EU Referendum - How will you vote?

[I1L2T3]

I have:

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts-behind-claims-uk-influence/

 

Between 2009 and 2015, we were in the losing minority 12.3% of the time compared with 2.6% between 2004 and 2009. Spin that as insignificant.

 

Thanks for that. Very interesting.

[unbeliever]

Thanks for that. Very interesting.

 

You are most welcome. It all works well when we work together (whilst forcefully disagreeing) to find the facts of the matter.

[Shef1985]

12% is not, by any reasonable standard, statistically insignificant.

Germany is on 5.4%.

I suspect that part of the problem is that under QMV there is an automatic Eurozone majority.

 

 

 

So your plan is to annoy your opponents into submission. Good entertainment, poor debate.

 

Ok, but it look worse only because you shrunk the margin. 56/2466 is very very minor.

[unbeliever]

Ok, but it look worse only because you shrunk the margin. 56/2466 is very very minor.

 

I've separated out the issues where there was division.

Most of the business of government is uncontentious.

 

Over 12% of contentious issues we lost on. That's 1 in 8. That's a lot.

Nobody else comes close to losing that often on contentious issues. The closest are Germany and Austria each on 5.4%.

 

Would have been nice to hang on to those vetoes. Still Lisbon was apparently a tidying up exercise, unworthy of a referendum.

[Quik]

If anyone, including the tedious troll, thinks lack of immediate personal consequences is a reason to accept laws being imposed without democratic accountability then I suggest they aquaint themselves with Martin Niemoller.

[Shef1985]

I've separated out the issues where there was division.

Most of the business of government is uncontentious.

 

Over 12% of contentious issues we lost on. That's 1 in 8. That's a lot.

Nobody else comes close to losing that often on contentious issues. The closest are Germany and Austria each on 5.4%.

 

Would have been nice to hang on to those vetoes. Still Lisbon was apparently a tidying up exercise, unworthy of a referendum.

 

No, we lost 12% in that smaller time period. They were no more contentious than over the whole period.

 

The link states quite clearly:

 

"This doesn’t tell us about how important the decisions were, though. The UK might have been on the winning side on all the issues it really cared about."

 

---------- Post added 18-06-2016 at 21:16 ----------

 

If anyone, including the tedious troll, thinks lack of immediate personal consequences is a reason to accept laws being imposed without democratic accountability then I suggest they aquaint themselves with Martin Niemoller.

 

Which one of the 56? I'm a troll huh? Or are you just sulking?

Edited June 18, 2016 by Shef1985

[unbeliever]

No, we lost 12% in that smaller time period. They were no more contentious than over the whole period.

 

The link states quite clearly:

 

"This doesn’t tell us about how important the decisions were, though. The UK might have been on the winning side on all the issues it really cared about."

 

Actually it's probably more to do with the Lisbon treaty as there was much more QMV after that and much more room for disagreement in the absence of vetoes.

[I1L2T3]

You are most welcome. It all works well when we work together (whilst forcefully disagreeing) to find the facts of the matter.

 

Just thinking this through. It shows (I think) perhaps a greater willingness by the UK government to take on the council when it doesn't agree, Under Labour I guess the government was more likely to be happy to be part of the consensus.

 

Being more combatitive during negotiations is a good thing. I fully support it. I really don't like consensus politics, which after all is what we have had in the UK pretty much for 20 years with our own consensus resulting in a closely aligned policy set between the three main parties. The Eurozone is similar being highly driven by an economic consensus which is damaging to some of the countries in it.

 

The more questioning approach puts the UK in a good position moving forward if there was a remain vote. We would have the opt-out on closer integration and I would expect this to be reflected in a greater assertiveness in the council and a move away from automatically forming part of a consensus. It would also help engineer the opting out process from policy we can't agree with. Every new law and decision is going to be much more heavily scrutinised by us (and more so by the public) if we stay in and that has to be a good thing.

[Shef1985]

Actually it's probably more to do with the Lisbon treaty as there was much more QMV after that and much more room for disagreement in the absence of vetoes.

 

Possibly. Oh well, 56/2466, 'uncontentious issues' as Mr Hartley points out..not so bad.

 

We don't want our own warmongering, corrupt, money grabbing, lying, dodgy lot in charge of everything.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Shef1985

[Quik]

No, we lost 12% in that smaller time period. They were no more contentious than over the whole period.

 

The link states quite clearly:

 

"This doesn’t tell us about how important the decisions were, though. The UK might have been on the winning side on all the issues it really cared about."

 

---------- Post added 18-06-2016 at 21:16 ----------

 

 

Which one of the 56? I'm a troll huh? Or are you just sulking?

 

For the last time any law, passed not only without the consent of our democratically elected government but expressly against their wishes is totally unacceptable regardless of its direct or indirect impact on me. If you can't wrap your head round this basic concept then we are done talking and you can be the first to get kicked to ignore touch.