Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
The White Knight

European Union - In Or Out?

Recommended Posts

I see how he can be negative, I think his 4 million followers is a solid vote, so a good start.

theres half the tory party campaigning for the out vote, which should carry a good bit of weight, add to that a solid northern working class backing, its going to be very close.. I think win or lose, ukip"s job will be over afterwards, as its their whole purpose to gain independence. Farage is liked or hated, theres no inbetween. as I always said, if you beat farage on the immigration argument, you wipe out ukip, as yet, it hasn't happened, I don't think its the mail that people read, I believe its what everyday people sees around them, and estates changing, with communites changing, local people waiting longer on the housing list, hospital waiting lists, traffic bumper to bumper, there has to be a numbers limit, to have open door borders is a disaster

Yet again the trouble immigration used it as excused for everything can't get job it's because of immigration hospital waiting lists are because of immigration etc etc ..people thinking just becomes lazy ...you go back to 1984 and you see people moaning about the same problems .....it's quite sad that no matter who fault is or something is being run poorly or underfunded the first port of call is to blame it on immigration .

Edited by orion

Share this post


Link to post

Yet again the trouble immigration used it as excused for everything can't get job it's because of immigration hospital waiting lists are because of immigration etc etc ..people thinking just becomes lazy ...you go back to 1984 and you see people moaning about the same problems .....it's quite sad that no matter who fault is or something is being run poorly or underfunded the first port of call is to blame it on immigration .

how many people fit in a phone box? there has to be a numbers limit, at some stage.

in most towns, they are expanding, your hospitals aren"t, your schools aren"t. of course its easy to blame immigration,

but its a fact in many many towns, communites have changed, you may not be in a area like that, but surely

you can see the concerns in some quarters? is there ANY number youwould say, "right, no more"?

Share this post


Link to post

The media, especially the tabloid press are partly to blame for this but it seems to me that the whole EU debate has been conducted all along by politicians, by EU Commisioners and by judges who think they know best and have no interest whatsoever in conveying their reasoning to the prolartariat. That is also why I asked the question WILL these details be fixed when you said they can be fixed.

The ECHR is a completely different institution to the EU and shouldn't be confused with the EU debate. A vote to leave the EU would not change the UK's status with respect to the ECHR, and there's not a chance the UK will abrogate the European Convention on Human Rights. I think there's more chance the Russians and one or two other countries will be expelled as they clearly do not conform to the convention.

 

As to it's relevance or importance, despite the impression given by the media, most cases raised in the UK never make it to the ECHR. Of those that do, the judgement goes against the UK in about 3 or 4 cases per year (<20% of those that get that far). And I actually find it difficult to find one ruling against the UK that I'd consider to be wrong.

 

Getting back to the EU, I don't think the EU debate has been conducted by the Commissioners at all, as they don't make the laws. They're the executive arm that implements decisions of European Parliament and European Council (representatives of national governments) in much the same way as Whitehall carries out decisions of Westminster.

 

I do think national politicians are guilty of making the EU a scapegoat for unpopular policies they'd want to introduce themselves, but equally the average member of public gullibly swallows the nonsense and seems to want to believe in bent banana laws. I'd agree that the EU decision making structure is somewhat convoluted and difficult to follow at times, but that's exactly because the member states don't want to give it any real power, and quite frankly, I suspect the average member of public doesn't really understand the decision making process in the UK either.

 

Of course they follow the authority of the legislators but the ECHR with its multiplicity of judges of rom here there and everywhere does appear to be the mouthpiece, or the tool of the academic elite that live in their own world, far removed from day to day life.

I don't like the legal profession one bit, and I think most lawyers are self-serving and pompous to boot. However, I accept that you need people to think about and codify laws.

 

This is always going to be a profession of an academic elite regardless of what political system you run, and in fact, that judges are often removed from mainstream society can be a strength because they don't have to pander to populist viewpoints as politicians do. There are of course crazy and daft judges, but that's why there's an extensive appeals process, and why the highest level courts always sit as a panel.

how many people fit in a phone box? there has to be a numbers limit, at some stage.

In the early 19th century, there were those who said the UK would be doomed when it hit 20 million, and yet we're up to 60 million and the country is far more prosperous now than then.

 

Going on the experience of Japan, the UK could accommodate up to 90 million people if they could be distributed more evenly around the country. And we're not talking about dumping people in remote areas, but having them live in currently depopulated towns in deprived parts of the country. The tax revenue raised in those areas could dramatically improved the infrastructure there, and sustain far more people as a result.

