FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > junckers plan
junckers plan
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So juncker has today spoken of complete plitical and financial union amongst all member states would remainers seriously be happy with that?" Complete quotes? Heard it on the office radio that he was talking about learning from the mistakes of the last two years but moving forward. Ironically for him I heard "more democratic and transparent Union" followed by a "closer Union after Brexit". Funnily enough, I imagine the first point will naturally come into conflict with the second point, to some extent if implemented | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So juncker has today spoken of complete plitical and financial union amongst all member states would remainers seriously be happy with that?" I've not read anything about this but any full member would have a veto they could use against things like this anyway. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"He said that the EU was on the up as well, anyone else thinking Greece ? "Not just Greece, massive unemployment in Spain and Portugal, Italian banks on the brink of needing bailouts, an ongoing migration crisis on the shores of the Mediterranean, Juncker is a d*unken deluded fool. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So juncker has today spoken of complete plitical and financial union amongst all member states would remainers seriously be happy with that?" After hearing what Jean Claude D*unker had to say today all I can say is thank God we're leaving! Closer EU political and financial integration, no thanks! Although after we've left they can do what the hell they like I really couldn't care less what they do once we're out of this wretched organisation. Interesting now the EU also wants to add Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, and Macedonia to the EU after Brexit, something that the Leave campaign warned against during the EU referendum here but was dismissed as scaremongering by Remainers. These new countries would have had full EU free movement of people rights to come to the UK had we remained. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So juncker has today spoken of complete plitical and financial union amongst all member states would remainers seriously be happy with that? After hearing what Jean Claude D*unker had to say today all I can say is thank God we're leaving! Closer EU political and financial integration, no thanks! Although after we've left they can do what the hell they like I really couldn't care less what they do once we're out of this wretched organisation. Interesting now the EU also wants to add Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, and Macedonia to the EU after Brexit, something that the Leave campaign warned against during the EU referendum here but was dismissed as scaremongering by Remainers. These new countries would have had full EU free movement of people rights to come to the UK had we remained. " Well, no. Not exactly. As with previous accession states, individual existing EU member states would be allowed to limit the influx of citizens from the accession states for five years, with the option of extending it by two years, and in exceptional circumstances, by a further two after that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So juncker has today spoken of complete plitical and financial union amongst all member states would remainers seriously be happy with that? After hearing what Jean Claude D*unker had to say today all I can say is thank God we're leaving! Closer EU political and financial integration, no thanks! Although after we've left they can do what the hell they like I really couldn't care less what they do once we're out of this wretched organisation. Interesting now the EU also wants to add Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, and Macedonia to the EU after Brexit, something that the Leave campaign warned against during the EU referendum here but was dismissed as scaremongering by Remainers. These new countries would have had full EU free movement of people rights to come to the UK had we remained. Well, no. Not exactly. As with previous accession states, individual existing EU member states would be allowed to limit the influx of citizens from the accession states for five years, with the option of extending it by two years, and in exceptional circumstances, by a further two after that." Yeah if and it's a big IF countries chose to, Tony Blair chose not to here in 2004 and now he wants to clamp down on immigration from the EU, a bit late in the day now him wanting to lock the stable door 13 years after the horse has bolted. Plus after those transition periods you mentioned then those countries have the full and automatic right to unlimited free movement of people rules anyway. No thanks not in a million years! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So juncker has today spoken of complete plitical and financial union amongst all member states would remainers seriously be happy with that? After hearing what Jean Claude D*unker had to say today all I can say is thank God we're leaving! Closer EU political and financial integration, no thanks! Although after we've left they can do what the hell they like I really couldn't care less what they do once we're out of this wretched organisation. Interesting now the EU also wants to add Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, and Macedonia to the EU after Brexit, something that the Leave campaign warned against during the EU referendum here but was dismissed as scaremongering by Remainers. These new countries would have had full EU free movement of people rights to come to the UK had we remained. " Your a top man my friend ! He really threw his toys out of the Pram today didn't he . Acting like a spoilt child who is used to getting his own way and throwing his weight around. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So juncker has today spoken of complete plitical and financial union amongst all member states would remainers seriously be happy with that? After hearing what Jean Claude D*unker had to say today all I can say is thank God we're leaving! Closer EU political and financial integration, no thanks! Although after we've left they can do what the hell they like I really couldn't care less what they do once we're out of this wretched organisation. Interesting now the EU also wants to add Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, and Macedonia to the EU after Brexit, something that the Leave campaign warned against during the EU referendum here but was dismissed as scaremongering by Remainers. These new countries would have had full EU free movement of people rights to come to the UK had we remained. Well, no. Not exactly. As with previous accession states, individual existing EU member states would be allowed to limit the influx of citizens from the accession states for five years, with the option of extending it by two years, and in exceptional circumstances, by a further two after that. Yeah if and it's a big IF countries chose to, Tony Blair chose not to here in 2004 and now he wants to clamp down on immigration from the EU, a bit late in the day now him wanting to lock the stable door 13 years after the horse has bolted. Plus after those transition periods you mentioned then those countries have the full and automatic right to unlimited free movement of people rules anyway. No thanks not in a million years!" That the UK did not avail of the mechanisms available to it is hardly the fault of the EU. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So juncker has today spoken of complete plitical and financial union amongst all member states would remainers seriously be happy with that? After hearing what Jean Claude D*unker had to say today all I can say is thank God we're leaving! Closer EU political and financial integration, no thanks! Although after we've left they can do what the hell they like I really couldn't care less what they do once we're out of this wretched organisation. Interesting now the EU also wants to add Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, and Macedonia to the EU after Brexit, something that the Leave campaign warned against during the EU referendum here but was dismissed as scaremongering by Remainers. These new countries would have had full EU free movement of people rights to come to the UK had we remained. Well, no. Not exactly. As with previous accession states, individual existing EU member states would be allowed to limit the influx of citizens from the accession states for five years, with the option of extending it by two years, and in exceptional circumstances, by a further two after that. Yeah if and it's a big IF countries chose to, Tony Blair chose not to here in 2004 and now he wants to clamp down on immigration from the EU, a bit late in the day now him wanting to lock the stable door 13 years after the horse has bolted. Plus after those transition periods you mentioned then those countries have the full and automatic right to unlimited free movement of people rules anyway. No thanks not in a million years! That the UK did not avail of the mechanisms available to it is hardly the fault of the EU. " For the 2nd time on this thread and for clarity the mechanisms you posted are only temporary with a limited time period. When that time period expires then those countries would have full and automatic right to UNLIMITED EU free movement of people rules. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So juncker has today spoken of complete plitical and financial union amongst all member states would remainers seriously be happy with that? After hearing what Jean Claude D*unker had to say today all I can say is thank God we're leaving! Closer EU political and financial integration, no thanks! Although after we've left they can do what the hell they like I really couldn't care less what they do once we're out of this wretched organisation. Interesting now the EU also wants to add Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, and Macedonia to the EU after Brexit, something that the Leave campaign warned against during the EU referendum here but was dismissed as scaremongering by Remainers. These new countries would have had full EU free movement of people rights to come to the UK had we remained. Well, no. Not exactly. As with previous accession states, individual existing EU member states would be allowed to limit the influx of citizens from the accession states for five years, with the option of extending it by two years, and in exceptional circumstances, by a further two after that. Yeah if and it's a big IF countries chose to, Tony Blair chose not to here in 2004 and now he wants to clamp down on immigration from the EU, a bit late in the day now him wanting to lock the stable door 13 years after the horse has bolted. Plus after those transition periods you mentioned then those countries have the full and automatic right to unlimited free movement of people rules anyway. No thanks not in a million years! That the UK did not avail of the mechanisms available to it is hardly the fault of the EU. For the 2nd time on this thread and for clarity the mechanisms you posted are only temporary with a limited time period. When that time period expires then those countries would have full and automatic right to UNLIMITED EU free movement of people rules. " A bit like what the Tories are suggesting now with THERE grab for power ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. " A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. " Don't agree with, or don't understand? Because the mantra of needing "control over immigration" is an oft repeated one, but also one that's in stark contrast to reality, which would suggest the latter. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. " Wrong yet again....you should had said the majority of people who voted didnt agree with them....but im guessing 95% of the people that voted dont know most of the rules anyway.....nice try on deflecting yet again...i bet you couldnt lie straight in bed haha | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Don't agree with, or don't understand? Because the mantra of needing "control over immigration" is an oft repeated one, but also one that's in stark contrast to reality, which would suggest the latter." Typical response we've come to expect from Remainers that you just throw insults and imply the electorate all must be thick because they don't agree with your opinion. Of course we understand the rules as has been explained to you TWICE on this thread that new countries transition rules only apply for a short limited time period then afterwards it's a free for all. You just can't seem to accept that a majority here in the UK disagree with you (and those rules) and no longer wish to be a part of the EU. The sooner we are out and rid of Euro wankers in Brussels like Juncker the better. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Wrong yet again....you should had said the majority of people who voted didnt agree with them....but im guessing 95% of the people that voted dont know most of the rules anyway.....nice try on deflecting yet again...i bet you couldnt lie straight in bed haha "It's you who is wrong. Yes a majority who voted Leave disagreed with the rules of the EU but who is to say how those who didn't vote would have voted had they turned out to the polling stations. Surely you wouldn't be so dumb as to claim all those who didn't vote would've voted Remain? Those who didn't vote are really irrelevant to the discussion and the pedantic nit picking about this every time someone says a majority voted Leave is really boring and tiresome. You say you guess 95% of those who voted Leave didn't know the rules, yet another condescending remainer who thinks anyone with a different opinion must be thick (which makes a change for you because you usually call anyone with a different opinion a racist). I'm guessing 95% of the time you think you are going to fart you actually follow through and shit your pants would be an equally valid guess and about as relevant as your claim. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"He said that the EU was on the up as well, anyone else thinking Greece ?
Not just Greece, massive unemployment in Spain and Portugal, Italian banks on the brink of needing bailouts, an ongoing migration crisis on the shores of the Mediterranean, Juncker is a d*unken deluded fool. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Don't agree with, or don't understand? Because the mantra of needing "control over immigration" is an oft repeated one, but also one that's in stark contrast to reality, which would suggest the latter. Typical response we've come to expect from Remainers that you just throw insults and imply the electorate all must be thick because they don't agree with your opinion. Of course we understand the rules as has been explained to you TWICE on this thread that new countries transition rules only apply for a short limited time period then afterwards it's a free for all. You just can't seem to accept that a majority here in the UK disagree with you (and those rules) and no longer wish to be a part of the EU. The sooner we are out and rid of Euro wankers in Brussels like Juncker the better. " But does freedom of movement mean freedom to stay. My understanding is it doesn't and freedom to stay requires residency tests. Happy to be corrected but your explanation which leads to a free for all is counter to other statements I have read... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Wrong yet again....you should had said the majority of people who voted didnt agree with them....but im guessing 95% of the people that voted dont know most of the rules anyway.....nice try on deflecting yet again...i bet you couldnt lie straight in bed haha
It's you who is wrong. Yes a majority who voted Leave disagreed with the rules of the EU but who is to say how those who didn't vote would have voted had they turned out to the polling stations. Surely you wouldn't be so dumb as to claim all those who didn't vote would've voted Remain? Those who didn't vote are really irrelevant to the discussion and the pedantic nit picking about this every time someone says a majority voted Leave is really boring and tiresome. You say you guess 95% of those who voted Leave didn't know the rules, yet another condescending remainer who thinks anyone with a different opinion must be thick (which makes a change for you because you usually call anyone with a different opinion a racist). I'm guessing 95% of the time you think you are going to fart you actually follow through and shit your pants would be an equally valid guess and about as relevant as your claim. "52% of those who voted in the referendum voted leave...NOT 52% of the electorate....are you just making numbers up yet again. If your going to talk bollocks at least try and get SOME of your figures right | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Don't agree with, or don't understand? Because the mantra of needing "control over immigration" is an oft repeated one, but also one that's in stark contrast to reality, which would suggest the latter. Typical response we've come to expect from Remainers that you just throw insults and imply the electorate all must be thick because they don't agree with your opinion. Of course we understand the rules as has been explained to you TWICE on this thread that new countries transition rules only apply for a short limited time period then afterwards it's a free for all. You just can't seem to accept that a majority here in the UK disagree with you (and those rules) and no longer wish to be a part of the EU. The sooner we are out and rid of Euro wankers in Brussels like Juncker the better. " Unless we're speaking on a cosmic scale, five years at a minimum and nine at a maximum are hardly a "short limited time period". Of course, there are measures beyond these that the UK could have availed of, but didn't. And again, this isn't the fault of the EU. As for crying persecution, I'm not interested. if you must imagine that, then please do so privately. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Have been busy since posting this morning, but find it astounding that so many remainers would have all our laws made in brussels , see us join a failing currency , our payment going ecer up as more and more poorercountries join and juncker as superpresident , hes been getting advice from blatter" Our Laws made in Brussels....please explain ?....which laws are you on about | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Don't agree with, or don't understand? Because the mantra of needing "control over immigration" is an oft repeated one, but also one that's in stark contrast to reality, which would suggest the latter. Typical response we've come to expect from Remainers that you just throw insults and imply the electorate all must be thick because they don't agree with your opinion. Of course we understand the rules as has been explained to you TWICE on this thread that new countries transition rules only apply for a short limited time period then afterwards it's a free for all. You just can't seem to accept that a majority here in the UK disagree with you (and those rules) and no longer wish to be a part of the EU. The sooner we are out and rid of Euro wankers in Brussels like Juncker the better. " It's not a free for all though is it? It's free movement of workers, not of people. Do you understand what the current system is? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Wrong yet again....you should had said the majority of people who voted didnt agree with them....but im guessing 95% of the people that voted dont know most of the rules anyway.....nice try on deflecting yet again...i bet you couldnt lie straight in bed haha
It's you who is wrong. Yes a majority who voted Leave disagreed with the rules of the EU but who is to say how those who didn't vote would have voted had they turned out to the polling stations. Surely you wouldn't be so dumb as to claim all those who didn't vote would've voted Remain? Those who didn't vote are really irrelevant to the discussion and the pedantic nit picking about this every time someone says a majority voted Leave is really boring and tiresome. You say you guess 95% of those who voted Leave didn't know the rules, yet another condescending remainer who thinks anyone with a different opinion must be thick (which makes a change for you because you usually call anyone with a different opinion a racist). I'm guessing 95% of the time you think you are going to fart you actually follow through and shit your pants would be an equally valid guess and about as relevant as your claim.
