News: No news is good news...

Login  |  Register

Author Topic: The UK's EU Referendum  (Read 36081 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Calamity

  • Concussor Concussed Dice | Captain
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3055
  • Country: gb
  • Cocking up miniatures since 1998
  • Armies: Kharadron Overlords, Bloodbound, Celestial Lions
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #120 on: June 25, 2016, 08:03:01 AM »
If we're postponing the Brexit process it's because we'll need a new prime minister, and also, there's elections in Germany and Frnace coming up yes?  Maybe we need to let the dust settle before continuing.

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11480
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #121 on: June 25, 2016, 08:20:17 AM »
Honest question Irisado.  Are you ok after this vote?  I know how much the EU means to you so this can't be easy.  :(

Of all the questions raised in this topic, this is the only one I'm going to say is best left unanswered.  Thank you for your concern though, I appreciate it :).

1. The public itself by collecting signatures.
2. They would be far less regular then you might think. How often does switzerland run referenda? And many of those are concerning local topics, so usually only people living at that place are even allowed to vote. Nation wide referendas dont happen that often, judging by the experience of countries who actually run them. Also running a campaign to collect said signatures would also be expensive, so only topics that really concern a lot of people would be put forward. Also internet solution. But i am starting to repeat myself.
3. The person or organization that runs the campaign.
4. Doubt that this would be a factor, we are not talking about dozens referendas a year after all.
5. Uhm by the guys who make and pass the laws (legislation) id suppose? Or would you like every referendum to have its own threshold? That would be highly impractical. You could argue about several thresholds, like changes to the constitution maybe needing 75% or so, while for other topics a simple minority is enough.
6. No, making a vote, especially for a referendum, compulsery kinda defeats its point. Also kinda curious, why you ask that one, since i cant think of any public vote that is actually compulsery.

1. Who decides which members of the public are authorised to do this?  How many groups would there be?  What about existing campaign groups that lobby parliament on behalf of the citizens?  What would happen to them?  What about charitable organisations?  I just don't think that what you're proposing is realistic.

2. What about those who have no internet access?  They would be excluded from internet led initiatives.  Also, comparing to Switzerland doesn't get us very far.  Its population is small and its an outlier country, which does not fully engage in many international institutions.  Other EU states are much more interconnected and are much more involved in global affairs on one side of an argument or another.  They cannot, therefore, open up issues to referenda like the Swiss can.

3. Again though, who decides which person or organisation should run it?  There needs to be oversight.

4. We agree to differ in that case.

5. Too confusing.  Most voters would find all that very complex.  You'd need one flat threshold in my opinion.  It would also need to be very high, so at least 75%.  You also then run the risk of paralysis, as that sort of turnout for elections or referenda is very hard to obtain in European countries, and that would lead to referenda failing to pass on the turnout threshold issue, but lowering it would reduce democratic legitimacy, so I see no effective way of making this work.

6. It is a legal requirement to vote in Australia.  I'd have to check whether any other countries have that law.  I was asking because making it compulsory is probably the only way to solve the democratic legitimacy problem I outlined in my response to point five.

Quote
Thats true, but for starters, the EU agreed to the UKs special status in the first place. So they can hardly hold it against them now. Also i have been working the last 5 years on construction projects and facility management. One important lesson i have learned is, that its very important to stay on good terms with people you might need later on again, even if you dont like them. Pissing people off might give you a moments satisfaction but can potentially cause you a lot of trouble and unnecessary work later on (though there are situations where this is neccessary). In other words, id have preffered a more constructive and grown up reaction from the EU.

I'd have preferred a more grown up and honest approach from Vote Leave, but we didn't get that.  The UK has responded to too many EU initiatives in a hostile manner down the years, partly because of domestic pressure from the public, but also partly because of a misplaced nostalgia for the days of the the British Empire and a lost global influence since the Suez Crisis.  You can argue that two wrongs don't make a right, however, the important thing to remember is that people get back what they give out and this applies to member states too.

A lot of damage was done by the Thatcher approach to negotiating at the EU in the 1980s.  She got what she wanted, but irritated a lot of others in the process.  That friction has never really gone away.  Blair did mend a lot of bridges, only to burn most of them again over Iraq.  The UK has always been half in and half out for many of the core EU member states, yet has wanted special treatment, and this wanting to have its cake and eat it approach has generated a lot of resentment.

