Documentation for New EU "Treaty" Released

[gosub]

Origins of the Second World War


Arrogant imposition of an unjust treaty
Conditions made worse by severe economic down turn
Then magnifying by failing to act quickly enough (with Annexing of Czechoslovakia came coal and iron ore for the war machine) due to appeasement at any price.


Joseph Heller's whole live/die feet /knee thing can never be fully resolved.
If the FSA agree Faifs its almost Heisenberg's uncertainty principle that the stock market will fall outside the scope of hedge funds ability to hedge.


Origins of the First World War

You could have railway timetables, or Prince Albert finding Victoria unsufferable when she was on the blob. Largely though you have the Kaiser jealously regarding the World's Super Power and going why can't we do that...

 

[gosub]

Write up of I Want a Referendum's mass lobby of Parliament yesterday which appears to have been successful: Ian Davidson (Lab) managed to get down an amendment calling for a two part referendum :

“Should the United Kingdom retain its membership of the European Union?”

“If it remains a member of the European Union, should the United Kingdom approve the Lisbon Treaty?”

Which should be enough to placate the Lib Dems to voting for their manifesto commitment made at the last election. The vote will be on 5/3/08

 

[gosub]

Do you honestly think the major concern of the British people when going to the polls is the European Union?! Come off it! Hardly anyone I know even knows what an MEP is, so how can you try and tell me that a great deal of the public actually care about the EU to the extent they know what it is? The only time people develop strong feelings about the EU is when there's an article in the Sun making some racist reference to World War II and how the EU is Hitler

I Want a Referendum's constituency Referendum results are in (press release)

ballot data

The democracy movement have a list of how each MP has been voting during the passage through the Commons here


That two part referendum amendment is definitely down and was put down on 27/02/08 so the article that appeared in the Times 28/02/08 seems most odd even [URL="http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/dominic-lawson/dominic-lawson-an-absurd-tactical-ploy-ndash-and-the-paradox-of-the-new-liberal-democrat-leaders-position-789308.html]Dominic Lawson's explanation in the Independent [/URL]on 29/02/08 makes no sense.
THERE WILL BE A VOTE ON WHAT THEY STORMED OUT OF THE CHAMBER FOR!

 

[CyberRose]

I Want a Referendum's constituency Referendum results are in (press release)

That says 68.144% of the electorate don't care for a referendum...

 

[gosub]

If you want to argue for the abandonment of Local elections for district and county councils that wouldn't surprise me, though Labour have pretty much already neutered them with council cabinets . Mind you at local elections you don't get major political parties calling for a boycott.

 

[gosub]

The response to I Want A Referendum's ballot in the media opponents of a referendum seem spilt between agreeing with cyberrose that 32% still shows apathy and looking at the numbers pointing out the difference between the the number of constituents and number of people balloted and using that to dismiss it, though anyone with with a history of direct marketing should be able to explain the latter and why that makes the former dishonest.


The discrepancy between the number of people on the electoral role and the number of people balloted is because there are two electoral roles (full/open) the full is used for official purposes and the open, those electors who have not objected to their details being sold to direct marketing agencies and the like. It is this open list which I Want A Referendum would have been obliged to use.

In short it was a ballot of voters in the 10 constituencies whom don't mind receiving "junk" mail. I will save cyberrose the effort of typing a banal response about the "junk" nature of the ballot - I concede readily it was not legally binding, to achieve that is surely the objective of the campaign. However response rate of 32% for an untargeted, unsolicited mailshot is significantly higher than anyone who has ever done direct marketing would ever dream of - even those who tell you :
YOU HAVE WON
(a chance to win)
£1,000,000

 

[CyberRose]

The response to I Want A Referendum's ballot in the media opponents of a referendum seem spilt between agreeing with cyberrose that 32% still shows apathy and looking at the numbers pointing out the difference between the the number of constituents and number of people balloted and using that to dismiss it, though anyone with with a history of direct marketing should be able to explain the latter and why that makes the former dishonest.


The discrepancy between the number of people on the electoral role and the number of people balloted is because there are two electoral roles (full/open) the full is used for official purposes and the open, those electors who have not objected to their details being sold to direct marketing agencies and the like. It is this open list which I Want A Referendum would have been obliged to use.

