be getting their vote.

It’ll be the EU’s fault. No explanation will be given as to why, and it defies all logic, but it just is, ok?! Shout it often enough and it becomes the truth

The gullible half-wits will lap it up and go out and vote for the **** tomorrow, en masse

Chewy an explanation would be great because you are talking nonsense

Okay I shall explain as you have asked me to.

UK civil service 340,000 (at least 20k extra added since Brexit vite)
EU civil service 46,000
Which is more bureaucratic ?

This >>> EU civil service 46,000.
You already have 340,000 and you still want to add more on top of that (directly or indirectly)?
But most importantly it is about the entire system. Not how many people you hire.

As I said don’t agree with the killfile but when you refuse to explain how this fits with your rhetoric it points to trolling.

This my response to Cougar.

If you were to argue that bureaucracy is a well-oiled machine you have a leg to stand on.
You might argue that technology (IT) reduces bureaucracy but the question of authority and power remains. In fact the technology makes the machine (bureaucrats) more powerful as they can now control the system more tightly from behind the scene. The deviation from the system norm (rules and regulations set by the bureaucrats) means you are in breach of the system norm and will be punished (assuming you are external to the system). To change the system you will have to dismantle it totally which can be difficult but not impossible. The replacement will be a system norm that might be “leaner” or but that does not mean less bureaucratic. We cannot escape the system norm (bureaucratic rules etc) but at least we can “reboot” them from time to time which is necessary.

The below is my other reply …

I think that’s more than just bureaucracy though Chewkw. Unless you live in a utopia, you need to have that admin chain behind your government structure. Someone, some group, has to do the turning of strategic direction into usable actions.

The problem is when that tail starts wagging the dog, when admin becomes the reason for admin. That’s when it gets out of control.

What you are arguing is that authority and power must reside centrally and the top down approach is advocated. Just like the feudal era where bureaucracy evolved from but now (current day bureaucracy) replaced by officials whose tasks are to focus on solely on administrative efficiency. Bureaucracy is supposed to be the means to achieve the ends but the means have now become the ends by itself.

If you apply that to the society you have a problem. i.e. if your thinking deviate from the system norm then you will encounter “errors”.

Bureaucracy is inevitable for large organisation (nation state whatever) but that does not mean you need to make it worst.

Chewkw, your argument falls down when you consider that we will simply have to employ more people in the civil service.

For example, the MHRA is now going to have to expand – or we just accept that anything the EMA says is safe, is safe for us. That isn’t taking back control is it?

Besides that, libertarian societies do not work in the modern age. In our complicated world, with matters such as climate change needing focussed leadership plus educated decisions and direction made on the behalf of society,so you need regulation and the strong application of the rule of law.

So to achieve less bureaucracy we have to have more bureaucrats? I shall fix this oil spill with more oil to cover up the existing oil. Chewkw has outchewkwed himself.

Chewkw, your argument falls down when you consider that we will simply have to employ more people in the civil service now.

Employing more people and complying with bureaucratic rules are two different issues.

Technically speaking bureaucracy may force people to work more as the system considers people to be disposable or able to do their work efficiently, hence there may or may not be an increased in head count.

However, there is also the possibilities that in order to prevent people from overworked or to improve work efficiency (many hands make light work) and to have work life balance etc … more people are employed.

Essentially, what you do not want is another system that artificially imposes on your system where you are forced to hire more beyond your ability.

For example, the MHRA is now going to have to expand – or we just accept that anything the EMA says is safe, is safe for us. That isn’t taking back control is it?

That depends on the experts’ views.
If you are in a bureaucratic system you will need to accept whatever is offered to you.

So to achieve less bureaucracy we have to have more bureaucrats? I shall fix this oil spill with more oil to cover up the existing oil. Chewkw has outchewkwed himself.

It is about authority and power. You have the flexibility to decide if there is a need to have more bureaucrats or not. However, if that flexibility is taken away then you simply need to comply regardless.

Essentially, what you do not want is another system that artificially imposes on your system where you are forced to hire more beyond your ability

But that will happen because we will always have to comply with EU rules to sell there, so not only will we have to employ more people to license drugs for the UK market. We will also have to employ a lot more people in the private sector to make sure drugs manufactured here are certified in the EU.

Essentially, what you do not want is another system that artificially imposes on your system where you are forced to hire more beyond your ability.

This is exactly what we are doing by leaving. We worked with our European partners before and developed one aligned system, there was no artificial doubling up.

It is about authority and power. You have the flexibility to decide if there is a need to have more bureaucrats or not. However, if that flexibility is taken away then you simply need to comply regardless.

Flexibility is what we had in, we have less flexibility out due to economic realities. Your definition of free doesn’t take into account theoretical Vs real freedom.

6 o clock news. The people are angry.

Looks like the protest vote for Farage will outnumber the protest vote against the Conservatives and Labour.

But that will happen because we will always have to comply with EU rules to sell there, so not only will we have to employ more people to license drugs for the UK market. We will also have to employ a lot more people in the private sector to make sure drugs manufactured here are certified in the EU.

