Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

hotmail.com

boring accountant wrote: »

The UK has had several majority governments over the last few decades.

I don't agree that majority governments = dictatorship. I'm not sure many historians would agree either.

The Nazis rose to power in a system that had 40 different parties in the Reichstag.

I think to a certain extent Western parliamentary systems are dictatorships in that the executives have all the power. Once elected, it is difficult to unseat them for at least 4 years.

Even within the cabinet, there is a hierarchy with more important ministers. The Finance Minister and the Prime Minister really own most of the power. Coalitions aren't much better. The FG/Labour coalition acted the same way, with a cabinet within a cabinet. 2 FGers and 2 Labour.

This is democracy.

hotmail.com

boring accountant wrote: »

Is this a bad thing? I think it's a good thing that people can have influence through nothing but exercising their freedom of speech.

No not a bad thing at all. It's just that a lot of people put weight on the fact that they've been elected. But what's the point if you make little difference.

ancapailldorcha

boring accountant wrote: »

If PR were ever implemented do you think that would slow or hasten the breakup of the Union?

The decay in the bonds holding the union together means that PR is unlikely to save it without further measures, namely significant political reform alongside a very soft Brexit to minimise any economic distress.

Imreoir2

boring accountant wrote: »

That's a reasonable view. Personally, I don't believe the current problems facing the EU (trade, climate change, populism, technology) will be solved through the current system. The current commission is making some good noises in the right direction, but in order to really deliver the EU needs real leadership. So far the only real leader in the EU is Macron. Germany has a leadership vacuum at the moment. We can't be dependent on internal politics of France and Germany for leadership. I think for consistency of leadership there needs to be real leadership from the Commission itself, and the only way to achieve that is through direct elections.

I don't think the EU is facing a problem when it comes to trade, it is a world powerhouse in that area. Both the US and UK have seen their political systems damage their trade position with Trump needlessly engageing in useless trade wars, and the UK inflicting Brexit upon itself.
What is the advantage of the US/UK system when it comes to climate change? The US does not even recognise it as a problem and has left the Paris Agreement. The UK is not exactly blazing a trail in the area either.

The EU does not depend on strong men to deliver change. It is a politically directed technocracy, its aims and direction are set by the political leadership but where it excells is in the detailed techincal work that political leader dominated systems like the US ignore. Both the US and the UK have failed spectacularly to tackle populism and their political systems have been captured by the populists. Europe faces the same challenge, but so far its way of doing things has proven to be far better adpeted to face up to that challenge. As for technology, I am not sure what you mean. In what way is Europe facing a technology problem?

The European system delvers consistancy, unlike the US where you get massive overnight policy swings from Democrat to Republicen administrations which replace not only the political but also the administrative leadership, or the huge policy swings in the UK from Labour to Conservative government. In the EU, you have consensus based coalition government in which the centre holds sway and extreme changes or policy swings are rare.

In three of the areas you have idenfitied, the European system seems to be doing better than the US/UK system you extoll. The EU works because it is not dominated by devicive politics or the cult of leadership that thinks the man at the top is more important than the culture of the organisation, the systems they oversee or the competance of the people working for them.

Imreoir2

hotmail.com wrote: »

The UK model doesn't allow for minorities to do much.

The executive has all the power in the UK. The parliament can only approve or reject laws and vote in motions of confidence.

And since we have a party political system with a whip system, the parliament doesn't have much influence.

Campaigners appearing on the radio or TV often have more influence than most backbenchers.

The Conservative party got a minority of the vote, and yet holds absolute power. As such the UK system allows a minority to rule the roost as long as they are the biggest minority in enough constitutiencies.

moon2

CelticRambler wrote: »

That's why I used the term "effective". The number of youngsters in Ireland who start secondary school thinking that they'll quit after the Junior Cert is minimal compared to the UK, where it's perfectly normal not just to plan to leave after doing GCSEs, but to still be citing them as part of your school-leaving qualifications five and ten years later.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2007/oct/03/schools.uk1

People will cite them if it's all they have. However if you leave with just GCSEs you've cut your lifetime earnings by about 50%. I haven't found a similar breakdown for Ireland though. I would be curious too!

As always, normal does not mean it's either good nor beneficial. I'd be trying to understand why people are leaving early and address the underlying problem. They're doing a serious disservice to themselves (broadly speaking)

hotmail.com

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The Conservative party got a minority of the vote, and yet holds absolute power. As such the UK system allows a minority to rule the roost as long as they are the biggest minority in enough constitutiencies.

I think we have a different definition of minority. The Tories won the most votes then.

Hardly ever does a party receive more than 50% in the first preference vote in a multi party system.

hotmail.com

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The decay in the bonds holding the union together means that PR is unlikely to save it without further measures, namely significant political reform alongside a very soft Brexit to minimise any economic distress.

