Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

EU 'exaserbated' by EU referendum vote Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...rates-brussels

    oh dear the EU is clearly worried the people may actually get a say
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ace123)
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...rates-brussels

    oh dear the EU is clearly worried the people may actually get a say
    We do get a say. We had a say in 2010, 2005, 2001, 1997, 1992, etc etc.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    That would be because concerns about the EU in the UK are being felt throughout Europe.

    In Europe, only 45% of the people support the EU (But that's 60% in Germany)

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-899803.html
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-899460.html


    I sense that the EU never really wants to ask 'people'.

    In relation to playing cards comments that we have a vote inline with our general Elections. Lets remember that Tony Blair promised a referendum that never materialised, The LibDems have it in their manifesto to have a referendum even tough they're now back peddling and saying that they'll veto the bill going through parliament.

    The issue of Europe isn't a left versus right. There's people at all ends of the political spectrum who are for or against the EU membership. Remember, we only got asked about entry into a common market. Not the abortion that the EU has turned into.

    There now appears to be three camps. In, Out and reform. I'm glad this debate is being tabled.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by playingcards)
    We do get a say. We had a say in 2010, 2005, 2001, 1997, 1992, etc etc.
    True I guess UKIP and co campaign for a referendum rather than a parliament vote to leave as it sounds more appealing. So to prove your point i'll just keep voting UKIP till we leave.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    That would be because concerns about the EU in the UK are being felt throughout Europe.

    In Europe, only 45% of the people support the EU (But that's 60% in Germany)

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-899803.html
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-899460.html


    I sense that the EU never really wants to ask 'people'.

    In relation to playing cards comments that we have a vote inline with our general Elections. Lets remember that Tony Blair promised a referendum that never materialised, The LibDems have it in their manifesto to have a referendum even tough they're now back peddling and saying that they'll veto the bill going through parliament.

    The issue of Europe isn't a left versus right. There's people at all ends of the political spectrum who are for or against the EU membership. Remember, we only got asked about entry into a common market. Not the abortion that the EU has turned into.

    There now appears to be three camps. In, Out and reform. I'm glad this debate is being tabled.
    Page 67: IN/OUT when there is a fundamental change in the UK/EU relationship

    There isn't one atm
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    There not the only one, when Mathew Parris was asked he he thought of the Tories banging on about this referendum (and he seems to be pro-Tory as a whole) he said "You don't need a political commentator to analyse today's events, you need a psychiatrist". Further on Con home the bill seems to have gone down like a lead balloon, those who want out say nothing less than this parliament is enough and those who want in view this as an act of extreme weakness.

    Unfortunately this debacle is just one controversy after another and we now have a PM who is allowing his party to essentially vote against his Queen's speech. Whether we have a referendum or not, this decent cannot be aloud.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by playingcards)
    We do get a say. We had a say in 2010, 2005, 2001, 1997, 1992, etc etc.
    That's *******s and you know it.

    No one has had a proper say on the EU since the 70's, which in itself is ridiculous considering how much it has changed from an economic bloc to a political union.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cannotbelieveit)
    That's *******s and you know it.

    No one has had a proper say on the EU since the 70's, which in itself is ridiculous considering how much it has changed from an economic bloc to a political union.
    The ENTIRE point of representative democracy is that our elected leaders make decisions which are expected to be in the best interests of the country. We elect people to get to grips with the minutiae of legislative detail and its consequences, not because they’re necessarily cleverer or better than we are, but because decisions have to be informed. This stuff is complicated, and most people are too busy putting food on the table to balance up and make a decision on, for example, the social, moral, and economics implications of reducing the legal aid bill by £350m. By having people whose job it is to think about this stuff, we get to better outcomes for the country.

    By your logic, people haven’t had a say on legal aid, or capital punishment, or the monarchy, or defence expenditure, or gay marriage, or any other of the thousands of bills and proposals that pass through each parliament.

    By all means, vote UKIP or Tory next time around. I hope that a Eurosceptic majority in Parliament 2015 would lead us out of Europe in a rational and sensible way. But stop pretending that a referendum is about democracy. It’s about you getting what you want. And to hell with the consequences.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    I think the referendum is wrong, we dont need one to leave the EU, we should just leave the EU outright, or seriously change our position within it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jordan-James)
    I think the referendum is wrong, we dont need one to leave the EU, we should just leave the EU outright, or seriously change our position within it.
    I sort of agree. I think it’s for Parliament to decide. It’s their job to weigh up the multifarious complex mix of pros and cons, and make the decision that is deemed to be in the country’s best interest.

    That’s why we have an elected, specialised, representative democratic government, rather than a direct decision by the public whenever we need a new law. That might look good, but it isn’t a healthy or democratic way to run a country.

    By haggling over a referendum, Parliament is shirking its duty.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by playingcards)
    I sort of agree. I think it’s for Parliament to decide. It’s their job to weigh up the multifarious complex mix of pros and cons, and make the decision that is deemed to be in the country’s best interest.

    That’s why we have an elected, specialised, representative democratic government, rather than a direct decision by the public whenever we need a new law. That might look good, but it isn’t a healthy or democratic way to run a country.

