pitrevie

2 hours ago, thaiturkey said:

WRONG......THE UK JOINED THE COMMON MARKET....a trading block.

This has since morphed (or attempted to) into a Federal Europe which few people really want, bringing with it massive restrictions on national governments, and huge increases in costs, and mindless bureaucracy. Then there is the Euro fiasco, which only benefits Germany; this crisis alone is enough to destroy the EU. Finally uncontrolled immigration, including a lot of barbaric future terrorsists.

The EU was doomed long before Brexit, Brexit will merely hasten the process!

The Community's initial aim was to bring about economic integration, including a common market and customs union, that was in the original intent. Do explain what it is about economic integration you don't understand?

1 hour ago, nontabury said:

In the 1970's the British electorate voted to join a Trading Block called the EEC.

If it had remained a trading block, with minor changes, this would have been acceptable to the vast majority of people. But you are incorrect in stateing "it's still the same organisation that we joined" The problem occurred when the politicians and senior Bureacrats decided to steam roll it into a Political so called Union,namely the E.U. Without firstly gaining the consent of the people.

I would agree that at the time of these treaties, the average member of the public

( also some well informed people like M.T. ) had no idea what these treaties entailed. However by 2016 many people had started to ask critical questions  regarding the direction the EU had taken  and further more were it is going, this is of course unless it disintegrates, as predicted by many people.

 

 

 

 

Could I remind you that the EU was once called the European Economic Community. The Community's initial aim was to bring about economic integration, including a common market and customs union, that sounds to me more than just some trading block. what part of that do you think was obscure?

So given that you are so keen on people being consulted about these changes I gather that when the full details are known you will be in favour of those same people being given the final say as to whether we accept the deal on offer? I accept we are going to leave the EU but on what terms, after all we were assured by many of the principal spokesmen that leaving the EU did not mean leaving the single market.

2 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Am I correct in thinking you are a supporter of Scottish seperation. And if so,one of the arguments put forward by the  SNP, was that Briexit was a fundamental change from what they voted for in the referendum of 2014, even though everyone was aware that a Briexit referendum was on the cards.Yet the British people as a whole,voted in 1973 to join the EEC, not the EU, and they certainly were not given the opportunity to vote on the Mastricht and Lisbon so called treaties.

 Is't it about time you and the rest of the Remoaners,realise that the British people have,as a whole voted to leave this undemocratic and corrupt so called Union.

 

 

 

No you are not correct in fact I see more strength in being unified than going alone hence my support for the EU.

Once again back to this silly distinction of course we didn't vote for the EU in 1975 are you really saying that the organization should not have changed in any way, it's much larger now but it's still the same organization that we joined more members constantly changing what organization doesn't change. It's still headquartered in the same place.

As for a vote on Lisbon or Maastricht I assume then that you are in favour of having a referendum every time we conclude a new or different treaty with anyone. Does that mean all the new treaties that are up for negotiation must first be approved by referendum?  That should be fun when we negotiate a free trade agreement with the USA I look forward to a referendum on the matter. 

That isn't the way the British system works and as I have pointed out we are a representative democracy, we elect MPs to use their judgement on these matters. 

I would really like to know what you think the average member of the public knows about the Lisbon or Maastricht treaties or indeed the SEA. My guess is zero.

15 hours ago, CharlieK said:

The beginning of the end! There is only one way the EU can survive and that is to keep the UK in the EU. There is no way they can continue without the contributions the UK makes into the EU coffers. You cannot have a two speed EU, where the southern states are left behind by the stronger EU countries as is happening.

 

Will there be an EU at the end of 2017?  

The EU was there before the UK joined and now that the one country that spent the last 40 years whinging, complaining and demanding special deals is leaving I should imagine that they are going to be there long after the door has slammed behind us. 

The European Parliament will no longer have to put up with Farage droning on and on and his presence will not be missed in the one committee he was appointed to given that he attended just once out of a possible 42 times.

