Pommie Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 A direct quote from Juncker."We have concluded a deal with the prime minister, he got the maximum he could receive, we gave the maximum we could give." There's no lost opportunity here. He go as much as he could get, virtually nothing. If we stay in the EU we will regret it. Immigration has and continues to be a positive for Britain. The vast majority of migrants pay taxes and contribute positively to our society carrying out many essential roles. A small minority claim benefits and take more than they contribute - the deal negotiated will tackle this, making sure people contribute for years before they can claim any benefits. Its easy to criticise the faults with the current system without offering any detail of the alternative...!! that is all team Brexit is doing. #vote REMAIN... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wooba Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 What the hell are you talking about Pommie? The Leave side is offering an alternative. You're advocating the status quo. There will be no fundamental change to the EU! That has been clear for years and even the EU leadership has made that clear with the quote I posted. This belief that Britain will be able to influence great change in the EU is pure fantasy. No more than Ukraine, Kazakhstan or any of the other territories had in the USSR. BTW there's a hell of a lot more wrong with the EU than just migrant benefits. The EU is absolutely broken. The solution for those running it is more of the same. Absolute lunacy. The EU will fail. That I'm absolutely certain of. The question is do we want to try and prolong the misery or do we want to distance ourselves from the danger. For me the choice is clear. Independence please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newjez Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 (edited) A direct quote from Juncker."We have concluded a deal with the prime minister, he got the maximum he could receive, we gave the maximum we could give." There's no lost opportunity here. He go as much as he could get, virtually nothing. If we stay in the EU we will regret it. And if we leave with gove and Boris we will regret it more. Happy for a controlled exit, but this is all about launching Boris at the expense of the country. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/12/michael-gove-not-bungler-but-idealogue Edited June 22, 2016 by newjez Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newjez Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 What the hell are you talking about Pommie? The Leave side is offering an alternative. You're advocating the status quo. There will be no fundamental change to the EU! That has been clear for years and even the EU leadership has made that clear with the quote I posted. This belief that Britain will be able to influence great change in the EU is pure fantasy. No more than Ukraine, Kazakhstan or any of the other territories had in the USSR. BTW there's a hell of a lot more wrong with the EU than just migrant benefits. The EU is absolutely broken. The solution for those running it is more of the same. Absolute lunacy. The EU will fail. That I'm absolutely certain of. The question is do we want to try and prolong the misery or do we want to distance ourselves from the danger. For me the choice is clear. Independence please. That's my problem. They haven't stated what the alternative is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quoll Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Actually, I am optimistic that there will be more of a coming together with the best and brightest of both sides to make it all work. We really can't stay in this dysfunctional arrangement. Heck, we can't even muster any support in the Eurovision Song Contest "L'Angleterre nil points!" so how the hell can we benefit from the EU. It's not all about Gove and Boris - in fact both of them have put more on the line than anyone. If they were desperate for power they would have gone with the status quo because Cameron has made such a dog's breakfast of it with his scare tactics. Someone will have to step into the breach there no matter what. When you have the likes of George Soros, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs and that ilk backing remain, you know that there has to be something massive in it for them - they couldn't give a toss about democracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wooba Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 That's my problem. They haven't stated what the alternative is. Really? http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36534802 If you don't like their ideas, that's one thing, but don't say there's no alternative. The alternative is clear and there's a potential road map laid out for it. I wonder if you felt the countries in the Warsaw Pact should have remained because they didn't have a plan? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winter1 Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Read the sun by mistake today. Waiting to get my tyres changed. Old Rupert wants us to leave pretty badly. Can't think of a better reason to stay. Actually I'm a bit pissed off. I would like to leave, but the likes of gove, Boris and IDS have given us no idea what we are voting for. If they had agreed a Norway type solution at least we'd have had half a chance at understanding the implications of an exit. So we're stuck with Europe. A lost opportunity for reform. Well, maybe the other referendums will achieve something. Ours seems to have been a divisive waste of time. What I find strange is that Rupert other paper "The Times" supports remain as reported below. http://nicosiamoneynews.com/2016/06/17/the-times-declares-for-remain-camp/ The Mail on Sunday declared for Remain but the Daily Mail declared for Brexit Am I the only cynical one here thinking that they keep a foot in both camps so they win whoever wins this horrendous experiment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wooba Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 How sad that you think democracy is an experiment... