EU referendum

[aguero93:20]

It's a good job they don't make the laws then, isn't it. Unlike the unelected European Commission (whom we do not vote, they are appointed.

Here, i'll let Tony Benn explain.

Tony Benn isn't that well informed. The UK has a two house system, one elected by the public, one unelected. Sound familiar?

26 COE Bishops get unelected seats in the house of lords.

The EC can only debate and delay legislation, they act as a minder to the European parliament.

The house of lords can only debate and delay legislation, they act as a minder to the house of commons.

However the house of lords, unlike the European commission, can introduce legislation independently.

96 members of the house of lords have position solely down to bloodline. The remainder are appointed

Anyone can become a member of the EC.

Unlike the European Union, Germany, Ireland, The USA etc, the UK don't have a third check mechanism in a first elected citizen (President) able to delay Cabal situations where two sitting houses act together to introduce catalytic laws without mandate. The UK also have no constitutional right to referendum on these laws, unlike the USA, the EU and Ireland.

Democracy awaits.

 

[CityStu]

I haven't seen any serious debate on this, any serious honesty with the public any attempt to make any serious policy. I am firmly for focusing on what's important and when a plan and strategy is in place the evaluate what the best way to acheive it is and make decisions on important issues like Europe when you do it for the right reasons IE pursuing a long term goal and having evaluated it.

I think many of the Out arguments put forwards argue well that the EU hinders the direction that some people would like the country to take, regardless of exactly what direction that may be. Is that not a fair basis on which to make a decision?

 

[aguero93:20]

If a political party comes forward with a method or policy to devolve powers from Westminster back to local parliaments, i'd be all for it. I am for example in favour of English Votes for English Laws, just as I approve of more devolved powers for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Westminster should NOT be the central powerhouse of the United Kingdom. But what would be the point if an EU Commission still held supremacy over any local parliament and Westminster?

If anything you've more or less advocated what the 'out' campaign is calling for.

I'll advocate direct democracy anytime but leaving the EU will give you less if it.

 

[Metal Biker]

I haven't seen any serious debate on this, any serious honesty with the public any attempt to make any serious policy. I am firmly for focusing on what's important and when a plan and strategy is in place the evaluate what the best way to acheive it is and make decisions on important issues like Europe when you do it for the right reasons IE pursuing a long term goal and having evaluated it.

You've not seen any serious debate because neither the BBC, Sky Broadcasting or tabloids are treating it as such, coughing up scaremongering terms without presenting facts or evidence for what is claimed, and I accuse BOTH sides of the debate on this. Even the outers state things without showing facts that people can look up for themselves and state "by golly, they're right!"

Is that enough of a convincing argument? For some it might be all they need, others might need more convincing, but for both sides to be wildly throwing headlines, statements and tidbits without any real information, i'm not surprised many people are viewing the 'debate' on the EU with shifty eyes. Especially when you consider the evident bias on show from certain outlets who have something to gain depending on the result going their way.

 

[aguero93:20]

I think many of the Out arguments put forwards argue well that the EU hinders the direction that some people would like the country to take, regardless of exactly what direction that may be. Is that not a fair basis on which to make a decision?

It is. What's the direction?

 

[aguero93:20]

You've not seen any serious debate because neither the BBC, Sky Broadcasting or tabloids are treating it as such, coughing up scaremongering terms without presenting facts or evidence for what is claimed

On both sides depending on the organisation. Let's not ask them to act out of character.

 

[Metal Biker]

I'll advocate direct democracy anytime but leaving the EU will give you less if it.

How?

Explain how, don't just say a sentiment and leave it there. I've already explained that we, the British public, have very little to no sway on the politics and agendas within the EU. The Commission makes the laws but the Commission isn't elected, not by us or anyone for that matter, just appointed by other appointed commissioners.

So please explain to me why Britain leaving the EU would mean we'd have less democratic method in this country. (refrain from mentioning the Tories; just because some people don't like a party, a majority vote in accordance to our election rules did enough to get them elected)

 

[CityStu]

It is. What's the direction?

As an example, I believe house availability and ergo house prices are a huge issue in the UK currently. I don't believe that that issue can be managed when we have no idea how many people the country may have to accommodate due to our membership of the EU. If we leave the EU, we can control the numbers (and occupations/abilities) of people coming in so that they fill gaps and we can plan the number of houses needed accordingly and house prices can stop being so unattainable for so many. A similar argument applies to education and health. We will never have enough teachers or doctors if the numbers of students and patients we are importing is above the level the level they can cope with.

There are many other arguments, but I that's one of my main ones.

 

[Metal Biker]

On both sides depending on the organisation. Let's not ask them to act out of character.

Yeeah... you see you'd redacted that sentence as the end of it I state I oppose BOTH sides of the debate for doing this.
If you're going to quote, do it honestly and accurately, please.

 

[aguero93:20]

How?

Explain how, don't just say a sentiment and leave it there. I've already explained that we, the British public, have very little to no sway on the politics and agendas within the EU. The Commission makes the laws but the Commission isn't elected, not by us or anyone for that matter, just appointed by other appointed commissioners.

So please explain to me why Britain leaving the EU would mean we'd have less democratic method in this country. (refrain from mentioning the Tories; just because some people don't like a party, a majority vote in accordance to our election rules did enough to get them elected)

Firstly, an ideological swing in one country doesn't change policy. Secondly, more vetoes. Thirdly, the countries within the EU with referendum powers brings the EU subject to direct democracy on major issues. Fourth, leaving the EU doesn't give you any of the preceding 3. Fifth, the first past the post system in the UK denies any political group with less than a majority view in their constituency a voice in politics - mob rule.