For what it's worth once some of the pain and sadness has died down a little, I think that you'll hear far less acrimonious statements in public, but the tension will never disappear.  The EU will try to maintain cordial relations with the UK and vice-versa, and, over time, this cordiality will probably be established.  However, there will never be the same level of warmth that is extended to members of the EU, and those of us who never wanted the UK to be in such a situation will be the ones who will feel the effects of that.

Quote
I recalled it from a newspaper article i can no longer find, but i might be wrong on that one. There is an article however, where Jean Claude Juncker states in an interview that "Der Deserteur wird nicht mit offenen Armen empfangen. Das steht für die Haltung der Kommission ebenso wie für die Einstellung anderer Regierungen" (the deserteur wont be received with open arms. This reflects the position of the commission and the positions of the other governments). This was actually shortly before the vote and i doubt that it was a helpfull remark. The UK didnt desert (which is an illegal act that can get you killed), they are using an legal option that is open for every country should they chose so.

There is also this remark by the chairman of the foreign commision in the Europaparlament Elmar Brok, who said  "Das war eine Fehlentscheidung, für die bitter bezahlt werden muss" (This was a wrong decision, for which has to be dearly paid).

Though i just read, that the UK solution to the referendum seems to be to postpone the Brexit until further notice. Now this i can see pissing the EU off.

I cannot comment on those articles, other than to say that in the UK media, much of which is very hostile to the EU institutions, I have yet to hear anything like this being quoted.  Juncker's statement to the media as a whole was just factual and to the point.  There was no emotion there.

Elmar Brok has been critical, but I seem to remember that this before the referendum not after it, so that would put a different contextual meaning on what he was saying.

There is a move to delay activating article 50 over here.  The stated reason is unclear, but the underlying reason is that Brexit is totally unprepared and has nothing in place, and with Cameron having announced his resignation, he's not going to be interested in conducting the negotiation, so it's very unclear what is going to happen between now and October (when the new Conservative leader and de facto Prime Minister is chosen).  The EU and its member states will see this, understandably, as yet another instance where it is being made to wait over what it's going to do by the British being awkward, so it will not go down very well.
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Lonewolf

  • Cthulhu cultist, The Final Solution | Swarmlord | Staff Soap Spotter
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4558
  • Country: de
  • Murdering armies since 2003 - retired since 2012
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #122 on: June 25, 2016, 09:51:50 AM »
Quote
1. Who decides which members of the public are authorised to do this?  How many groups would there be?  What about existing campaign groups that lobby parliament on behalf of the citizens?  What would happen to them?  What about charitable organisations?  I just don't think that what you're proposing is realistic.

1. I really dont understand your problem here. You seem to pretend, that the concept of a referendum is something entierly new, when its actually a common concept among many countries, through the results are not often binding (although a politician completly ignoring such a vote might find himself out of a job soon).

Quote
2. What about those who have no internet access?  They would be excluded from internet led initiatives.  Also, comparing to Switzerland doesn't get us very far.  Its population is small and its an outlier country, which does not fully engage in many international institutions.  Other EU states are much more interconnected and are much more involved in global affairs on one side of an argument or another.  They cannot, therefore, open up issues to referenda like the Swiss can.

Voting via Mail comes to mind as an alternative way. Or via an official PC terminal in a voting chamber.

Quote
3. Again though, who decides which person or organisation should run it?  There needs to be oversight.

Why? Though I agree, that there needs to be an agency where you have to registrate the referendum and turn in the neccessary signatures and that then organizes the actual vote process.

Quote
5. Too confusing.  Most voters would find all that very complex.  You'd need one flat threshold in my opinion.  It would also need to be very high, so at least 75%.  You also then run the risk of paralysis, as that sort of turnout for elections or referenda is very hard to obtain in European countries, and that would lead to referenda failing to pass on the turnout threshold issue, but lowering it would reduce democratic legitimacy, so I see no effective way of making this work.

Again i think you are overthinking things. Introducing maybe 2 thresholds dosent sound to complicated too me. There just needs to be a clear definition when which threshold applies.