 

The problem is that the majority (immigrant and non-immigrant alike) wants to be located in the South-East because that's where the well-paying jobs are, as well as the services generally being better too. The UK is also quite bad at planning ahead as well, plus it has a significant nimby lobby that makes it difficult to invest in decent infrastructure that can alleviate the issues of overcrowding and help develop deprived areas. You only have to look at the fuss over HS2 and the third runway at Heathrow (if not a completely new airport) to see the small mindedness that holds back the UK.

 

Getting specifically to the issue of immigration though, you need to make the distinction between EU/EEA and non-EEA immigration as really they're separate issues. Non-EEA immigration has been running at far higher levels, and unlike EU immigration, most of the immigration will be permanent. Many EU immigrants are transient or otherwise likely to go back to their own countries at some in the future, whereas most non-EU immigrants are coming from developing countries. There's also the issue that with the exception of the likes of Australia and South Africa, non-EU immigrants are more likely to come with different social and cultural values.

 

Farage continues to (deliberately) muddle the EU and immigration when in fact they're somewhat different issues. However, this is where he goes wrong with the middle-of-the-road voter because most of us have neighbours and friends from the EU who'll be affected if UKIP had their way. Conversely, I think fewer of us have South Asian or muslim friends, and rightly or wrongly far more voters would particularly care about reducing immigration from those countries.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

personally think we should have that extra runway, we need to compete and remain a big player, but im not from that area

so easy for me to say that.

Share this post


Link to post

The ECHR is a completely different institution to the EU and shouldn't be confused with the EU debate. s.

It is a different institution but all EU members are tied to it and it reflects the thinking of the EU academics and legislators in general. In the perception of many people it is inextricably linked to the EU in terms of its affect on people's lives. It goes against the grain for many that the UK's highest courts should be subservient to a court whose Judges are drawn from places whose own judicial systems are no great example to anyone else. That makes it part of the debate if not a direct part of the referendum. It is part of the general debate on how this country should be governed and to that extent is linked to the referendum debate.

I don't like the legal profession one bit, and I think most lawyers are self-serving and pompous to boot. However, I accept that you need people to think about and codify laws.This is always going to be a profession of an academic elite regardless of what political system you run, and in fact, that judges are often removed from mainstream society can be a strength because they don't have to pander to populist viewpoints as politicians do..

There are plenty of good blokes in the law, play football, go to the pub, do all the things that normal people do. I have met and worked with them. Part of the problem is that , like politicians, the good ones get on with the job and the tosses spend their time networking and making contacts to further ththeir careers. The other part of the problem is that a lot,of judges are failed barristers. The good barristers often don't apply to become judges because they can make more money as top barristers.

 

However, whichever way you look at it and for whatever reason, the fact remains that judges as a class tend to be elite and out of touch, even more so in the ECHR where they are selected from Bongo-Bongo Land , Belgium or some other non-entity. The whole system needs an overhaul, and a change of outlook but it won't happen so we are stuck with the poor system we have. It won't change and therefore the ECHR won't change.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

It is a different institution but all EU members are tied to it and it reflects the thinking of the EU academics and legislators in general. In the perception of many people it is inextricably linked to the EU in terms of its affect on people's lives.

Sorry, don't get that at all. If people perceive them to be the same thing, or even linked, then their perception is wrong.

 

Who are these EU academics?

 

It goes against the grain for many that the UK's highest courts should be subservient to a court whose Judges are drawn from places whose own judicial systems are no great example to anyone else.

Out of the 50 or so Council of Europe members, there are maybe 2 or 3 countries with seriously questionable judicial systems these days. However, their judges still have to be approved by the other Council of Europe members, so there's some filtering in terms of the character of those who actually sit. And whilst there might be 47 judges, only a handful (maybe 3) sit for each case and I think is supposed to include one judge from the country concerned, so the chances of getting a judge from Russia sitting on a British case is fairly low.

 

I think though, the position of Russia is becoming increasingly untenable they'll either leave or be expelled if the Putin regime continues.

 

even more so in the ECHR where they are selected from Bongo-Bongo Land , Belgium or some other non-entity.

Why is Belgium considered a non-entity and unqualified to participate? It's a perfect stable country with a long history of functional democracy and fair judicial system.

 

I'd say that countries without specific axes to grind are precisely the ones that should be sitting in judgement of things.

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry, don't get that at all. If people perceive them to be the same thing, or even linked, then their perception is wrong.

The perception isnt wrong , at all. They are bedfellows , with the same aims , same goals. More interestingly , The European Union is not a member of the Council of Europe[1] and, accordingly, it is not bound by the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights. So therefore can do what the hell it wants while shoving sh*t down everyone elses throats.

Edited by phlipphlop

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry, don't get that at all. If people perceive them to be the same thing, or even linked, then their perception is wrong.s.

