[Politics] Brexit

[Lincoln Imp]

Never really got that argument about Brexit MP`s voting against TM`s deal ,nearly all Labour MP`s voted against it 3 times if i remember correctly .What were they voting for ?

A definition of a governing party is one that can command a majority in parliament. The Tories, with friends, can just about do that and in normal circumstances the business of government can proceed - the opposition, with policies of its own, can oppose but the governing party will prevail. In the case of May's deal, rebels on the government benches stopped this happening. Most of the rebels were Brexiteers, not Remainers. Personally, I don't feel you can chastise these rebels for holding true to their consciences - and you most certainly cannot criticise the opposition for doing its job. All groupings have their own views on the best way forward.

The problem is, as it always has been, that the referendum did not indicate which of many forms of Brexit the 52 percent wanted three years ago. The one they were offered didn't exist. There is a lack of clarity about the public's wishes, and many people feel there is only one way of resolving that.

 

[portlock seagull]

You do nothing to prove me wrong.

Makes about as much sense as your other gibberish.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

But how? Via which deal? You can’t just say Leave. That’s like saying “I’m getting dressed now” but not choosing which clothes to put on.

Remember No Deal was ruled out by all at the time of the vote, so you know it can’t be No Deal.

Which version of Leave did everyone agree on then? Easy question, should be an easy answer.

but no deal is still on the table? there wasn't a version, people like yourself have tried to invent one , leave means leave not dangling one foot in one foot out ,roll on the 31st of October
regards
DR

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

The hold up is due to Brexit MPs voting against the deal the PM got because it didn't suit their version.




She is an elected member of the European Parliament. She can't do both.

she's a Women
regards
DR

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOwRhkWpnuI
regards
DR

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

You do nothing to prove me wrong.

Time for meds then
regards
DR

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nigel-farage/nigel-farages-brexit-analogy-july-4th/
regards
DR

 

[Thunder Bolt]

but no deal is still on the table? there wasn't a version, people like yourself have tried to invent one , leave means leave not dangling one foot in one foot out ,roll on the 31st of October

Parliament have voted against no deal and will do so again. The Tories have lost another seat since then.
Parliament is sovereign.

 

[pastafarian]

I'll take that as a "no" then.

I will take it then from your reluctance to answer, that you do in fact believe that directly applicable EU regulations and EU law making competences exist.
Making your whole point……..err pointless.

You now suggest that you think it would have been right to have carried out a policy of appeasement 'to finalisation' if it was voted for in a prewar referendum. What do you mean by 'finalisation'? The arrival of H Hitler in Westminster or the realisation that the policy as outlined three years earlier wasn't going to work?
.

um neither, i said carry through a vote to finalisation, not a policy to finalisation. Simply means enacting the vote and the instruction given by the electorate.

Genuinely sorry to hear your father has passed.
Even more sorry to see the experience seems to have made you even more of an aggressive arse. If that was possible.

It hasnt, but considering you are without doubt the most aggressive poster on NSC by a country mile, i will bow to your expertise.

 

[Grombleton]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOwRhkWpnuI
regards
DR

She's old enough to remember slavery. Out of touch Dinosaur that she is.

'we are glad to be going'. Don't speak for the majority love, time for your sponge bath.

 

[pastafarian]

The Brexit people have no understanding of democracy full stop.
Here is one complaining about having to vote for the EU President. You know, voting for one of those unelected bureaucrats.

Would appear the European Parliament have no idea about democracy either then as they condemn the so called “democratic” nature of the process you are fawning over.



‘This is not democracy’: European parliament unites to condemn selection of new EU Commission president behind closed doors

The European parliament’s political groups have united to condemn the selection of the next European Commission president, branding the process an undemocratic stitch-up by national governments.

EU leaders chose Ursula von der Leyen as their pick to replace Jean-Claude Juncker as the leader of the European Union’s executive branch despite the fact she was not on the ballot paper as a candidate and has no manifesto.