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the bottler Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 [ATTACH=CONFIG]33743[/ATTACH] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winter1 Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 (edited) Really? http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36534802 If you don't like their ideas, that's one thing, but don't say there's no alternative. The alternative is clear and there's a potential road map laid out for it. I wonder if you felt the countries in the Warsaw Pact should have remained because they didn't have a plan? Actually as the leave camp is a mish mash with representatives from all parties they do not actually form the government so will probably be unable to deliver. There are more MPs who support remain across all the parties so there have been reports that they may vote it down, however I assume this is unlikely as David Cameron has promised he will act on the result. Although DC may no longer be the PM after Friday if Brexit win. I wonder if there would be an anti Boris coalition of MPs these are unusual times and I would rule nothing out. @Wooba "How sad that you think democracy is an experiment... " Remember that Leave say take back your Democratic rights and take back control. I have an issue with this as most governments in the UK win power with fewer than 50% of the electorate voting for them. The last election in 2015 was won by the Conservatives with only 66.4% of the electorate in total voting. The conservatives got 36.9% of the vote yet they formed government. At least Australia has compulsory voting and preference voting which is not perfect but it is better than the UK system. The house of lords is totally unelected. Edited June 22, 2016 by winter1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gbye grey sky Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Really? http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36534802 If you don't like their ideas, that's one thing, but don't say there's no alternative. The alternative is clear and there's a potential road map laid out for it. I wonder if you felt the countries in the Warsaw Pact should have remained because they didn't have a plan? That is true. Follow, follow, follow, follow, follow the yellow brick road..............and you will have your very own personal pot of gold at the end of it with no filthy foreigners to take any of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wooba Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 That is true. Follow, follow, follow, follow, follow the yellow brick road..............and you will have your very own personal pot of gold at the end of it with no filthy foreigners to take any of it. There's a **** of a lot more at issue here than immigrants. I live in Toronto, possibly the most diverse city in the world. My wife is brown. I never mentioned "filth foreigners" How dare you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wooba Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Remember that Leave say take back your Democratic rights and take back control. I have an issue with this as most governments in the UK win power with fewer than 50% of the electorate voting for them. The last election in 2015 was won by the Conservatives with only 66.4% of the electorate in total voting. The conservatives got 36.9% of the vote yet they formed government. At least Australia has compulsory voting and preference voting which is not perfect but it is better than the UK system. The house of lords is totally unelected. Yes, a common theme at every election. Even here. But it's always the people on the "loosing" side that complain isn't it? It's part of being in a democracy. Let's get rid of that shall we? Let's just have European elections where on 66% of the population vote to have what? 73 members out of 751. Ooh, not even 10% of the the say. How wonderful. In what way is this better? Perhaps the solution is taking back sovereignty and changing the election format rather than just accepting your fate in a crap system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinkla Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Let's just have European elections where on 66% of the population vote to have what? 73 members out of 751. Ooh, not even 10% of the the say. How wonderful. In what way is this better? One of the things that entertains me is that the arguments used by the Scottish independence campaign (which I supported) are being deployed by the Leave campaign that would, almost to a man, have been in the Better Together camp. Meanwhile, the arguments used by Better Together (aka Project Fear) are now being used by the Remain campaign (which I support), many of whom would have backed Scots independence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wooba Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 I'm not Scottish so I won't pretend to know all the details. But I supported Scotland in their drive for Independence. The results of that have zero bearing on my opinion of the EU. I've always been against the UK being in the EU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robfromdublin Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 "At least Australia has compulsory voting and preference voting which is not perfect but it is better than the UK system. The house of lords is totally unelected." Compulsory voting is a terrible idea, and leads to the kind of short-attention-span, TV waffle that elected representatives come up with here. Everyone had the right to vote in the general election but some could not be bothered. Do you really want an election decided by the 20-30% of the electorate who have no interest in voting, but only do so because they are forced to to avoid the fine? They are just the kind of people susceptible to