How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 4)
Discussion
Coolbanana said:
I’m 100% for QMV over Unanimity – veto voting. 
I want further integration and a Democratic EU (to suggest otherwise is pig-ignorant of the processes involved and not worthy of debate, like declaring the Earth is flat!)) should have the ability to work in a manner that reflects best the wishes of a majority of Member States. As things are at the moment, the EU Council uses a Simple Majority for basic issues – as the name implies, a majority vote on any procedural matter wins the day.
QMV, however, requires a ‘double majority’ and is far more complex, used on larger issues and accounts for most legislation that is voted upon.
How it works is this: 2 Conditions have to be met; 55% of all States have to be in favour and those 55% must represent 65% of the EU population.
To prevent less populous states from ganging up on larger ones, the blocking minority must be composed of at least four countries representing 35% of the overall population in order to block a decision. Abstentions – due to Opt-Outs for example are automatically counted as being Against.
The exception for the threshold is if the proposal did not originate within the EU Commission; then it is increased to 72%.
Unanimity is reserved for especially sensitive voting topics; EU Army (the French are really promoting this, good idea too), who to let in and the like. It is, to me, ultimately anti-Democratic and allows a single State to refuse the wishes of the Majority of States. To behave like a spoiled-brat bully. Any country that wants to be a Member of the EU must respect the Democratic wishes of the Majority - if not, sod off. Bye bye UK you will not be missed kinda thing!
Let's look at it this way: how would you like it if London could veto any major decision that affects the whole of the UK? Think about that, Northerners. You wouldn’t like it, would you? Indeed, you already think London wields too much power and that there is an immense imbalance of preference for National funding and importance. QMV vs Unanimity is essentially the same, QMV allows for a better Democratic system and makes the Will of the Majority easier to achieve – to go in the direction they want to go in.
Now, obviously, if you are severely brainwashed and believe the Boris, JRM, Farage-esque mistruths and redirection a’la Trump, then you will be incapable of understanding that the EU is a true, Democratically-elected representation of the desires of its Member States.
If you cannot free your mind from the fog of lies you have been force-fed to take advantage of your inner prejudices, then you will never appreciate the value of the EU and so you will continue with your Lemming-like Mantra’s and Dogma’s while your Master’s wring their hands gleefully, laughing at you as you help further their nefarious agendas.
I’d say top trolling but from your previous posts you do appear to be a true believer which is fair enough.I want further integration and a Democratic EU (to suggest otherwise is pig-ignorant of the processes involved and not worthy of debate, like declaring the Earth is flat!)) should have the ability to work in a manner that reflects best the wishes of a majority of Member States. As things are at the moment, the EU Council uses a Simple Majority for basic issues – as the name implies, a majority vote on any procedural matter wins the day.
QMV, however, requires a ‘double majority’ and is far more complex, used on larger issues and accounts for most legislation that is voted upon.
How it works is this: 2 Conditions have to be met; 55% of all States have to be in favour and those 55% must represent 65% of the EU population.
To prevent less populous states from ganging up on larger ones, the blocking minority must be composed of at least four countries representing 35% of the overall population in order to block a decision. Abstentions – due to Opt-Outs for example are automatically counted as being Against.
The exception for the threshold is if the proposal did not originate within the EU Commission; then it is increased to 72%.
Unanimity is reserved for especially sensitive voting topics; EU Army (the French are really promoting this, good idea too), who to let in and the like. It is, to me, ultimately anti-Democratic and allows a single State to refuse the wishes of the Majority of States. To behave like a spoiled-brat bully. Any country that wants to be a Member of the EU must respect the Democratic wishes of the Majority - if not, sod off. Bye bye UK you will not be missed kinda thing!