    By haggling over a referendum, Parliament is shirking its duty.
    That would be great if our Parliament was legitimately representative - but it quite clearly isn't.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Well said playingcards, couldn't agree more.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OMGWTFBBQ)
    That would be great if our Parliament was legitimately representative - but it quite clearly isn't.
    Again, you only say this to get what you want, not through some principled concern over voting reform.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by playingcards)
    The ENTIRE point of representative democracy is that our elected leaders make decisions which are expected to be in the best interests of the country. We elect people to get to grips with the minutiae of legislative detail and its consequences, not because they’re necessarily cleverer or better than we are, but because decisions have to be informed. This stuff is complicated, and most people are too busy putting food on the table to balance up and make a decision on, for example, the social, moral, and economics implications of reducing the legal aid bill by £350m. By having people whose job it is to think about this stuff, we get to better outcomes for the country.

    By your logic, people haven’t had a say on legal aid, or capital punishment, or the monarchy, or defence expenditure, or gay marriage, or any other of the thousands of bills and proposals that pass through each parliament.

    By all means, vote UKIP or Tory next time around. I hope that a Eurosceptic majority in Parliament 2015 would lead us out of Europe in a rational and sensible way. But stop pretending that a referendum is about democracy. It’s about you getting what you want. And to hell with the consequences.
    Cool story, bro. I suppose we should just let ourselves be totally in thrall to the omniscient politicians who have been so expertly guiding HMS Britannia straight into a sea of minefields. Why anybody would put faith into a corrupt, self-serving class of career politicians is beyond me. But then again, I obviously know less than the holy of holies in Westminster who most definitely aren't in it for themselves.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    Again, you only say this to get what you want, not through some principled concern over voting reform.
    Actually the only times I've ever voted have been for the AV referendum, against a local congestion charge referendum (PR) and EU elections (PR).

    I do not vote in Westminster elections because it would be a complete waste of time given my constituency.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MaxTib)
    Cool story, bro. I suppose we should just let ourselves be totally in thrall to the omniscient politicians who have been so expertly guiding HMS Britannia straight into a sea of minefields. Why anybody would put faith into a corrupt, self-serving class of career politicians is beyond me. But then again, I obviously know less than the holy of holies in Westminster who most definitely aren't in it for themselves.
    That's not what he's saying. He's saying that if we're to have a representative democracy, we should jolly well have one, or if we insist on having referendums, on the basis that we haven't been consulted on the EU, it's only consistent to have them on absolutely everything.

    At least with politicians we can punish them every five years at election time. We're stuck with an unaccountable electorate that can make naff decisions.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OMGWTFBBQ)
    Actually the only times I've ever voted have been for the AV referendum, against a local congestion charge referendum (PR) and EU elections (PR).

    I do not vote in Westminster elections because it would be a complete waste of time given my constituency.
    Well even then, to say that Westminster is not legitimately representative is just overstating your cause; it's perfectly representative, just not representative in the way you in particular approve of. Argue for electoral reform by all means as a means of representation you find better or more efficient, but I think people who campaign on some kind of fundamental principle of representation are missing the point.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MaxTib)
    Cool story, bro. I suppose we should just let ourselves be totally in thrall to the omniscient politicians who have been so expertly guiding HMS Britannia straight into a sea of minefields. Why anybody would put faith into a corrupt, self-serving class of career politicians is beyond me. But then again, I obviously know less than the holy of holies in Westminster who most definitely aren't in it for themselves.
    If that’s the case, get involved! Find a party that represents your views, or start your own party. If politics is so dominated by spineless incompetents, you are shirking a civil duty by simply complaining rather than standing against them. Get out and oppose these self-serving career politicians, put yourself forward, make the case for your integrity and selflessness!

    We shouldn’t be in thrall to politicians. That’s why we have elections – to kick them out if they do badly, and put in people we think will do better. Elections are when people do have a duty to spend time researching and thinking about the minutiae of political decisions, in order to select the representative they think will do the best job for them and the country.

    But we cannot achieve good government through direct democracy unless every one of 60 million in the country can commit time to understand the details of a legislative agenda. That isn’t feasible. Direct democracy is like 400 passengers getting on a plane and demanding an equal say in how it’s flown. Representative democracy allows those 400 passengers to elect the person they think will fly it best (ideally a pilot ), and replacing them if they do it badly.

    For a country to be democratic it’s not enough to have a vote – that vote has to be INFORMED by the facts and a full consideration of the consequences.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    Well even then, to say that Westminster is not legitimately representative is just overstating your cause; it's perfectly representative, just not representative in the way you in particular approve of.
    No. It's just plain unrepresentative.

    I think you're overstating your approval of the system just because you have an issue with direct democracy.

    See how your accusation can work both ways?

    You are just as biased as everybody else - at least with PR everybody's biases are given equal weight.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OMGWTFBBQ)
    No. It's just plain unrepresentative.

    I think you're overstating your approval of the system just because you have an issue with direct democracy.

    See how your accusation can work both ways?

    You are just as biased as everybody else - at least with PR everybody's biases are given equal weight.
    I do have an issue with direct democracy, which playingcards has also touched upon. We have a representative democracy for a reason, because in such a system the decisionmakers can be held to account for their decisions and are chosen and paid to devote time and energy to researching and discussing things in detail. The best the electorate can do is determine broad directions of policy, and very, very few of the public have the inclination to study matters in detail.

    At least when politicians get it wrong - and they do - they can be punished.

    Everybody's biases aren't given weight in PR. This whole subject is aside from the main subject of the thread so I recommend starting a new thread to discuss it, but I will simply point out that the Lib Dems, for example, argue for STV which deliberately enhances parties of the centre, and PR as a whole serves to enhance the power and influence of small parties in parliamentary systems. But I'll leave it there for now.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: May 27, 2013
  • 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
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    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.