PR won't change the nature or system of government. The executive still retains the power, just more likely under a coalition led by Tories or Labour.

PR doesn't address the elephant in the room.. the power of the executive.

Akrasia

hotmail.com wrote: »

PR won't change the nature or system of government. The executive still retains the power, just more likely under a coalition led by Tories or Labour.

PR doesn't address the elephant in the room.. the power of the executive.

PR addresses the massive glaring issue of voters not being able to vote for their preferred candidate for fear that their vote might allow their least preferred candidate to win.

It turns a vote for anyone other than the two leading candidates into a vote that is effectively voting against your own interests

Professor Genius

boring accountant wrote: »

If PR were ever implemented do you think that would slow or hasten the breakup of the Union?

The PR referendum was defeated 68 to 32

L1011

That wasn't PR, it was preferential voting. We have both but preferential alone is not PR

L1011

L1011 wrote: »

That wasn't PR, it was preferential voting. We have both but preferential alone is not PR

It doesn't matter what type of voting methodology it was, TFTP was retained as a result of that referendum.

johnnyskeleton

Strazdas wrote: »

They don't seem to either know or care that the constant hurling of insults at the EU ('the fourth Reich', 'the EUSSR' etc) is hugely debasing to themselves and portrays them in a terrible light. No other country in Europe talks about the EU in such insulting terms, not even Eurosceptic ones like Italy and Denmark. The debate in Britain is beyond toxic.

Its more offensive to the survivors of WWII and the Warsaw Pact to be honest. There may be a lot of concern in Eastern Europe about migration, and they may have a point that burden sharing isnt part of the treaties, but when it comes down to it they can see within their lifetimes the benefits of being part of the EU.

As can Ireland. Guy Verhofstadts comments aside, the idea that the EU acts like an empire is ridiculous, although I do enjoy the unironic way in which the Brits talk about it!

johnnyskeleton

boring accountant wrote: »

I prefer adversarial politics that adequately represents the divisions in society. I prefer a politics where rival parties try to compete rather than "build consensus". That's a recipe for stagnation, which is where the EU is currently.


Every now and again the system needs shaking up. Only direct election for the highest office is capable of providing that.

I love the way when the UK has 1.2% annual growth its strong, when Germany has growth of 1.2% its stagnating and when Ireland has growth rate of 5.6% it can be safely ignored. The one good thing about Brexit is that it allows people to say things like that

Strazdas

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Its more offensive to the survivors of WWII and the Warsaw Pact to be honest. There may be a lot of concern in Eastern Europe about migration, and they may have a point that burden sharing isnt part of the treaties, but when it comes down to it they can see within their lifetimes the benefits of being part of the EU.

As can Ireland. Guy Verhofstadts comments aside, the idea that the EU acts like an empire is ridiculous, although I do enjoy the unironic way in which the Brits talk about it!

If the EU truly was the monstrous and corrupt dictatorship they claim, it would have collapsed many years ago. Nobody in Europe would want to belong to such a thing.

We're talking about quite absurd levels of paranoia and insecurity. How on earth could 7m British people sign a petition asking for A50 to be revoked, and with most of the signatures coming from moderates and centrists, if what the Brexiteers say is true? Nothing about their claims add up.

SantaCruz

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Guy Verhofstadts comments aside, the idea that the EU acts like an empire is ridiculous, although I do enjoy the unironic way in which the Brits talk about it!

Guy Vehofstadt never said or implied that the EU should be an empire. That was just the spin added by the usual suspects. The fact that intelligent people are repeating it is a worry.

johnnyskeleton

SantaCruz wrote: »

Guy Vehofstadt never said or implied that the EU should be an empire. That was just the spin added by the usual suspects. The fact that intelligent people are repeating it is a worry.

Here is the video (sorry for twitter link but youtube isnt working for me at the moment):

https://mobile.twitter.com/RupertLowe10/status/1173115471903756288?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-736564138668757555.ampproject.net%2F1912201827130%2Fframe.html

‘The world of tomorrow is not a world order based on nation states or countries. It is a world order that is based on empires. China, is not a nation, it’s a civilisation. India, you know better than me, is not a nation there are two thousand nations there. There are 20 languages there. The US is also an empire, more than a nation… And then finally the Russian federation.

The world of tomorrow is a world of empires in which we Europeans, and you British, can only defend your interests, your way of life, by doing it together, in a European framework and in the European Union.’

I like the idea of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats (lord knows how FF got to be members) and I liked Verhofstadt up until he said that. I even tried to make sense or interpret it in his favour but couldnt. Maybe he shouldve said Blocks instead of Empires, but he still said it.