52% of those who voted in the referendum voted leave...NOT 52% of the electorate....are you just making numbers up yet again.
If your going to talk bollocks at least try and get SOME of your figures right "52% voted leave. 48% voted remain. The ones who didn't vote couldn't be arsed either way. If they had been, guess what?.......They would have voted.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have to say that Mr Junker is standing by his beliefs, convictions and aspirations. It may turn out an absolutely fantastic idea, who knows, no body knows what will happen. Costs must be phenomenal, But we keep being told that everything is good now in the EU so why not steam a head. That European army sounds great, hope they get their own uniform, perhaps a new camouflage to add to my collection. Hope they do decide to have proper elections though. Bit odd the people not voting for their leaders? If it's going to be more centralised with more power, surely a properly elected EU government must happen." I have to agree with you.I only see the EU being more powerful and more integrated and an EU army is a great idea.Considering Russian agression recently . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have to say that Mr Junker is standing by his beliefs, convictions and aspirations. It may turn out an absolutely fantastic idea, who knows, no body knows what will happen. Costs must be phenomenal, But we keep being told that everything is good now in the EU so why not steam a head. That European army sounds great, hope they get their own uniform, perhaps a new camouflage to add to my collection. Hope they do decide to have proper elections though. Bit odd the people not voting for their leaders? If it's going to be more centralised with more power, surely a properly elected EU government must happen." Like having a parliament? Yup, EU has that. And a cabinet? Yeah, they just call it a commission. People voting for their leaders? You mean how someone like Juncker is chosen as leader because he comes from the biggest party in the parliament. I mean, that's how they do it now, hmmm, sounds remarkably similar to how we chose a PM in this country don't you think? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have to say that Mr Junker is standing by his beliefs, convictions and aspirations. It may turn out an absolutely fantastic idea, who knows, no body knows what will happen. Costs must be phenomenal, But we keep being told that everything is good now in the EU so why not steam a head. That European army sounds great, hope they get their own uniform, perhaps a new camouflage to add to my collection. Hope they do decide to have proper elections though. Bit odd the people not voting for their leaders? If it's going to be more centralised with more power, surely a properly elected EU government must happen. I have to agree with you.I only see the EU being more powerful and more integrated and an EU army is a great idea.Considering Russian agression recently . "It was EU meddling in Ukraine that led to the annexation of the Crimea. On past form Brussels would still be pissing about with the paperwork while Putins tanks were rolling down the Champs Elysees. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have to say that Mr Junker is standing by his beliefs, convictions and aspirations. It may turn out an absolutely fantastic idea, who knows, no body knows what will happen. Costs must be phenomenal, But we keep being told that everything is good now in the EU so why not steam a head. That European army sounds great, hope they get their own uniform, perhaps a new camouflage to add to my collection. Hope they do decide to have proper elections though. Bit odd the people not voting for their leaders? If it's going to be more centralised with more power, surely a properly elected EU government must happen. Like having a parliament? Yup, EU has that. And a cabinet? Yeah, they just call it a commission. People voting for their leaders? You mean how someone like Juncker is chosen as leader because he comes from the biggest party in the parliament. I mean, that's how they do it now, hmmm, sounds remarkably similar to how we chose a PM in this country don't you think? " Er. I think you have got the Junker bit slightly (no drastically) wrong. He is appointed to the commission by his home country. In this case Luxembourg. He is appointed president of the commission by the 28 national leaders. He is then rubber stamped by the parliament who have yet to refuse an appointee for the post. At least Teresa May, or Blair, Brown, Cameron Etc. have been elected to parliament by their constituents and are actual members of their parliament. Not one ordinary voter in the whole of Europe has put a cross next to Junkers name for the job or even to be in Brussels at all. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Greater integration and more powers to the EU parliament will allow the EU to be coherent and unified in its response to a changing world.Dealing with many states slows things down .Im guessing they want to speed things up.Making it a bigger player.Its already the second largest economy in the world just behind china. "The main thing I heard was a "president of Europe"..... he's just another Napoleon! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have to say that Mr Junker is standing by his beliefs, convictions and aspirations. It may turn out an absolutely fantastic idea, who knows, no body knows what will happen. Costs must be phenomenal, But we keep being told that everything is good now in the EU so why not steam a head. That European army sounds great, hope they get their own uniform, perhaps a new camouflage to add to my collection. Hope they do decide to have proper elections though. Bit odd the people not voting for their leaders? If it's going to be more centralised with more power, surely a properly elected EU government must happen. I have to agree with you.I only see the EU being more powerful and more integrated and an EU army is a great idea.Considering Russian agression recently .
It was EU meddling in Ukraine that led to the annexation of the Crimea.
On past form Brussels would still be pissing about with the paperwork while Putins tanks were rolling down the Champs Elysees."Thats a poor justification for Russian agression.Today they start the zapad war games on the weakest part of border with Belarus .The EU has good reason to create an EU army.Theres also trumps apathy towards nato.Its prudential to assume the worst with Russia today. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Greater integration and more powers to the EU parliament will allow the EU to be coherent and unified in its response to a changing world.Dealing with many states slows things down .Im guessing they want to speed things up.Making it a bigger player.Its already the second largest economy in the world just behind china.
The main thing I heard was a "president of Europe"..... he's just another Napoleon!"What he wants to do is combine the two jobs of Commission and council presidents and giving the position executive powers. But no mention of how that president would be elected or appointed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have to say that Mr Junker is standing by his beliefs, convictions and aspirations. It may turn out an absolutely fantastic idea, who knows, no body knows what will happen. Costs must be phenomenal, But we keep being told that everything is good now in the EU so why not steam a head. That European army sounds great, hope they get their own uniform, perhaps a new camouflage to add to my collection. Hope they do decide to have proper elections though. Bit odd the people not voting for their leaders? If it's going to be more centralised with more power, surely a properly elected EU government must happen. I have to agree with you.I only see the EU being more powerful and more integrated and an EU army is a great idea.Considering Russian agression recently .
It was EU meddling in Ukraine that led to the annexation of the Crimea.
On past form Brussels would still be pissing about with the paperwork while Putins tanks were rolling down the Champs Elysees. Thats a poor justification for Russian agression.Today they start the zapad war games on the weakest part of border with Belarus .The EU has good reason to create an EU army.Theres also trumps apathy towards nato.Its prudential to assume the worst with Russia today. "I am in no way justifying it. However the old soviet naval bases on the Black Sea ended up on Ukrainian territory. The Russians were happy to keep it that way as long as Ukraine remained on side. When the EU started meddling in Ukrainian affairs and supporting a revolt (coup) you didn't need a degree in diplomacy to see where it would end up. And you want these buffoons to be in charge of an army? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have to say that Mr Junker is standing by his beliefs, convictions and aspirations. It may turn out an absolutely fantastic idea, who knows, no body knows what will happen. Costs must be phenomenal, But we keep being told that everything is good now in the EU so why not steam a head. That European army sounds great, hope they get their own uniform, perhaps a new camouflage to add to my collection. Hope they do decide to have proper elections though. Bit odd the people not voting for their leaders? If it's going to be more centralised with more power, surely a properly elected EU government must happen. I have to agree with you.I only see the EU being more powerful and more integrated and an EU army is a great idea.Considering Russian agression recently .
It was EU meddling in Ukraine that led to the annexation of the Crimea.
On past form Brussels would still be pissing about with the paperwork while Putins tanks were rolling down the Champs Elysees. Thats a poor justification for Russian agression.Today they start the zapad war games on the weakest part of border with Belarus .The EU has good reason to create an EU army.Theres also trumps apathy towards nato.Its prudential to assume the worst with Russia today.
I am in no way justifying it.
However the old soviet naval bases on the Black Sea ended up on Ukrainian territory. The Russians were happy to keep it that way as long as Ukraine remained on side.
When the EU started meddling in Ukrainian affairs and supporting a revolt (coup) you didn't need a degree in diplomacy to see where it would end up.
And you want these buffoons to be in charge of an army? "Yes i do .We have an orange buffoon in the Whitehouse who has a thing for Russia and no love for nato or the EU.A prudent move by the EU in the current climate of Russian aggression and American apathy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have to say that Mr Junker is standing by his beliefs, convictions and aspirations. It may turn out an absolutely fantastic idea, who knows, no body knows what will happen. Costs must be phenomenal, But we keep being told that everything is good now in the EU so why not steam a head. That European army sounds great, hope they get their own uniform, perhaps a new camouflage to add to my collection. Hope they do decide to have proper elections though. Bit odd the people not voting for their leaders? If it's going to be more centralised with more power, surely a properly elected EU government must happen. Like having a parliament? Yup, EU has that. And a cabinet? Yeah, they just call it a commission. People voting for their leaders? You mean how someone like Juncker is chosen as leader because he comes from the biggest party in the parliament. I mean, that's how they do it now, hmmm, sounds remarkably similar to how we chose a PM in this country don't you think? Er. I think you have got the Junker bit slightly (no drastically) wrong. He is appointed to the commission by his home country. In this case Luxembourg. He is appointed president of the commission by the 28 national leaders. He is then rubber stamped by the parliament who have yet to refuse an appointee for the post. At least Teresa May, or Blair, Brown, Cameron Etc. have been elected to parliament by their constituents and are actual members of their parliament. Not one ordinary voter in the whole of Europe has put a cross next to Junkers name for the job or even to be in Brussels at all." You sure about that? You cant even spell his name!
"In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that theSpitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Claude_Juncker
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have to say that Mr Junker is standing by his beliefs, convictions and aspirations. It may turn out an absolutely fantastic idea, who knows, no body knows what will happen. Costs must be phenomenal, But we keep being told that everything is good now in the EU so why not steam a head. That European army sounds great, hope they get their own uniform, perhaps a new camouflage to add to my collection. Hope they do decide to have proper elections though. Bit odd the people not voting for their leaders? If it's going to be more centralised with more power, surely a properly elected EU government must happen. Like having a parliament? Yup, EU has that. And a cabinet? Yeah, they just call it a commission. People voting for their leaders? You mean how someone like Juncker is chosen as leader because he comes from the biggest party in the parliament. I mean, that's how they do it now, hmmm, sounds remarkably similar to how we chose a PM in this country don't you think? Er. I think you have got the Junker bit slightly (no drastically) wrong. He is appointed to the commission by his home country. In this case Luxembourg. He is appointed president of the commission by the 28 national leaders. He is then rubber stamped by the parliament who have yet to refuse an appointee for the post. At least Teresa May, or Blair, Brown, Cameron Etc. have been elected to parliament by their constituents and are actual members of their parliament. Not one ordinary voter in the whole of Europe has put a cross next to Junkers name for the job or even to be in Brussels at all. You sure about that? You cant even spell his name!