If the perception is wrong where is the medium or machinery to correct it ? This brings us back to the real nub of the discussion, which is that people are being invited to vote in a referendum in which in general they have very little information on the subject matter namely the benefits and drawbacks of the EU. The EU is there primarily to serve the public. One of the ways it can do this is to inform the public of why and how it operates but it fails to do so because few of the EU hierarchy seem to appreciate that the bottom line is that they are public servants. It's much the same as the Scottish referendum, with people voting on instinct or tradition, instead of informed opinion, with all the distasteful violence that went with it in some quarters.

Edited by E I Addio

Share this post


Link to post

im sure once Cameron picks a date, tv will be full of debates. id guess at least 60% already know which way to vote, but unlike

the general election, I think theres more scope for swaying the vote on this one. newspapers have to dramatise it, cos its all

about circulation, so the main tv channels "should" be a bit more fair on the reporting events

Share this post


Link to post

Out of the 50 or so Council of Europe members, there are maybe 2 or 3 countries with seriously questionable judicial systems these days.

The Presiding Judge of the ECHR is from Italy, and the two Vice Presidents are from Turkey and Hungary. I wouldn't fancy my chances in the legal systems of either of those countries. You only have to look at the Meredith Kirscher case , or the case involving Tessa Jowells ex-husband Davd Mills not to mention some of the wheeler dealings involving Bellisconi to see what a shambles Italy's judicial system is, and you have made adverse comments of your own in the past about Turkey and Hungary. The bigger problem is that many of the ECHR judges are academics. They have usually been law lecturers not in client practice, not meeting and defending or prosecuting the man in the street, or having to explain to a distressed client that the law is an ass at times, not having seen at first hand the dark side of the law that sometimes fails to protect the most vulnerable. They are generally even more remote than the British judiciary.

Share this post


Link to post

More interestingly , The European Union is not a member of the Council of Europe[1] and, accordingly, it is not bound by the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights. So therefore can do what the hell it wants while shoving sh*t down everyone elses throats.

The EU isn't a sovereign state so can't be a member, although it's member states are. EU decisions are collectively made by its member states, which also have veto rights on significant issues, so not sure of the point you're trying to make.

Share this post


Link to post

im sure once Cameron picks a date, tv will be full of debates. id guess at least 60% already know which way to vote, but unlike

the general election, I think theres more scope for swaying the vote on this one. newspapers have to dramatise it, cos its all

about circulation, so the main tv channels "should" be a bit more fair on the reporting events

If the vote is to stay in will you accept it ?

Share this post


Link to post

The EU is there primarily to serve the public. One of the ways it can do this is to inform the public of why and how it operates but it fails to do so because few of the EU hierarchy seem to appreciate that the bottom line is that they are public servants.

The EU does try to inform the public, but the UK public at least would rather read silly stories about bent bananas. They're also not helped by national governments doing little in the way of positive publicity.

 

And with respect as well, how many Eurocrats have you actually met to form the opinion they're self serving?

The Presiding Judge of the ECHR is from Italy, and the two Vice Presidents are from Turkey and Hungary. I wouldn't fancy my chances in the legal systems of either of those countries. You only have to look at the Meredith Kirscher case , or the case involving Tessa Jowells ex-husband Davd Mills not to mention some of the wheeler dealings involving Bellisconi to see what a shambles Italy's judicial system is, and you have made adverse comments of your own in the past about Turkey and Hungary. The bigger problem is that many of the ECHR judges are academics. They have usually been law lecturers not in client practice, not meeting and defending or prosecuting the man in the street, or having to explain to a distressed client that the law is an ass at times, not having seen at first hand the dark side of the law that sometimes fails to protect the most vulnerable. They are generally even more remote than the British judiciary.

I'm no fan of Hungary, Italy or Turkey, but that doesn't mean their ECHR judges are bad. Frankly as well, you could dig up umpteen UK cases where the law has been as an ass too.

 

Meredith Kercher was fortunate to come from a privileged American background whose parents knew how to lobby and press the right buttons both in Italy and the US. The whole thing was a farce, but it shows that justice rarely serves the poor anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post

If the vote is to stay in will you accept it ?

of course, accept any democratic vote. didn't like tories winning election, but only win any vote through a ballot box

Share this post


Link to post

of course, accept any democratic vote. didn't like tories winning election, but only win any vote through a ballot box

Good, I asked because already some supporters of the leave campaign are already claiming the vote will be rigged, and the Scottish Goverment will not accept a result in which the UK votes to leave but Scotland votes to stay , I fear the result will not be conclusive and lead to the end of the U K

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy