President Blair and the EU Constitution, er Treaty

Do you want a vote on the EU Treaty?


  • Total voters
    167
#1
Premier Brown on Blair becoming the first permanent EU President.
Mr Brown told BBC's Politics Show: "Tony Blair would be an excellent president. I don't know whether he wants the job.

"It's really a matter for him. He hasn't said to anybody whether he wants the job or not and it really is a matter for the future. It's not a matter for me."

So seemingly not a matter for the electorate Gordon? Or do you not believe we should decide our leaders and changes to Constitutional Affairs?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7212876.stm

Time this government, after handing so much to Brussels asks the British electorate for once and for all whether or not we want this Treaty, as we were promised.
 
#2
The only time this government will ask a question of the electorate is when they are sure of getting the reply they want, if they thought they would get a yes vote on the European constitution or whatever it is they are calling it now a referendum would have been announced before the ink was dry on the initial draft.
 

wet_blobby

War Hero
Moderator
#3
I agree 100% Mikh, the [email protected] in power will word the question so they get the desired response, probable some thing along the lines of "Does Europe have a letter E in it?"

When everyone says yes they'll truimphantly say "we asked the masses a question on Europe and the overwhelming response was Yes".

Fcuking tossers.
 
#4
wet_blobby said:
I agree 100% Mikh, the [email protected] in power will word the question so they get the desired response, probable some thing along the lines of "Does Europe have a letter E in it?"

When everyone says yes they'll truimphantly say "we asked the masses a question on Europe and the overwhelming response was Yes".

Fcuking tossers.

Ditto , bunch of scheming bastards the lot of them , aaaarrrrgggg ,
 
#5
I somehow doubt we will get a straight referendum on yes or no to the "Treaty". There are those in the Lib-Dems and elsewhere who would like to divert the matter; http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/32288/Clegg-will-block-EU-referendum-bid .

It's prbably quite a smart move by the pro Europeans. They may have guessed that it would be a close run contest and wouldn't want to risk a setback to the grand plan. The all or nothing option would very likely catch Joe Public in a dilema. Having to make a decision of such magnitude would make many people very nervous. Being inside the EU, as it has become, has given them a perceived safe and prosperous life. To leave would present them with a leap into the unknown. Bearing in mind that, lottery aside, our average Brits tend to be markedly risk averse, there is a very good chance that they will vote for what they know; stay in. By default, the "Treaty" then sails though.

Edited for finger trouble!
 
#6
wet_blobby said:
I agree 100% Mikh, the [email protected] in power will word the question so they get the desired response, probable some thing along the lines of "Does Europe have a letter E in it?"

When everyone says yes they'll truimphantly say "we asked the masses a question on Europe and the overwhelming response was Yes".

Fcuking tossers.
No need to say much more Herr blair will lead us into the Brussells.. :threaten:
 
#7
When you have control over the question you can get it to come to the result you want, so any vote over this is a complete waste of time and money IMHO.

Particularly with the great British public, you've got to dumb down the question so much to account for the lack of awareness and analytical skill that it really wouldn't be meaningful anyway.

Democracy stinks
 
#9
Potential_Officer said:
The Question must be validated by the Electoral Commission does it not?
Still doesn't mean it won't come up with the expected result

Besides, the Sun et al, will gladly help the masses make their decision.
Hence my point about the futility of communicating anything more complex than cup size to the British electorate...
 
#12
Potential_Officer said:
Time for the right to vote to be based on IQ? Ahh "Intelligent Democracy"!
That assumes that an assessment of intelligence automagically finds someone who'se prepared to make an informed and considered judgement, rather than just react according to their inherent prejudices and life conditioning.

Nothing about democracy is intelligent, people are driven by short term personal gain and few can consider the long game.
 

chieftiff

War Hero
Moderator
#13
Karma said:
Potential_Officer said:
Time for the right to vote to be based on IQ? Ahh "Intelligent Democracy"!
Nothing about democracy is intelligent, people are driven by short term personal gain and few can consider the long game.
Oh how very true, people are all too quick to shout about the right to democracy yet few reflect on its true meaning, as Thomas Jefferson said
“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.â€

and Winston Churchill

“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.â€
 
#14
It did occur to me that, if my assumption on the referendum wording is correct, it would be a good idea for the Media that isn't psychopathically pro a European superstate to pre programme the Population. Whilst conceding that there have been benefits from joining the Common Market that have transferred to EU membership, they could make known the disadvantages. The sort of things your average chavoid could identify with because they are the ones that call the shots at the ballot box.