« Last Edit: June 25, 2016, 11:46:52 AM by Lonewolf »


No problem, I'll give you a 100% increase in pay effective immediately and retroactive to 1999.

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11480
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #123 on: June 25, 2016, 11:52:09 AM »
1. I really dont understand your problem here. You seem to pretend, that the concept of a referendum is something entierly new, when its actually a common concept among many countries, through the results are not often binding (although a politician completly ignoring such a vote might find himself out of a job soon).

They are an unfamiliar concept for the UK, and quite a few other EU countries, because they are hardly ever held.  The concept itself may be known, but people do not necessarily know how to treat them.  There's a high danger of protest voting against the government of the day, regardless of the issue on the paper, which undermines their democratic legitimacy.

I think you've successfully pointed out why the non-binding element isn't a good case for having them ;).

Quote
Voting via Mail comes to mind as an alternative way. Or via an official PC terminal in a voting chamber.

The first runs into the problem of people have to make their minds up before the campaign has finished, in some cases long before.  This potentially influenced the outcome of this referendum, because the number of leave votes was higher among postal voters, according to some sources, and the postal votes had to be submitted at a time when the Brexit argument was doing well in the polls.  There is, therefore, a danger that voters may change their minds as the campaign progress, but will have already committed to a vote.  That's not something I like the idea of.

The PC terminal looks good on paper, but the issue I see with that is security and authenticity.  There are quite a few voters and technicians who are rather good at hacking into, or otherwise tampering with, computers.

Quote
Why?

To remove accusations of bias in terms of who writes the question, who monitor the running the count, to choose which will be the official campaigns for and against, and to oversee the overall running of any campaign.

As you can see, that all starts to get quite expensive when carried out on a regular basis.

Quote
Again i think you are overthinking things. Introducing maybe 2 thresholds dosent sound to complicated too me. There just needs to be a clear definition when which threshold applies.

It doesn't sound to complicated to me either, but I know from when I used to teach in adult education, and from my discussions with colleagues who work across quite a wide range of different community teaching that mature students and adult learners (to use the jargon) find any change to the voting system to be very confusing (which is one reason why so few bothered to even vote in the AV referendum), and want to stick avidly to the current system.

That attitude may vary across Europe, but in the UK there is a seemingly ironclad resistance to changing the voting system.
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Lonewolf

  • Cthulhu cultist, The Final Solution | Swarmlord | Staff Soap Spotter
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4558
  • Country: de
  • Murdering armies since 2003 - retired since 2012
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #124 on: June 25, 2016, 01:40:17 PM »
Quote
There's a high danger of protest voting against the government of the day, regardless of the issue on the paper, which undermines their democratic legitimacy.

The danger is there of course, but less so if people get more often the opportunity to shape the course of their country. Because at the end of the day, the people can hardly blame politicians for a course of action, they have voted for themselves.

Quote
To remove accusations of bias in terms of who writes the question, who monitor the running the count, to choose which will be the official campaigns for and against, and to oversee the overall running of any campaign.

As you can see, that all starts to get quite expensive when carried out on a regular basis.

You where probably already in the course of writing your reply, when i edited my post a bit here  :)

Why remove bias from the questions (if they includ any)? If the question is heavily biased then its part of the poll. A referendum wouldnt really make sense, if the goverment choses the formulations of its very text  :P

An answer to the other points i edited into the post you replied to.

Also costs are relative. As stated, someone trying to set up a referendum needs to gather signatures first. At this point that person/organization just needs to registrate the referendum. If he dosent deliver enough signatures it already ends there. With neglectible costs for the public.

Quote
It doesn't sound to complicated to me either, but I know from when I used to teach in adult education, and from my discussions with colleagues who work across quite a wide range of different community teaching that mature students and adult learners (to use the jargon) find any change to the voting system to be very confusing (which is one reason why so few bothered to even vote in the AV referendum), and want to stick avidly to the current system.

That attitude may vary across Europe, but in the UK there is a seemingly ironclad resistance to changing the voting system.

Well as someone who recently had to try to wrap his head around a 1.5m broad and DINA4 size long election paper, that contained an awfull lot of parties and their respective votable members (for a city council election no less!) i dont understand the problem  :P


No problem, I'll give you a 100% increase in pay effective immediately and retroactive to 1999.