In short it was a ballot of voters in the 10 constituencies whom don't mind receiving "junk" mail. I will save cyberrose the effort of typing a banal response about the "junk" nature of the ballot - I concede readily it was not legally binding, to achieve that is surely the objective of the campaign. However response rate of 32% for an untargeted, unsolicited mailshot is significantly higher than anyone who has ever done direct marketing would ever dream of - even those who tell you :
YOU HAVE WON
(a chance to win)
£1,000,000

So what you're saying is that considering the open electoral list will be a small proportion of the full list, the amount of people that said they actually care about having a referendum is even less than the 32% that responded? So what, can we say about 10% of the people want a referendum? Or am I being too generous there?

Anyway, everybody knows "I Want A Referendum" is just a Tory front to win a few more seats in the next general election

I'd also go as far as saying "I Want A Referendum" don't care one little bit about the Treaty, all they care about is getting the UK out of the EU, and that is what their campaign is about, not because they disagree with what is in the Lisbon Treaty (being Eurosceptics they would actually support the measures in the Treaty if that was their concern)

 

[Gmart]

Europe cant be all that bad compared to the bunch of rubbish we have here parading as a Govt, just look how they have dealt with uncaring Airlines who were benefitting by passengers misery with the blessing of our "care only for the rich" govt, add to that Ms Redding slapping our greedy mobilephone networks in to line, something again our "care only for the rich" govt would have never done.

Sadly this site has little or no balance when it comes to discussing the EU. The knee-jerk 'get us out' reaction is too strong to ignore. Ignoring that there are many issues that need to be addressed at an international level where the UK is just too small...

I wouldn't waste your breath trying to find anyone here who won't shout you down the moment you suggest that the EU might not be all bad.

See this thread for example, a perfectly decent example of why the EU is needed to deal with the modern issues of a globalised world. Any comment? Nah! Best to go back to fear based conservatism etc.

As Marvin would say, How depressingly stupid!!

 

[CyberRose]

Sadly this site has little or no balance when it comes to discussing the EU. The knee-jerk 'get us out' reaction is too strong to ignore. Ignoring that there are many issues that need to be addressed at an international level where the UK is just too small...

I wouldn't waste your breath trying to find anyone here who won't shout you down the moment you suggest that the EU might not be all bad.

See this thread for example, a perfectly decent example of why the EU is needed to deal with the modern issues of a globalised world. Any comment? Nah! Best to go back to fear based conservatism etc.

As Marvin would say, How depressingly stupid!!

You couldn't even read the post above could you?!

 

[EddyBlack]

So what you're saying is that considering the open electoral list will be a small proportion of the full list, the amount of people that said they actually care about having a referendum is even less than the 32% that responded? So what, can we say about 10% of the people want a referendum? Or am I being too generous there?

Anyway, everybody knows "I Want A Referendum" is just a Tory front to win a few more seats in the next general election

I'd also go as far as saying "I Want A Referendum" don't care one little bit about the Treaty, all they care about is getting the UK out of the EU, and that is what their campaign is about, not because they disagree with what is in the Lisbon Treaty (being Eurosceptics they would actually support the measures in the Treaty if that was their concern)

Tony Blair emphatically promised that we would have a referendum.

So why shouldn't we since we voted to have one?

 

[Gmart]

Nope, I read the hitch hikers bit, the rest was boring. Sure the Tories are jumping on the anti EU bandwagon in that they wouldn't dare take us out of it. Any government will avoid a referendum because they know how damaging it would be to industry and thus jobs. Jobs being the priority of course. So more likely the Tories will promise a load in order to get into power and then renege.

The treaty is quite similar to the original treaty of course but even that wasn't all that bad, the idea of a decentralised state giving us our first written constitution would seem like a good idea, though again not voiced on Urban very much. We could do with turning our focus from dissing the EU and start to discuss what form of decentralised super-state we should aim towards.

 

[CyberRose]

Tony Blair emphatically promised that we would have a referendum.

So why shouldn't we since we voted to have one?

Oh yea like anyone actually voted for Labour solely because they promised a referendum on the Constitution?!

Either way you won't win me round with that argument because I have already stated that Labour should not have promised a referendum on the Constitution and nor should we use referendums as a means of implementing any policies...

(And that's not even touching the issue that the Treaty is not the Constitution, no matter how similar people may think they are)

 

[EddyBlack]

I’ve been listening to politicians in the commons debate from both sides of the argument saying that the treaty is in reality the same document. Nobody has convincingly argued anything else The comments from pro-constitution European heads of state are well known. I think it is pretty dishonest the way the government has behaved on this, and I understand that you think the referendum was a bad idea to begin with. But it is too late now, they are breaking their promise.

