4 hours ago, candide said:

One of the main argument for Brexit has been that the "new" global UK would be able to strike significant deals which would not have been possible for the EU to make  (because of EU bureaucracy, etc...)

So what did UK achieve in terms of trade deals which has not been made already (or close to completion ) by the EU? And if any, how significant?

Most significant is that they are UK deals with rest in of the world, not EU deals. The bigger and better UK/World deals are in progress now, while the EU is a spent force. Enjoy your bloc while you can.  

Sovereignty is just a word, British citizens do not have any greater rights since Brexit, rather the reverse, lost the freedom to travel and live in Europe with no restrictions.

Brexit sold the UK fishing industry out to complete the deal, and the farming industry as well. Now busy trying to roll back Environmental promises as well. Small and Medium enterprises lost the ability to export to Europe with no restrictions, and exports from them have fallen substantially - it is no longer financially viable. Only people to benefit so far are the larger companies (less competition for them). Life was a damn sight better 15 years ago in the UK.

14 hours ago, rickudon said:

Sovereignty is just a word, British citizens do not have any greater rights since Brexit, rather the reverse, lost the freedom to travel and live in Europe with no restrictions.

Brexit sold the UK fishing industry out to complete the deal, and the farming industry as well. Now busy trying to roll back Environmental promises as well. Small and Medium enterprises lost the ability to export to Europe with no restrictions, and exports from them have fallen substantially - it is no longer financially viable. Only people to benefit so far are the larger companies (less competition for them). Life was a damn sight better 15 years ago in the UK.

Well, now the decisions about the country are taken by people we elected. As opposed to some unelected Bureaucrat in Brussels who is selected by their peers and cannot be voted out.

 

I will always take Democracy over Technocracy.

23 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Well, now the decisions about the country are taken by people we elected. As opposed to some unelected Bureaucrat in Brussels who is selected by their peers and cannot be voted out.

 

I will always take Democracy over Technocracy.

What are talking about?

Council: composed of elected country governments

Commission: selected by council members

Parliament: elected

55 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Well, now the decisions about the country are taken by people we elected. As opposed to some unelected Bureaucrat in Brussels who is selected by their peers and cannot be voted out.

 

I will always take Democracy over Technocracy.

Brussels never took decisions about the uk governance.

 

the uk signed up to regulations.

 

They ar not the same thing.

28 minutes ago, candide said:

What are talking about?

Council: composed of elected country governments

Commission: selected by council members

Parliament: elected

I am talking about the commission. They are 'selected' and not elected. That's how you end up with drunks like Juncker in positions of power or now the useless Von Der Leyen. Useless bunch of technocrats. Not exactly a shining light for diversity either.

 

24 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

I am talking about the commission. They are 'selected' and not elected. That's how you end up with drunks like Juncker in positions of power or now the useless Von Der Leyen. Useless bunch of technocrats. Not exactly a shining light for diversity either.

 

''A new EC is appointed every five years, within six months of the elections to the European Parliament, which occur in June. The procedure is that the governments of the member states jointly select a commission president, who is then approved by Parliament. The president of the EC is chosen by the European Council, a body made up the heads of state of each of the countries in the EU, for a term lasting two and one-half years. The commission president-designate, in discussion with the member state governments, chooses the other members of the EC.''

 

https://www.britannica.com/topic/European-Commission

 

Just now, Bluespunk said:

''A new EC is appointed every five years, within six months of the elections to the European Parliament, which occur in June. The procedure is that the governments of the member states jointly select a commission president, who is then approved by Parliament. The president of the EC is chosen by the European Council, a body made up the heads of state of each of the countries in the EU, for a term lasting two and one-half years. The commission president-designate, in discussion with the member state governments, chooses the other members of the EC.''

 

https://www.britannica.com/topic/European-Commission

 

Yes. Selected, not elected.

 

Glad we're in agreement.

7 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Yes. Selected, not elected.

 

Glad we're in agreement.

Good I am thankful you understand they are selected by the elected representatives of the member countries.

 

Elected to the Parliament in Elections every 5 years.

 

In much the same way a cabinet in the uk is selected by the elected parliamentary representatives after national elections.

