hate to go against you this one Loz, BUT since when has anyone ever voted for anything outside their own self interest. Ever since Thatcher radicalised the economy and reduced taxes "Greed is King" philosophy has taken over. Finding any goodwill anywhere is nigh on impossible. So to believe that people will vote for community and welfare is fanciful. TB
Because it seems to be about the EU project , I am possibly wrong but wonder how long before they want everyone to drop their countries names and just be called EUregion1 EUregion2 etc.
Have we moved on. All parties seem to be talking about a second referendum and I’m sure there will be a ‘remain’ option.
Is it heck, the eu can't break an agreement it was never a signatory too. Ireland is a pawn and when this is all over, will be slowly dropped down to the lesser ranks by the very same eu masters. When we go wto and free trade and the eu has lost it's leverage in keeping us in the eu, how do you think they will deal with things between the eu and U.K. will it be the same as now, or different?
Like it or not fin the eu has a tier system too, you know this The eu project (not countries, comes first) then Germany Then France Then the Northern european states Then Italy Then the old eastern european then the older mediteraneans but never be in doubt, Since Maastericht, the eu project/commission will always hold the ace card It's about time the snp government woke up and was honest with it's people. By population, Scotland if it became independent and then gave it away to the eu, would be entitled to 14 mep's (same as slovakia given the matching population). Now if you think not getting your own way as part of 4 nations with 59 Scottish mp's in a house of 650 is so unbearable that you want to swap it for being one country within 28 and with 14 meps in a parliament of 751 meps, then someone is holding back on the honesty. The snp have often confused, "why won't you listen to our lunacy" to "the people of Scotland are being ignored"
That's good, TB. Now take the next step in your argument. If the people do not care about a particular issue, upon whose authority can regulation be imposed upon the people, legally and morally? OK, you can argue that a "benign" authority can impose laws upon a population "for its own good" and without specific permission from the people. This is the bedrock of UK parliamentary democracy after all, which directly replaced the mechanics of the feudal society (but not the underlying principles). However, if Parliament is seen to go too far in "acting on our behalf", we can at least protest and/or vote the buggers out. But what if an unelected government from overseas decides to implement more and more laws and regulations? Where is our recourse there? I believe that the people should control their government, not the other way round ... at least in principle. In practice though, the UK is too far gone and the population too institutionalised in serfdom to ever be able to wrest any true sovereignty from Parliament. Maybe the Scottish can save us? Shut up finderman, I'm trolling you on the last point, leave it alone : o )
and it aint called a veto. there is no tier system, they all have equal status, some have more MEP's than others, but its also uses a PR system. it relies on consensus not a single party majority. you dont get or understand PR systems do you?
Consensus government is great for when you're fiddling around the edges of political issues. You can get cooperation when you're arguing differences in degree rather than kind. On truly contentious issues though - consent-based government is a recipe for inaction and paralysation. Which may be a good thing and may be a bad thing. I'm not judging : o )
its a v,good thing. tho things deffo take longer. it does rely on a lil grown up and less confrontational politics too. something else yer a lil behind the curve on over here. what sort of legislation ever needs an instant answer to anyhoo?
You're conflating issues that may need hammering out over time with issues people will never agree over. I wonder why? It's ok though, I understand that in echo-chamber Scotchland, you all basically agree on everything. Well, everything you have a say on, anyway.
As much as I appreciate your dulcet tones fin, are you really saying that the snp holyrood discussions are more grown up and less confrontational? (knowing I have access to you tube too)