"In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that theSpitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Claude_Juncker
"Maybe people get confused with how to spell his name as he's more widely know by his nickname Jean Claude D*unker. I wonder how many Cognac's he has with his breakfast this morning?  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Have been busy since posting this morning, but find it astounding that so many remainers would have all our laws made in brussels , see us join a failing currency , our payment going ecer up as more and more poorercountries join and juncker as superpresident , hes been getting advice from blatter Our Laws made in Brussels....please explain ?....which laws are you on about "I was talking of future plans but bendy bananas and the metric system both come to mind | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Don't agree with, or don't understand? Because the mantra of needing "control over immigration" is an oft repeated one, but also one that's in stark contrast to reality, which would suggest the latter. Typical response we've come to expect from Remainers that you just throw insults and imply the electorate all must be thick because they don't agree with your opinion. Of course we understand the rules as has been explained to you TWICE on this thread that new countries transition rules only apply for a short limited time period then afterwards it's a free for all. You just can't seem to accept that a majority here in the UK disagree with you (and those rules) and no longer wish to be a part of the EU. The sooner we are out and rid of Euro wankers in Brussels like Juncker the better. It's not a free for all though is it? It's free movement of workers, not of people. Do you understand what the current system is? " If they are all workers how come so many are claiming benefit? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Don't agree with, or don't understand? Because the mantra of needing "control over immigration" is an oft repeated one, but also one that's in stark contrast to reality, which would suggest the latter. Typical response we've come to expect from Remainers that you just throw insults and imply the electorate all must be thick because they don't agree with your opinion. Of course we understand the rules as has been explained to you TWICE on this thread that new countries transition rules only apply for a short limited time period then afterwards it's a free for all. You just can't seem to accept that a majority here in the UK disagree with you (and those rules) and no longer wish to be a part of the EU. The sooner we are out and rid of Euro wankers in Brussels like Juncker the better. It's not a free for all though is it? It's free movement of workers, not of people. Do you understand what the current system is? If they are all workers how come so many are claiming benefit?" They can't claim benefits when they arrive. They have to be resident in the UK for at least 6 months to do that. However if they haven't found a job within 3 months, then they can be deported. Were you aware of that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Don't agree with, or don't understand? Because the mantra of needing "control over immigration" is an oft repeated one, but also one that's in stark contrast to reality, which would suggest the latter. Typical response we've come to expect from Remainers that you just throw insults and imply the electorate all must be thick because they don't agree with your opinion. Of course we understand the rules as has been explained to you TWICE on this thread that new countries transition rules only apply for a short limited time period then afterwards it's a free for all. You just can't seem to accept that a majority here in the UK disagree with you (and those rules) and no longer wish to be a part of the EU. The sooner we are out and rid of Euro wankers in Brussels like Juncker the better. It's not a free for all though is it? It's free movement of workers, not of people. Do you understand what the current system is? If they are all workers how come so many are claiming benefit? They can't claim benefits when they arrive. They have to be resident in the UK for at least 6 months to do that. However if they haven't found a job within 3 months, then they can be deported. Were you aware of that? " Yes i am aware of that but sadly its not being enforced as far as im concerned they should not be entitled to benefits at any point then maybe they would return home when job enede | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice." That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Don't agree with, or don't understand? Because the mantra of needing "control over immigration" is an oft repeated one, but also one that's in stark contrast to reality, which would suggest the latter. Typical response we've come to expect from Remainers that you just throw insults and imply the electorate all must be thick because they don't agree with your opinion. Of course we understand the rules as has been explained to you TWICE on this thread that new countries transition rules only apply for a short limited time period then afterwards it's a free for all. You just can't seem to accept that a majority here in the UK disagree with you (and those rules) and no longer wish to be a part of the EU. The sooner we are out and rid of Euro wankers in Brussels like Juncker the better. It's not a free for all though is it? It's free movement of workers, not of people. Do you understand what the current system is? If they are all workers how come so many are claiming benefit? They can't claim benefits when they arrive. They have to be resident in the UK for at least 6 months to do that. However if they haven't found a job within 3 months, then they can be deported. Were you aware of that? " No he wasn't....like most anti EU on here they don't even know there own countries immigration laws...they just make them fit there own thoughts....to much reading of the Daily Fail and the Scum me thinks....along with listening to Farage | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Don't agree with, or don't understand? Because the mantra of needing "control over immigration" is an oft repeated one, but also one that's in stark contrast to reality, which would suggest the latter. Typical response we've come to expect from Remainers that you just throw insults and imply the electorate all must be thick because they don't agree with your opinion. Of course we understand the rules as has been explained to you TWICE on this thread that new countries transition rules only apply for a short limited time period then afterwards it's a free for all. You just can't seem to accept that a majority here in the UK disagree with you (and those rules) and no longer wish to be a part of the EU. The sooner we are out and rid of Euro wankers in Brussels like Juncker the better. It's not a free for all though is it? It's free movement of workers, not of people. Do you understand what the current system is? If they are all workers how come so many are claiming benefit? They can't claim benefits when they arrive. They have to be resident in the UK for at least 6 months to do that. However if they haven't found a job within 3 months, then they can be deported. Were you aware of that? Yes i am aware of that but sadly its not being enforced as far as im concerned they should not be entitled to benefits at any point then maybe they would return home when job enede" So thats not the fault of the EU then is it? When their job ends, if they don't find a new job in 3 months, they can be deported. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM! "I get to vote who I would like to be the PM. I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!"Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here "I believe you are wrong on that! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
I believe you are wrong on that!"Nah im not maybe you should have a read up....or watch a video on youtube on how the system works in the EU....i do believe its been explained in detail further down on this thread | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that "Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
I believe you are wrong on that!
Nah im not maybe you should have a read up....or watch a video on youtube on how the system works in the EU....i do believe its been explained in detail further down on this thread "I have no need or desire to as the UK is leaving the EU. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!"Yes, you do. The leader is chosen from the largest party in the european parliament. Just like in the UK system. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
I believe you are wrong on that!"In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that theSpitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc "Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017 Immigration All Citizenships 588,000 British 74,000 Non-British 514,000 EU 248,000 Non-EU 266,000 Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside. What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it "I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
"Our government are not that good in collecting figures im afraid....they push them out and let the Daily Fail or The Scum sensationalise they...then let the gullible people swallow the bullshit headlines.....job done id say. But some on here look into things more closely...id advise you to do that ...BUT in answer to your original post top and bottom you have been duped | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
"How about a system where, they can't claim benefits, they cant use the NHS, they can't get social housing, and if they dont find a job within 3 months they get deported. How does that sound to you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
How about a system where, they can't claim benefits, they cant use the NHS, they can't get social housing, and if they dont find a job within 3 months they get deported. How does that sound to you? "Funny how times and opinions change. Are you saying now this is what you'd like the UK to do now. 10 years ago you'd have been one of the Blair/Brown fanboys calling anyone who made such suggestions a racist. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
I believe you are wrong on that!
Nah im not maybe you should have a read up....or watch a video on youtube on how the system works in the EU....i do believe its been explained in detail further down on this thread "I'm afraid your quick guide to the EU for dummies just doesn't quite cut it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
I believe you are wrong on that!
Nah im not maybe you should have a read up....or watch a video on youtube on how the system works in the EU....i do believe its been explained in detail further down on this thread
I'm afraid your quick guide to the EU for dummies just doesn't quite cut it. "I know it goes straight over theres and your heads...i really don't know why i suggested it Homer tbh | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
Our government are not that good in collecting figures im afraid....they push them out and let the Daily Fail or The Scum sensationalise they...then let the gullible people swallow the bullshit headlines.....job done id say.
But some on here look into things more closely...id advise you to do that ...BUT in answer to your original post top and bottom you have been duped "You seem to be under the impression that I voted leave due to immigration. Actually that was not my reason. So I have not been duped at all. I think you have a case of sour grapes however you still have free movement to move to the EU if you like it so much. However it is time to understand the UK voted to leave! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
Our government are not that good in collecting figures im afraid....they push them out and let the Daily Fail or The Scum sensationalise they...then let the gullible people swallow the bullshit headlines.....job done id say.
But some on here look into things more closely...id advise you to do that ...BUT in answer to your original post top and bottom you have been duped
You seem to be under the impression that I voted leave due to immigration.
Actually that was not my reason.
So I have not been duped at all.
I think you have a case of sour grapes however you still have free movement to move to the EU if you like it so much.
However it is time to understand the UK voted to leave!"So then why did YOU introduce immigration into the thread? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here "A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate. "Homer Homer please he was democratically elected by the representatives in the EU...is that so hard...some of the Tories opposed May does that make her the same as Juncker lol... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
How about a system where, they can't claim benefits, they cant use the NHS, they can't get social housing, and if they dont find a job within 3 months they get deported. How does that sound to you?
Funny how times and opinions change. Are you saying now this is what you'd like the UK to do now. 10 years ago you'd have been one of the Blair/Brown fanboys calling anyone who made such suggestions a racist. "That is exactly what the system has always been! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice." Same here. Everything that the vote Leave campaign warned against during the EU referendum seems to be coming to fruition in the EU now, EU army plans confirmed and new countries like Macedonia, Albania, Serbia and Montenegro to join the EU. When these concerns were raised during the EU referendum Remainers dismissed it as scaremongering, they must feel pretty stupid now all this so called scaremongering is coming true. Thank god we didn't listen to them and now we are vindicated and were right to vote Leave. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
I believe you are wrong on that!
Nah im not maybe you should have a read up....or watch a video on youtube on how the system works in the EU....i do believe its been explained in detail further down on this thread
I'm afraid your quick guide to the EU for dummies just doesn't quite cut it.
I know it goes straight over theres and your heads...i really don't know why i suggested it Homer tbh "No it's you who doesn't get it. Keep taking the medication though your delusions may just allow you to get through the day without having a meltdown. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
How about a system where, they can't claim benefits, they cant use the NHS, they can't get social housing, and if they dont find a job within 3 months they get deported. How does that sound to you?
Funny how times and opinions change. Are you saying now this is what you'd like the UK to do now. 10 years ago you'd have been one of the Blair/Brown fanboys calling anyone who made such suggestions a racist.
That is exactly what the system has always been! "And anyone who suggested it should be like that back in 2004 was branded a rabid racist by Blair/Brown and New Labour! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
How about a system where, they can't claim benefits, they cant use the NHS, they can't get social housing, and if they dont find a job within 3 months they get deported. How does that sound to you?
Funny how times and opinions change. Are you saying now this is what you'd like the UK to do now. 10 years ago you'd have been one of the Blair/Brown fanboys calling anyone who made such suggestions a racist.
That is exactly what the system has always been!
And anyone who suggested it should be like that back in 2004 was branded a rabid racist by Blair/Brown and New Labour!"Absolute rubbish Homer...now you are just making things up | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
How about a system where, they can't claim benefits, they cant use the NHS, they can't get social housing, and if they dont find a job within 3 months they get deported. How does that sound to you?
Funny how times and opinions change. Are you saying now this is what you'd like the UK to do now. 10 years ago you'd have been one of the Blair/Brown fanboys calling anyone who made such suggestions a racist.
That is exactly what the system has always been!
And anyone who suggested it should be like that back in 2004 was branded a rabid racist by Blair/Brown and New Labour!"It WAS that in 2004! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So juncker has today spoken of complete plitical and financial union amongst all member states would remainers seriously be happy with that? After hearing what Jean Claude D*unker had to say today all I can say is thank God we're leaving! Closer EU political and financial integration, no thanks! Although after we've left they can do what the hell they like I really couldn't care less what they do once we're out of this wretched organisation. Interesting now the EU also wants to add Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, and Macedonia to the EU after Brexit, something that the Leave campaign warned against during the EU referendum here but was dismissed as scaremongering by Remainers. These new countries would have had full EU free movement of people rights to come to the UK had we remained. "
Topics mentioned were
Own military forces
Compulsory single currency
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
I believe you are wrong on that!