And his point is that the era of Nation States is over and that the world, as he sees it, is divided into Empires.

He made a better attempt at it on a different occasion, where he said that the EU can stand up to Empires:

https://mobile.twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1123864665325559808?lang=en

But no matter how I try to spin it, I cant reformulate his words into anything other than him saying that the EU needs to be an empire to compete with China, India, Russia, US etc, and that the era of the nation state is over.

SantaCruz

It seems evident to me that he refers to the rest of the world becoming or acting like empires, so that we need to remain a union to survive in this new reality. This in the context of the UK quitting the union.

johnnyskeleton

SantaCruz wrote: »

It seems evident to me that he refers to the rest of the world becoming or acting like empires, so that we need to remain a union to survive in this new reality. This in the context of the UK quitting the union.

In the second link maybe, but in the first, no. But hes also saying thatthe time of nation states is over. Im not sure thats the right message

LuckyLloyd

Fogmatic wrote: »

In these recent weeks the mainland UK media seems to have gone quiet about Ireland (let alone how the demands of the borders involved will supposedly be reconciled). Is that just because I don't see much of that media, or is the elephant in the room now universal over there?

If the latter, I'm not surprised if most of them don't care about Ireland, as somebody said here. Who has the time (plus the cynicism) to discover current affairs that the popular media may be glossing over?

Before anyone gets hot under the collar, I'm not taking sides here. (Manipulated news does leavers a disservice too!).

There is nothing more to say on the Irish issue, Johnson's withdrawal agreement solves it. When it becomes a concluded International treaty on January 31st, the front stop arrangements will have the force of law and the Irish aspect of Brexit will be concluded.

moon2

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There is nothing more to say on the Irish issue, Johnson's withdrawal agreement solves it. When it becomes a concluded International treaty on January 31st, the front stop arrangements will have the force of law and the Irish aspect of Brexit will be concluded.

I think part of the issue is that Johnson continually states 'facts' about the implications of the agreement which appear to contradict the wording of the agreement.

For example he's promised zero extra paperwork, yet there will be more paperwork

ambro25

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I love the way when the UK has 1.2% annual growth its strong, when Germany has growth of 1.2% its stagnating and when Ireland has growth rate of 5.6% it can be safely ignored. The one good thing about Brexit is that it allows people to say things like that

We're just back from a week in t'UK, spent Xmas at my mother-in-law near Sheffield.

I can't say I saw much evidence of that percent growth. It might have been the weather (truly dire for the entire week), but the place felt even more of a pit than when we last visited around Easter (there will be a post or two about that in an earlier instance of the Brexit threads). Most roads now worthy of a third world country, and measurably less new cars around on them. More than half of city centres stores boarded up in Worksop, Dinnington, Rotherham. Truly grim.

Whoever still argues that consequences are 'unknown' because "Brexit hasn't happened yet" (ie a prorogation of the Project Fear arguments of old), should have a quiet word with Kent folks who use the M20 on their commute. Must be fun to travel all those miles of motorway coned and cement-barrier'd off for Operation Brock at 40-50 under average speed cams, day after day after day (since Easter at least).

Libb1964

listermint wrote: »

Sorry. How is the effective equivalent of the leaving cert GCSE?

The junior cert is the effective equivalent and children in Ireland can leave after that seeking apprenticeship or jobs or whatever. Same as they can in the UK . They don't because it appears there's more value put in further education.

Those language stats exams are extremely telling and there's no two ways about it. The figures are awful.


Don't dilute the education system by saying GCSE is the finishing exam it's not. If more kids are taking it as the finishing exam then it shows you just how bad things are.

I hate to be pedantic but GCSE grades A*to C are the equivalent of Ordinary level in the Leaving.

A-levels are a slightly higher level than Higher level in the Leaving cert.

Grades D-G at GCSE level are the same as the Junior certificate.

The information can be found on the European Commissions website explaining the Qualification Framework which is used by all countries within the EU to understand the different qualifications people have when applying for jobs in other EU countries.
This chart will be of no use to the UK once they leave!!!

I do agree with you that Ireland has an education system that produces a much
better overall standard and is also more inclusive.

murphaph

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

In the second link maybe, but in the first, no. But hes also saying thatthe time of nation states is over. Im not sure thats the right message

But it's true. There was a time before nation states. There will be stone after them and after that. Some day in the far future we will leave this planet and by then nation states will be a distant memory. You have to get there somehow and it's going to be through regional superpowers.

LuckyLloyd

moon2 wrote: »

I think part of the issue is that Johnson continually states 'facts' about the implications of the agreement which appear to contradict the wording of the agreement.