Interestingly, one Labour MP argued against a referendum on this because she did not believe that people would have the ability to understand and make a proper rational decision. I disagree. There are ways to have a proper informed debate. That is not what we have had; all we have had is political maneuvering and evasiveness from the government.

The pro-European argument is that the referendum vote would simply be made by the euro-skeptic press. I understand this fear but I think that it is a bit cowardly. Labour still won the last two elections by huge majorities despite the opposition of the same newspapers.

 

[gosub]

 

[EddyBlack]

In fact I think that by behaving in this way they are handing the election to David Cameron. His most familar attack is to call the government liars.

 

[gosub]

that was a link by the way.

Cyberrose looking at the sats would say 1/4 responded to an unsolicited untargeted direct mailing still well off the scale. 97 Election what with sitting Labour MP's supporting referendum calls, Referendum Party only stood against sitting MP's against a referendum (largely Tories) look up the stats but if irc Referendum Party directly claimed 28 scalps including Micheal Portillo, I do hope something similar happens against this government.

GMathews we had quite a long thread with you calling black white and saying the EU was the best way to counter corperatism and you refusing to accept rational arguement to the contary (I may dig it out later but not in the mood) was hoping you would resurface when I linked to the refesults of the European court I had pointed to came in namely that while busnesses have full EU legal backing to rel0ocate elsewhere in EU for cheaper labour, the existing workforce have no right under EU law to protest. You're santimonious clap trap doesn't wash.

 

[Gmart]

IIR you won't believe in anything which is positive about the EU and I wouldn't accept that they are all bad.

Evidently your recollection differs and I was unreasonable, not surprisingly. Still don't let my recollection get in the way

 

[CyberRose]

I’ve been listening to politicians in the commons debate from both sides of the argument saying that the treaty is in reality the same document. Nobody has convincingly argued anything else The comments from pro-constitution European heads of state are well known. I think it is pretty dishonest the way the government has behaved on this, and I understand that you think the referendum was a bad idea to begin with. But it is too late now, they are breaking their promise.

Interestingly, one Labour MP argued against a referendum on this because she did not believe that people would have the ability to understand and make a proper rational decision. I disagree. There are ways to have a proper informed debate. That is not what we have had; all we have had is political maneuvering and evasiveness from the government.

The pro-European argument is that the referendum vote would simply be made by the euro-skeptic press. I understand this fear but I think that it is a bit cowardly. Labour still won the last two elections by huge majorities despite the opposition of the same newspapers.

Do you think there should have been a referendum (ignoring for a minute what any party promised in their manifesto)? If you do, then how would you have voted and why?

The reason we shouldn't have referendums imo is because 1) Rupert Murdoch would become Emperor of Britain and 2) no progressive policies would ever be introduced (for example, would the male electorate have given women the vote had it been put to a referendum?)

The Commons vote has finally put the referendum debate to bed. I'd like to think now people will concentrate on what the Treaty actually does, but I won't be holding my breath

 

[CyberRose]

In fact I think that by behaving in this way they are handing the election to David Cameron. His most familar attack is to call the government liars.

It does hand him a powerful weapon, but at the end of the day, people just don't care enough about the EU (they should) for it to be as damaging as you might think...

 

[CyberRose]

GMathews we had quite a long thread with you calling black white and saying the EU was the best way to counter corperatism and you refusing to accept rational arguement to the contary (I may dig it out later but not in the mood) was hoping you would resurface when I linked to the refesults of the European court I had pointed to came in namely that while busnesses have full EU legal backing to rel0ocate elsewhere in EU for cheaper labour, the existing workforce have no right under EU law to protest. You're santimonious clap trap doesn't wash.

So you support the complete harmonisation of employment laws across the EU and the complete harmonisation of taxes?

Cool!

 

[gosub]

I have covered that before, pan EUropean trade unions seemed like a logical development to me yet they were sty-med in that ruling (earlier in thread). Harmonisation of taxes would really require a democratically elected central government (which in our case we have not got) and would be the end of the UK national health service, destroy Irish neutrality....

Speaking candidly, clearly everything is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.



"This is going to end badly"
Henri Emmanuelli. 03-02-2008 13:03