At least the Irish have the guts

[northwind]

1 and 3 aren't They're about the general voting system. 2 5 and 6 are the troublesome ones, 1 and 3 are just changes to the way they do things, not changes to what they can do.

1) Majority voting - 55% required majority for certain aspects of the EU, which at the moment, require a unamimous vote. In future, this could be used to push through changes to the EU's powers etc, and if we vote no, we may be among the 45%.

3) If the UK looses it's veto (over anything), combined with #1, again, we can't stop legislation being forced upon us.

You said 6 was troublesome (lack of representation), but surely if our votes are not taken account of fully, then we're not being rightfully represented.

The "Majority voting" issue is one whereby the heads of governments decided (not the people) if a majority is OK rather than unanimous decision, ie, the government decides if it wants the possibility of being walked all over in the future. This is not a case by case decision, if it were, it wouldn't be an issue.

The issue only exists if (for example) the EU asks everyone "do you accept a majority vote in terms of minimum fuel duty (to take something topical)?". Our government then say "Yeah, no problem, we'll go with the flow." Next thing you know 55% of the EU pass a move to up "green tax" on fuel to £2/litre just to be eco-friendly.

OK, so I'm vastly exagerating, but that's the issue with "Majority voting."

[northwind]

Originally Posted by Baph

OK, so I'm vastly exagerating, but that's the issue with "Majority voting."

What, that it's democratic? In what way does majority voting not take into account people's votes fully? Vetos undermine people's votes. You can't expect to always get your own way in any group larger than you.

All I know is our PM, Socrates, was utterly ****ed off at the Irish "no". And that can only be a good thing

Originally Posted by northwind

What, that it's democratic? In what way does majority voting not take into account people's votes fully? Vetos undermine people's votes. You can't expect to always get your own way in any group larger than you.

It's not 'peoples' votes though is it, it's their government. I know we elect MPs to represent us so really, we don't as people have a vote, but the more layers of government you have the more opportunity for political meddling occurs.

The fact of the matter is though that Europe is profoundly corrupt. IIRC not once in the many many years that the EU has been going have accountants signed off the books. Millions (billions?) of pounds go 'missing' every year, and no-one seems to see this as any kind of problem.

[punyXpress]

[quote=Baph;1538532]1) Majority voting - 55% required majority for certain aspects of the EU, which at the moment, require a unamimous vote. In future, this could be used to push through changes to the EU's powers etc, and if we vote no, we may be among the 45%.

Is that similar to what happened in the Eurovision - we was well shafted & that might just be to familiarise ourselves with what living under the EU will be like.

Snore.