LaPennaBianca
Well-known member
But it's not spot on - he thinks the EP has the only veto.Absolutely spot on.
But it's not spot on - he thinks the EP has the only veto.Absolutely spot on.
I don't have a problem with the EU creating trade policy. It's the other political agendas I may have a problem with.The veto comes in the Council where each country is represented by their head of state and it requires unanimity. Nothing to do with MEPs.
Yes MEPs have a say in policy, but nothing gets done without the council's approval. Especially not treaty changes - which is the only way to change the SM and CU. If the UK was in the SM and CU but not in the council then we'd be affected by this hypothetical new treaty. If we were a full member we'd have a role in drafting it (as with Maastricht and Lisbon) and be able to veto it. We'd even have the chance to have a referendum on it.
Crikey "we'd even have the chance to have a referendum on it". Imagine how lucky we'd be to have that in our own country!The veto comes in the Council where each country is represented by their head of state and it requires unanimity. Nothing to do with MEPs.
Yes MEPs have a say in policy, but nothing gets done without the council's approval. Especially not treaty changes - which is the only way to change the SM and CU. If the UK was in the SM and CU but not in the council then we'd be affected by this hypothetical new treaty. If we were a full member we'd have a role in drafting it (as with Maastricht and Lisbon) and be able to veto it. We'd even have the chance to have a referendum on it.
Nothing to do with cancel culture bm and all to do with how St engages with people.Cancel culture fella
Read my responses - they make clear where my mis-trust of veto lies. A PM so pro Euro project can easily block any referendum. Major did.But it's not spot on - he thinks the EP has the only veto.
Let's hope we get one soon and we rejoin to stop this dreadful mistake.There was no referendum for Maastricht or Lisbon, just a PM action.
A pro EU "project" leader with a Govt majority can ALWAYS avoid a referendum.
Spin it however you want.
It's not an erroneous prediction at all. We disagree, that's fine. It does not make you right.
Thats not actually what I think. In any event even if it were, it wouldn't change my stance. I don't like the EU's political agenda.But it's not spot on - he thinks the EP has the only veto.
It's true, but you've not read mine.Read my responses - they make clear where my mis-trust of veto lies. A PM so pro Euro project can easily block any referendum. Major did.
A leader like Hammond would never have allowed for a mis-calculation like Cameron did.
Rejoin what?Let's hope we get one soon and we rejoin to stop this dreadful mistake.
Thats not actually what I think. In any event even if it were, it wouldn't change my stance. I don't like the EU's political agenda.
You may be but another PM might not.Rejoin what?
Single Market fine, but if you mean the full EU, no thanks, delighted to be out of that.
I think that is complete spin.It's true, but you've not read mine.
If we are in the SM and CU but out of the political side we have no recourse It wouldn't matter if it was Hammond, Major, Johnson, Cameron, Corbyn or Gareth Southgate - we'd *have* to lump it.
IF we were in, the we'd be able to input into the drafting of the treaties (like with Maastricht and Lisbon) and l, if we so wished, veto. That would of course depend on the gov of the day, but it would be am option available.
So it's a question of possible (even if you think improbable) Vs Impossible.
No because as in parliament MEP's have a right to question the parliamentary commission and the right to table amendments to anything proposed in parliament. The first power is particular pertinent given that I don't believe the EU parliament is very democratic even though many would disagree with that too.So why did you say that our veto depended on our number of MEPs? Banter?
I think that is complete spin.
I don't think we will significantly influence the still broader unification of Europe from within. It is on a path. Fat lot of good it did us having input into Maastricht and Lisbon and their concentration of central powers.
An EU supportive PM will not veto anything.
The EU would far prefer us in the Single Market and Customs Union, so we would still have some influence in economic affairs if we were not in the "full EU" and where that goes.
I don't care if we don't have influence in the rest of the European convergence.
But what has any of this got to do with the fact that the power to veto still lies with the council - which is our elected appointed head of national government?No because as in parliament MEP's have a right to question the parliamentary commission and the right to table amendments to anything proposed in parliament. The first power is particular pertinent given that I don't believe the EU parliament is very democratic even though many would disagree with that too.
It's the primary reason I don't want any part of the political union. There are other reasons, the 100 grand a year salary and the 5 grand a month expense account. The 3.5% of gross salary as a pension for every year they serve rankles with me too. Thats 10 years as an mep gives you a pension of 35 grand a year and we have just removed the triple lock on our state pension.
There are other reasons some more pertinent than others.
The EU would far prefer us in the Single Market and Customs Union, so we would still have some influence in economic affairs if we were not in the "full EU" and where that goes.
No because as in parliament MEP's have a right to question the parliamentary commission and the right to table amendments to anything proposed in parliament. The first power is particular pertinent given that I don't believe the EU parliament is very democratic even though many would disagree with that too.
It's the primary reason I don't want any part of the political union. There are other reasons, the 100 grand a year salary and the 5 grand a month expense account. The 3.5% of gross salary as a pension for every year they serve rankles with me too. Thats 10 years as an mep gives you a pension of 35 grand a year and we have just removed the triple lock on our state pension.
There are other reasons some more pertinent than others.
It ignores that what is being vetoed is amended by meps. Those amendments are likely to be tabled by meps that support the political union. The Council being questioned by EU sympathisers is hardly thorough scrutiny.But what has any of this got to do with the fact that the power to veto still lies with the council - which is our elected appointed head of national government?
It ignores that what is being vetoed is amended by meps. Those amendments are likely to be tabled by meps that support the political union. The Council being questioned by EU sympathisers is hardly thorough scrutiny.
More jaundiced interpretation and selective observations.Lots and lots of misinformation here.
MEPs had barely any influence of the exercise of EU veto rights.
Where a referendum is required to waive certain veto rights or e.g. proposals to change the EU Treaties, joining the euro, or giving up our national border controls there is no legal means of avoiding that referendum.
Being members of the SM and CU without being a member of the EU represents ceding control to the EU rather than exerting any. It is literally the reason being put forward for not wanting to be part of the so called political union i.e. that we don't want to be swept up by the EU and taken places we don't want to go.
These are not opinions but facts. These arguments do not and have never stood up to any scrutiny.