In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that theSpitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast."So from a population of around 500 million he got 422 votes. Democracy in action then.
Makes the Brexit vote look like a landslide.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate. "It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
I believe you are wrong on that!
In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that theSpitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast.
So from a population of around 500 million he got 422 votes. Democracy in action then.
Makes the Brexit vote look like a landslide. "Quite a silly quote that tbh...but expected | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
How about a system where, they can't claim benefits, they cant use the NHS, they can't get social housing, and if they dont find a job within 3 months they get deported. How does that sound to you?
Funny how times and opinions change. Are you saying now this is what you'd like the UK to do now. 10 years ago you'd have been one of the Blair/Brown fanboys calling anyone who made such suggestions a racist.
That is exactly what the system has always been!
And anyone who suggested it should be like that back in 2004 was branded a rabid racist by Blair/Brown and New Labour!
It WAS that in 2004! "Blair didn't want it to be like that though did he! That's why he opened the floodgates to all and sundry without any transitional restrictions and called anyone who disagreed with him a racist! More than likely you were one of his cheerleaders back then too. It completely disingenuous and false of him on the Andrew Marr show (and you here now) to claim you want any kind of clampdown. You'd have us remaining in the EU and joining the border free schengen zone within the blink of an eye if you could and so would Blair! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!"For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
I believe you are wrong on that!
In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that theSpitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast.
So from a population of around 500 million he got 422 votes. Democracy in action then.
Makes the Brexit vote look like a landslide. "How many people voted for May? Wasn't it zero after Leadsome pulled out? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
I believe you are wrong on that!
In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that theSpitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast.
So from a population of around 500 million he got 422 votes. Democracy in action then.
Makes the Brexit vote look like a landslide.
Quite a silly quote that tbh...but expected "Keep reading your quick dummies guide to the EU, you may get there eventually, but by the time you do we will have already left in March 2019. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK. "So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK.
So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs?"So you think Juncker is a right and proper person to be appointed to that position then given his extremely dodgy history and murky past. Says a lot about the way you think if you do.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
I believe you are wrong on that!
In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that theSpitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast.
So from a population of around 500 million he got 422 votes. Democracy in action then.
Makes the Brexit vote look like a landslide.
Quite a silly quote that tbh...but expected
Keep reading your quick dummies guide to the EU, you may get there eventually, but by the time you do we will have already left in March 2019. "As was this post...nothing but hot air Homer | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
How about a system where, they can't claim benefits, they cant use the NHS, they can't get social housing, and if they dont find a job within 3 months they get deported. How does that sound to you?
Funny how times and opinions change. Are you saying now this is what you'd like the UK to do now. 10 years ago you'd have been one of the Blair/Brown fanboys calling anyone who made such suggestions a racist.
That is exactly what the system has always been!
And anyone who suggested it should be like that back in 2004 was branded a rabid racist by Blair/Brown and New Labour!
It WAS that in 2004!
Blair didn't want it to be like that though did he! That's why he opened the floodgates to all and sundry without any transitional restrictions and called anyone who disagreed with him a racist! More than likely you were one of his cheerleaders back then too. It completely disingenuous and false of him on the Andrew Marr show (and you here now) to claim you want any kind of clampdown. You'd have us remaining in the EU and joining the border free schengen zone within the blink of an eye if you could and so would Blair!"I don't want any changes. I'm happy with the system now. You were happy with it too, until I pointed out to you that it's the system we have always had! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
How about a system where, they can't claim benefits, they cant use the NHS, they can't get social housing, and if they dont find a job within 3 months they get deported. How does that sound to you?
Funny how times and opinions change. Are you saying now this is what you'd like the UK to do now. 10 years ago you'd have been one of the Blair/Brown fanboys calling anyone who made such suggestions a racist.
That is exactly what the system has always been!
And anyone who suggested it should be like that back in 2004 was branded a rabid racist by Blair/Brown and New Labour!
It WAS that in 2004!
Blair didn't want it to be like that though did he! That's why he opened the floodgates to all and sundry without any transitional restrictions and called anyone who disagreed with him a racist! More than likely you were one of his cheerleaders back then too. It completely disingenuous and false of him on the Andrew Marr show (and you here now) to claim you want any kind of clampdown. You'd have us remaining in the EU and joining the border free schengen zone within the blink of an eye if you could and so would Blair!
I don't want any changes. I'm happy with the system now. You were happy with it too, until I pointed out to you that it's the system we have always had! "It isn't though because it isn't the system that was implemented here! That's the very basic point you are failing to grasp! The status quo you say you like isn't an option either as Junckers speech very clearly outlined it's more EU, not less in future for member states. The EU has learned absolutely nothing from Brexit, Marine Le Pen coming 2nd in France, Geert Wilders coming 2nd in the Netherlands and a far right candidate coming a close 2nd in Austria. When will the Euroloons in Brussels get the hint that the people want less of the EU not more. With what the EU indicated with Junckers speech shows that the EU is storing up yet more anger, resentment and trouble for the future, and this whole rotten project really will not end well. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
How about a system where, they can't claim benefits, they cant use the NHS, they can't get social housing, and if they dont find a job within 3 months they get deported. How does that sound to you?
Funny how times and opinions change. Are you saying now this is what you'd like the UK to do now. 10 years ago you'd have been one of the Blair/Brown fanboys calling anyone who made such suggestions a racist.
That is exactly what the system has always been!
And anyone who suggested it should be like that back in 2004 was branded a rabid racist by Blair/Brown and New Labour!
It WAS that in 2004!
Blair didn't want it to be like that though did he! That's why he opened the floodgates to all and sundry without any transitional restrictions and called anyone who disagreed with him a racist! More than likely you were one of his cheerleaders back then too. It completely disingenuous and false of him on the Andrew Marr show (and you here now) to claim you want any kind of clampdown. You'd have us remaining in the EU and joining the border free schengen zone within the blink of an eye if you could and so would Blair!
I don't want any changes. I'm happy with the system now. You were happy with it too, until I pointed out to you that it's the system we have always had!
It isn't though because it isn't the system that was implemented here! That's the very basic point you are failing to grasp! The status quo you say you like isn't an option either as Junckers speech very clearly outlined it's more EU, not less in future for member states. The EU has learned absolutely nothing from Brexit, Marine Le Pen coming 2nd in France, Geert Wilders coming 2nd in the Netherlands and a far right candidate coming a close 2nd in Austria. When will the Euroloons in Brussels get the hint that the people want less of the EU not more. With what the EU indicated with Junckers speech shows that the EU is storing up yet more anger, resentment and trouble for the future, and this whole rotten project really will not end well. "You peddle the same old shite without any foundation at all to it...read up on EU law and elections Homer | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it strange how people always want to shrink and fragment society and organisation and the reason is always the same, they are too big and too remote and don't represent 'us' (whoever 'us' is. But funnily enough progress is made made by enlarging and integration whereas shrinking and fragmentation leads to extremism and conflict. I wonder why otherwise sane and intelligent people would rather shrinkage, extremism and conflict over growth, integration and peace?" Progress, growth and peace are you having a laugh? Ask the people in Greece stuck in abject poverty on the breadline if the EU has brought them progress, and growth in their economy. Riots on the streets in many European cities in recent years, and far left and far right parties springing up and gaining ground left, right and centre all over the place! A model of peace and harmony my arse! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it strange how people always want to shrink and fragment society and organisation and the reason is always the same, they are too big and too remote and don't represent 'us' (whoever 'us' is. But funnily enough progress is made made by enlarging and integration whereas shrinking and fragmentation leads to extremism and conflict. I wonder why otherwise sane and intelligent people would rather shrinkage, extremism and conflict over growth, integration and peace? Progress, growth and peace are you having a laugh? Ask the people in Greece stuck in abject poverty on the breadline if the EU has brought them progress, and growth in their economy. Riots on the streets in many European cities in recent years, and far left and far right parties springing up and gaining ground left, right and centre all over the place! A model of peace and harmony my arse! " Why don't you become a politician your fucking mad there all fucking mad you would get on like a house on fire you talk utter bullshit like them Homer | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
How about a system where, they can't claim benefits, they cant use the NHS, they can't get social housing, and if they dont find a job within 3 months they get deported. How does that sound to you?
Funny how times and opinions change. Are you saying now this is what you'd like the UK to do now. 10 years ago you'd have been one of the Blair/Brown fanboys calling anyone who made such suggestions a racist.
That is exactly what the system has always been!
And anyone who suggested it should be like that back in 2004 was branded a rabid racist by Blair/Brown and New Labour!
It WAS that in 2004!
Blair didn't want it to be like that though did he! That's why he opened the floodgates to all and sundry without any transitional restrictions and called anyone who disagreed with him a racist! More than likely you were one of his cheerleaders back then too. It completely disingenuous and false of him on the Andrew Marr show (and you here now) to claim you want any kind of clampdown. You'd have us remaining in the EU and joining the border free schengen zone within the blink of an eye if you could and so would Blair!
I don't want any changes. I'm happy with the system now. You were happy with it too, until I pointed out to you that it's the system we have always had!
It isn't though because it isn't the system that was implemented here! That's the very basic point you are failing to grasp! The status quo you say you like isn't an option either as Junckers speech very clearly outlined it's more EU, not less in future for member states. The EU has learned absolutely nothing from Brexit, Marine Le Pen coming 2nd in France, Geert Wilders coming 2nd in the Netherlands and a far right candidate coming a close 2nd in Austria. When will the Euroloons in Brussels get the hint that the people want less of the EU not more. With what the EU indicated with Junckers speech shows that the EU is storing up yet more anger, resentment and trouble for the future, and this whole rotten project really will not end well. "We are talking about the current UK immigration system for EU workers into the UK. You thought I was suggesting a radical new system that you agreed with, when in fact I simply laid out the current system. The system that has been in place for years. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Don't agree with, or don't understand? Because the mantra of needing "control over immigration" is an oft repeated one, but also one that's in stark contrast to reality, which would suggest the latter. Typical response we've come to expect from Remainers that you just throw insults and imply the electorate all must be thick because they don't agree with your opinion. Of course we understand the rules as has been explained to you TWICE on this thread that new countries transition rules only apply for a short limited time period then afterwards it's a free for all. You just can't seem to accept that a majority here in the UK disagree with you (and those rules) and no longer wish to be a part of the EU. The sooner we are out and rid of Euro wankers in Brussels like Juncker the better. It's not a free for all though is it? It's free movement of workers, not of people. Do you understand what the current system is? If they are all workers how come so many are claiming benefit? They can't claim benefits when they arrive. They have to be resident in the UK for at least 6 months to do that. However if they haven't found a job within 3 months, then they can be deported. Were you aware of that? No he wasn't....like most anti EU on here they don't even know there own countries immigration laws...they just make them fit there own thoughts....to much reading of the Daily Fail and the Scum me thinks....along with listening to Farage "Maybe you should read more i replied to _lcc stating i was aware and at my dissappointment at the rules not being enforced | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, those are the rules of the EU. However, it's not as straightforward as you initially made out, and while it might be too late, it is always worth pointing out that the notion of unlimited immigration from the EU is not, and has never been, accurate. Of course, why you feel that these nations in particular would be so disastrous as to proclaim "never in a million years" is probably best left unexplored. A majority of the UK electorate don't agree with those EU rules and that just one of the many reasons why we are leaving. Sooner people like you accept it the better. Don't agree with, or don't understand? Because the mantra of needing "control over immigration" is an oft repeated one, but also one that's in stark contrast to reality, which would suggest the latter. Typical response we've come to expect from Remainers that you just throw insults and imply the electorate all must be thick because they don't agree with your opinion. Of course we understand the rules as has been explained to you TWICE on this thread that new countries transition rules only apply for a short limited time period then afterwards it's a free for all. You just can't seem to accept that a majority here in the UK disagree with you (and those rules) and no longer wish to be a part of the EU. The sooner we are out and rid of Euro wankers in Brussels like Juncker the better. It's not a free for all though is it? It's free movement of workers, not of people. Do you understand what the current system is? If they are all workers how come so many are claiming benefit? They can't claim benefits when they arrive. They have to be resident in the UK for at least 6 months to do that. However if they haven't found a job within 3 months, then they can be deported. Were you aware of that? No he wasn't....like most anti EU on here they don't even know there own countries immigration laws...they just make them fit there own thoughts....to much reading of the Daily Fail and the Scum me thinks....along with listening to Farage
Maybe you should read more i replied to _lcc stating i was aware and at my dissappointment at the rules not being enforced"So was i | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate. "Yeah, the UK being the victim of EU bullying is a pleasant fiction, if you're if a certain bent, but still just a fiction. Also, I'm curious as to how you can reconcile the idea that the brexit vote, being democracy in action, is something that should be accepted without question, yet the vote to confirm Junker is an unimaginable abomination. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK.