 

See how that works...

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

I am talking about the commission. They are 'selected' and not elected. That's how you end up with drunks like Juncker in positions of power or now the useless Von Der Leyen. Useless bunch of technocrats. Not exactly a shining light for diversity either.

 

But the Commission is not a legislative body.

 

To argue that EU states are governed by the Commission is like arguing that the UK is governed by the Civil Service. The Commission and Civil Service undoubtedly both have an influence but they do govern.

8 minutes ago, RayC said:

But the Commission is not a legislative body.

 

To argue that EU states are governed by the Commission is like arguing that the UK is governed by the Civil Service. The Commission and Civil Service undoubtedly both have an influence but they do govern.

I guess you mean "do not" govern.

He's been told at least 100 times but he cannot acknowledge it as it nullifies one of the main Brexiters argument.

38 minutes ago, candide said:

I guess you mean "do not" govern.

He's been told at least 100 times but he cannot acknowledge it as it nullifies one of the main Brexiters argument.

Yes. Thanks  Typo.  "... do NOT govern ..."

 

I agree entirely. Facts appear to be an irrelevant to Brexiters as is the ability to take any accountability and responsibility for what they voted for 

15 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Good I am thankful you understand they are selected by the elected representatives of the member countries.

 

Elected to the Parliament in Elections every 5 years.

 

In much the same way a cabinet in the uk is selected by the elected parliamentary representatives after national elections.

 

See how that works...

Except in the UK, the MP that I vote for has powers along with other MP's to propose legislation, to introduce a bill.

 

In the EU, the right to inititate legislation is reserved for the EU Commission. So the people we vote for have very little power, and the people who really run the show, those with the real power are 'selected'. EU Parliamentarians are like a toothless tiger, which is just the way the commission likes it. Give the illusion of being democratic without actually affording those elected by the voters any real powers.

 

If you're happy to pretend that is real Democracy, great. I'm not and neither were the UK electorate which is The BRexit party had so many seats before we swiftly left.

14 hours ago, RayC said:

But the Commission is not a legislative body.

 

To argue that EU states are governed by the Commission is like arguing that the UK is governed by the Civil Service. The Commission and Civil Service undoubtedly both have an influence but they do govern.

Nonsense. Does the UK Civil service initiate new legislation? No. Yet the European Commission does. Not even nearly the same thing. Ridiculous comparison.

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Except in the UK, the MP that I vote for has powers along with other MP's to propose legislation, to introduce a bill.

 

In the EU, the right to inititate legislation is reserved for the EU Commission. So the people we vote for have very little power, and the people who really run the show, those with the real power are 'selected'. EU Parliamentarians are like a toothless tiger, which is just the way the commission likes it. Give the illusion of being democratic without actually affording those elected by the voters any real powers.

 

If you're happy to pretend that is real Democracy, great. I'm not and neither were the UK electorate which is The BRexit party had so many seats before we swiftly left.

Incorrect.
 

Members of the EU Parliament can propose legislation.
 

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/about-parliament/en/powers-and-procedures/legislative-powers

 

 

It is real democracy.
 

You just like to pretend otherwise. 
 

Just now, Bluespunk said:

It is real democracy. You just like to pretend otherwise. 
 

You vote for an MP that has no real power. 1 of over 700.

 

The EC has one member per member state, but members are bound by oath to represent the general interest of the EU as a whole rather than their home state. The commission president (VDL) is proposed by the European Council (the 27 heads of state) and elected (approved) by the European Parliament. The European Council then nominates the other members of the Commission in agreement with the nominated President, and the 27 members as a team are then subject to a vote of approval by the European Parliament.

 

That MP you voted for is one of hundreds of MP's that give a vote of approval on a proposal by the Council. The members that are selected are bound to represent the EU, not the home state. That's some great representation I have there!!! I get to vote for 1 MP who gets a token gesture vote to approve the selection for someone who must represent the EU, not the UK ????. Oh yeah, and the MP I voted for cannot inititiate legislation. Only the EU commission can do that.

 

Yeah, totally democratic ????.

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

You vote for an MP that has no real power. 1 of over 700.