misinformation, sound bites and three-word-slogans, and the type of rhetoric that has sullied the EU referendum campaigning would become the norm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinkla Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Compulsory voting is a terrible idea, and leads to the kind of short-attention-span, TV waffle that elected representatives come up with here. Everyone had the right to vote in the general election but some could not be bothered. Do you really want an election decided by the 20-30% of the electorate who have no interest in voting, but only do so because they are forced to to avoid the fine? They are just the kind of people susceptible to misinformation, sound bites and three-word-slogans, and the type of rhetoric that has sullied the EU referendum campaigning would become the norm. I agree. Even though compulsory voting is said to favour the ALP - which would align with my general leaning - I think it undermined democracy to force people to vote against their will and when they have little knowledge of what they are voting for. It is a principle of democracy that those who feel most strongly about something have a louder voice than those who don't - whether that is through organising, campaigning or just voting. Plus, when you combine compulsory voting with transferable votes, you essentially force people in most areas to vote either ALP or Coalition, even though they may not like either party. This provides neither main party with any incentive to reform themselves or require them to really compete for their votes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Compulsory voting is far preferable to the UK system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robfromdublin Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Yes I agree on being forced to vote ALP/LNP, but it's not down to transferable votes. A better solution is a proportional representation system with multiple seats per constituency, which would align the proportion of elected representatives with the popular vote more closely. AUS has this for the senate but because it's only 12 seats per state you get dozens of candidates which makes the ballot sheet difficult to decipher. At a constituency level you would only have maybe 10 candidates and the resulting parliament would be a better representation of the will of the people. Either way, it won't ever happen because the current format benefits the 2 major parties. The Greens got nearly 9% of the popular vote in the last election, but only got 1 seat out of 150. What incentive is there to vote for the 3rd biggest party in the country? Anyway, I digress. Back to the EU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robfromdublin Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Compulsory voting is far preferable to the UK system. Compelling argument! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinkla Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Compulsory voting is far preferable to the UK system. because... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinkla Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Yes I agree on being forced to vote ALP/LNP, but it's not down to transferable votes. A better solution is a proportional representation system with multiple seats per constituency, which would align the proportion of elected representatives with the popular vote more closely. AUS has this for the senate but because it's only 12 seats per state you get dozens of candidates which makes the ballot sheet difficult to decipher. At a constituency level you would only have maybe 10 candidates and the resulting parliament would be a better representation of the will of the people. Not sure about this. The number of candidates is broadly going to increase with the number of seats available. I remember the NI Peace Talks elections with five members per constituency and NI Assembly elections with six. In East Belfast we had over a hundred candidates. The end result is that smaller parties find it easier to get representation, meaning nobody will have an overall majority and government will always be some form of coalition. I think that is a good thing - but many don't. It can lead to unstable governments and smaller parties getting to implement policies that don;t have much popular support. But on the other hand (and I find this compelling) it requires trading, dealing and compromise rather than one lot being able to steamroller the other lot - hence catching a lot of bad policies before they every happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Because everyone should have a say and be forced to have a say. Otherwise what always happens is the people who want change are the ones who go to the trouble of voting whereas the one's content tend not to bother. This is one of the key advantages for the Leave campaign in Brexit too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul1Perth Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 The day of reckoning. I think a lot of people who've been in support of the out vote will lose their nerve when it comes to putting it down on paper. A lot will just think better the devil you know. I would like it to be an out vote but gut feeling says in. Hope I'm wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robfromdublin Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 100 candidates is a bit much, I'll give you that! At least if you do it in such a way that a person only has to fill in the slots they wish to, rather than the full ballot that could work. Yes you're right one party rarely has a majority, but I also tend to think it's better that way. I can't see it happening here in any case. Parley, if someone can't even be bothered to take a short time out of their day to vote then why should their opinion count the same as someone who campaigns for something? For even a slightly complex referendum they wouldn't be an informed voter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.