The flexibility is ours and it works both ways. They comply with our rules we comply with theirs if we all want to trade amicably.

This is exactly what we are doing by leaving. We worked with our European partners before and developed one aligned system, there was no artificial doubling up.

The alignment of system depends entirely on your organisation and agreement. The main question here who is in charge. Again, power come into play …

Flexibility is what we had in, we have less flexibility out due to economic realities. Your definition of free doesn’t take into account theoretical Vs real freedom.

Put it another way you will have even less flexibility if you are being imposed on. However, true freedom is very difficult to achieve but making it less is not the way to go.

the EU.

The flexibility is ours and it works both ways. They comply with our rules we comply with theirs if we all want to trade amicably.

Thats not how economics works, we are a tiny market compared to the EU. We will have to comply with their rules no matter whether we like it or not.

Put it another way you will have even less flexibility if you are being imposed on. However, true freedom is very difficult to achieve but making it less is not the way to go

We were helping to make the rules, there was no imposition when it came to medicines. The MHRA was widely considered to be a thought leader by the EU and an agency to copy and listen to. We will not have the flexibility to do that now, we will be rule takers in the area of Pharmaceuticals.

This >>> EU civil service 46,000.
You already have 340,000 and you still want to add more on top of that (directly or indirectly)?
But most importantly it is about the entire system. Not how many people you hire.

But this is total nonsense, that’s 46,000 shared between 28 countries and; iver 550,000,000 people.
The UK alone has had to hire 20,000 just to handle Brexit & now we have more bureaucracy, I have to arrange transport of biohazard materials between countries, to the EU it’s simple, 1 form good for 27 countries. that’s a huge reduction in bureaucracy, compared to 27 different forms.That’s a huge benefit replicated access every sector and it’s an immense benefit to the country.

Your argument makes literally no sense whatsoever !

The lie of “small government”, i.e. less bureaucracy is that it’s inefficient when compared to private business when in fact the exact opposite is true. The UK has an adult population of roughly 46 million so with 340,000 civil servants that’s 0.7%. Most businesses have at least 5% admin staff of various sorts and depending on the business up to 20% may be employed away from the front line (cleaners, caterers, etc.).

The truth about imposing less bureaucracy, i.e. governance, is that it allows businesses to get away with things they otherwise couldn’t and shouldn’t do. Read this analysis https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/boeing_two_deadly_crashes of the balance of power between the FAA and Boeing as an example.

Freedom is marketing, it’s a sales pitch. It doesn’t matter unless not having it stops you doing what you want to do. Now, in the UK we all have political freedom and relatively quite a bit of freedom enshrined in law. But there’s a lot we can’t do because we need to live in a society that functions. Like most places. We actually need less than complete freedom, so that we are protected from other people exercising it.

Fetishising freedom as an abstract concept is worthless, it’s a tool used by people who want power so that they can be allowed to do what THEY want to do. Because it sounds good but actually serves THEIR interests, not yours. What we need is the right amount of freedom, not too much.

The opposite of freedom is restrictions. We need restrictions; for example on the chemicals we can dump into the environment, the quality of our food and goods, and so on. Because otherwise, things will get very very shitty very quickly. So, back on topic, the EU is well placed to create these restrictions because it is NOT a national government. National governments seek power so often do whatever it takes to make the economy strong and create wealth. They NEED to do this, otherwise they will be replaced. If they are the only creators of rules then there’s no incentive for them to do anything that might harm the economy.

The EU however is one layer of government away from national governments. And crucially, it affects a wide range of countries that would otherwise be slashing regulations (or ignoring them) to increase their competitiveness. It’s like having Marquess of Queensbury rules in boxing. You can still fight, but the rules ultimately provide basic protection.

This is a main reason why I am pro-EU. It’s BECAUSE they are imposing rules on all governments together, so it’s not necessary to flout them to make a quick buck.

Thats not how economics works, we are a tiny market compared to the EU. We will have to comply with their rules no matter whether we like it or not.

5th largest economy is a tiny market? They comply with ours we comply with theirs. Work both ways.
Info here

We were helping to make the rules, there was no imposition when it came to medicines. The MHRA was widely considered to be a thought leader by the EU and an agency to copy and listen to. We will not have the flexibility to do that now, we will be rule takers in the area of Pharmaceuticals.

That is for the pharmaceutical industry to decide what standard they intend to set and who they can impose on.

But this is total nonsense, that’s 46,000 shared between 28 countries and; iver 550,000,000 people.

Notice that you need to hire extra people to maintain the EU system in addition to those in the country. The EU system can be do without simply put.

The UK alone has had to hire 20,000 just to handle Brexit & now we have more bureaucracy, I have to arrange transport of biohazard materials between countries, to the EU it’s simple, 1 form good for 27 countries. that’s a huge reduction in bureaucracy, compared to 27 different forms.That’s a huge benefit replicated access every sector and it’s an immense benefit to the country.

The irony is that we need to hire more people to handle Brexit to get out from the EU bureaucratic system …
As for using 1 form for 27 countries do you see the change to 27 different form in future?

Your argument makes literally no sense whatsoever !

🤔