European Politics

I understand your point if they really listen to these arguments. But if they are only listening to the arguments of the leave camp (some of them are also called economical, true or not), basically, as long as the majority listens to the wrong camp, you can erase every word you just said.
 
I'm not underestimating any of it. There's a been a culture of 'blame the EU for everything' from the outset. I think the vote will be Out, with the strongest Out support in England, particularly the Home Counties. Cried is right, people do tend to vote for the status quo. But (in England at least), EU change is seen as being the new thing. Both the in and out campaigns are just irritating people more than anything, not changing long term views.

We will have the answer to that when people vote. That seems like the core question. Can the system be improved/reformed or is it a hopeless and distant layer mindless governmental drones that are incapable of change?

Sadly, I don't think the more casual anti-EU sentiment that has been going on in the background for years is well informed. First it was suspicion about France and Germany trying to take over Europe, then standardised use of metric and various food regulations were seen as an attack on British culture. After that it was anger about immigration and migrant workers, objections to human rights legislation and health and safety law. Health and safety culture is far more intense in Britain than it is in any other EU country I've been to. The British administration itself specialises in multiple tiers of management, freeloading private consultants and think tanks, this is why it spends so much. International immigration isn't the product of the EU, and migrant working isn't likely to end.

At the end of the day, it's looking like a lot of anti-EU sentiment is based on 'no foreigner tells me what to do'. If there's less EU opposition in Scotland, that speaks volumes about England.
 
I'm not underestimating any of it. There's a been a culture of 'blame the EU for everything' from the outset. I think the vote will be Out, with the strongest Out support in England, particularly the Home Counties. Cried is right, people do tend to vote for the status quo. But (in England at least), EU change is seen as being the new thing. Both the in and out campaigns are just irritating people more than anything, not changing long term views.



Sadly, I don't think the more casual anti-EU sentiment that has been going on in the background for years is well informed. First it was suspicion about France and Germany trying to take over Europe, then standardised use of metric and various food regulations were seen as an attack on British culture. After that it was anger about immigration and migrant workers, objections to human rights legislation and health and safety law. Health and safety culture is far more intense in Britain than it is in any other EU country I've been to. The British administration itself specialises in multiple tiers of management, freeloading private consultants and think tanks, this is why it spends so much. International immigration isn't the product of the EU, and migrant working isn't likely to end.

At the end of the day, it's looking like a lot of anti-EU sentiment is based on 'no foreigner tells me what to do'. If there's less EU opposition in Scotland, that speaks volumes about England.
Again, I agree with most of that. The Scottish issue is massive, personally. In fact, it's amazing how the very same arguments are essentially replicated here in Scotland, but in respect to England. The only difference is Scotland, as a small country, seems to want to be far more outward looking & part of the global community. If England votes to leave (& the majority of Scotland does not), regardless of the narrowness of that vote (in both Scotland & England), then another Independence Referendum will loom very large on the political agenda here. The message will be rammed home (perhaps decisively this time), a believe underpinning much nationalist thinking; that England (by this, I mean the British government(s), past & present), has no real interest in Scottish affairs (echoed by the English public opinion of "just let the Scots leave then" sentiment during the Independence Referendum; the shrugged shoulders, who cares stance, as it was sometimes characterised), and in some cases are actively disinterested & hostile to Scottish matters, to the detriment of the Scottish people; this, you have to understand, even goes as far as saying this is to the detriment of Scottish lives. e.g. the "Glasgow effect". We then face the very real prospect of the disintegration of the UK in it's present form. I voted yes in the independence referendum, but this makes me a little uneasy. That (the indy vote) would have been a positive move for independence; this (the EU vote) might turn out to be a desperate move to independence to avoid following England down the ruinous path (so the narrative will go) it seems hell-bent on following. It will be fucking chaos.
 
Last edited:
Westminster seems to have no real interest in the affairs of a lot of the UK, this is what I think people are missing. It's clearer to see when there's a border and a geographical focus, but I'd argue large parts of the population of England aren't really of concern to the Government either. I've recently being trying to read up on legislation agreed under EVEL (English Votes for English Laws). It's difficult to track down where it's been used, and as far as I can see it's by and large been used to carry specifically Tory policy, rather than English issues. Social engineering is an accusation frequently levelled re London in particular. Initiatives like the Northern Powerhouse look like a PR stunt.
 
