Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
UK to discuss EU withdrawal referendum
Comments
-
-
-
-
Case in point. Here we have a perfect example of someone who has bought wholesale into the tabloid vision of the EU being some sort of outside force that makes us implement nasty horrible laws (like product safety, and gender equality, and data privacy, and safe working practices - the evil bastards) rather than being an organisation into which we have as much input as anyone else.Master and commander wrote: »It would give British and Irish people actual control over their own turf, rathar than being a yes man. At the very least, it would mean an end to the seemingly endless barrage of EU directives telling us what we can and can't do.
And that's why referendums are a stupid way to decide major issues of national importance.
I don't even know what to say to this.The EU is a redundant entity anyway. It was only created to be an opposing force to the USSR and since that is no more, the EU is a bit of a pointless project. Bollox to it i say.
0 -
These would be the same directives that the UK and Ireland assist in drafting?Master and commander wrote: »At the very least, it would mean an end to the seemingly endless barrage of EU directives telling us what we can and can't do.
That’s not what you said earlier.Master and commander wrote: »Yes i do. EC EU, same thing really in practical terms
Nobody’s business but ours what we do with our wimmens either, eh?Master and commander wrote: »Like the Peat bogs thing. Its none of their business what we do with our bogs, they're our bogs.
Bollocks?oscarBravo wrote: »And that's why referendums are a stupid way to decide major issues of national importance. I don't even know what to say to this.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
walrusgumble wrote: »You are absolutely correct in the sense that it is the people, well, in Ireland at least, you give the power to the Community/Union, and it was the Council who drafted the Treaties ie our ministers. But is it informed consent? Why don't other countries not give their people the same referendums? How many times has our parliament discussed the eu ala the bread and butter day discussions? despite the new protocols on national parliament involvement with eu legislation.
If you're asking me is there a better option than representative democracy... not that I've seen but that's another debate. Political parties all over Europe put out their manifestos and it's the pro-EU ones that get elected over and over. So I think it's fair to say the majority of the people of the EU won't be remotely surprised by the decisions taken. Personally the more referenda I live though here the more I think they are a terrible idea. Rarely are the real issues discussed properly. The best option we've got is electing people to represent our best interests, perhaps we should be electing better people though.walrusgumble wrote: »But the problem is, that there was/is (well Lisbon might sort it out or at least improve it) a major democratic deficit, and despite their genuine efforts in dealing with the concerns of smaller countries (ie generous QMV, our concessions from the treaties) there is still an image all over europe from its citizens that the union ignores the concerns of the people. The Courts and Commission are too readily interested in ruling on areas that are arguably not the direct concern of the union (ie internal suitation and free movement of people as an example - if there is a smidgen of eu law involved they are all over it). In this country, we complain of judicial activism. The CJEU is completely up to their necks in it, and it would be worse if they adopted all of the opinions of the Adovate Generals . The vision of the European Courts often greatly differ to that of even the democratically elected council of ministers. I despise the attitudes of our current Irish Judiciary but ironically strongly adovate for judicial restraint on a european level.
No one is suggesting the EU is perfect. My main problem with the debate though is it's rarely based on the facts. It seems to me that the problem with the EU is often just perception. The EU is not given credit where it's due, the local politicians grab the credit.walrusgumble wrote: »The Commission over the years seriously lacks creditibility (how many budgets have they managed to balance?) and its not directly elected (despite what i will point out to below, this is important to people). And contrary to what you say, the Commission is, despite the efforts of Lisbon, an institution that does decide their policy behind closed doors (with very big exception to being limitedly answerable to the European Parliament)
We'll disagree here though to be fair it would be nice at some point that they balance the budget
walrusgumble wrote: »There is also the problem that different countries like Belgium want different things from the union, ie federalism v intergovernmentalism. Even the French, when it suits them, kick up when their nationalistic interests are at risk. The UK is always seen as the villian.
I have no issue with nationalistic or competing interests. It's the EU that keeps the playing fields level. And the UK are rarely honest with their relationship with the EU. There is a constant feeling that 'EU' and the 'UK' and utterly separate when clearly the UK is as much the EU as anyone is. The EU can't make British newspapers and politicians be honest.walrusgumble wrote: »You would be absolutely within your rights, and i would agree with you, if you said that the national parliaments do little in telling people of the importance of the union etc, but look at how pathethically low the turn outs are for the European Parliament elections - (a body that is getting increasingly powerful and truely represents the people)
It's just too easy to take credit when the EU does something good and blame them when there's something the public doesn't like. I've seen numerous stories here where the locals blame the EU but in reality it has nothing to do with the EU whatsoever.walrusgumble wrote: »The Commission do not do enough to educate the Union about their workings and the workings of the union (despite their excellent websites and their continuous publications of guidelines etc)
That's true but again I say it's just not in the locals interest to give the EU too much credit.walrusgumble wrote: »I would not advocate leaving the Union, until genuine reform is made . I acknowledge that Lisbon is trying this. I am completely against the entry of other member states UNTIL, we get our house in order. It has become a mess. The vision and idea of the Union is not the problem, its how its being implemented. Every state got suckered by the property boom and other matters and the Commission sat on its hands during this time.