Without wishing to hi-jack the Thread, what would we place in the pro and con columns? To me, the pros would be;

freedom of movement
freedom from trade tarrifs
freedom from duel taxation (paying tax at Customs on goods already tax paid)
aligned trading standards
aligned employment standards
secure and fair government in those Countries accustomed to being run by other Countries at regular intervals

The cons I would suggest are;

freedom of movement to a point beyond control
abolition of Duty free allowances
aligned trading standards to the point of stupidity
aligned employment standards to the point of stupidity
interference with single State national government
attempted interference with single State foreign policy
the creation of a porous Border

I think that could be sufficient to nip in the bud a form of opinion manipulation (OK, that's politics) that would pay lip service to an Election Manifesto "promise" and probably permanently quell any dissenting voices. If the manipulators thought that a vote to remain in Europe might become a close run thing, though, they would very soon back away from it.
 
#15
The EU constitution ?

'Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it'

EU/Liebour ? ....... close, but not right ... Adolf Hitler 1889 - 1945

And one for the previous incumbent PM of our (mal)administration:

'I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator' .... also by said gentleman above. Could be also be applicable to the thinkings of the current holder of the PM post perhaps ?

:|
 
#16
Passed-over_Loggie said:
It did occur to me that, if my assumption on the referendum wording is correct, it would be a good idea for the Media that isn't psychopathically pro a European superstate to pre programme the Population. Whilst conceding that there have been benefits from joining the Common Market that have transferred to EU membership, they could make known the disadvantages. The sort of things your average chavoid could identify with because they are the ones that call the shots at the ballot box.

Without wishing to hi-jack the Thread, what would we place in the pro and con columns? To me, the pros would be;

freedom of movement
freedom from trade tarrifs
freedom from duel taxation (paying tax at Customs on goods already tax paid)
aligned trading standards
aligned employment standards
secure and fair government in those Countries accustomed to being run by other Countries at regular intervals

The cons I would suggest are;

freedom of movement to a point beyond control
abolition of Duty free allowances
aligned trading standards to the point of stupidity
aligned employment standards to the point of stupidity
interference with single State national government
attempted interference with single State foreign policy
the creation of a porous Border

I think that could be sufficient to nip in the bud a form of opinion manipulation (OK, that's politics) that would pay lip service to an Election Manifesto "promise" and probably permanently quell any dissenting voices. If the manipulators thought that a vote to remain in Europe might become a close run thing, though, they would very soon back away from it.
OK I'll bite

Freedom of movement, if it is controlled then it is not free. Equally many in this country have and still do take advantage of this, so are you saying we should be free but others not.

Duty free allowances, I must admit I didn't really miss them when they went and in many countries had found the supemarkets were cheaper than the airport/ferry duty frees any way, so not that much of a loss then.

Alignened trading and employment standards are one of the key points of a 'common market'

Of course it is only interferance when you don't like the idea, but at the end of the day shared sovereignty can be seen in one way as lost sovereignnty, or gained sovereingty depending on whether you are a half full or half empty person.

As for interferance with foreign policy, perhaps you have missed the concept of together we are strong but alone we are weak. It is for example noticable the the septics do take note of the EU on trade matters because we can as a group have an impact on their business.

Porous border, pot kettle black, our immigration people don't really know who is in or out, our border is every bit a porous as any one elses, and that has b*gger all to do with the EU, that is down to the incompetance of our own government
 
#17
Maxi_77.
I wasn't eliciting a bite (well, maybe a bit). It was rather like one of those brain storming sessions they used to throw at us. It would be good to debate the points and consider new ones but that would really need a new Thread. Additionally, it would need to be structured and edited to a "results" Thread by a/the Mod(s); not to censor but filter out the repetitions (and Normanisms) and condense the salient points.
 
#18
Maxi_77 said:
[Porous border, pot kettle black, our immigration people don't really know who is in or out, our border is every bit a porous as any one elses, and that has b*gger all to do with the EU, that is down to the incompetance of our own government
Peter

You are a yachtsman. If this country has ever had anything but a porous border, I'll eat my hat. I don't think it's necessarily a government failing, as policing the whole of the coastline would be impossible. What irks me about our borders since becoming members of the Euro club, is that the pressure to admit so many people who choose to bypass the rest of Europe to get to our welfare heaven has become so great.
 
#19
Britain shouldnt be a part of europe. We are not connected to it, we are a separate continent, all be it a small one. Europe should show us some respect and not take this country for everything it has, Europe owes the brave men and women of Britain its life else they would all be speaking German.
 
#20
Surely the only wording of any referendum should read " Do you wish to be part of the United States of Europe, surrendering all the rights our forefathers have fought against for the last thousand years ?". Can't see it happening, but I know what my answer would be..........
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top