The European Council effectively ignored the European parliament’s spitzenkandidat, or “lead candidate” system, which was supposed to inject an element of democracy into the selection of commission president – instead nominating the defence minister, who is largely unknown outside Germany.

“I’m not going to congratulate the council. President Tusk, I cannot support how things were done and the lack of respect that you’ve shown to other institutions,” said Gonzalez Pons, spokesperson for the dominant centre-right EPP group in the parliament. The EPP’s criticism of the process is notable because Ms Von der Leyen, a member of Angela Merkel’s CDU party, is actually a member of the EPP.

Mr Pons continued: “The future of Europe can no longer be decided behind closed doors. The spizenkandidat process is not about one person or one name – the citizens of Europe want to elect the person who is governing Europe. This is not revolutionary, this is democracy.

“The council has the right to propose a candidate to lead the commission to lead the parliament. However, what the council doesn’t have the right to do is to ignore all the candidates that have been voted for by European citizens.” He said the approach of carving up other top jobs taken by EU leaders was “clearly against the treaties”.

“You were telling the parliament who it should nominate as president of our chamber! You are now at the point where you’re deciding who is in charge of the ECB [European Central Bank] as if there was one more political nomination. This is not democracy – you are supporting the Eurosceptics, even the nationalists. None of the presidents on the council would accept this being done in their countries. It would be taken to a constitutional court,” he said.

Iratxe García Perez, leader of the second largest group, the centre-left socialists, said EU leaders can’t “come here and just lay out the council position and say that we have to vote for it”.

“We believe that it should have been Frans Timmermans to lead the commission because he was the spizenkandidat who could have achieved a majority of votes in this parliament and also because of the democratic rules that we’ve established,” she added.

Dacian Ciolos, leader of the liberal Renew Europe group set up by Emmanuel Macron, called for a constitutional convention to overhaul the process.

“What we need first and foremost is to democratise the process of appointing leadership roles in the EU. We can discuss names, gender balance, geographic balance: but for as long as we don’t have a transparent, democratic process for selecting those who lead Europe, we will not have achieved satisfaction,” he told MEPs.

He said his group would propose “a conference with a sufficient duration, two years, two-and-a-half years” to democratise the electoral process in the EU “so that by the next elections we have a mechanism in place”

But Donald Tusk, the European Council president, who looked uncomfortable sitting through the speeches in the parliament, defended the approach taken by the council.

“To some the parliament represents genuine European democracy because of its directly elected members, while to others it is the European Council because of the strong democratic legitimacy of the leaders. Such disputes make little sense as both institutions are democratic,” he told MEPs.

Despite the furore, it is yet to be seen whether MEPs – who technically have a veto on the appointment – will block the council’s choice. Philippe Lamberts, co-leader of the Green group, admonished his fellow MEPs for not standing up to the council, warning: “It’s easy to criticise the heads of state and government but I wanted to say to all of you in this house that if the parliament is emerging from this episode in a weaker position then it only has itself to blame.”

Under the spitzenkandidat system agreed by the parliament, each political group nominated a candidate, who stood on an identifiable manifesto, for commission president. The candidate from the winning group – or one who could command a majority across the parliament – would have become leader of he EU’s executive. However, European Union leaders refused to write the system into law and ignored it when the time came – carving up the top jobs at a three-day summit in Brussels

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...der-leyen-juncker-eu-parliament-a8987841.html

the Brexit party isn't a political party,

They are registered to, authorised by and recorded as, a political party by the Electoral Commission in the Great Britain Register of Political Parties.
But what do they know eh……

They have .....................................................no policies.

What is The Brexit Party policy on European Union membership, generally in favour or generally against?

 

[birthofanorange]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOwRhkWpnuI
regards

Good grief! She reminds me so much of the crazy old dear I saw pushing a shopping trolley full of junk, ranting at random people, the other day.
I despair, truly.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Would appear the European Parliament have no idea about democracy either then as they condemn the so called “democratic” nature of the process you are fawning over.



‘This is not democracy’: European parliament unites to condemn selection of new EU Commission president behind closed doors

The European parliament’s political groups have united to condemn the selection of the next European Commission president, branding the process an undemocratic stitch-up by national governments.