Let's look at it this way: how would you like it if London could veto any major decision that affects the whole of the UK? Think about that, Northerners. You wouldn’t like it, would you? Indeed, you already think London wields too much power and that there is an immense imbalance of preference for National funding and importance. QMV vs Unanimity is essentially the same, QMV allows for a better Democratic system and makes the Will of the Majority easier to achieve – to go in the direction they want to go in.
Now, obviously, if you are severely brainwashed and believe the Boris, JRM, Farage-esque mistruths and redirection a’la Trump, then you will be incapable of understanding that the EU is a true, Democratically-elected representation of the desires of its Member States.
If you cannot free your mind from the fog of lies you have been force-fed to take advantage of your inner prejudices, then you will never appreciate the value of the EU and so you will continue with your Lemming-like Mantra’s and Dogma’s while your Master’s wring their hands gleefully, laughing at you as you help further their nefarious agendas.
For what it’s worth there is undoubtedly a lot that can be said for the benefits that the EU can bring to countries that have little history of democratic legitimacy, small economic heft, problematic public institutions and no corpus of native evolved law.
Possibly it will allow them to develop tools like a respectable military capability and allow them the ability to defend themselves against sizeable more aggressive neighbours.
More problematically they may struggle to balance the effects of being in a single economic area, and with no proper means of managing borders but I’m sure they’ll muddle through in the end. Or the whole thing may be unsustainable. Who knows.
Either way the manifest benefits that all of that brings have little meaning to a country that largely *already* has all of that, so I think the U.K. is wise to move on as the only thing it’s brings is the end of a successful independent U.K. nation state, as you pretty much admit.
So no thanks.
SpeckledJim said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Coolbanana said:
If you cannot free your mind from the fog of lies you have been force-fed to take advantage of your inner prejudices, then you will never appreciate the value of the EU and so you will continue with your Lemming-like Mantra’s and Dogma’s while your Master’s wring their hands gleefully, laughing at you as you help further their nefarious agendas.
Peak Coolbanana has now been reached. How can we be fed a fog?
Since when did Lemmings have mantras and dogmas? Let alone Mantra's and Dogma's. Or are the Mantra's and Dogma's similar to Lemmings?
Who is the Master anyway, and what's his 'wring'?
And what the bloody hell are you talking about?
Incidentally the veto is only anti democratic if you're idea of democracy is 27 wolves and one sheep voting on what to have for lunch.
Better go, I'm taking my Mantra's dogma for a walk, it might look like a lemming, but only because it's foggy.
.
I think there's a magic point between one bottle and two bottles that he becomes this charming mixture of verbose, maudlin, aggressive and frustrated. This fizzes and churns and culminates in a triumphal post on Pistonheads, before settling back down again as we head quietly into bottle number three.
Helicopter123 said:
Tuna said:
Helicopter123 said:
Scrapping workers rights would benefit the few, not the many. Why would the EU wish to see its citizens engaged in a race to the bottom?
I'll bite.I've got a pile of cash ready for a job right now. It would keep someone busy for nine months or so, and should lead to a long term product with a chance to grow. All I need is someone to do the work.
Except, with all of the employment protection, described euphemistically as "workers rights", there is no way in hell I'm going to employ someone to do the work. It's just not worth it. It amplifies the risk from very minor to a significant sum, as well as exposing me to the risk of court cases and employee tribunals if the project doesn't work out.
So - that's one person not getting employed, and potentially a whole business not getting started.
I'm sure many will argue the details, but the broad point here is that "workers rights" are not a magic one way street where more and more are automatically best for the worker. You can point to the unions of the 70s to see that if you have enough "workers rights" you can actually destroy a whole industry, and with it the livelihood of tens of thousands of workers.
Equally, the knee jerk response that not having workers rights (OMG! Zero hours contracts!) is automatically a bad thing is nonsense. As ever, being able to take a nuanced view, reacting to local conditions is going to be the best option.
Coolbanana said:
I’m 100% for QMV over Unanimity – veto voting.