For example he's promised zero extra paperwork, yet there will be more paperwork

That doesn’t matter. The British public may allow themselves to be lied to continuously by lads from the Etonian debating society but Ireland and the EU won’t. The U.K. will be made honour the terms of the front stop as per the new international treaty. The Irish aspect of Brexit is solved.

listermint

Libb1964 wrote: »

I hate to be pedantic but GCSE grades A*to C are the equivalent of Ordinary level in the Leaving.

A-levels are a slightly higher level than Higher level in the Leaving cert.

Grades D-G at GCSE level are the same as the Junior certificate.

The information can be found on the European Commissions website explaining the Qualification Framework which is used by all countries within the EU to understand the different qualifications people have when applying for jobs in other EU countries.
This chart will be of no use to the UK once they leave!!!

I do agree with you that Ireland has an education system that produces a much
better overall standard and is also more inclusive.

There's about as much chance of a GCSE being the same as a leaving cert as a three week old bread not being mouldy. Pedantic or not. There's no proof of this and the educational outcome stands to attest to that .

johnnyskeleton

ambro25 wrote: »

We're just back from a week in t'UK, spent Xmas at my mother-in-law near Sheffield.

I can't say I saw much evidence of that percent growth. It might have been the weather (truly dire for the entire week), but the place felt even more of a pit than when we last visited around Easter (there will be a post or two about that in an earlier instance of the Brexit threads). Most roads now worthy of a third world country, and measurably less new cars around on them. More than half of city centres stores boarded up in Worksop, Dinnington, Rotherham. Truly grim.

Whoever still argues that consequences are 'unknown' because "Brexit hasn't happened yet" (ie a prorogation of the Project Fear arguments of old), should have a quiet word with Kent folks who use the M20 on their commute. Must be fun to travel all those miles of motorway coned and cement-barrier'd off for Operation Brock at 40-50 under average speed cams, day after day after day (since Easter at least).

Its probably all in London and thats the growth rate for last year. But yeah, the problem we have in Ireland where there is high growth but many people dont feel it is probably worse in the UK

As regards the Brexit hasnt happened yet brigade, theyre all waiting for the sunny uplands where they can cast off the shackles and be free! In much the same way as a sitting government gets blamed regardless of whether it was their fault or not, so too the EU will be blamed for the current scenario right up to when thry leave!

johnnyskeleton

murphaph wrote: »

But it's true. There was a time before nation states. There will be stone after them and after that. Some day in the far future we will leave this planet and by then nation states will be a distant memory. You have to get there somehow and it's going to be through regional superpowers.

I dont think hes talking about the far future though, hes talking about our own lifetime.

ambro25

ambro25 wrote: »

I can't say I saw much evidence of that percent growth. It might have been the weather (truly dire for the entire week), but the place felt even more of a pit than when we last visited around Easter (there will be a post or two about that in an earlier instance of the Brexit threads). Most roads now worthy of a third world country, and measurably less new cars around on them. More than half of city centres stores boarded up in Worksop, Dinnington, Rotherham. Truly grim.
.

Most of those northern cities have been in the doldrums since the 70s, when businesses started to export their production to the far East.


As for the roads, most were built at least 30 years or so before their Irish equivalents and are due a rebuild at this time.


Brexit was and still is a protest vote against the governments because of this neglect.

ambro25

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Its probably all in London and thats the growth rate for last year. But yeah, the problem we have in Ireland where there is high growth but many people dont feel it is probably worse in the UK

(...)

Keep in mind that the area I was referring to, is one of those electing-a-donkey-with-a-red-rosette-for-generations recently turned blue at the 2019GE.

Topically with the recent aside about education and conparisons, my kid took the opportunity of visiting her old secondary school in Retford (North Notts), on their last day before the Xmas break.

Now for background, she entered the Luxembourgish educational system mid-year last year (March '18), in a brand new international (state) school with multingual streams, dispensing the Luxembourgish curriculum towards the European Baccalaureate. That means 4 languages (3 official Lux: Lux, German, French; plus English) at once, with a 5th starting next year (choice of approx.17, including mainstays like Mandarin, Japanese, Soanish, Portuguese etc.).

The curriculum is geared so that kids in the English stream get taught maths, history, etc. in English, and all the foreign languages in the actual language. Starting the 2nd year, they then get taught maths, history, etc. in their 'first' foreign language (French, for my kid). No more teaching in English (besides English language classes). The year after, in the 'second' foreign language (German, for my kid).

Her Brit (ex-) teachers couldn't believe it. Nor how far ahead she's got, academically, relative to her mock GCSE sitting (ex-) classmates. But I can tell you it's been quite the slog for her (and I mean in terms of homework and regular weekly exams, rather than adaptation/levelling up to her new schooling environment), relative to the Brit learning pace.