Home & Garden20 mins ago
Chris Patten
74 Answers
This man has been on the TV this week rubbishing Brexit. Prise coming from a man who, as Governor of Hong Kong, fought for HK to have a democracy all the time he was there. I lived in Hong Kong at the time and was right behind him? However, on his return he was made a European Commissioner! Usually given as a reward or to compensate failure, is Mandleson was given a Commission job for failing as a Minister. I know these people are protecting their fat EU pensions but I think it's a bit rich!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by lindapalmara. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
“How can you not like something which, by your own admission, has no effect on your daily life?”
I don’t know whether you are being deliberately obtuse or whether you really don’t get it, Zacs. Either way, there’s not much point in our continuing to debate the same thing over and over again. So I’ll just explain one more time:
I don’t like the fact that a body – especially one so democratically deficient as the EU – can hold sway over what the elected UK government may or may not do. The issue is not with what the Euromaniacs do or do not do. (I support some of the things they do whilst vehemently opposing others). It’s the fact that they have the power to do it that is my concern. I do not like the idea that unelected foreign civil servants, whom we cannot deselect, can dictate what laws the UK government – and hence UK citizens - must comply with. I don’t know of any other country or group of countries outside Europe that would acquiesce to such a scheme. I accept that common standards are necessary for trade to be relatively frictionless. However I believe that the mass of other legislation introduced by the EU Commission has nothing to do with trade (the EEC’s original focus) but simply amounts to a concerted march towards a Federal State.
I accept that there is much wrong with the democratic process and with politics in the UK (as you have rightly pointed out in the past). But it’s the best we’ve got and the electorate is not best served by ditching the democracy that we have got – warts and all - for no democracy at all.
It’s quite clear that you (and probably most Remainers) are happy to see the UK government have its hands tied by such an organisation. You must also be content to see its aim of a United States of Europe ultimately fulfilled. (If not you should have voted to leave because, unless it breaks up in chaos, that will be the eventual outcome). That is your privilege. The majority of people who voted in the referendum obviously thought differently.
I don’t really know how much clearer or simpler I can put it.
I don’t know whether you are being deliberately obtuse or whether you really don’t get it, Zacs. Either way, there’s not much point in our continuing to debate the same thing over and over again. So I’ll just explain one more time:
I don’t like the fact that a body – especially one so democratically deficient as the EU – can hold sway over what the elected UK government may or may not do. The issue is not with what the Euromaniacs do or do not do. (I support some of the things they do whilst vehemently opposing others). It’s the fact that they have the power to do it that is my concern. I do not like the idea that unelected foreign civil servants, whom we cannot deselect, can dictate what laws the UK government – and hence UK citizens - must comply with. I don’t know of any other country or group of countries outside Europe that would acquiesce to such a scheme. I accept that common standards are necessary for trade to be relatively frictionless. However I believe that the mass of other legislation introduced by the EU Commission has nothing to do with trade (the EEC’s original focus) but simply amounts to a concerted march towards a Federal State.
I accept that there is much wrong with the democratic process and with politics in the UK (as you have rightly pointed out in the past). But it’s the best we’ve got and the electorate is not best served by ditching the democracy that we have got – warts and all - for no democracy at all.
It’s quite clear that you (and probably most Remainers) are happy to see the UK government have its hands tied by such an organisation. You must also be content to see its aim of a United States of Europe ultimately fulfilled. (If not you should have voted to leave because, unless it breaks up in chaos, that will be the eventual outcome). That is your privilege. The majority of people who voted in the referendum obviously thought differently.
I don’t really know how much clearer or simpler I can put it.
From NJ to Zacs, //I don’t know whether you are being deliberately obtuse or whether you really don’t get it, Zacs. Either way, there’s not much point in our continuing to debate the same thing over and over again. //
Which is precisely why I said I'm not entering into discussions about it with you again, Zacs. Groundhog day.
Which is precisely why I said I'm not entering into discussions about it with you again, Zacs. Groundhog day.
But the system isn't working perfectly well for the majority of UK referendum voters Zac.
Actually thinking about it it is working perfectly well. It is working perfectly well for the system that it is. It is just a system that is not democratic. And that the majority who voted decided they didn't want to belong.
You seem to want the status quo simply because you appear to ignore the democratic deficits and problems that it has.
Actually thinking about it it is working perfectly well. It is working perfectly well for the system that it is. It is just a system that is not democratic. And that the majority who voted decided they didn't want to belong.
You seem to want the status quo simply because you appear to ignore the democratic deficits and problems that it has.
I wanted the status quo because the country was doing very well out of it.
Name me 3 ways in which the EU affects your daily life cassa, and 3 ways it will definitely (not speculatively) improve in a year’s time.
(I make no apologies for repeating my question as I see it as the most relevant question about why leave voters voted).
Name me 3 ways in which the EU affects your daily life cassa, and 3 ways it will definitely (not speculatively) improve in a year’s time.
(I make no apologies for repeating my question as I see it as the most relevant question about why leave voters voted).
We will not be a tad more democratically governed through leaving the EU, in my opinion.
I give one example: our local clinic was threatened with closure recently. Our local MP circulated a questionnaire to people canvassing their opinions on the closure. It is hard to imagine that anyone replied "I agree with that". The result of all the protest? The clinic will close anyway.
Against that, the local council planned a housing development on an AONB: again, lots of protests. The result this time? The development got canned. This is the sort of democracy that matters to me, and I cannot see how our membership of the EU affects it in any way. We will carry on as befor,e winnig some and losing some.
On the other hand all economic forecasts suggest that the areas with voted in greatest numbers for Brexit are the ones likley to suffer economically. It seems that at the moment people realise this but don't care.