I want further integration and a Democratic EU (to suggest otherwise is pig-ignorant of the processes involved and not worthy of debate, like declaring the Earth is flat!)) should have the ability to work in a manner that reflects best the wishes of a majority of Member States. As things are at the moment, the EU Council uses a Simple Majority for basic issues – as the name implies, a majority vote on any procedural matter wins the day.
QMV, however, requires a ‘double majority’ and is far more complex, used on larger issues and accounts for most legislation that is voted upon.
How it works is this: 2 Conditions have to be met; 55% of all States have to be in favour and those 55% must represent 65% of the EU population.
To prevent less populous states from ganging up on larger ones, the blocking minority must be composed of at least four countries representing 35% of the overall population in order to block a decision. Abstentions – due to Opt-Outs for example are automatically counted as being Against.
The exception for the threshold is if the proposal did not originate within the EU Commission; then it is increased to 72%.
Unanimity is reserved for especially sensitive voting topics; EU Army (the French are really promoting this, good idea too), who to let in and the like. It is, to me, ultimately anti-Democratic and allows a single State to refuse the wishes of the Majority of States. To behave like a spoiled-brat bully. Any country that wants to be a Member of the EU must respect the Democratic wishes of the Majority - if not, sod off. Bye bye UK you will not be missed kinda thing!
Let's look at it this way: how would you like it if London could veto any major decision that affects the whole of the UK? Think about that, Northerners. You wouldn’t like it, would you? Indeed, you already think London wields too much power and that there is an immense imbalance of preference for National funding and importance. QMV vs Unanimity is essentially the same, QMV allows for a better Democratic system and makes the Will of the Majority easier to achieve – to go in the direction they want to go in.
Now, obviously, if you are severely brainwashed and believe the Boris, JRM, Farage-esque mistruths and redirection a’la Trump, then you will be incapable of understanding that the EU is a true, Democratically-elected representation of the desires of its Member States.
If you cannot free your mind from the fog of lies you have been force-fed to take advantage of your inner prejudices, then you will never appreciate the value of the EU and so you will continue with your Lemming-like Mantra’s and Dogma’s while your Master’s wring their hands gleefully, laughing at you as you help further their nefarious agendas.
You are pretty much alone here. The tone at the referendum was for Remainers to say how sI want further integration and a Democratic EU (to suggest otherwise is pig-ignorant of the processes involved and not worthy of debate, like declaring the Earth is flat!)) should have the ability to work in a manner that reflects best the wishes of a majority of Member States. As things are at the moment, the EU Council uses a Simple Majority for basic issues – as the name implies, a majority vote on any procedural matter wins the day.
QMV, however, requires a ‘double majority’ and is far more complex, used on larger issues and accounts for most legislation that is voted upon.
How it works is this: 2 Conditions have to be met; 55% of all States have to be in favour and those 55% must represent 65% of the EU population.
To prevent less populous states from ganging up on larger ones, the blocking minority must be composed of at least four countries representing 35% of the overall population in order to block a decision. Abstentions – due to Opt-Outs for example are automatically counted as being Against.
The exception for the threshold is if the proposal did not originate within the EU Commission; then it is increased to 72%.
Unanimity is reserved for especially sensitive voting topics; EU Army (the French are really promoting this, good idea too), who to let in and the like. It is, to me, ultimately anti-Democratic and allows a single State to refuse the wishes of the Majority of States. To behave like a spoiled-brat bully. Any country that wants to be a Member of the EU must respect the Democratic wishes of the Majority - if not, sod off. Bye bye UK you will not be missed kinda thing!
Let's look at it this way: how would you like it if London could veto any major decision that affects the whole of the UK? Think about that, Northerners. You wouldn’t like it, would you? Indeed, you already think London wields too much power and that there is an immense imbalance of preference for National funding and importance. QMV vs Unanimity is essentially the same, QMV allows for a better Democratic system and makes the Will of the Majority easier to achieve – to go in the direction they want to go in.
