TorquayFans.com | Torquay United Fans Forum

So you're agreeing with forever that they aren't elected just as he said?

Southampton Gull wrote:So you're agreeing with forever that they aren't elected just as he said?

The point is that they are democratically appointed. They are not evil dictators ruling over us. At the end of the day if we don't like their decisions then we vote for different MEPs come election time.

PhilGull wrote:Regardless of EU membership the British Government could work to save the British steel industry in the short-term by increasing tarifs on Chinese steel and providing subsidies - which despite what the anti-EU scaremongers say are perfectly legal under EU law and are provided by other EU Governments for their own industries. In the longer term it should be re-nationalised. It makes me so f**king angry when all of our privatised industries are being run by nationaly owned companies from other countries.

Agreed. Makes me angry that British industries are owned by foreign companies whether state-owned or privately owned. But successive governments from Thatcher's onwards have encouraged the asset-stripping of the UK. As for our steel industry problem, it is the EU’s tariff inaction, along with its Renewables Directive and Large Combustion Plants Directive, along with the dumping of foreign cheap imports, that has sounded Port Talbot’s death knell. The government has either colluded with the EU or abstained on these matters, and appears to have no understanding of the problem, nor any clue as to how it is to be resolved.

And while we're on the subject of Europe, some people ask what the plan is for the future of the UK if we do vote to leave. Seems to me that the Brexit campaigners, Nigel Farage and others, have explained pretty well what is planned. But turn the question around, and ask: have the 'remain' campaigners told us in any detail what the future will be if we stay in the EU? I don't think they have. But we appear to have a choice between EU security, compliance, and conformity on the one hand, and independence, freedom, uncertainty, and self-determination on the other.

That's the point though Phil, they are NOT democratically appointed. The appointments are voted for by all member states, so if you have a particular candidate backed by a number of states who are allied with a common cause, that candidate will be appointed that's not democratic at all.

When we go to the polls to elect our MEP'S, the people should also vote for the EU president and commissioners, as these are the people that wield all the power.

As for what the UK would look like post Brexit, think your missing the point there as well. The government wants us to vote in, they're not going to set out what our country would look like for the fear the people might like it and vote out.

Leaving the EU is nothing to fear Phil, and the government is playing on our fears, the EU was formed in 1993. Britain had national security prior to 1993, we had jobs, prosperity, Britain were members of the G7 prior to 1993, Britain had global influence, especially when you consider in 1991 when the first gulf war occurred, who was the first country the USA turned to, yep, it was Britain, as it always has, and always will regardless.

PhilGull wrote:UK accused of leading efforts to block limits to Chinese steel dumping

You read the Guardian??? :~D Anyway, confirms my suspicions about the Government's attitude here.

Regarding the EU democracy question, as Forever has indicated, European Commissioners are in fact the equivalent of national ministers; they are nominated by national governments and appointed by the President, not elected. The President of the European Commission is equivalent to a Prime Minister and is elected by the European Parliament on a proposal of the European Council for five-year terms. The Commission must act in EU (not UK) interests, and the Commission is the only body that can propose EU laws.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commissioner
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President ... Commission

Gullscorer wrote: You read the Guardian??? :~D Anyway, confirms my suspicions about the Government's attitude here.

Regarding the EU democracy question, as Forever has indicated, European Commissioners are in fact the equivalent of national ministers; they are nominated by national governments and appointed by the President, not elected. The President of the European Commission is equivalent to a Prime Minister and is elected by the European Parliament on a proposal of the European Council for five-year terms. The Commission must act in EU (not UK) interests, and the Commission is the only body that can propose EU laws.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commissioner
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President ... Commission

Ha ha, I use a variety of news sources! This link happened to pop up on my Twitter feed earlier and I thought it pertinent here.

PhilGull wrote: The point is that they are democratically appointed. They are not evil dictators ruling over us. At the end of the day if we don't like their decisions then we vote for different MEPs come election time.

No they aren't. Do you really believe that your vote makes any difference at all?

Southampton Gull wrote:

No they aren't. Do you really believe that your vote makes any difference at all?

Tell me, does your head get itchy under that tinfoil hat?

No, do your balls get itchy sitting on that fence? :~D

I came across this article about Brexit. It's written from a particular perspective, but gives little known information about the EU, and the comments section is also of interest: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/fe ... -help-men/

By the way, anybody know where I can get a tinfoil hat?

forevertufc wrote: And when we're talking about scaremongering, both sides are guilty, however the in campaign are 10 times worse than the out campaign, what's the latest effort we hear, if the country votes out England will be suspended from EURO 16, that one is just laughable.

After all if the country does vote out, both Wales and Northern Ireland will also be leaving the EU, so why won't they be suspended as well, and how many other qualified countries are not members of the EU.

Since when has UEFA ever stated that being a member of the EU is a requirement to take part in UEFA competitions.

The arguments on both sides were progressing well in March and then as soon as April hits all of a sudden they become foolish overnight...

Indeed, but the story of England being suspended from Euro 16 appeared on msn, the day before on Thursday March 31st , so don't see that as an April fools joke, and if it was meant as such, not very funny, considering how potentially serious an issue this is.

Most papers went with a 'Brexit' April Fool this year. They seemed to work quite well as a theme as people are so willing to believe anything that they think supports their argument. The Euro 2016 one was the Telegraph, and for the reasons you included in your original post is very obviously not a genuine news story.

Yes I saw many of the "in" and "out" campaigns April fools jokes, the one done by Farage was decent. They were all very obvious, and all published on the morning of April 1st just as they should be. Like someone trying convince people he was moving to Spain

I'm not the person that tends to tell lies. When I say I read this story on MSN March 31st it's because I did, also forgot to mention that the story was covered on BBC radio news on the 31st.

Fully admit when I read I did check the date, as I thought this sounds like an April fools joke, but the very fact it was the day before was enough to convince me it wasn't, and the point is how many more were convinced and maybe changed their minds on which way they were going to vote, just little bit naughty in my view.