Westminster seems to have no real interest in the affairs of a lot of the UK, this is what I think people are missing. It's clearer to see when there's a border and a geographical focus, but I'd argue large parts of the population of England aren't really of concern to the Government either. I've recently being trying to read up on legislation agreed under EVEL (English Votes for English Laws). It's difficult to track down where it's been used, and as far as I can see it's by and large been used to carry specifically Tory policy, rather than English issues. Social engineering is an accusation frequently levelled re London in particular. Initiatives like the Northern Powerhouse look like a PR stunt.
Indeed, but with Scotland you have the added reality of devolution in many areas, historical independence of important institutions (with things like education, policing, law, health, etc), and (real or imagined) "national identity"; combined, these are a far more persuasive argument for "why are we not just independent from these guys?" Scotland has all the machinery of an independent state, when you look at the detail. The only real problem is the issue of economy. With the rest of England, although your argument is undoubtedly true, I'm guessing you guys still identify as English & part of that failing system; in Scotland, not so much. These issues did get highlighted during the Independence campaign (i.e. that many of the issues raised were concerns of, for example, the north of England too); there is overlap. In fact, all of the arguments can essentially be turned around & questions asked in regards to both issues i.e. Scottish Independence & Brexit.

In respect to EVEL; I'm confused, is this actually happening?
 
You're right to be confused. EVEL was agreed in October last year. The Housing and Planning Bill, which includes the sell-off of thousands of council and housing association homes (and replaces them with so-called 'starter homes'), went through under EVEL provisions.

But yes, there's no line to draw in England, it's just a political split. One thing I will say: if the UK does come out of Europe, it might focus English politicians on real issues and stop them blaming the EU.
 
You're right to be confused. EVEL was agreed in October last year. The Housing and Planning Bill, which includes the sell-off of thousands of council and housing association homes (and replaces them with so-called 'starter homes'), went through under EVEL provisions.
I totally didn't know that. I take it nothing even remotely contentious (Scottish/English) has been voted on with EVEL then?
But yes, there's no line to draw in England, it's just a political split. One thing I will say: if the UK does come out of Europe, it might focus English politicians on real issues and stop them blaming the EU.
This is, again, something that also might happen up here too. The SNP administration is often criticised for deflecting blame/scrutiny of their own policies/decisions by simply blaming the Westminster Government i.e. don't blame us this issue isn't devolved. It's usually a pretty unfair criticism as the Scottish parliament often is hand tied on big issues which aren't devolved. Independence would obviously remove this. Kind of a difficult argument for the Scottish Conservatives (& other opposition parties) to make though, since they're mostly pro-union. It's true though; independence would largely relegate the "blame-Westminster/England" to history.
 
I totally didn't know that. I take it nothing even remotely contentious (Scottish/English) has been voted on with EVEL then?

It's as clear as mud how the debating and voting process worked on the Housing and Planning Bill. The most controversial parts of that are England-only, but some provisions of the Bill apply to Scotland too. I assume Scottish MPs could vote on those parts. It's been suggested that a bill on expansion of airports in the South East, using state funding, may became an EVEL vote.
 
Heard about that, huh? Just fucked up. Crazy thing is it's the same mistake being made for the second time, it happened in 1994, too.

It targets the centre-left main opposition party CHP as well, that one's the party I vote for. But CHP was put in the sticky situation of being accused of being terrorist supporters when they initially rejected the vote, so some had to switch their votes. Another (maybe the main) reason for the switch is that Erdoğan may take the vote to a referendum and combine it with a presidential referendum. 340 votes would mean a referendum, 376 means direct passing.

I'd say dark day for Turkish democracy but there really isn't any democracy to be honest.
 
Last edited:
The Austrian election .. and to be honest, outside of Waldheim (sp?) I could not name any Austrian President ... continues a trend of the old parties loosing their grip on power. Neither of the two that have dominated Austrian Post-War politics did not make the final round and you had left and right populist movements finish 1 and 2.
 
Well, I do not think anyone opposed to the current immigration policies are exactly Nazis. In any case, the middle is crumbling .. which might not be a 100% bad thing. But it seems the swings left to right in some countries are a lot more extreme than they used to be. Though from my understanding, the President of Austria has minimal power over anything, this probably shows how the next meaningful election will go with both these two parties capturing a lot of seats and probably one of them needing to be part of a government.
 
Back
Top