EU leaders chose Ursula von der Leyen as their pick to replace Jean-Claude Juncker as the leader of the European Union’s executive branch despite the fact she was not on the ballot paper as a candidate and has no manifesto.

The European Council effectively ignored the European parliament’s spitzenkandidat, or “lead candidate” system, which was supposed to inject an element of democracy into the selection of commission president – instead nominating the defence minister, who is largely unknown outside Germany.

“I’m not going to congratulate the council. President Tusk, I cannot support how things were done and the lack of respect that you’ve shown to other institutions,” said Gonzalez Pons, spokesperson for the dominant centre-right EPP group in the parliament. The EPP’s criticism of the process is notable because Ms Von der Leyen, a member of Angela Merkel’s CDU party, is actually a member of the EPP.

Mr Pons continued: “The future of Europe can no longer be decided behind closed doors. The spizenkandidat process is not about one person or one name – the citizens of Europe want to elect the person who is governing Europe. This is not revolutionary, this is democracy.

“The council has the right to propose a candidate to lead the commission to lead the parliament. However, what the council doesn’t have the right to do is to ignore all the candidates that have been voted for by European citizens.” He said the approach of carving up other top jobs taken by EU leaders was “clearly against the treaties”.

“You were telling the parliament who it should nominate as president of our chamber! You are now at the point where you’re deciding who is in charge of the ECB [European Central Bank] as if there was one more political nomination. This is not democracy – you are supporting the Eurosceptics, even the nationalists. None of the presidents on the council would accept this being done in their countries. It would be taken to a constitutional court,” he said.

Iratxe García Perez, leader of the second largest group, the centre-left socialists, said EU leaders can’t “come here and just lay out the council position and say that we have to vote for it”.

“We believe that it should have been Frans Timmermans to lead the commission because he was the spizenkandidat who could have achieved a majority of votes in this parliament and also because of the democratic rules that we’ve established,” she added.

Dacian Ciolos, leader of the liberal Renew Europe group set up by Emmanuel Macron, called for a constitutional convention to overhaul the process.

“What we need first and foremost is to democratise the process of appointing leadership roles in the EU. We can discuss names, gender balance, geographic balance: but for as long as we don’t have a transparent, democratic process for selecting those who lead Europe, we will not have achieved satisfaction,” he told MEPs.

He said his group would propose “a conference with a sufficient duration, two years, two-and-a-half years” to democratise the electoral process in the EU “so that by the next elections we have a mechanism in place”

But Donald Tusk, the European Council president, who looked uncomfortable sitting through the speeches in the parliament, defended the approach taken by the council.

“To some the parliament represents genuine European democracy because of its directly elected members, while to others it is the European Council because of the strong democratic legitimacy of the leaders. Such disputes make little sense as both institutions are democratic,” he told MEPs.

Despite the furore, it is yet to be seen whether MEPs – who technically have a veto on the appointment – will block the council’s choice. Philippe Lamberts, co-leader of the Green group, admonished his fellow MEPs for not standing up to the council, warning: “It’s easy to criticise the heads of state and government but I wanted to say to all of you in this house that if the parliament is emerging from this episode in a weaker position then it only has itself to blame.”

Under the spitzenkandidat system agreed by the parliament, each political group nominated a candidate, who stood on an identifiable manifesto, for commission president. The candidate from the winning group – or one who could command a majority across the parliament – would have become leader of he EU’s executive. However, European Union leaders refused to write the system into law and ignored it when the time came – carving up the top jobs at a three-day summit in Brussels

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...der-leyen-juncker-eu-parliament-a8987841.html




They are registered to, authorised by and recorded as, a political party by the Electoral Commission in the Great Britain Register of Political Parties.
But what do they know eh……



What is The Brexit Party policy on European Union membership, generally in favour or generally against?

There are four candidates for the presidency.

What are the other policies of the Brexit party say on the NHS, taxation, defence, climate change, education etc? Who votes for those policies?