 

The EC has one member per member state, but members are bound by oath to represent the general interest of the EU as a whole rather than their home state. The commission president (VDL) is proposed by the European Council (the 27 heads of state) and elected (approved) by the European Parliament. The European Council then nominates the other members of the Commission in agreement with the nominated President, and the 27 members as a team are then subject to a vote of approval by the European Parliament.

 

That MP you voted for is one of hundreds of MP's that give a vote of approval on a proposal by the Council. The members that are selected are bound to represent the EU, not the home state. That's some great representation I have there!!! I get to vote for 1 MP who gets a token gesture vote to approve the selection for someone who must represent the EU, not the UK ????. Oh yeah, and the MP I voted for cannot inititiate legislation. Only the EU commission can do that.

 

Yeah, totally democratic ????.

Yes it is democratic.

 

And again a EU MP can propose legislation.

 

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/about-parliament/en/powers-and-procedures/legislative-powers

 

Already dealt with your EC selected/elected post and how national governments have a say in it's composition earlier in this thread.

 

 

57 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Yes it is democratic.

 

And again a EU MP can propose legislation.

 

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/about-parliament/en/powers-and-procedures/legislative-powers

 

Already dealt with your EC selected/elected post and how national governments have a say in it's composition earlier in this thread.

 

 

Again.

 

The EC has one member per member state, but those "selected" members are bound by oath to represent the general interest of the EU as a whole rather than their home state. 

 

So I can vote for an MP who has very, very limited powers but I cannot vote for the 'selected' member of the commission that supposedly represents the UK. I say supposedly because the member that represents my home state, the UK is in fact bound by oath to represent the interests of the EU, not the UK.  

 

If that is what you class as Democracy, you're welcome to it. The UK electorate saw it for what it is and decided to leave despite the Europhiles doing their best to block the democratic vote of 2016. Well you failed and we're out, live with it.

23 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Again.

 

The EC has one member per member state, but those "selected" members are bound by oath to represent the general interest of the EU as a whole rather than their home state. 

 

So I can vote for an MP who has very, very limited powers but I cannot vote for the 'selected' member of the commission that supposedly represents the UK. I say supposedly because the member that represents my home state, the UK is in fact bound by oath to represent the interests of the EU, not the UK.  

 

If that is what you class as Democracy, you're welcome to it. The UK electorate saw it for what it is and decided to leave despite the Europhiles doing their best to block the democratic vote of 2016. Well you failed and we're out, live with it.

Answered all this already.

 

And of course lets not forget that while in the EU the uk had more opt outs than any other member state

 

https://www.lewik.org/term/17596/uk-opt-outs-from-eu-legislation-14-the-great-repeal-bill-white-paper/

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Nonsense. Does the UK Civil service initiate new legislation? No. Yet the European Commission does. Not even nearly the same thing. Ridiculous comparison.

Can the Commission pass new legislation itself? No!

 

It works on researching and drafting prospective legislation in the same way the UK Civil Service does.

3 minutes ago, RayC said:

Can the Commission pass new legislation itself? No!

 

It works on researching and drafting prospective legislation in the same way the UK Civil Service does.

Could the European MP I voted for initiate EU legislation? No! The Commission inititates it and then my MP is one of 700 odd MP's who votes to rubber stamp it. A token gesture to present the illusion of Democracy. 

 

Can my UK MP initiate UK legislation? Of course.

 

What can I do if I don't like the EU leadership? Errr, nothing. Just wait to the next leader to be 'selected' by people I didn't vote for, behind closed doors. What can I do if I don't like The Tories leadership? Vote for Labour or the Lib Dems (assuming I was that stupid). 

 

Maybe best you just accept you lost. It's been 6 years now. No point continuing to whine about it. After all, once we've made amendments to the protocol we'll be one more step away from the corrupt, failing federalist project ????. You can scream about breaking international law all you like but I suggest you check article 16.

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Except in the UK, the MP that I vote for has powers along with other MP's to propose legislation, to introduce a bill.

Except that in reality, a backbench MP has a very slim chance of getting any bill debated in the House, and a snowball's chance in hell of it actually becoming law.

