I was going to vote reamin but

[The Jorge]

Even if that argument weren't as utterly, pitifully flawed as it is (neither the House of Lords nor the Monarch has actual executive power - unlike the Commission), it is a strange and perverse argument to say that you believe it's right to vote for even less political accountability because you don't feel our level of political accountability at the moment is what it ought to be.

Oh, and your £60-£80 billion figure is entirely fictitious and utterly unprovable - something that ought to be obvious from the fact that there is a disparity of TWENTY - count 'em - £20 billion between the estimates

Democracy doesnt just mean the executive has power though, and that was a stat from the CBI btw, hardly the most rabidly pro-eu body I think you'll agree. http://news.cbi.org.uk/reports/our-g...utweigh-costs/

[Burney]

Democracy doesnt just mean the executive has power though, and that was a stat from the CBI btw, hardly the most rabidly pro-eu body I think you'll agree. http://news.cbi.org.uk/reports/our-g...utweigh-costs/

Well actually, the CBI (as opposed to its membership) is pretty rabidly pro-EU.
Also, have you actually read that document? It's full of vague generalities and is apparently predicated on the ridiculous assumption that Europe will effectively cease to trade with us if we're outside the EU.
And executive power is pretty important, yes. The Lords cannot create or stop legislation and neither (in anything other than theory) can the Queen. On the other hand, the unelected EU Commission decides absolutely what legislation our elected representatives are or aren't allowed to vote on. They define the EU's legislative agenda completely and are utterly unaccountable to any electorate or elected body. That is utterly antithetical to democracy, since it means EU citizens cannot ever choose the political direction of the EU, but instead have it dictated to them.

And you haven't explained why not being happy with our level of domestic democratic accountability means you're happy to vote for even less democratic accountability within the EU.

[The Jorge]

Well actually, the CBI (as opposed to its membership) is pretty rabidly pro-EU.
Also, have you actually read that document? It's full of vague generalities and is apparently predicated on the ridiculous assumption that Europe will effectively cease to trade with us if we're outside the EU.
And executive power is pretty important, yes. The Lords cannot create or stop legislation and neither (in anything other than theory) can the Queen. On the other hand, the unelected EU Commission decides absolutely what legislation our elected representatives are or aren't allowed to vote on. They define the EU's legislative agenda completely and are utterly unaccountable to any electorate or elected body. That is utterly antithetical to democracy, since it means EU citizens cannot ever choose the political direction of the EU, but instead have it dictated to them.

And you haven't explained why not being happy with our level of domestic democratic accountability means you're happy to vote for even less democratic accountability within the EU.

Our PM appoints a comissioner just the same as every other country does, your argument is the equivalent of saying that we arent democratic because the parties appoint our PM and not us. That document is on the value of the EU to britain's businesses and, as the Leave campaign has clearly demonstrated, it's virtually impossible for anyone to predict what not being part of the EU would look like, they just chose to ignore the obvious fact that it will be a lot harder and take years to sort out.

My broader point is that democracy in this country is a sham and we'd be better trying to address the democratic deficit in our own country if we were really serious about wanting a more representative democracy.

[Burney]

Our PM appoints a comissioner just the same as every other country does, your argument is the equivalent of saying that we arent democratic because the parties appoint our PM and not us. That document is on the value of the EU to britain's businesses and, as the Leave campaign has clearly demonstrated, it's virtually impossible for anyone to predict what not being part of the EU would look like, they just chose to ignore the obvious fact that it will be a lot harder and take years to sort out.

My broader point is that democracy in this country is a sham and we'd be better trying to address the democratic deficit in our own country if we were really serious about wanting a more representative democracy.

Nonsense. We get to vote for our parties knowing full well who their leaders are and thus who is likely to be the Prime Minister. We tend not to like PMs who are unelected and thus kick them out if they hang around too long without a mandate, as Gordon Brown found out. Also, 'our' commissioner is one appointee by our PM in a room full of people appointed by people we, the British people, didn't vote for and who have utterly different agendas to us, meaning that - even if he were to represent our interests - he will always be outvoted by those countries whose conception of the role of the EU is very different to ours and about whose decisions we have no say whatsoever. Equally, since there is no weighting of representation based on size of population, economy, etc, you have the absurdly undemocratic situation whereby Luxembourg has as big a say as the UK - bigger in fact, since the ****'s the Commission President at the moment.
And, of course, the real point is that one that Commissioner is appointed by the PM, he is absolutely unaccountable to anyone. He can do as he wishes and vote as he wishes and no-one can ever hold him to account for it.
The EU makes it explicit that it wants to hush the voices of individual nations and it does that by arranging its systems in such a way that the democratic wishes of entire nations can be easily overridden in pursuit of ever closer union. Try as you might, you cannot justify its anti-democratic nature by comparing it with the UK.