Again I agree it's not perfect. It would be lunacy for Ireland to leave the EU. Though if you're asking me am I surprised that things can get messy and bureaucratic when 25 countries make deals then no I'm not. The problem is I'm not sure we can ever get a near perfect solution when there will always have to be so much compromise and horse trading. I'm fascinated that there are constant claims the EU has too much power but often the same people claim the EU should have stopped individual countries acting financially imprudently - which they didn't have power to do in the first place. At the end of the day I believe the benefits of the EU far outweigh any downside and they are a force for good - not perfect though.0 -
-
-
If you're asking me is there a better option than representative democracy... not that I've seen but that's another debate. Political parties all over Europe put out their manifestos and it's the pro-EU ones that get elected over and over. So I think it's fair to say the majority of the people of the EU won't be remotely surprised by the decisions taken. Personally the more referenda I live though here the more I think they are a terrible idea. Rarely are the real issues discussed properly. The best option we've got is electing people to represent our best interests, perhaps we should be electing better people though.
God no. It is very easy to criticise the Union but hardier to give solutions. I am only commenting, and not attacking your view. I am only saying that the representative democracy in the EU needs to improve, that is starting with the Lisbon Treaty (the good parts of the defunct Constitution). Our Political Parties don't give detailed summaries of their stance, bar, to be fair, Fine Gael. Rehashed rethoric is not good enough for us, but that it not the EU's fault. I am going to re-check the election manifesto's of our parties, because I don't call any specific issues forming part of their core elections policies.
The Idea of Referendums, like the Union itself is not the problem, its the political parties and their attitudes to it. Our Constitution, as you know, in Article 6 makes it clear that Governments powers come via the people. Where ahem, soverignity is being shifted, we must authorise our government to ratify / implement it into national law. Nice and Lisbon , the government and all parties' efforts in explaining the nature of the treaties were pathetic. You look at this boards and politics.ie, whether one agreed with comments or not, at least people cared, and many were not stupid.
But yes, the problem lies in the quality of debate. Commission don't do enough on this, and they are constantly preceived to be talking down to people. The Commissioner President comes across as an arrogant twit and dismisses any form of valid criticism.No one is suggesting the EU is perfect. My main problem with the debate though is it's rarely based on the facts. It seems to me that the problem with the EU is often just perception. The EU is not given credit where it's due, the local politicians grab the credit.
We'll disagree here though to be fair it would be nice at some point that they balance the budget
I have no issue with nationalistic or competing interests. It's the EU that keeps the playing fields level. And the UK are rarely honest with their relationship with the EU. There is a constant feeling that 'EU' and the 'UK' and utterly separate when clearly the UK is as much the EU as anyone is. The EU can't make British newspapers and politicians be honest.
I can not disagree with your comment on preception. If anyone has doubts on the good things that the EU did, should read Dr Patrick's Hillery's book which covers some very interesting areas when he was our Commissioner for an area of extreme contraversy during the 1970's (ie Social Welfare)It's just too easy to take credit when the EU does something good and blame them when there's something the public doesn't like. I've seen numerous stories here where the locals blame the EU but in reality it has nothing to do with the EU whatsoever.
And this is why I personally am not willing to give up on the EU. But I want them to rid itself of the arrogance (yes, Ireland has acted very arrogant at times, much to the annoyance of the Union) Going back to our Commissioner President, I have to agree with him when he bolloxed Joe Higgins, publicly when the latter predictably blamed all of Ireland's ills on Europe.Again I agree it's not perfect. It would be lunacy for Ireland to leave the EU. Though if you're asking me am I surprised that things can get messy and bureaucratic when 25 countries make deals then no I'm not. The problem is I'm not sure we can ever get a near perfect solution when there will always have to be so much compromise and horse trading. I'm fascinated that there are constant claims the EU has too much power but often the same people claim the EU should have stopped individual countries acting financially imprudently - which they didn't have power to do in the first place. At the end of the day I believe the benefits of the EU far outweigh any downside and they are a force for good - not perfect though.