So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs?
So you think Juncker is a right and proper person to be appointed to that position then given his extremely dodgy history and murky past. Says a lot about the way you think if you do. "People voted for MEPs. The Biggest party in European Parliament proposed him, and the majority of the European Parliament voted for him. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Dont worry all you little Englands you got you way all these pesky foreigners will be on there way home soon... Here's a fun fact for you...more people entered the UK from OUTSIDE the EU last year....and WE can control that
Ah but they are subject to greater visa restrictions and work permits etc
Table 1: Latest Migration Statistics, Year Ending March 2017
Immigration
All Citizenships 588,000
British 74,000
Non-British 514,000
EU 248,000
Non-EU 266,000
Yeah they are and more come from outside the EU than inside.
What do you think the NET figures are the ones that actually stay here ?...and like you said we CAN control those...and could had the EU ones and can if we choose to do it
I would be far more interested in those figures if they actually stated what type of jobs they were here to do if any.
Our government are not that good in collecting figures im afraid....they push them out and let the Daily Fail or The Scum sensationalise they...then let the gullible people swallow the bullshit headlines.....job done id say.
But some on here look into things more closely...id advise you to do that ...BUT in answer to your original post top and bottom you have been duped
You seem to be under the impression that I voted leave due to immigration.
Actually that was not my reason.
So I have not been duped at all.
I think you have a case of sour grapes however you still have free movement to move to the EU if you like it so much.
However it is time to understand the UK voted to leave!
So then why did YOU introduce immigration into the thread? "I never introduced immigration into the tread. I commented on a post that YOU made about immigration figures! Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about..! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK.
So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs?
So you think Juncker is a right and proper person to be appointed to that position then given his extremely dodgy history and murky past. Says a lot about the way you think if you do.
People voted for MEPs. The Biggest party in European Parliament proposed him, and the majority of the European Parliament voted for him. "A majority of British MEP's rejected Juncker, our Prime Minister rejected Juncker, now the British people have also rejected Juncker and his shitty little club. We are leaving, Deal with it! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK.
So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs?
So you think Juncker is a right and proper person to be appointed to that position then given his extremely dodgy history and murky past. Says a lot about the way you think if you do.
People voted for MEPs. The Biggest party in European Parliament proposed him, and the majority of the European Parliament voted for him.
A majority of British MEP's rejected Juncker, our Prime Minister rejected Juncker, now the British people have also rejected Juncker and his shitty little club. We are leaving, Deal with it! "So you think that British MEPs should have more of a say than all other MEPs? Is that what you are trying to say? A democratic vote taken in the European Parliament shouldn't count if UKIP dont agree with it? What kind of democracy is that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK.
So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs?
So you think Juncker is a right and proper person to be appointed to that position then given his extremely dodgy history and murky past. Says a lot about the way you think if you do.
People voted for MEPs. The Biggest party in European Parliament proposed him, and the majority of the European Parliament voted for him.
A majority of British MEP's rejected Juncker, our Prime Minister rejected Juncker, now the British people have also rejected Juncker and his shitty little club. We are leaving, Deal with it!
So you think that British MEPs should have more of a say than all other MEPs? Is that what you are trying to say? A democratic vote taken in the European Parliament shouldn't count if UKIP dont agree with it? What kind of democracy is that? "With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic. Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK.
So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs?
So you think Juncker is a right and proper person to be appointed to that position then given his extremely dodgy history and murky past. Says a lot about the way you think if you do.
People voted for MEPs. The Biggest party in European Parliament proposed him, and the majority of the European Parliament voted for him.
A majority of British MEP's rejected Juncker, our Prime Minister rejected Juncker, now the British people have also rejected Juncker and his shitty little club. We are leaving, Deal with it!
So you think that British MEPs should have more of a say than all other MEPs? Is that what you are trying to say? A democratic vote taken in the European Parliament shouldn't count if UKIP dont agree with it? What kind of democracy is that?
With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic.
Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is!".. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK.
So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs?
So you think Juncker is a right and proper person to be appointed to that position then given his extremely dodgy history and murky past. Says a lot about the way you think if you do.
People voted for MEPs. The Biggest party in European Parliament proposed him, and the majority of the European Parliament voted for him.
A majority of British MEP's rejected Juncker, our Prime Minister rejected Juncker, now the British people have also rejected Juncker and his shitty little club. We are leaving, Deal with it!
So you think that British MEPs should have more of a say than all other MEPs? Is that what you are trying to say? A democratic vote taken in the European Parliament shouldn't count if UKIP dont agree with it? What kind of democracy is that?
With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic.
Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is!"What dont you get that it works the same way here as well...and always has done....you vote for a member to represent you...he/she votes for someone to lead the government...not rocket science or maybe it is to some | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Oh another fun fact for you.....I never voted for Farage to be the mouth piece in Brussels for the UK and lead us down this path....but guess what ? "But we DO elect our members of European Parliament...on a PR basis. UKIP won more votes in the last European Parliament Elections than any other party. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Its pretty simple, really. Having issues with the result of a vote is an intolerable state of affairs, and people need to just accept the result and the accompanying actions based off said result. However in the case of the election of someone you have strong negative feelings about for vague reasons to a post whose powers you're unsure of, dissenting in the strongest possible terms is the only proper thing to do. It's not rocket surgery..." Ah so we should only accept your version of democracy when the result goes the way you want it. We should all accept Juncker was elected because that is acceptable democracy to you but the EU referendum vote should not be accepted because you don't agree with the result and that's not proper democracy in your eyes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Its pretty simple, really. Having issues with the result of a vote is an intolerable state of affairs, and people need to just accept the result and the accompanying actions based off said result. However in the case of the election of someone you have strong negative feelings about for vague reasons to a post whose powers you're unsure of, dissenting in the strongest possible terms is the only proper thing to do. It's not rocket surgery... Ah so we should only accept your version of democracy when the result goes the way you want it. We should all accept Juncker was elected because that is acceptable democracy to you but the EU referendum vote should not be accepted because you don't agree with the result and that's not proper democracy in your eyes. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK.
So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs?
So you think Juncker is a right and proper person to be appointed to that position then given his extremely dodgy history and murky past. Says a lot about the way you think if you do.
People voted for MEPs. The Biggest party in European Parliament proposed him, and the majority of the European Parliament voted for him.
A majority of British MEP's rejected Juncker, our Prime Minister rejected Juncker, now the British people have also rejected Juncker and his shitty little club. We are leaving, Deal with it!
So you think that British MEPs should have more of a say than all other MEPs? Is that what you are trying to say? A democratic vote taken in the European Parliament shouldn't count if UKIP dont agree with it? What kind of democracy is that?
With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic.
Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is!
What dont you get that it works the same way here as well...and always has done....you vote for a member to represent you...he/she votes for someone to lead the government...not rocket science or maybe it is to some "It's not the same as here though. In your mind it maybe but in reality it's not! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Its pretty simple, really. Having issues with the result of a vote is an intolerable state of affairs, and people need to just accept the result and the accompanying actions based off said result. However in the case of the election of someone you have strong negative feelings about for vague reasons to a post whose powers you're unsure of, dissenting in the strongest possible terms is the only proper thing to do. It's not rocket surgery... Ah so we should only accept your version of democracy when the result goes the way you want it. We should all accept Juncker was elected because that is acceptable democracy to you but the EU referendum vote should not be accepted because you don't agree with the result and that's not proper democracy in your eyes. "It's a bit rich to demand that the results of votes are sacrosanct, and then complain that because Junker was elected against some people's wishes. You can either be consistent about it, or you can employ some nuance in your views. You can't, however, do neither. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Its pretty simple, really. Having issues with the result of a vote is an intolerable state of affairs, and people need to just accept the result and the accompanying actions based off said result. However in the case of the election of someone you have strong negative feelings about for vague reasons to a post whose powers you're unsure of, dissenting in the strongest possible terms is the only proper thing to do. It's not rocket surgery... Ah so we should only accept your version of democracy when the result goes the way you want it. We should all accept Juncker was elected because that is acceptable democracy to you but the EU referendum vote should not be accepted because you don't agree with the result and that's not proper democracy in your eyes. "No its how most democracy works across the globe...its really simple Homer | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK.
So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs?
So you think Juncker is a right and proper person to be appointed to that position then given his extremely dodgy history and murky past. Says a lot about the way you think if you do.
People voted for MEPs. The Biggest party in European Parliament proposed him, and the majority of the European Parliament voted for him.
A majority of British MEP's rejected Juncker, our Prime Minister rejected Juncker, now the British people have also rejected Juncker and his shitty little club. We are leaving, Deal with it!
So you think that British MEPs should have more of a say than all other MEPs? Is that what you are trying to say? A democratic vote taken in the European Parliament shouldn't count if UKIP dont agree with it? What kind of democracy is that?
With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic.
Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is!
What dont you get that it works the same way here as well...and always has done....you vote for a member to represent you...he/she votes for someone to lead the government...not rocket science or maybe it is to some
It's not the same as here though.
In your mind it maybe but in reality it's not!"But it is the same...there elected just like any other politician....are you Homers brother ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Oh another fun fact for you.....I never voted for Farage to be the mouth piece in Brussels for the UK and lead us down this path....but guess what ?
But we DO elect our members of European Parliament...on a PR basis. UKIP won more votes in the last European Parliament Elections than any other party. "Were have i said we dont elect them...in fact i've been arguing they all are elected | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not fully up to speed still today with all the rules in the EU regarding immigration. Not sure that you can be as a non imigration lawor nor am I political commentator. I do however have concerns over a group of individual country's and sovereignties trying to link a group of countries into a ever increasing single state. With one president and finance minister under one currency! As each country have differing GPD's debt levels and earning capacities. No doubt the tax regulations will need to also be alined as well. The fact is ever since the estabilishment of this group as a common market (which is what we joined) they have never had their accounts signed off. I wonder why their own rules on transparity of financial institutues dont apply to themsleves I do? Seems that as we saw with those less affluent members their enconomies can and no doubt will be skewed by larger members influcts of wealth and withdrawals of support later as this states economy develops. Effectively allowing the bigger contributors power over individual sovereignties. I voted stay but only becuase I felt this is now to big to change from the outside, meaning we will now need to wait for it to implode rather than check it from doing so. By leaving we will no doubt be in for a long period of struggling we are however natural traders and hugely inventive so this is not going to be easy but the vote was cast we are a democracy we all now need to just get on with the task as best we can. Every potential problem brings with it equal or greater oppertunity. " The EU accounts have been signed off every year since 2007 actually.....feel free to carry on ranting now | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK.
So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs?
So you think Juncker is a right and proper person to be appointed to that position then given his extremely dodgy history and murky past. Says a lot about the way you think if you do.
People voted for MEPs. The Biggest party in European Parliament proposed him, and the majority of the European Parliament voted for him.
A majority of British MEP's rejected Juncker, our Prime Minister rejected Juncker, now the British people have also rejected Juncker and his shitty little club. We are leaving, Deal with it!
So you think that British MEPs should have more of a say than all other MEPs? Is that what you are trying to say? A democratic vote taken in the European Parliament shouldn't count if UKIP dont agree with it? What kind of democracy is that?
With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic.
Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is!
What dont you get that it works the same way here as well...and always has done....you vote for a member to represent you...he/she votes for someone to lead the government...not rocket science or maybe it is to some
It's not the same as here though.
In your mind it maybe but in reality it's not!"It is exactly the same system that we have in the UK! If you think its not, then please explain how May and Brown and Major became Prime Ministers. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic. Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is!" Firstly, they are not just 729 random people, they have been elected by the 500 million! Secondly, do you think it would be more democratic if there were 7,290 members of parliament? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Have been busy since posting this morning, but find it astounding that so many remainers would have all our laws made in brussels , see us join a failing currency , our payment going ecer up as more and more poorercountries join and juncker as superpresident , hes been getting advice from blatter Our Laws made in Brussels....please explain ?....which laws are you on about
I was talking of future plans but bendy bananas and the metric system both come to mind"The metric system? Wtf? You're not the full shilling mate (see what I did there?). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK.