I think Kenneth Clarke got it just right when he said words to the effect that he wished his country well even though he thought it was a very bad decision and that he feared for the future a position I endorse wholeheartedly.

i also wish the EU well in the future as I do not see it in the U.Ks interest that it should fall apart as many on the Brexit side wish for. 

7 hours ago, George FmplesdaCosteedback said:

Okay thanks for that. I rather like the cartoon.

I would point out that the UK was promised a vote on "any major change in the EU treaties and agreements" by several  (some prospective) PMs in the run up to several elections, but each time we were let down. That is where representational democracy breaks down. Had Thatcher read through the Single European Act herself before signing it in '86 she said herself she would never have signed it.

You can't trust every decision to the elected few, and the civil service..

 

Great so what do we do from now on when we negotiate treaties with numerous countries? Should we hold a referendum every time we negotiate a new treaty or even when there is some change to an existing treaty as with Lisbon, Maastricht etc?

Then if our representatives don't read what they are signing up to and people like Thatcher fundamentally don't understand what they are signing then how on earth is Joe public going to make an informed decision when it's down to him to decide. I guess we will all have to rely on the Daily Hail to tell us which way to vote I am certain their leader writers will be wading through these issues so as to better inform us. 

As Churchill often said democracy is the worst form of government but it's better than all the rest. 

3 hours ago, nontabury said:

When did the British people get the opportunity to vote on the Mastricht and Lisbon treaties?

 

 

 

 

 

 

We don't vote on treaties because we have a system of representative democracy. Are you really suggesting that anyone would bother to read these treaties and make a considered judgement. We rely on our representatives in Parliament to do the job for us and like all the laws and treaties originating from the EU none of them can take effect until our own Parliament approves them which it did. It has been stated often enough the UK Parliament is supreme in all matters of law making in the U.K. And has been since the time of Cromwell.  As Thatcher remarked if we were to submit these issues to referenda then we would not have abolished hanging. 

14 minutes ago, Morakot said:

 

555 that was a good one!

 

Monckton was never a member of  the "Lords". Just a pure fraught who happened to have  an aristocratic title.

Pre the Blair reformation he would have been entitled to sit in the Lords but thanks to Blair we have been spared that fate.

3 hours ago, hawker9000 said:

 

Oh my goodness! You mean there's no law in the UK that allows only thw people YOU think are "bright" to vote?? 'Must change that! Or even better, just eliminate all that pesky majority business, and put l'il ol' YOU in charge. What a concept, eh?

Pffffft

 

Churchill didn't appear to have a very high opinion of the average voter.

“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” 

1 minute ago, Morakot said:

 

It's quite self-explanatory; just watch the clip.

 

Whether I agree or not with what's being said there is not very relevant. What's much more interesting is that "Lords reform" has been on the table for more than 100 years and it has been consistently blocked, hindered, and water down by all sorts of parliamentarians --- spearheaded by conservative politicians. The irony is that only a few weeks again minsters threaten to create a 1000 (one thousand!) new Conservative peers if the government doesn't get its way. Hypocrisy!

Agreed and it's strange that one of the most derided PMs in recent times is the only one who reformed the Lords to any degree, getting rid of the automatic conservative majority and the automatic right of many others to sit in the Lords such as Christopher  Monckton. Still a long way to go but it was a start.

I am sure that those who now have their country back free from the unelected dictatorship of Brussels will not want to avail themselves of any such offer. 

37 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

There was nothing in the referendum about the process of Brexit and therefore the claim that the government is carrying out the direct will of the people by being opposed to parliamentary scrutiny is a bogus one.

You are quite right but what was stated by many of the principle spokesmen for Brexit and especially by Boris Johnson was that Brexit did not mean exit from the single market and that we intended to remain in the single market. I gather that position has now been abandoned.  

