Jmack Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 You're wrong there SevenRivers. The ECHR has nothing to do with the EU. It was founded and is run by the Council of Europe which is a separate body and has a lot more members than the EU does. There is also the European Court of Justice which is part of the EU but you weren't talking about that. I think he's been wrong about a lot more than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 I'm not scared of our European friends, they're our neighbours and trading partners. I am scared of what a handful of the EU political elite want to achieve, seemingly without consultation of the good people of Europe. You're making things up again. Structural changes to the EU are agreed in EU treaties. These are drawn up by heads of governments and ratified by all member governments. If you'd stop lying then maybe we could have a rational debate. ---------- Post added 12-01-2014 at 19:16 ---------- I think he's been wrong about a lot more than that. See above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qualtrough Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 So only the Conservatives have a right to govern according to you. Also the Lib Dems have only been a party for 25 years so it looks like we've got a fair amount of time before we're disbanded :hihi: I did refer to the two main parties. The Lib Dems are just a continuation of the Liberals. If not then my point remains, if after close to 30 years you get 23% and a pitiful number of seats then you're pointless. All Clegg can do is trim the fringes of Tory policy while Cable keeps popping up to make statements designed to alienate his coelition partners and most of the public. The party isn't exactly stuffed with honourable members, Teather the quitter, Hughes the hypocrite and Hune the wannabe lawmaker who is a law breaker. Are they continuing the tradition of Jeremy Thorpe and Rinkagate? Or have you disowned him with your re badging? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happ Hazzard Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 We need to get out of the EU, and sharpish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenRivers Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 You're wrong there SevenRivers. The ECHR has nothing to do with the EU. It was founded and is run by the Council of Europe which is a separate body and has a lot more members than the EU does. There is also the European Court of Justice which is part of the EU but you weren't talking about that. They're all very much intricately entwined. As I pointed out earlier, signing up to the ECHR is a precondition of joining the EU (see Copenhagen Criteria), and the European Court of Human Rights is part of the ECHR. Further the Lisbon Treaty requires that the EU itself sign the ECHR. Article 17 of protocol no.14 allows the European Union to become party to the Convention. In turn the Lisbon Treaty, which entered force in December 2009, provides that the European Union should accede and become a party to the Convention Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmack Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 I did refer to the two main parties. The Lib Dems are just a continuation of the Liberals. If not then my point remains, if after close to 30 years you get 23% and a pitiful number of seats then you're pointless. All Clegg can do is trim the fringes of Tory policy while Cable keeps popping up to make statements designed to alienate his coalition partners and most of the public. The party isn't exactly stuffed with honourable members, Teather the quitter, Hughes the hypocrite and Hune the wannabe lawmaker who is a law breaker. Are they continuing the tradition of Jeremy Thorpe and Rinkagate? Or have you disowned him with your re badging? Well you've changed your point. You said that if a party was in the wilderness for 100 years you'd disband it. Now after i pointed out the Lib Dems are only 25 years old you've reduced that to 30 years. I think your own misinformation is becoming very clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenRivers Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 You're making things up again. Structural changes to the EU are agreed in EU treaties. These are drawn up by heads of governments and ratified by all member governments. If you'd stop lying then maybe we could have a rational debate. ---------- Post added 12-01-2014 at 19:16 ---------- See above. At least 3 countries rejected the European Constitution. The UK would likely been a forth, had we been given the chance. But the EU disregarded the democratic result, and plodded on with implementing the Lisbon Treaty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmack Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Logic of some people: If we get out of the EU all are problems will be solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 At least 3 countries rejected the European Constitution. The UK would likely been a forth, had we been given the chance. But the EU disregarded the democratic result, and plodded on with implementing the Lisbon Treaty. Which three? The three that rejected it, voted again and then accepted it? Another point I have with right-wingers who oppose the EU because they support parliamentary sovereignty is that they don't mind undermining parliamentary sovereignty by having referenda when parliamentary sovereignty votes for something right-wingers disagree with. Funny that. ---------- Post added 12-01-2014 at 20:00 ---------- ....and the European Court of Human Rights is part of the ECHR. The ECHR is part of the ECHR. Yes. Well spotted. It's not part of the EU though even if the EU supports it. All EU members are members of the Council of Europe so yes, the EU would support it. There is nothing wrong with human rights unless you can come up with a good reason to oppose them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenRivers Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Which three? The three that rejected it, voted again and then accepted it? Indeed. The Irish would have been made to vote over and over until they did accept it. The French public, which rejected it in a referendum, were not given the chance to vote again, Sarkozy did not trust them to return the desired outcome, so he denied them the right to vote again and ratified it through Parliament. Although opinion polls in France suggest a majority of voters would prefer to have another referendum, President Sarkozy has called for a speedy ratification before France takes on the EU presidency in July. The president chose the parliamentary path for ratification because he did not want the risk of a second defeat in a popular referendum, Paris reporter Hugh Schofield says. Another point I have with right-wingers who oppose the EU because they support parliamentary sovereignty is that they don't mind undermining parliamentary sovereignty by having referenda when parliamentary sovereignty votes for something right-wingers disagree with. Funny that. Referenda are nothing new, and don't undermine democracy, they enhance it, we should have more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.