So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs?
So you think Juncker is a right and proper person to be appointed to that position then given his extremely dodgy history and murky past. Says a lot about the way you think if you do.
People voted for MEPs. The Biggest party in European Parliament proposed him, and the majority of the European Parliament voted for him.
A majority of British MEP's rejected Juncker, our Prime Minister rejected Juncker, now the British people have also rejected Juncker and his shitty little club. We are leaving, Deal with it!
So you think that British MEPs should have more of a say than all other MEPs? Is that what you are trying to say? A democratic vote taken in the European Parliament shouldn't count if UKIP dont agree with it? What kind of democracy is that?
With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic.
Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is!
What dont you get that it works the same way here as well...and always has done....you vote for a member to represent you...he/she votes for someone to lead the government...not rocket science or maybe it is to some
It's not the same as here though.
In your mind it maybe but in reality it's not!
It is exactly the same system that we have in the UK! If you think its not, then please explain how May and Brown and Major became Prime Ministers."That is just an outright lie. The system of democracy in the EU is completely different to that of the UK. The UK has a first past the post electoral system and the EU doesn't. If you can't even understand the basics of this then there really is no point in discussing it with you any further. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic. Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is! Firstly, they are not just 729 random people, they have been elected by the 500 million! Secondly, do you think it would be more democratic if there were 7,290 members of parliament? " I actually think it would be better if the 500 million people got a direct vote who is standing to be leader of the EU. As it stand we vote for members to be in the EU parliament. Then every member of that parliament decides who is the leader. This is completely different to what happens in the UK. I can't remember the last time the 660 members of the UK parliament voted on who will be the PM can you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So juncker has today spoken of complete plitical and financial union amongst all member states would remainers seriously be happy with that?" What, so the EU actually have a plan... ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What, so the EU actually have a plan... ?" Yep, and it is the same plan they have had since the since 1948. That is closer and closer economic, political and monetary union in Europe making it impossible for national rivalries to cause another world war. Now that the British "None! none! NO!" started by Thatcher and continued by every PM since her has eventually led to the UK withdrawing from the EU and removing its continual block on progress to the EU's eventual goal we get to watch what will be the most powerful economy in the world grow and evolve while we sit on the sidelines and stamp our feet in impotent fury as we fade into insignificance. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I voted to leave the EU and after hearing what Junckers plans are for the EU I'm even more convinced I made the right choice. That's about as sensible as leaving the UK every time you don't like the PM!
I get to vote who I would like to be the PM.
I've never once been given the vote who is in charge of the EU!
Nah you dont....and you did get the chance to vote in the EU elections if you chose to...YOUR candidate CHOOSES the leader like here
A majority of UK MEP's in the EU opposed Junckers appointment and voted against it. Ukip is the largest contingent of MEP's in the European Parliament and they opposed Junckers appointment, they even raised a motion of censure against Juncker on the grounds he was not a fit and proper person to take the position due to the dodgy and murky history he had with helping facilitate tax avoidance and tax evasion and corruption for big business and multinationals in his home country of Luxembourg when he was Prime Minister there. Not only Ukip but our then Prime minister David Cameron also opposed Junckers appointment as EU President along with a significant number of Conservative MEP's. As is always often the case within the EU though Britain's wishes were sidelined and ignored and outvoted and Juncker was handed the position on a plate.
It doesn't matter that UKIP didn't like him, the majority of the European Parliament voted for him! UKIP isn't the largest party in the European Parliament, there isn't even a UKIP party IN the European Parliament. European Parliamentary Parties have to have members from more than one party. This biggest party in the European Parliament, was Juncker's!
For heavens sake it's like pulling teeth talking to you on here. You know full well I meant ukip are the largest continent of MEP's in the EU from the UK.
So what? Do you think the largest party from northern Ireland should get to decide who is PM against the wishes off all the other MPs?
So you think Juncker is a right and proper person to be appointed to that position then given his extremely dodgy history and murky past. Says a lot about the way you think if you do.
People voted for MEPs. The Biggest party in European Parliament proposed him, and the majority of the European Parliament voted for him.
A majority of British MEP's rejected Juncker, our Prime Minister rejected Juncker, now the British people have also rejected Juncker and his shitty little club. We are leaving, Deal with it!
So you think that British MEPs should have more of a say than all other MEPs? Is that what you are trying to say? A democratic vote taken in the European Parliament shouldn't count if UKIP dont agree with it? What kind of democracy is that?
With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic.
Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is!
What dont you get that it works the same way here as well...and always has done....you vote for a member to represent you...he/she votes for someone to lead the government...not rocket science or maybe it is to some
It's not the same as here though.
In your mind it maybe but in reality it's not!
It is exactly the same system that we have in the UK! If you think its not, then please explain how May and Brown and Major became Prime Ministers.
That is just an outright lie. The system of democracy in the EU is completely different to that of the UK. The UK has a first past the post electoral system and the EU doesn't. If you can't even understand the basics of this then there really is no point in discussing it with you any further. "Centaur, we are talking about how the leaders are chosen, not the parliamentarians. Please try to keep up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic. Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is! Firstly, they are not just 729 random people, they have been elected by the 500 million! Secondly, do you think it would be more democratic if there were 7,290 members of parliament? I actually think it would be better if the 500 million people got a direct vote who is standing to be leader of the EU. As it stand we vote for members to be in the EU parliament. Then every member of that parliament decides who is the leader. This is completely different to what happens in the UK. I can't remember the last time the 660 members of the UK parliament voted on who will be the PM can you?" In the UK, do we directly elect the PM? When I went to the ballot this year, I didn't see a box for May or Corbyn. No one did. Not one single person in this country. Now I accept that you might say we should have, however what we are looking at here is the similarities between EU leadership elections, and UK leadership elections | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic. Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is! Firstly, they are not just 729 random people, they have been elected by the 500 million! Secondly, do you think it would be more democratic if there were 7,290 members of parliament? " What's your source for 500 Million votes having been cast? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic. Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is! Firstly, they are not just 729 random people, they have been elected by the 500 million! Secondly, do you think it would be more democratic if there were 7,290 members of parliament? I actually think it would be better if the 500 million people got a direct vote who is standing to be leader of the EU. As it stand we vote for members to be in the EU parliament. Then every member of that parliament decides who is the leader. This is completely different to what happens in the UK. I can't remember the last time the 660 members of the UK parliament voted on who will be the PM can you? In the UK, do we directly elect the PM? When I went to the ballot this year, I didn't see a box for May or Corbyn. No one did. Not one single person in this country. Now I accept that you might say we should have, however what we are looking at here is the similarities between EU leadership elections, and UK leadership elections " Technically, the voters of Maidenhead and Islington North did see those names. That's one of the vagaries of our voting system, as opposed to say France, where your vote is for the leader. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So can anyone tell me which election did Juncker win to even get on the commission in the first place? As an aside. Juncker is a "bad choice for his job" "He is absolutely in the wrong place and does no favours for the British pro- Europeans" My words you may think. Maybe Centaur's? Could even be from Farage. However No. They are the words of Remainer in chief Sir Vince Cable. " Agree, the swivel eyed europhiles on here can see no wrong with the EU, even defending Jean Claude D*unker, lol. Thing is Juncker has been a bigger recruiting sergeant for Brexit and Euroskepticism in the wider EU than Nigel Farage or Boris Johnson could ever be. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So can anyone tell me which election did Juncker win to even get on the commission in the first place? As an aside. Juncker is a "bad choice for his job" "He is absolutely in the wrong place and does no favours for the British pro- Europeans" My words you may think. Maybe Centaur's? Could even be from Farage. However No. They are the words of Remainer in chief Sir Vince Cable.
Agree, the swivel eyed europhiles on here can see no wrong with the EU, even defending Jean Claude D*unker, lol. Thing is Juncker has been a bigger recruiting sergeant for Brexit and Euroskepticism in the wider EU than Nigel Farage or Boris Johnson could ever be. "Thing is that the remainers can't really see the wood for the trees. Juncker and Barnier are so hell bent on punishing Britain for having the audacity to vote to leave that they will deliberately screw up the negotiating process for the whole of the EU. It's time the EU heads of government put a stop to their political grandstanding and replace them with people who actually want to strike a deal. BTW. I noticed further up the thread that one poster thought that it was much more important to pull me up on my mis-spelling of Junckers name that to mention the millions of young Europeans who are stuck on the dole (which was the main thrust of my post). Maybe to the remainers this lost generation are just collateral damage as long as their great USE project doesn't get derailed. None of the remainers on here (or even Juncker himself) really seem to care much about them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Junker is not elected, he's delegated or chosen for the position, by other commissionaires. I'm pretty sure If old Tony B would have stuck around he would be some sort of Euro president too. However he went the old middle east route. We all know how that turned out!" Blair actively lobbied for the Job before Van Rumpoy got it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic. Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is! Firstly, they are not just 729 random people, they have been elected by the 500 million! Secondly, do you think it would be more democratic if there were 7,290 members of parliament? I actually think it would be better if the 500 million people got a direct vote who is standing to be leader of the EU. As it stand we vote for members to be in the EU parliament. Then every member of that parliament decides who is the leader. This is completely different to what happens in the UK. I can't remember the last time the 660 members of the UK parliament voted on who will be the PM can you? In the UK, do we directly elect the PM? When I went to the ballot this year, I didn't see a box for May or Corbyn. No one did. Not one single person in this country. Now I accept that you might say we should have, however what we are looking at here is the similarities between EU leadership elections, and UK leadership elections Technically, the voters of Maidenhead and Islington North did see those names. That's one of the vagaries of our voting system, as opposed to say France, where your vote is for the leader." But May and Corbyn didn't run in the same constituency, so no one saw both their names on a single ballot. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic. Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is! Firstly, they are not just 729 random people, they have been elected by the 500 million! Secondly, do you think it would be more democratic if there were 7,290 members of parliament? What's your source for 500 Million votes having been cast?" No you're right. What I wrote was hyperbole as many of those 500m are under voting age and of course there is voter turnout to consider, however I think you understood the thrust of my argument. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Junker is not elected, he's delegated or chosen for the position, by other commissionaires. I'm pretty sure If old Tony B would have stuck around he would be some sort of Euro president too. However he went the old middle east route. We all know how that turned out!" No, he is not. In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that theSpitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So can anyone tell me which election did Juncker win to even get on the commission in the first place? As an aside. Juncker is a "bad choice for his job" "He is absolutely in the wrong place and does no favours for the British pro- Europeans" My words you may think. Maybe Centaur's? Could even be from Farage. However No. They are the words of Remainer in chief Sir Vince Cable. "He was elected as an MEP, to the biggest party in the European Parliament. And then parliament voted him into his current position. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So can anyone tell me which election did Juncker win to even get on the commission in the first place? As an aside. Juncker is a "bad choice for his job" "He is absolutely in the wrong place and does no favours for the British pro- Europeans" My words you may think. Maybe Centaur's? Could even be from Farage. However No. They are the words of Remainer in chief Sir Vince Cable.
He was elected as an MEP, to the biggest party in the European Parliament. And then parliament voted him into his current position.