32 minutes ago, Ken Khomdee said:

Smart man. he probably wants to eat with these people as much as I would want to eat with many of the people on here. Press on Mr. President, there are far better ways to spend your time!

I agree and the fact that its on a Saturday when they know full well that he will be Mar-a-Lago playing golf.

They should get Alec Baldwin to do it instead.

2 hours ago, 4737 Carlin said:

'The people who cast the votes don't decide an election, the people who count the votes do.'

Electoral fraud in Labour-controlled areas is endemic.
 

Go on tell us about all the dead people still on the electoral role.

1 minute ago, nontabury said:

 Coming from a diehard Labour area,I' m not at all surprised at this result,even though Stoke recorded one of the highest votes for Briexit 70%.                                 As they say in these areas, you can put a red rosette on a Donkey and they'd still vote Labour in a domestic vote.

 What would be interesting,would the Scottish electorate who voted 62% to remain in the EU, transfer their votes to the SNP in the event of a 2nd seperation referendum, or would they realise that they are better of in the UK.

 

 

 

 I have never understood that sort of remark as if it only applies to die hard Labour areas. I am sure there are plenty of Tory areas where if you stuck a blue rosette on a donkey the locals would still vote for it.

"You know what uranium is, right? This thing called nuclear weapons like lots of things are done with uranium including some bad things". Well at least Trump has sorted that out, he knows far more than any scientist you care to name.

13 minutes ago, jpinx said:

 

Well that's the fourth time he has failed to get into the UK Parliament, I bet he is after Farage's record of 7. Now that their European gravy train is coming to a halt they are desperate to keep their snouts in the trough.

4 hours ago, zaZa9 said:

"HOLD your nose and vote for Chirac" is the message from France's Socialists this weekend as they face an unappetizing choice between Jacques Chirac and Jean-Marie Le Pen, the National Front leader, in tomorrow's presidential election."

 

And what if the public won't?

I swear , this constant  dismisiveness of  the  expressed concerns of the general populous by the Left who purport to be their representatives  will  only see them  lose ground and assist  the rise of the radical Right ...

Call it 'protest votes' , call it whatever you want , but if the Left continue to ignore or even ridicule their constituents views  , then they will lose badly.

And like the US , a plainly polarised  situation will result ...

 

Then if the public wont they will get a Trump or even worse as we have seen before in Europe and then we will see how well off they will be. Already in the USA the draining of the swamp is on hold in fact it is now overflowing with the very people the likes of Trump and Farage railed against. 

"HOLD your nose and vote for Chirac" is the message from France's Socialists this weekend as they face an unappetizing choice between Jacques Chirac and Jean-Marie Le Pen, the National Front leader, in tomorrow's presidential election.

That was the message in 2002 and I expect it will be the same this time around. The French will hold their noses and vote for cholera' instead of the plague.

It appears the campaign for his release was led by none other than the Daily Hail and supported by one Boris Johnson. Of course the Daily Hail is now trying to pin the blame elsewhere.

10 minutes ago, alanrchase said:

 

You do have a "New England" though if I remember correctly.

Sent from my SM-A500F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app
 

 

and don't forget New York

2 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

 

it seems to be the way now for everything when people don't like a result or until they get the answer they were after. Ireland, Holland as examples.

What you mean like the British referendum where the EU declared within hours that they respected the decision of the British people  and that they should go as soon as possible and which I heartily agree with.

However to my knowledge we haven't yet held a referendum on whether to invite Trump for a State visit but I give my solemn pledge if we do I will respect the result, how about you?

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

There was no majority in favour of banning Trump from the UK. Just a bunch of silly lefty loonies having a whine about something they had no control over.

Perhaps we need to hold a referendum to see if the majority of British people support this decision.

1 hour ago, whatawonderfulday said:

should have been de-frocked on Facebook !!!

Yes I am surprised  that he hasn't already been defrocked unlike the Catholics who have tended to move them to another location where they can start all over again.