Is the EU is about to collapse?

We wouldn't be leaving the EU lovefest, if peoplein this country felt that the UK had a voice, rather than just be used as a cash machine.
Whether that feeling is based on fact is a separate question.
 
I don't expect to convince you. Simply refuting the oft trotted out lie that the UK had no influence in the EU.

It's clearly not true
Remind me again of what charges to the EU managed to get through.

The EU is made up of 28 member states. Each one has influence to some degree.

Influence or not you can’t get 28 member states to align themselves.

The only way to do that is to go down the federal route like America and turn nation states into member states with an over arching government.

But in response to the original thread, the EU either goes federal or collapses. Big money men like Sorros will people like Blair doing their bidding will not want to loose their money so will push the federal route.
 
Remind me again of what charges to the EU managed to get through.

The EU is made up of 28 member states. Each one has influence to some degree.

Influence or not you can’t get 28 member states to align themselves.

The only way to do that is to go down the federal route like America and turn nation states into member states with an over arching government.

But in response to the original thread, the EU either goes federal or collapses. Big money men like Sorros will people like Blair doing their bidding will not want to loose their money so will push the federal route.
All rubbish Andy.

28 MS managed to sign advantageous trade deals that cover over 60% of the world's economies by GDP. That is due to reaching a consensus. The advantage being in collective bargaining power.

The 27 remaining MS have been in unanimous agreement wrt brexit, despite attempts at divide and conquer, including the distasteful backing of fascism in Hungary.

Usual misinformation Andy
 
The issue is when you have member states, with the same amount of say around a table, when actually they are probably smaller in population/ GDP etc than Manchester / Birmingham, or even for that matter Bristol.
Maybe if they had, on expansion adopted a model similar to the UN Security Council with some permanent members (those with biggest population and/or GDP), plus the others rotating in and out on a 6 month/ yearly basis. You could perhaps group Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg into one group etc etc.
 
All rubbish Andy.

28 MS managed to sign advantageous trade deals that cover over 60% of the world's economies by GDP. That is due to reaching a consensus. The advantage being in collective bargaining power.

The 27 remaining MS have been in unanimous agreement wrt brexit, despite attempts at divide and conquer, including the distasteful backing of fascism in Hungary.

Usual misinformation Andy
Advantageous to who? Not to joe public in the U.K.?

Why do these so advantageous trade deals take so long to sign off?
 
The issue is when you have member states, with the same amount of say around a table, when actually they are probably smaller in population/ GDP etc than Manchester / Birmingham, or even for that matter Bristol.
Maybe if they had, on expansion adopted a model similar to the UN Security Council with some permanent members (those with biggest population and/or GDP), plus the others rotating in and out on a 6 month/ yearly basis. You could perhaps group Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg into one group etc etc.
However the EU parliament also has a major democratic deficit with 1 MEP representing 810k U.K. constituents whilst Malta has an MEP for every 76K
 
However the EU parliament also has a major democratic deficit with 1 MEP representing 810k U.K. constituents whilst Malta has an MEP for every 76K
Oddly enough, the same democratic defect seems fine in the Parliament which is taking back control.
 
Which deficit are you talking about there?
Why the deficit where elected representatives represent different numbers of people in different places.

The one you were complaining about in the post I responded directly to and quoted?
 
Why the deficit where elected representatives represent different numbers of people in different places.

The one you were complaining about in the post I responded directly to and quoted?
The U.K. is under continual boundary changes.

There are some discrepancies however U.K. boundary changes also tend to take into account geographical size as well.

Parliamentary constituencies

The EU is out by a few 1000%.
 
The U.K. is under continual boundary changes.

There are some discrepancies however U.K. boundary changes also tend to take into account geographical size as well.

Parliamentary constituencies

The EU is out by a few 1000%.
Ah, so UK MPs don't represent different population densities because different geographical considerations need to be taken into account and that's just something the nasty EU does, even though it's explicitly an organisation of member states and not populations.

It's all so clear to me now.
 
Ah, so UK MPs don't represent different population densities because different geographical considerations need to be taken into account and that's just something the nasty EU does, even though it's explicitly an organisation of member states and not populations.

It's all so clear to me now.
You tell 'im.

What we need is an electoral college system, just to make sure there can be no disputes over the result. Oh, wait...
 
Ah, but the EU's Parliament of MEPS, elected peoples, do NOT have any legislative power as yet. They may get these powers at some stage in the future. All they can do is vote for 'Yeah' or 'Nay' to proposals and policies put before them. The EU parliament cannot amend nor stike down current EU legislation. In effect, the EU Parliament is a 'Talking Shop' for the policies put before them by either of the various Commission departsmetns or the Council of Ministers.
 
Not really, we're already £500 million worse of per week, so a sizeable net loss, to make things worse.

Brexit has cost Britain 500 million pounds a week, study says | Reuters

Spectacular own goal, in fact
The key word in their report is 'could', as in we're going to assume despite having no evidence, oh look this assumption comes up with result we'd like to publicise. Given that economists repeated fail to spot the next big problem coming along I'm as trusting of their predictive 'could's as I am of old mother Riley's tea leaves.
 
Aren't we currently in the process of adjusting constituency boundaries to even up the number of people each MP represents so as to be more equal...?
 
Aren't we currently in the process of adjusting constituency boundaries to even up the number of people each MP represents so as to be more equal...?
Unless 'more equal' means 'absolutely equal' it's just a synonym for 'still unequal'.

But British inequality in representation is so much better than that filthy EU inequality in representation because... er...

TAKE BACK CONTROL!!!
 

Latest Threads

Top