"Juncker isn't and NEVER has been an MEP. Best re-check the Wiki page. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I give up on this, as we go around in circles, you people believe what you like. " I don't "believe" my post above. I know it. 100% fact. Check it out wherever you like. I notice now that Junckers cheerleader in chief on here has suddenly gone quiet. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In his defence it is only fair to point out that Jean-Claude was awarded the Prize of the European Federation of Taxpayers in 2002... I'm sure they got the wrong Jean-Claude because it goes on to say in the Wikipedia article that Luxembourg under his premiership had turned into a major European centre of corporate tax avoidance. With the aid of the Luxembourg government, companies transferred tax liability for many billions of euros to Luxembourg, where the income was taxed at a fraction of 1%. Juncker, who in a speech in Brussels in July 2014 promised to "try to put some morality, some ethics, into the European tax landscape", was sharply criticized following the leaks. A subsequent motion of censure in the European parliament was brought against Juncker over his role in the tax avoidance schemes. The motion was defeated by a large majority. In 2017, leaked diplomatic cables show Juncker, as Luxembourg’s prime minister from 1995 until the end of 2013, blocked EU efforts to fight tax avoidance by multinational corporations. Luxembourg agreed to multinational businesses on an individualised deal basis, often at an effective rate of less than 1%. The guy is a crook!" I think you've confused "thing I don't like" with "thing that is illegal" Several EU nations have what can be best described as "pro business" tax rates. Ireland and the Netherlands spring to mind, but nobody is calling the premiers of those countries "crooks" for that reason. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In his defence it is only fair to point out that Jean-Claude was awarded the Prize of the European Federation of Taxpayers in 2002... I'm sure they got the wrong Jean-Claude because it goes on to say in the Wikipedia article that Luxembourg under his premiership had turned into a major European centre of corporate tax avoidance. With the aid of the Luxembourg government, companies transferred tax liability for many billions of euros to Luxembourg, where the income was taxed at a fraction of 1%. Juncker, who in a speech in Brussels in July 2014 promised to "try to put some morality, some ethics, into the European tax landscape", was sharply criticized following the leaks. A subsequent motion of censure in the European parliament was brought against Juncker over his role in the tax avoidance schemes. The motion was defeated by a large majority. In 2017, leaked diplomatic cables show Juncker, as Luxembourg’s prime minister from 1995 until the end of 2013, blocked EU efforts to fight tax avoidance by multinational corporations. Luxembourg agreed to multinational businesses on an individualised deal basis, often at an effective rate of less than 1%. The guy is a crook! I think you've confused "thing I don't like" with "thing that is illegal" Several EU nations have what can be best described as "pro business" tax rates. Ireland and the Netherlands spring to mind, but nobody is calling the premiers of those countries "crooks" for that reason." This government have threatened to turn the UK into a tax haven post brexit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In his defence it is only fair to point out that Jean-Claude was awarded the Prize of the European Federation of Taxpayers in 2002... I'm sure they got the wrong Jean-Claude because it goes on to say in the Wikipedia article that Luxembourg under his premiership had turned into a major European centre of corporate tax avoidance. With the aid of the Luxembourg government, companies transferred tax liability for many billions of euros to Luxembourg, where the income was taxed at a fraction of 1%. Juncker, who in a speech in Brussels in July 2014 promised to "try to put some morality, some ethics, into the European tax landscape", was sharply criticized following the leaks. A subsequent motion of censure in the European parliament was brought against Juncker over his role in the tax avoidance schemes. The motion was defeated by a large majority. In 2017, leaked diplomatic cables show Juncker, as Luxembourg’s prime minister from 1995 until the end of 2013, blocked EU efforts to fight tax avoidance by multinational corporations. Luxembourg agreed to multinational businesses on an individualised deal basis, often at an effective rate of less than 1%. The guy is a crook! I think you've confused "thing I don't like" with "thing that is illegal" Several EU nations have what can be best described as "pro business" tax rates. Ireland and the Netherlands spring to mind, but nobody is calling the premiers of those countries "crooks" for that reason. This government have threatened to turn the UK into a tax haven post brexit. ""It's OK when we do it " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In his defence it is only fair to point out that Jean-Claude was awarded the Prize of the European Federation of Taxpayers in 2002... I'm sure they got the wrong Jean-Claude because it goes on to say in the Wikipedia article that Luxembourg under his premiership had turned into a major European centre of corporate tax avoidance. With the aid of the Luxembourg government, companies transferred tax liability for many billions of euros to Luxembourg, where the income was taxed at a fraction of 1%. Juncker, who in a speech in Brussels in July 2014 promised to "try to put some morality, some ethics, into the European tax landscape", was sharply criticized following the leaks. A subsequent motion of censure in the European parliament was brought against Juncker over his role in the tax avoidance schemes. The motion was defeated by a large majority. In 2017, leaked diplomatic cables show Juncker, as Luxembourg’s prime minister from 1995 until the end of 2013, blocked EU efforts to fight tax avoidance by multinational corporations. Luxembourg agreed to multinational businesses on an individualised deal basis, often at an effective rate of less than 1%. The guy is a crook! I think you've confused "thing I don't like" with "thing that is illegal" Several EU nations have what can be best described as "pro business" tax rates. Ireland and the Netherlands spring to mind, but nobody is calling the premiers of those countries "crooks" for that reason." I'm fully aware of the Double Irish arrangement and the Dutch Sandwich. In October 2015, the European Commission concluded that the tax deals in favour of Fiat Finance and Trade in Luxembourg and Starbucks in the Netherlands are illegal state aid. If Juncker wanted to put some morality, some ethics, into the European tax landscape then he should have promoted standardised tax rates not individualised deals when he was the Luxembourg prime minister. He is crook in my book. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So can anyone tell me which election did Juncker win to even get on the commission in the first place? As an aside. Juncker is a "bad choice for his job" "He is absolutely in the wrong place and does no favours for the British pro- Europeans" My words you may think. Maybe Centaur's? Could even be from Farage. However No. They are the words of Remainer in chief Sir Vince Cable.
He was elected as an MEP, to the biggest party in the European Parliament. And then parliament voted him into his current position.
Juncker isn't and NEVER has been an MEP.
Best re-check the Wiki page. "Check your souce From 1995 to 2013 he was the 23rd Prime Minister of Luxembourg, and from 1989 to 2009 he was the Minister for Finances. By the time he left office, he was the longest-serving head of any national government in the EU, and one of the longest-serving democratically elected leaders in the world, his tenure encompassing the height of the European financial and sovereign debt crisis.[1] From 2005 to 2013, Juncker served as the first permanent President of the Eurogroup. In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that the Spitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast.[6] He succeeded Jose Manuel Barroso as President on 1 November 2014.[7] Juncker stated that his priorities would be the creation of a digital single market, the development of an EU Energy Union, the negotiation of the Transatlantic Trade Agreement, the continued reform of the Economic and Monetary Union of the European Union—with the social dimension in mind—and a "targeted fiscal capacity" for the Eurozone, as well as to negotiate a new deal with Britain.[8] During his leadership, Britain voted to leave the European Union in 2016. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So can anyone tell me which election did Juncker win to even get on the commission in the first place? As an aside. Juncker is a "bad choice for his job" "He is absolutely in the wrong place and does no favours for the British pro- Europeans" My words you may think. Maybe Centaur's? Could even be from Farage. However No. They are the words of Remainer in chief Sir Vince Cable.
He was elected as an MEP, to the biggest party in the European Parliament. And then parliament voted him into his current position.
Juncker isn't and NEVER has been an MEP.
Best re-check the Wiki page.
Check your souce
From 1995 to 2013 he was the 23rd Prime Minister of Luxembourg, and from 1989 to 2009 he was the Minister for Finances. By the time he left office, he was the longest-serving head of any national government in the EU, and one of the longest-serving democratically elected leaders in the world, his tenure encompassing the height of the European financial and sovereign debt crisis.[1] From 2005 to 2013, Juncker served as the first permanent President of the Eurogroup.
In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that the Spitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast.[6] He succeeded Jose Manuel Barroso as President on 1 November 2014.[7] Juncker stated that his priorities would be the creation of a digital single market, the development of an EU Energy Union, the negotiation of the Transatlantic Trade Agreement, the continued reform of the Economic and Monetary Union of the European Union—with the social dimension in mind—and a "targeted fiscal capacity" for the Eurozone, as well as to negotiate a new deal with Britain.[8] During his leadership, Britain voted to leave the European Union in 2016.
"What is wrong with his source? Juncker is President of the European Commission. The President is the head of the European Commission, the executive branch of the European Union. His salary is €306,655 per year plus an allowance for a residence equal to 15% of salary as well as other allowances including for children's schooling and household expenses. The President reports to and is appointed by the European Parliament. He is not an MEP. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So can anyone tell me which election did Juncker win to even get on the commission in the first place? As an aside. Juncker is a "bad choice for his job" "He is absolutely in the wrong place and does no favours for the British pro- Europeans" My words you may think. Maybe Centaur's? Could even be from Farage. However No. They are the words of Remainer in chief Sir Vince Cable.
He was elected as an MEP, to the biggest party in the European Parliament. And then parliament voted him into his current position.
Juncker isn't and NEVER has been an MEP.
Best re-check the Wiki page.
Check your souce
From 1995 to 2013 he was the 23rd Prime Minister of Luxembourg, and from 1989 to 2009 he was the Minister for Finances. By the time he left office, he was the longest-serving head of any national government in the EU, and one of the longest-serving democratically elected leaders in the world, his tenure encompassing the height of the European financial and sovereign debt crisis.[1] From 2005 to 2013, Juncker served as the first permanent President of the Eurogroup.
In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that the Spitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast.[6] He succeeded Jose Manuel Barroso as President on 1 November 2014.[7] Juncker stated that his priorities would be the creation of a digital single market, the development of an EU Energy Union, the negotiation of the Transatlantic Trade Agreement, the continued reform of the Economic and Monetary Union of the European Union—with the social dimension in mind—and a "targeted fiscal capacity" for the Eurozone, as well as to negotiate a new deal with Britain.[8] During his leadership, Britain voted to leave the European Union in 2016.
What is wrong with his source?
Juncker is President of the European Commission. The President is the head of the European Commission, the executive branch of the European Union. His salary is €306,655 per year plus an allowance for a residence equal to 15% of salary as well as other allowances including for children's schooling and household expenses.
The President reports to and is appointed by the European Parliament.
He is not an MEP."After being elected by his party....whats wrong with you...and elected by the EU MP's | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In his defence it is only fair to point out that Jean-Claude was awarded the Prize of the European Federation of Taxpayers in 2002... I'm sure they got the wrong Jean-Claude because it goes on to say in the Wikipedia article that Luxembourg under his premiership had turned into a major European centre of corporate tax avoidance. With the aid of the Luxembourg government, companies transferred tax liability for many billions of euros to Luxembourg, where the income was taxed at a fraction of 1%. Juncker, who in a speech in Brussels in July 2014 promised to "try to put some morality, some ethics, into the European tax landscape", was sharply criticized following the leaks. A subsequent motion of censure in the European parliament was brought against Juncker over his role in the tax avoidance schemes. The motion was defeated by a large majority. In 2017, leaked diplomatic cables show Juncker, as Luxembourg’s prime minister from 1995 until the end of 2013, blocked EU efforts to fight tax avoidance by multinational corporations. Luxembourg agreed to multinational businesses on an individualised deal basis, often at an effective rate of less than 1%. The guy is a crook! I think you've confused "thing I don't like" with "thing that is illegal" Several EU nations have what can be best described as "pro business" tax rates. Ireland and the Netherlands spring to mind, but nobody is calling the premiers of those countries "crooks" for that reason. I'm fully aware of the Double Irish arrangement and the Dutch Sandwich. In October 2015, the European Commission concluded that the tax deals in favour of Fiat Finance and Trade in Luxembourg and Starbucks in the Netherlands are illegal state aid. If Juncker wanted to put some morality, some ethics, into the European tax landscape then he should have promoted standardised tax rates not individualised deals when he was the Luxembourg prime minister. He is crook in my book." And were Junker a prime minister who pursued those policies after said October ruling, I might be inclined to agree with you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" After being elected by his party....whats wrong with you...and elected by the EU MP's " I'll try and spell this out in plain English. The European Commission and the European Parliament are two totally different things. MEP is the abbreviation for Member of the European Parliament. Jean-Claude Juncker is not an MEP, he is the President of the European Commission which makes him a member of the European Commission. He is a member of the European People's Party which is a transnational organisation. So how do become the most powerful man in Europe? Each new President is nominated by the European Council and formally elected by the European Parliament. The European Council votes by qualified majority for a nominee for the post of President, taking account of the latest European elections. This proposal is then put before Parliament which must approve or veto the appointment. If an absolute majority of MEPs support the nominee, he/she is elected. Taking account of the latest European elections where the European People's Party had a 'majority', their candidate Jean-Claude Juncker was nominated. An absolute majority of MEPs supported the nominee so he was elected. I hope that is clear enough for you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" After being elected by his party....whats wrong with you...and elected by the EU MP's I'll try and spell this out in plain English. The European Commission and the European Parliament are two totally different things. MEP is the abbreviation for Member of the European Parliament. Jean-Claude Juncker is not an MEP, he is the President of the European Commission which makes him a member of the European Commission. He is a member of the European People's Party which is a transnational organisation. So how do become the most powerful man in Europe? Each new President is nominated by the European Council and formally elected by the European Parliament. The European Council votes by qualified majority for a nominee for the post of President, taking account of the latest European elections. This proposal is then put before Parliament which must approve or veto the appointment. If an absolute majority of MEPs support the nominee, he/she is elected. Taking account of the latest European elections where the European People's Party had a 'majority', their candidate Jean-Claude Juncker was nominated. An absolute majority of MEPs supported the nominee so he was elected. I hope that is clear enough for you." The reason he is ....because he was elected to a party...that party put him forward for the job....and the EU representatives ELECTED him...whats so hard about that....the very same way as the Tories and all other parties elect the prime minister...or is it just that its the EU that you dont like it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So can anyone tell me which election did Juncker win to even get on the commission in the first place? As an aside. Juncker is a "bad choice for his job" "He is absolutely in the wrong place and does no favours for the British pro- Europeans" My words you may think. Maybe Centaur's? Could even be from Farage. However No. They are the words of Remainer in chief Sir Vince Cable.