I am only pointing out that the EU needs to be more democratic and stick to what the treaty actually says (ie Courts)0 -
oscarBravo wrote: »Case in point. Here we have a perfect example of someone who has bought wholesale into the tabloid vision of the EU being some sort of outside force that makes us implement nasty horrible laws (like product safety, and gender equality, and data privacy, and safe working practices - the evil bastards) rather than being an organisation into which we have as much input as anyone else.
And that's why referendums are a stupid way to decide major issues of national importance. I don't even know what to say to this.
I, like you won't touch the second issue, with a barge pole. nearly fell off my chair.
Your case in point, i agree with you. But, surely the Commission had better things to deal with when it made its decisions on the bogs. (over 10 years ago, and view in Ireland batted an eyelid - Galway one of the first to get done - but compensated) I know that it was all enviroment issues etc, but it fails to take into account that it will hardly be an appreciable improvement when our states can't, won't or are unable to get its house in order with alernatives. We, the Dutch and Brits are the only ones (i think) effected by this. The bog is a big issue, especially for the eldery, rural areas and even people's livlihoods. ITs not to be sniffed at. It has effect all to do with product safety, and gender equality, and data privacy, and safe working practices. Might be alright for those in the east of Ireland. Ok, its not a piont to die on the ditches over leaving EU, but this decision of the EU was wrong.
(Even if they were compensated. Where where the IFA parading on in Brussels over this? - This is the problem with Europe. It is willing to disregard issues that are more important to smaller nations. If Germany was as effected what would have happened? I hope EU are as pro active with nuclear power etc. Remember, Merkell was all for it prior to the Japan diasters , is making wobblies now)0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Europe and immigration are vital issues, so let's discuss them
Telegraph View: The voters want a debate on Europe's influence, and the Government should let them have it.
Flagging: today's Europe has no leaders, but it has strong political forces at work
By Telegraph View
15 May 2011
228 Comments
The nation state, which welds together people who share a common history, culture and language, remains the basis of democracy in every country in Europe. No other way of pulling individuals together to form a single political entity has been able to command their trust, still less their affection.
That fact is proving to be a serious problem for the European Union. Over the past 30 years, the senior officials of the EU have been committed to "ever-closer union" between its members. They have hoped to replace the patchwork quilt of nation states with a super-state responsible not merely for economic regulation, but for harmonising all laws across the whole continent.
It is becoming clear that such a vision is not shared by voters of the EU's member nations – not least because it is proving singularly incapable of adapting itself to political and economic reality. The tendency to rebel against the EU's supra-national rule is clearest in the determination of all but four of the EU's members to take control of their own borders. The Schengen Agreement, which dispensed with the need for border checks for those countries who signed up to it (and Britain never did), is now on the verge of being overthrown, as individual nations decide that they want to regain the right to say who they shall welcome, and who they will not allow to settle in their country. The increasingly serious debt crisis of the peripheral members of the euro, particularly Ireland, Greece and Portugal, is leading both France and Germany to reassess how much "solidarity", in financial terms, they are prepared to show to the nations that have already soaked up billions in loans from them, and now are back needing still more.
This is a critical time for the EU: as the vision that has sustained it for so long starts to subside, there urgently needs to be a debate about what the future of the union should be, and what its fundamental goals are. The poll we publish today indicates that the people of Britain are eager for such a debate: after the economy, the issues that voters who either vote Conservative, or would think about doing so (a category that includes most of the population), care most about are Europe and immigration – two topics that are entwined, since European law determines, to a very significant extent, both who will be admitted into Britain, and to whom we can decide to refuse entry. For example, it is the "right to family life" enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights – compliance with which is a condition of EU membership – that is preventing us from deporting many criminals we would dearly like to be rid of, such as the robber from Sri Lanka whose case we report today.
These are issues of vast importance, both to voters and to the nation. And yet the Conservatives have deliberately shied away from promoting, or even endorsing, any such debate. Why? The only reason appears to derive from the fear of igniting the old divisions between Europhiles and Eurosceptics within the Tory party, or of upsetting their Liberal Democrat partners. But these topics are too important to be subordinated to the usual party squabbles. Britain urgently needs to debate the future of the EU – as does the EU itself, since that future depends on finding an alternative to "ever-closer union", one which works in the interest of the peoples of Europe, rather than their rulers.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/8514152/Europe-and-immigration-are-vital-issues-so-lets-discuss-them.html0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
Advertisement