Now, obviously, if you are severely brainwashed and believe the Boris, JRM, Farage-esque mistruths and redirection a’la Trump, then you will be incapable of understanding that the EU is a true, Democratically-elected representation of the desires of its Member States.
If you cannot free your mind from the fog of lies you have been force-fed to take advantage of your inner prejudices, then you will never appreciate the value of the EU and so you will continue with your Lemming-like Mantra’s and Dogma’s while your Master’s wring their hands gleefully, laughing at you as you help further their nefarious agendas.
t the EU was, but that it was better than leaving. Two years on and look what we have from the same people, big red bus rage and wondering how you lost a vote for an organisation everyone thinks is a bit s
t and can hardly say anything positive for. The Remainer message of the referendum was one of telling people we would never be fully aligned to the EU's ideals and we had an opt out for everything. It's a tough sell when Remainers themselves were distancing from the EU.
Your last part is pure ravings. Amusing to read though.
Ridgemont said:
I’d say top trolling but from your previous posts you do appear to be a true believer which is fair enough.
It is fair enough, wanting a "USofE" - however that view is generally suppressed behind the veneer of "remain is the status quo, how can we risk brexit" presented by the vast majority of absolute federalists...Almost as if they realise it's possibly the least popular opinion across the country, and therefore something to be tucked away in the background - while others less far along the Remain spectrum bang the drum that it's democratic, there are checks on further integration, there'll never be an EU army, etc.
Coolbanana said:
jsf said:
Any of the remainers fancy a look at this https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-politic...
How do you feel about Junkers comments that even if you don't like it, the veto is gone and more powers are being taken from nation states.
If you cannot free your mind from the fog of lies you have been force-fed to take advantage of your inner prejudices, then you will never appreciate the value of the EU and so you will continue with your Lemming-like Mantra’s and Dogma’s while your Master’s wring their hands gleefully, laughing at you as you help further their nefarious agendas. How do you feel about Junkers comments that even if you don't like it, the veto is gone and more powers are being taken from nation states.
Tuna said:
I'll bite.
I've got a pile of cash ready for a job right now. It would keep someone busy for nine months or so, and should lead to a long term product with a chance to grow. All I need is someone to do the work.
Except, with all of the employment protection, described euphemistically as "workers rights", there is no way in hell I'm going to employ someone to do the work. It's just not worth it. It amplifies the risk from very minor to a significant sum, as well as exposing me to the risk of court cases and employee tribunals if the project doesn't work out.
So - that's one person not getting employed, and potentially a whole business not getting started.
I'm sure many will argue the details, but the broad point here is that "workers rights" are not a magic one way street where more and more are automatically best for the worker. You can point to the unions of the 70s to see that if you have enough "workers rights" you can actually destroy a whole industry, and with it the livelihood of tens of thousands of workers.
Equally, the knee jerk response that not having workers rights (OMG! Zero hours contracts!) is automatically a bad thing is nonsense. As ever, being able to take a nuanced view, reacting to local conditions is going to be the best option.
Why don't you take on a contractor or a temporary employee? Presumably it's because you need to pay a contractor more to counteract their lack of employment protections and benefits.I've got a pile of cash ready for a job right now. It would keep someone busy for nine months or so, and should lead to a long term product with a chance to grow. All I need is someone to do the work.
Except, with all of the employment protection, described euphemistically as "workers rights", there is no way in hell I'm going to employ someone to do the work. It's just not worth it. It amplifies the risk from very minor to a significant sum, as well as exposing me to the risk of court cases and employee tribunals if the project doesn't work out.
So - that's one person not getting employed, and potentially a whole business not getting started.
I'm sure many will argue the details, but the broad point here is that "workers rights" are not a magic one way street where more and more are automatically best for the worker. You can point to the unions of the 70s to see that if you have enough "workers rights" you can actually destroy a whole industry, and with it the livelihood of tens of thousands of workers.