 

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

In the EU, the right to inititate legislation is reserved for the EU Commission. So the people we vote for have very little power, and the people who really run the show, those with the real power are 'selected'.

Covered by others. I would just add that you ignore the fact that the European Parliament can table amendments to proposed legislation.

 

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

EU Parliamentarians are like a toothless tiger, which is just the way the commission likes it.

No different to the UK - especially opposition - MPs then, which is presumably how the government likes it.

 

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Give the illusion of being democratic without actually affording those elected by the voters any real powers.

 

You infer that the UK form of democracy is better but what about the fact that a single party government can be formed by a party securing less than 50% of votes cast? What about the fact that a vote cast for an opposition party in a Labour/ Tory stronghold is effectively meaningless?  What about the fact that an completely unelected second chamber can propose new legislation and block legislation from the lower chamber. 

 

Hardly democratic, is it?

 

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

If you're happy to pretend that is real Democracy, great. I'm not and neither were the UK electorate which is The BRexit party had so many seats before we swiftly left.

As is clear, there are different forms of democratic government. There are pros and cons associated with them all. You can continue with pretence that the UK form is superior if you like.

6 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Could the European MP I voted for initiate EU legislation? No! The Commission inititates it and then my MP is one of 700 odd MP's who votes to rubber stamp it. A token gesture to present the illusion of Democracy. 

 

Can my UK MP initiate UK legislation? Of course.

 

What can I do if I don't like the EU leadership? Errr, nothing. Just wait to the next leader to be 'selected' by people I didn't vote for, behind closed doors. What can I do if I don't like The Tories leadership? Vote for Labour or the Lib Dems (assuming I was that stupid). 

 

Maybe best you just accept you lost. It's been 6 years now. No point continuing to whine about it. After all, once we've made amendments to the protocol we'll be one more step away from the corrupt, failing federalist project ????. You can scream about breaking international law all you like but I suggest you check article 16.

The EC represents the EU's interest (in particular the application of treaties signed by governments)

The Council represents the countries (elected governments)

The EP represents individual citizen.

It seems to be a good balance to me.

 

 

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

The EC has one member per member state, but those "selected" members are bound by oath to represent the general interest of the EU as a whole rather than their home state. 

In a multi-national organisation, why should that be surprising?

 

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

So I can vote for an MP who has very, very limited powers

Discussed in another post. In reality,  UK MPs also have very, very limited legislative powers.

 

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

but I cannot vote for the 'selected' member of the commission that supposedly represents the UK.

The concept of directly elected Commissioners is one that I would support. However, in defence of the existing system, Commissioners are nominated by their respective governments, who presumably select individuals who they feel will also best represent their country.

 

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

I say supposedly because the member that represents my home state, the UK is in fact bound by oath to represent the interests of the EU, not the UK.  

See previous paragraph

 

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

If that is what you class as Democracy, you're welcome to it. The UK electorate saw it for what it is and decided to leave despite the Europhiles doing their best to block the democratic vote of 2016. Well you failed and we're out, live with it.

You're right. Brexiters won. As you again rightly say: 'Deal with it'. Take accountability and responsibility for your decision. Stop pointing the finger at others for your inability to deliver what was promised.

 

A good start might be to try and implement a Agreement which Brexiters lauded as 'Getting Brexit done', rather than try to rewrite a Protocol which, it appears, the majority of the public most affected (NI electorate) have no desire to be rewritten.

On 6/12/2022 at 6:26 AM, Loiner said:

Most significant is that they are UK deals with rest in of the world, not EU deals. The bigger and better UK/World deals are in progress now, while the EU is a spent force. Enjoy your bloc while you can.  

As virtually all economists agree, one of the 2 overwhelming factors that influences how much trade nations due with each other is distance . (The other is the size of the economy) The closer nations are to each other, the more trade there will be between them. The technical term that economists use for this economic fact is gravity. No amount of trade any of the large economies open to freer trading (so that rules out India and China) is going to make much of a difference. Unless the PM is in possession of some magical potion, nothing he can do will defy the law of gravity.