[The Jorge]

Nonsense. We get to vote for our parties knowing full well who their leaders are and thus who is likely to be the Prime Minister. We tend not to like PMs who are unelected and thus kick them out if they hang around too long without a mandate, as Gordon Brown found out. Also, 'our' commissioner is one appointee by our PM in a room full of people appointed by people we, the British people, didn't vote for and who have utterly different agendas to us, meaning that - even if he were to represent our interests - he will always be outvoted by those countries whose conception of the role of the EU is very different to ours and about whose decisions we have no say whatsoever. Equally, since there is no weighting of representation based on size of population, economy, etc, you have the absurdly undemocratic situation whereby Luxembourg has as big a say as the UK - bigger in fact, since the ****'s the Commission President at the moment.
And, of course, the real point is that one that Commissioner is appointed by the PM, he is absolutely unaccountable to anyone. He can do as he wishes and vote as he wishes and no-one can ever hold him to account for it.
The EU makes it explicit that it wants to hush the voices of individual nations and it does that by arranging its systems in such a way that the democratic wishes of entire nations can be easily overridden in pursuit of ever closer union. Try as you might, you cannot justify its anti-democratic nature by comparing it with the UK.

But my MP (lets leave aside the fact it's that useless **** Philip Davies) is one person in a room full of people with very different ideas about what britain is, also the boundaries populations of wards/boroughs etc isnt fairly weighted either. I'm sure Witney in Oxfordshire therefore has more of a say as their MP is also the PM, who is unelected. I simply dont see what we can gain by putting all our undemocratic eggs in one basket. And, if you've not noticed, we've got just as many systems of stymying dissent and mitigating the will of the people in this country.

[Burney]

But my MP (lets leave aside the fact it's that useless **** Philip Davies) is one person in a room full of people with very different ideas about what britain is, also the boundaries populations of wards/boroughs etc isnt fairly weighted either. I'm sure Witney in Oxfordshire therefore has more of a say as their MP is also the PM, who is unelected. I simply dont see what we can gain by putting all our undemocratic eggs in one basket. And, if you've not noticed, we've got just as many systems of stymying dissent and mitigating the will of the people in this country.

But we have an effective party system that means that our representatives have power as part of a meaningful bloc. Indeed, most of us don't really vote for individuals, but for their parties, which means we can look at the manifesto and have a good idea what we're voting for and can kick the individual out if we don't like how he votes. No such power exists within the Commission. The individual is both impotent as an individual representative and at the same time unaccountable - and that total unaccountability is the key issue here, which is why I suspect you're dodging it.

You may not like how our lives are run. That's a fair point of view. I don't agree with you but I can respect your opinion. What I cannot respect is your decision to complain about that and then to vote for even less democratic control over the way our lives are run. That seems totally contradictory and perverse to me.

[The Jorge]

But we have an effective party system that means that our representatives have power as part of a meaningful bloc. Indeed, most of us don't really vote for individuals, but for their parties, which means we can look at the manifesto and have a good idea what we're voting for and can kick the individual out if we don't like how he votes. No such power exists within the Commission. The individual is both impotent and unaccountable - and that total unaccountability is the key issue here, which is why I suspect you're dodging it.

You may not like how our lives are run. That's a fair point of view. I don't agree with you but I can respect your opinion. What I cannot respect is your decision to complain about that and then to vote for even less democratic control over the way our lives are run. That seems totally contradictory and perverse to me.

I dont get how you can be so outraged at a perceived lack of control (it is indeed all about control for the brexiters) in the EU - which is 1-2% of govt spend - whilst being totally sanguine about the lack of control we have over the 98%. The 98% would seem like the bigger issue to me.

[Burney]

I dont get how you can be so outraged at a perceived lack of control (it is indeed all about control for the brexiters) in the EU - which is 1-2% of govt spend - whilst being totally sanguine about the lack of control we have over the 98%. The 98% would seem like the bigger issue to me.

Well first of all your numbers are highly debatable in terms of the amount of legislation that comes our way and secondly we as an electorate do have some measure of control over domestic legislation, but none at all over EU legislation.

[The Jorge]

Well first of all your numbers are highly debatable in terms of the amount of legislation that comes our way and secondly we as an electorate do have some measure of control over domestic legislation, but none at all over EU legislation.

They arent as debatable to make them not germane though. I dont get the fixation on the tiny, much less significant portion and ignoring the much wider, more pertinent issue.

It's like being served a **** trifle and only getting wound up because you dont like maraschino cherries