Equally, the knee jerk response that not having workers rights (OMG! Zero hours contracts!) is automatically a bad thing is nonsense. As ever, being able to take a nuanced view, reacting to local conditions is going to be the best option.
Dr Jekyll said:
Coolbanana said:
If you cannot free your mind from the fog of lies you have been force-fed to take advantage of your inner prejudices, then you will never appreciate the value of the EU and so you will continue with your Lemming-like Mantra’s and Dogma’s while your Master’s wring their hands gleefully, laughing at you as you help further their nefarious agendas.
Peak Coolbanana has now been reached. .
I'm still trying to work out what the holy feck is the message encrypted in that mystical paragraph.
Is this the level of mind-feckery required to be engaged in the EU project?
If it is, it explains A LOT.
B'stard Child said:
SpeckledJim said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Coolbanana said:
If you cannot free your mind from the fog of lies you have been force-fed to take advantage of your inner prejudices, then you will never appreciate the value of the EU and so you will continue with your Lemming-like Mantra’s and Dogma’s while your Master’s wring their hands gleefully, laughing at you as you help further their nefarious agendas.
Peak Coolbanana has now been reached. How can we be fed a fog?
Since when did Lemmings have mantras and dogmas? Let alone Mantra's and Dogma's. Or are the Mantra's and Dogma's similar to Lemmings?
Who is the Master anyway, and what's his 'wring'?
And what the bloody hell are you talking about?
Incidentally the veto is only anti democratic if you're idea of democracy is 27 wolves and one sheep voting on what to have for lunch.
Better go, I'm taking my Mantra's dogma for a walk, it might look like a lemming, but only because it's foggy.
.
I think there's a magic point between one bottle and two bottles that he becomes this charming mixture of verbose, maudlin, aggressive and frustrated. This fizzes and churns and culminates in a triumphal post on Pistonheads, before settling back down again as we head quietly into bottle number three.
Recreate the spirit of 1920's Raffles, Singapore, direct from the fridge whenever you no longer have to hold onto the floor to prevent falling off it.
It's 5 o'clock somewhere.
desolate said:
Integroo said:
Why don't you take on a contractor or a temporary employee? Presumably it's because you need to pay a contractor more to counteract their lack of employment protections.
Employment protections which barely exist in the first two years of employment.don'tbesilly said:
Coolbanana said:
jsf said:
Any of the remainers fancy a look at this https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-politic...
How do you feel about Junkers comments that even if you don't like it, the veto is gone and more powers are being taken from nation states.
If you cannot free your mind from the fog of lies you have been force-fed to take advantage of your inner prejudices, then you will never appreciate the value of the EU and so you will continue with your Lemming-like Mantra’s and Dogma’s while your Master’s wring their hands gleefully, laughing at you as you help further their nefarious agendas. How do you feel about Junkers comments that even if you don't like it, the veto is gone and more powers are being taken from nation states.
Integroo said:
desolate said:
Integroo said:
Why don't you take on a contractor or a temporary employee? Presumably it's because you need to pay a contractor more to counteract their lack of employment protections.
Employment protections which barely exist in the first two years of employment.don'tbesilly said:
Tuna said:
Sway said:
Excellent.
Davis/ERG/etc. proposal it is then.
It seems to be only May herself that doesn't want that to happen. The Tory conference is going to be interesting.Davis/ERG/etc. proposal it is then.
Edited to add: there would be some irony if the son-of-Davis' proposal turns out to be the final deal. Some commentators would really have to eat their words.
It can only lead to speculation as to what her grand plan is, and the speculation can offer some strange motivations/reasons as to what & where May wants to end up with/at.
Deptford Draylons said:
I keep hearing about swathes of workers rights going the min we leave the EU. Do you know which is first on the chopping block ?
Wouldn't that be for Tuna and SpeckledJim to answer rather than Helicoper?Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 26th September 11:36
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff