Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by paul514)
    Aka I'm happy to discuss it if remain supporters will directly answer questions


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Hear, hear!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Well, I don't think he wanted reform of the EU. He just wanted something to shut the backbenchers up because he stupidly thought that he would get more support.

    The issue is that we won't get reform of the EU by being outside of it without any voting influence. If multiple countries such as Sweden and the Netherlands threatened to break away then it might make sense but that is not the case.
    As regards to "reform", there doesn't seem to be much of a roadmap for this. There is no indication of how it might happen; or its feasibility, especially bearing in mind how sclerotic some of its institutions are, and how reluctant to make changes to the EU even when its second-largest net contributor is threatening to leave. I was extremely surprised with the miserly 'reforms' the Prime Minister secured a few months ago. I was expecting the EU to placate the UK government so as to still its uneasy spirit.

    I am not quite sure how the aftermath of the "Remain" vote will propel the sort of reform your thinking. It strikes me that such vote will be perceived as a discreet acquiescence in the general direction of even greater fiscal, economic, political and judicial union. This strikes me as a departure from a certain English liberal tradition (somewhat mythologised) from the Magna Carta, the Civil War, the Glorious Revolution, the Great Reform Acts and the primacy of the Commons over the Lords. It doesn't quite follow.

    The objective of the EU is a drift away from supranationalism and towards federalism. Decision-making is streamlined as control is centralised. It's the only means to a more efficient Europe: a more centralised Europe. The "status quo" is not what we're voting for. That's because it's not a fixed constitutional position. The drive is towards deeper integration & increased federalism. Whatever your views on the EU, the vote is really not a new deal or a new relationship, it's exactly the same.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I disagree. The UK Government got a commitment that the UK does not need to sign up to any further integration projects that it does not feel interested in. This was already conceded in practice years ago (things like the euro and the Social Chapter), and now it's out there.

    What's more, domestically we've already enshrined in law that any further Treaty changes must be ratified in the UK by referendum. I have come to despise referendums, but we are where we are.

    The EU itself is the agglomeration of many voices and interests. It is not a single body with a single purpose, driven by a single mind. That's the fundamental misunderstanding of eurosceptics. It's not aiming towards federalism; some of its voices may be, but fundamentally it is not. What's more, the EU has already made concessions towards giving local voices greater importance, with the green/red card scheme for national parliaments and the beefing up of the Reasoned Opinion system.

    Much like 'reform' of parliament, the problem is this: you can't have it be made more efficient and/or democratic without eliminating voices and veto points from its decisionmaking process, and doing so would cause outcry of the EU 'federalising'; likewise, you can't make it more subject to local concerns and national interests without compromising its ability to respond quickly and with co-ordination, and that gives its opponents more ammunition to criticise it with.

    Efficient, democratic, intergovernmental. Pick any two.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    The idea we can Reform the EU is simply mad, we tried it with a serious threat of leaving (admittedly I think they kinda want us to leave) and it got nowhere, the German far right is rising, the Dutch are questioning, as are the Flemish.
    Mobile[/URL][/SIZE]
    Well, I don't know how you would know if no one has tried to achieve any realistic reform. The British position has been to sit and do nothing and let the French and Germans run the show and then complain after.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Well, I don't know how you would know if no one has tried to achieve any realistic reform. The British position has been to sit and do nothing and let the French and Germans run the show and then complain after.
    Maybe because for the last 40 years we've been trying to take it in a different direction, read reform it, and get various concessions. Funnily enough the direction is not the one we tried to take it and concessions tend to only be permanent for as long as people remember they're a thing.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    Just like the remain figures were lies the out campaign simply doesn't want to do it.

    Whatever they say will be wrong as they don't 100% know anything as in who will do the negotiation, how long the talks will last and of course what deal will be done because durr it hasn't been negotiated yet.

    You can only do something on balance of probability


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    So we should split the UK into independent countries based on counties, each ruled by a fudal lord selected from a trial in combat! Then Yorkshire would have it's sovereignty back.

    I mean, I have no doubt if you used the best financial forecasting on what that would do to our economy it would show it falls to pieces.

    But we should still do it, because a forcast isn't 100% and we can't know for sure.

    The argument that forecast and predictions should be absolutely discounted and ignored because they might not be perfect and we don't know "for sure" is as meaningless as blindly following them. They are evidence to add to the pile.

    Try telling a business not to forecast it's profits, losses etc forward when making big business decisions because you can't know for sure. They'll tell you to shove off.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Maybe because for the last 40 years we've been trying to take it in a different direction, read reform it, and get various concessions. Funnily enough the direction is not the one we tried to take it and concessions tend to only be permanent for as long as people remember they're a thing.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Well, the UK hasn't. Involvement is minimal at best. That is why Agricultural policy has been completely dominated by the French even though it is a broken policy. Did Cameron or Thatcher negotiate that? No. Get the rebate and leave the broken policy in place.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Hear, hear!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    No one took it up, third thread running


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hanvyj)
    So we should split the UK into independent countries based on counties, each ruled by a fudal lord selected from a trial in combat! Then Yorkshire would have it's sovereignty back.

    I mean, I have no doubt if you used the best financial forecasting on what that would do to our economy it would show it falls to pieces.

    But we should still do it, because a forcast isn't 100% and we can't know for sure.

    The argument that forecast and predictions should be absolutely discounted and ignored because they might not be perfect and we don't know "for sure" is as meaningless as blindly following them. They are evidence to add to the pile.

    Try telling a business not to forecast it's profits, losses etc forward when making big business decisions because you can't know for sure. They'll tell you to shove off.
    None of which I said


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by paul514)
    No one took it up, third thread running


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Well I regularly ask inners what the legislative agenda of the EU is for the next 12 months and funnily enough none of them are even able to tell me one item that's either due or expected to come up, even though they all seem to claim to see several decades into the future.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.