He was elected as an MEP, to the biggest party in the European Parliament. And then parliament voted him into his current position.
Juncker isn't and NEVER has been an MEP.
Best re-check the Wiki page.
Check your souce
From 1995 to 2013 he was the 23rd Prime Minister of Luxembourg, and from 1989 to 2009 he was the Minister for Finances. By the time he left office, he was the longest-serving head of any national government in the EU, and one of the longest-serving democratically elected leaders in the world, his tenure encompassing the height of the European financial and sovereign debt crisis.[1] From 2005 to 2013, Juncker served as the first permanent President of the Eurogroup.
In 2014, the European People's Party (EPP) had Juncker as its lead candidate, or Spitzenkandidat, for the Presidency of the Commission in the 2014 elections. This marked the first time that the Spitzenkandidat process was employed.[2] Juncker is the first President that prior to the election has campaigned as a candidate for the position, a process introduced with the Treaty of Lisbon. The EPP won 220 out of 751 seats in the Parliament. On 27 June 2014, the European Council officially nominated Juncker for the position,[3][4][5] and on 15 July 2014, the European Parliament elected him with a majority of 422 votes from a total of 729 cast.[6] He succeeded Jose Manuel Barroso as President on 1 November 2014.[7] Juncker stated that his priorities would be the creation of a digital single market, the development of an EU Energy Union, the negotiation of the Transatlantic Trade Agreement, the continued reform of the Economic and Monetary Union of the European Union—with the social dimension in mind—and a "targeted fiscal capacity" for the Eurozone, as well as to negotiate a new deal with Britain.[8] During his leadership, Britain voted to leave the European Union in 2016.
"And where exactly does that say that he was ever a member of the European parliament? If you still think he was then please tell me in which European parliament election did he win his seat? He is not, has never been, and, in all probability never will be an MEP. Since the end of his tenure as PM of Luxembourg he has been nothing more than a political placeman. He was parachuted in to his current job directly from his previous one as president of the Euro group (another unelected post BTW) and was rubber stamped (with some opposition it has to be said) into the presidency of the commission. Since he finished as PM of Luxembourg he has never been elected by anyone other than a few hundred, whipped, MEP's You can copy and paste as much from Wiki as you like but it will never make him an MEP or even an ex one. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" After being elected by his party....whats wrong with you...and elected by the EU MP's I'll try and spell this out in plain English. The European Commission and the European Parliament are two totally different things. MEP is the abbreviation for Member of the European Parliament. Jean-Claude Juncker is not an MEP, he is the President of the European Commission which makes him a member of the European Commission. He is a member of the European People's Party which is a transnational organisation. So how do become the most powerful man in Europe? Each new President is nominated by the European Council and formally elected by the European Parliament. The European Council votes by qualified majority for a nominee for the post of President, taking account of the latest European elections. This proposal is then put before Parliament which must approve or veto the appointment. If an absolute majority of MEPs support the nominee, he/she is elected. Taking account of the latest European elections where the European People's Party had a 'majority', their candidate Jean-Claude Juncker was nominated. An absolute majority of MEPs supported the nominee so he was elected. I hope that is clear enough for you. The reason he is ....because he was elected to a party...that party put him forward for the job....and the EU representatives ELECTED him...whats so hard about that....the very same way as the Tories and all other parties elect the prime minister...or is it just that its the EU that you dont like it " Your ignorance and persistence are equally matched! It is not the same way the Tories and all other parties elect the prime minister. The UK prime minister is a serving MP. Jean-Claude Juncker is not a serving MEP so not one of the ordinary voters in Europe have voted for him in any election. Jean-Claude Juncker wasn't elected by any MEP. That privilege went to the European Council, yet another unelected body. All MEPs can do is approve or veto the nomination given to them by the European Council. I don't like the EU. Our parliamentary system isn't perfect but at least the electorate can vote out a political leader if they want. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The European council is made up of the heads of state of the EU nations (plus it's own president and the commission president, who don't vote) The notion that they are unelected is not accurate. " ...so would you of voted in Junker if you had the chance. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The European council is made up of the heads of state of the EU nations (plus it's own president and the commission president, who don't vote) The notion that they are unelected is not accurate. ...so would you of voted in Junker if you had the chance." Probably, but given the scope of the role, I don't really have a problem with it being a parliamentary election. And, frankly, I don't find the very specific fetishisation of plebiscites that crop up when the EU is mentioned very compelling. Doubly so, when the people that take exception to how some posts are filled within the EU will have no problem with equally 'unelected' positions within their own country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The European council is made up of the heads of state of the EU nations (plus it's own president and the commission president, who don't vote) The notion that they are unelected is not accurate. " But not elected in European elections. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The European council is made up of the heads of state of the EU nations (plus it's own president and the commission president, who don't vote) The notion that they are unelected is not accurate. But not elected in European elections." They're elected heads of state. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The European council is made up of the heads of state of the EU nations (plus it's own president and the commission president, who don't vote) The notion that they are unelected is not accurate. But not elected in European elections. They're elected heads of state." They are elected in national elections not European elections. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What, so the EU actually have a plan... ? Yep, and it is the same plan they have had since the since 1948. That is closer and closer economic, political and monetary union in Europe making it impossible for national rivalries to cause another world war. Now that the British "None! none! NO!" started by Thatcher and continued by every PM since her has eventually led to the UK withdrawing from the EU and removing its continual block on progress to the EU's eventual goal we get to watch what will be the most powerful economy in the world grow and evolve while we sit on the sidelines and stamp our feet in impotent fury as we fade into insignificance." In YOUR opinion, obviously, lol. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The European council is made up of the heads of state of the EU nations (plus it's own president and the commission president, who don't vote) The notion that they are unelected is not accurate. But not elected in European elections. They're elected heads of state. They are elected in national elections not European elections." Why on earth would they be? They're the heads of EU states, criticizing that they're not elected in Europe wide elections is like criticizing a cat for not being a dog. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The European council is made up of the heads of state of the EU nations (plus it's own president and the commission president, who don't vote) The notion that they are unelected is not accurate. But not elected in European elections. They're elected heads of state. They are elected in national elections not European elections. Why on earth would they be? They're the heads of EU states, criticizing that they're not elected in Europe wide elections is like criticizing a cat for not being a dog." Would you want the whole of the EU to vote on who is the UK PM? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic. Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is! Firstly, they are not just 729 random people, they have been elected by the 500 million! Secondly, do you think it would be more democratic if there were 7,290 members of parliament? What's your source for 500 Million votes having been cast? No you're right. What I wrote was hyperbole as many of those 500m are under voting age and of course there is voter turnout to consider, however I think you understood the thrust of my argument. " I understood the hypocrisy and lies of what you said...... You claim a 42% EU parliament turnout to be the votes of 500 Million people. And yet you claim a 72% Brexit turnout to be meaningless. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The European council is made up of the heads of state of the EU nations (plus it's own president and the commission president, who don't vote) The notion that they are unelected is not accurate. But not elected in European elections. They're elected heads of state. They are elected in national elections not European elections. Why on earth would they be? They're the heads of EU states, criticizing that they're not elected in Europe wide elections is like criticizing a cat for not being a dog." Who is criticizing? I'm making the distinction between a national vote and a European vote. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The European council is made up of the heads of state of the EU nations (plus it's own president and the commission president, who don't vote) The notion that they are unelected is not accurate. But not elected in European elections. They're elected heads of state. They are elected in national elections not European elections. Why on earth would they be? They're the heads of EU states, criticizing that they're not elected in Europe wide elections is like criticizing a cat for not being a dog. Who is criticizing? I'm making the distinction between a national vote and a European vote." Yes, but it's a pointless one, in this case. The European council are not unelected. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The European council is made up of the heads of state of the EU nations (plus it's own president and the commission president, who don't vote) The notion that they are unelected is not accurate. But not elected in European elections. They're elected heads of state. They are elected in national elections not European elections. Why on earth would they be? They're the heads of EU states, criticizing that they're not elected in Europe wide elections is like criticizing a cat for not being a dog. Who is criticizing? I'm making the distinction between a national vote and a European vote. Yes, but it's a pointless one, in this case. The European council are not unelected." been saying that all along | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" With a population of over 500 million I don't think having 729 people voting who is in charge is very democratic. Just my opinion though I'm sure there are some who think it is! Firstly, they are not just 729 random people, they have been elected by the 500 million! Secondly, do you think it would be more democratic if there were 7,290 members of parliament? What's your source for 500 Million votes having been cast? No you're right. What I wrote was hyperbole as many of those 500m are under voting age and of course there is voter turnout to consider, however I think you understood the thrust of my argument. I understood the hypocrisy and lies of what you said...... You claim a 42% EU parliament turnout to be the votes of 500 Million people. And yet you claim a 72% Brexit turnout to be meaningless. " What the fuck are you talking about? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, but it's a pointless one, in this case." I don't think it is. There isn't an election for the members of the European Council. "been saying that all along" Really? You were saying Jean-Claude Juncker was an MEP! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, but it's a pointless one, in this case. I don't think it is. There isn't an election for the members of the European Council. " Correct, there isn't an election. There are twenty eight. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, but it's a pointless one, in this case. I don't think it is. There isn't an election for the members of the European Council. been saying that all along Really? You were saying Jean-Claude Juncker was an MEP!" no i was saying he was elected then elected as the leader you were saying he wasnt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, but it's a pointless one, in this case. I don't think it is. There isn't an election for the members of the European Council. been saying that all along Really? You were saying Jean-Claude Juncker was an MEP! no i was saying he was elected then elected as the leader you were saying he wasnt "Read back to what you have written. Why did you ask _otlovefun42 to check his 'source' when he stated Juncker was not an MEP? I read that as you thought Juncker was an MEP. Of course you can change your mind now that CCLC has been proven to be incorrect! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, but it's a pointless one, in this case. I don't think it is. There isn't an election for the members of the European Council. been saying that all along Really? You were saying Jean-Claude Juncker was an MEP! no i was saying he was elected then elected as the leader you were saying he wasnt
Read back to what you have written. Why did you ask _otlovefun42 to check his 'source' when he stated Juncker was not an MEP?
I read that as you thought Juncker was an MEP. Of course you can change your mind now that CCLC has been proven to be incorrect!
"Nope i knew what he was as did CCLC ...we were saying he was elected...you and Hotlover were saying he wasnt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Have been busy since posting this morning, but find it astounding that so many remainers would have all our laws made in brussels , see us join a failing currency , our payment going ecer up as more and more poorercountries join and juncker as superpresident , hes been getting advice from blatter" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, but it's a pointless one, in this case. I don't think it is. There isn't an election for the members of the European Council. been saying that all along Really? You were saying Jean-Claude Juncker was an MEP! no i was saying he was elected then elected as the leader you were saying he wasnt
Read back to what you have written. Why did you ask _otlovefun42 to check his 'source' when he stated Juncker was not an MEP?
I read that as you thought Juncker was an MEP. Of course you can change your mind now that CCLC has been proven to be incorrect!
Nope i knew what he was as did CCLC ...we were saying he was elected...you and Hotlover were saying he wasnt "CCLC said 'He was elected as an MEP, to the biggest party in the European Parliament. And then parliament voted him into his current position'. Maybe you can answer the question _otlovefun42 has already asked CCLC, which European parliament election did he win his seat? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