 

Gravity model of trade

The gravity model of international trade in international economics is a model that, in its traditional form, predicts bilateral trade flows based on the economic sizes and distance between two units. Research shows that there is "overwhelming evidence that trade tends to fall with distance."^[1]

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_model_of_trade}

 

Gravity Without Apology: the Science of Elasticities, Distance and Trade 

Gravity as both fact and theory is one of the great success stories of recent research on international trade, and has featured prominently in the policy debate over Brexit. We first review the facts, noting the overwhelming evidence that trade tends to fall with distance.

https://academic.oup.com/ej/article-abstract/130/628/880/5815071?redirectedFrom=fulltext

 

THE GRAVITY EQUATION IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE: AN EXPLANATION

The gravity equation in international trade is one of the most robust empirical finding in economics: bilateral trade between two countries is proportional to size, measured by GDP, and inversely proportional to the geographic distance between them.

https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w19285/w19285.pdf

9 minutes ago, candide said:

The EC represents the EU's interest (in particular the application of treaties signed by governments)

The Council represents the countries (elected governments)

The EP represents individual citizen.

It seems to be a good balance to me.

 

 

Except that the commission (that represents the EU's interests and is 'selected' not 'elected') holds all the power. MP's are there to rubber stamp the decisions and little else. Ferried around in chauffeur driven cars from one cocktail party to the next, very few cause an issue for those with the real power, best not to ruffle any feathers when the perks are so generous. Jobs for the boys, simply there to create the illusion of a functioning Democracy. Clare Fox documented her experience very well, describing the experience as an MEP as a 'gravy train'. Worth a read if you have an open mind.

 

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/gravy-train-a-first-taste-of-life-as-an-mep/

 

Anyway, I'm happy that you like the EU system. I prefer the UK's system of governance and I am delighted that due to Brexit, that system now has full sovereignty over the country and we escaped the federalist project before it was too late.

22 hours ago, JonnyF said:

I am talking about the commission. They are 'selected' and not elected. That's how you end up with drunks like Juncker in positions of power or now the useless Von Der Leyen. Useless bunch of technocrats. Not exactly a shining light for diversity either.

 

They are selected from the elected 

21 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Except that the commission (that represents the EU's interests and is 'selected' not 'elected') holds all the power. MP's are there to rubber stamp the decisions and little else. Ferried around in chauffeur driven cars from one cocktail party to the next, very few cause an issue for those with the real power, best not to ruffle any feathers when the perks are so generous. Jobs for the boys, simply there to create the illusion of a functioning Democracy. Clare Fox documented her experience very well, describing the experience as an MEP as a 'gravy train'. Worth a read if you have an open mind.

 

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/gravy-train-a-first-taste-of-life-as-an-mep/

 

Anyway, I'm happy that you like the EU system. I prefer the UK's system of governance and I am delighted that due to Brexit, that system now has full sovereignty over the country and we escaped the federalist project before it was too late.

As usual you are distorting reality. The EC does not hold all powers. It has been explained to you many times but it doesn't fit the Brexiters narrative.

 

Anyway, you now have an "independent" government, mainly composed of Brexiters. So why don't you stop pointing fingers at others, and focus instead on the political accountability you allegedly voted for.

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

Maybe best you just accept you lost. It's been 6 years now. No point continuing to whine about it. After all, once we've made amendments to the protocol we'll be one more step away from the corrupt, failing federalist project ????. You can scream about breaking international law all you like but I suggest you check article 16.

My reply crossed with your post but to reiterate.

 

Maybe just accept you won, take responsibility and accountability for your decision, act in accordance with Agreements that you willingly signed and stop whining about it being other people's fault when the government you support is unable and/or unwilling to meet its' obligations.

 

I think that it's you who needs to read and understand The Withdrawal Agreement. Enacting Article 16 does not abrogate the Agreement which remans subject to international law 

On 6/12/2022 at 12:26 AM, Loiner said:

Most significant is that they are UK deals with rest in of the world, not EU deals. The bigger and better UK/World deals are in progress now, while the EU is a spent force. Enjoy your bloc while you can.  

Can you give us an example of one of these ‘bigger and better deals’?