 

[pastafarian]

There are four candidates for the presidency.

Who are the four candidates put forward for the commission president, the position that is relevant to the article and relevant to the complaints of the parliament members? You obviously didnt read it.

What are the other policies of the Brexit party say on the NHS, taxation, defence, climate change, education etc? Who votes for those policies?

So they do have a policy, even though you said they didnt have any and they are a political party even though you said they were not

 

[GrizzlingGammon]

Who are the four candidates put forward for the commission president, the position that is relevant to the article and relevant to the complaints of the parliament members? You obviously didnt read it.



So they do have a policy, even though you said they didnt have any and they are a political party even though you said they were not

I think this is what you asked for.

Ska Keller (Germany, Greens)

Sira Rego (Spain, GUE/NGL)

David-Maria Sassoli (Italy, S&D)

Jan Zahradil (Czech Republic, ECR)

It was democratically elected heads of state (EU Council) who have ignored the Spitzenkandidat system, although it is not in law that this has to be used.

 

[Baldseagull]

On the subject of Brexit, without any sense of irony, you epitomise the blinkered myopic lunacy you so readily mock as a leavers mindset. You simply cannot see fault lies on all sides for the predicament we’re in. If we’re ever to even start coming together as a country once more, prats like you that are STILL hurling insults as the preferred way forward will need to be silenced. For the love of god, even the Guardian Editorial admits the condescending campaign to mock Leavers as idiotic racists was a massive mistake. But still, you carry on...

I understand it is counterproductive to insult someone you hope to persuade to come to your way of thinking, but if you still think leaving without a deal on 31st October is a viable route to go down, you are an idiot.
It is not a matter of opinion that it would be damaging for the country, absolutely everyone agrees, I suspect even you realise it will do more harm than just reduce your choice of cheeses.

 

[pastafarian]

I think this is what you asked for.

Ska Keller (Germany, Greens)

Sira Rego (Spain, GUE/NGL)

David-Maria Sassoli (Italy, S&D)

Jan Zahradil (Czech Republic, ECR)

It was democratically elected heads of state (EU Council) who have ignored the Spitzenkandidat system, although it is not in law that this has to be used.

No it wasnt what i asked, the article was primarily concerned with the president of the commission, the nomination of this position is what has angered MEP`s , who indecently you havnt even listed.
TB came back with there are four candidates for the presidency, and since the relevant issue is the presidency of the commission, i asked for who are the four candidates for the president of the commission, not the candidates for a completely different presidential position.

 

[Baldseagull]

Never really got that argument about Brexit MP`s voting against TM`s deal ,nearly all Labour MP`s voted against it 3 times if i remember correctly .What were they voting for ?

Labour are the opposition, it is not surprising that they vote against the Government.

 

[GrizzlingGammon]

On the subject of Brexit, without any sense of irony, you epitomise the blinkered myopic lunacy you so readily mock as a leavers mindset. You simply cannot see fault lies on all sides for the predicament we’re in. If we’re ever to even start coming together as a country once more, prats like you that are STILL hurling insults as the preferred way forward will need to be silenced. For the love of god, even the Guardian Editorial admits the condescending campaign to mock Leavers as idiotic racists was a massive mistake. But still, you carry on...

Your point falls flat when you complain about insults being used by using an insult in your argument.

 

[GrizzlingGammon]

No it wasnt what i asked, the article was primarily concerned with the president of the commission, the nomination of this position is what has angered MEP`s , who indecently you havnt even listed.
TB came back with there are four candidates for the presidency, and since the relevant issue is the presidency of the commission, i asked for who are the four candidates for the president of the commission, not the candidates for a completely different presidential position.

Appologies, my mistake. In April these were the 6 nominations; 1 from each political grouping.

Manfred Weber — European People’s Party

Margrethe Vestager — Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe

Jan Zahradil — European Conservatives and Reformists

Bas Eickhout — Greens/European Free Alliance

Violeta Tomić — European Left

Frans Timmermans — Party of European Socialists