I give one example: our local clinic was threatened with closure recently. Our local MP circulated a questionnaire to people canvassing their opinions on the closure. It is hard to imagine that anyone replied "I agree with that". The result of all the protest? The clinic will close anyway.
Against that, the local council planned a housing development on an AONB: again, lots of protests. The result this time? The development got canned. This is the sort of democracy that matters to me, and I cannot see how our membership of the EU affects it in any way. We will carry on as befor,e winnig some and losing some.
On the other hand all economic forecasts suggest that the areas with voted in greatest numbers for Brexit are the ones likley to suffer economically. It seems that at the moment people realise this but don't care.
"I just can’t get my head around anyone voting to change a system which was working perfectly well and which by your own admission, doesn’t affect our daily lives."
But it’s not working perfectly well, Zacs. Its monetary policies have consigned millions of people – particularly the young – in southern Europe to penury. It has presided over a shambolic immigration crisis which has been exacerbated by its ludicrous Schengen Agreement. Next up will be an economic crisis in Italy which will come about for the same reason as caused the penury visited upon Greece, Spain and Portugal. It simply stumbles from one crisis to the next because it refuses to accept that its Utopian vision for Europe, particularly its fiscal and immigration policies, are simply not fit for purpose. Fortunately the UK has been shielded from the worst effects of some of this by being (kindly) provided with “opt outs” from both the single currency and Schengen. They will not last forever. In true EU style they will be removed (under the guise of “harmonisation”) as soon as the opportunity arises and the next “Treaty” is on the table.
When I said it does not affect my daily life I did not mean that it does not affect me at all. Our membership of the EU does not prevent me conducting my life on a daily basis with some modicum of order. However there are countless items of legislation that have been introduced by the EU that do affect me. I cannot have a proper vacuum cleaner (next will be regulations on hair-dryers, toasters and kettles); I cannot buy incandescent light bulbs; I cannot buy duty-free goods in Europe; I cannot enjoy a separate “UK passport holders” queue at Gatwick; I pay a tidy sum on my energy bills to satisfy the EU directive on Climate Change and the use of so-called renewables. Each one small beer, I agree. But my list is by no means exhaustive and these are beers that should not be for an unelected super-quango to serve.
If a UK government had originated the same legislation I’d still be unhappy with it but I’d be content that it had been introduced by the UK’s MPs and voted on by them solely with the best interests of the UK in mind. As I keep saying, it’s not what they do but the fact that they can do it and I don’t think we will ever resolve that fundamental difference between us.
But it’s not working perfectly well, Zacs. Its monetary policies have consigned millions of people – particularly the young – in southern Europe to penury. It has presided over a shambolic immigration crisis which has been exacerbated by its ludicrous Schengen Agreement. Next up will be an economic crisis in Italy which will come about for the same reason as caused the penury visited upon Greece, Spain and Portugal. It simply stumbles from one crisis to the next because it refuses to accept that its Utopian vision for Europe, particularly its fiscal and immigration policies, are simply not fit for purpose. Fortunately the UK has been shielded from the worst effects of some of this by being (kindly) provided with “opt outs” from both the single currency and Schengen. They will not last forever. In true EU style they will be removed (under the guise of “harmonisation”) as soon as the opportunity arises and the next “Treaty” is on the table.
When I said it does not affect my daily life I did not mean that it does not affect me at all. Our membership of the EU does not prevent me conducting my life on a daily basis with some modicum of order. However there are countless items of legislation that have been introduced by the EU that do affect me. I cannot have a proper vacuum cleaner (next will be regulations on hair-dryers, toasters and kettles); I cannot buy incandescent light bulbs; I cannot buy duty-free goods in Europe; I cannot enjoy a separate “UK passport holders” queue at Gatwick; I pay a tidy sum on my energy bills to satisfy the EU directive on Climate Change and the use of so-called renewables. Each one small beer, I agree. But my list is by no means exhaustive and these are beers that should not be for an unelected super-quango to serve.
If a UK government had originated the same legislation I’d still be unhappy with it but I’d be content that it had been introduced by the UK’s MPs and voted on by them solely with the best interests of the UK in mind. As I keep saying, it’s not what they do but the fact that they can do it and I don’t think we will ever resolve that fundamental difference between us.
So NJ, you voted to leave because:
1. People in Southern Europe are in penuary. How noble of you.
2. Italy is, you claim, heading for an economic downturn.
3. You can’t buy a decent vacuum (you should try a digital motor Dyson)
4. You can’t buy energy sapping incandescent lamps (there are LED filament lamps available which are just as good). This tipifies the older generation’s inconsiderate ignoring of young people’s future BTW.
5. You like queuing in a separate line at the airport.
And 6. You’re being deprived of a bit of discount on your Remy Martin.
Well why didn’t you say that earlier. All perfectly sound reasons for disrupting our countries economy!
1. People in Southern Europe are in penuary. How noble of you.
2. Italy is, you claim, heading for an economic downturn.
3. You can’t buy a decent vacuum (you should try a digital motor Dyson)
4. You can’t buy energy sapping incandescent lamps (there are LED filament lamps available which are just as good). This tipifies the older generation’s inconsiderate ignoring of young people’s future BTW.
5. You like queuing in a separate line at the airport.
And 6. You’re being deprived of a bit of discount on your Remy Martin.
Well why didn’t you say that earlier. All perfectly sound reasons for disrupting our countries economy!
Latest Posts
ChatterBank36 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles64 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles137 mins ago
Are We Heading Towards Another...
Politics137 mins ago
ChatterBank142 mins ago