Offline The GrimSqueaker

  • The Badger on the Road | Staff Infection Officer | Debased Vassal Slayer | Title Barfly | XOXOXO Gossip Girl | Bent Over
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19053
  • Country: nz
  • From the Fourth Necromantic House
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #125 on: June 25, 2016, 02:21:49 PM »
If we're postponing the Brexit process it's because we'll need a new prime minister, and also, there's elections in Germany and Frnace coming up yes?  Maybe we need to let the dust settle before continuing.

Part of the delay is also because we're now at step 2 where:
Step 1: BREXIT.
Step 2: ????
Step 3: Profit.

I suspect Leave wasn't that sure of success and didn't actually plan for the outcome. Now they're trying to come up with a process and policies that, hopefully, won't cause the whole place to burn down (any further). You'll notice the main suspects have become very quiet and have somewhat stopped crowing.

One of the plus sides is that the French government is keeping the Calais agreement intact. It was bilateral UK/FR rather than the EU. The Mayor of Calais wanted to amphetamine parrot can it and that would've added more fuel to the fire.
Quote from: @TracyAuGoGO
Tact is for people who are too slow witted to be sarcastic.
Drink
Knights Tippler
Quote from: Surviving the World
If you can't make fun of something, it's probably not worth taking seriously.

You have to love the smell of science in the morning. It smells of learning.... or perhaps a gas leak.

Offline Calamity

  • Concussor Concussed Dice | Captain
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3055
  • Country: gb
  • Cocking up miniatures since 1998
  • Armies: Kharadron Overlords, Bloodbound, Celestial Lions
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #126 on: June 25, 2016, 02:25:40 PM »
That's why I backed out in the end.  There wasn't an exit strategy.

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11480
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #127 on: June 25, 2016, 02:45:30 PM »
Lonewolf: Specifically on the issue of bias, there were lengthy discussions about how to word the EU referendum question to avoid one side or the other being unhappy or saying that it favoured the other side.  A body has to oversee that and it cannot necessarily be the government, as it may favour one side or the other.  The UK has the electoral commission for such matters, but whether there would be enough personnel to regularly oversee questions is open to debate.  Either way, I suspect that it would need more funding to bolster its staffing and resources.  As for other European countries, they may have the necessary institutions in place, but if not, again there would be costs involved, which could be more significant than would appear to be the case.

I just don't think that the potential benefits of referenda outweigh the risks when it comes down to it, especially in the UK.  There's just too much of a possibility of people exploiting them to protest, rather than to vote on the issue, and there is always the risk that complex issues could be resolved unsatisfactorily by misguided or ill informed voting.

That's why I backed out in the end.  There wasn't an exit strategy.

You mean backed out of voting for leave, I assume ;)?
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline The GrimSqueaker

  • The Badger on the Road | Staff Infection Officer | Debased Vassal Slayer | Title Barfly | XOXOXO Gossip Girl | Bent Over
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19053
  • Country: nz
  • From the Fourth Necromantic House
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #128 on: June 25, 2016, 02:51:41 PM »
Please cut out the sarcasm, it's detracting from has been a very well framed and formulated debate.

Which applies to me as well, I'll dial it back so as not to further sully what's been an informative discussion.
Quote from: @TracyAuGoGO
Tact is for people who are too slow witted to be sarcastic.
Drink
Knights Tippler
Quote from: Surviving the World
If you can't make fun of something, it's probably not worth taking seriously.

You have to love the smell of science in the morning. It smells of learning.... or perhaps a gas leak.

Offline Calamity

  • Concussor Concussed Dice | Captain
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3055
  • Country: gb
  • Cocking up miniatures since 1998
  • Armies: Kharadron Overlords, Bloodbound, Celestial Lions
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #129 on: June 25, 2016, 03:34:58 PM »
Yes, I, the most ardent eu hater you could find, backed out of voting to leave. :P

Offline The GrimSqueaker

  • The Badger on the Road | Staff Infection Officer | Debased Vassal Slayer | Title Barfly | XOXOXO Gossip Girl | Bent Over
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19053
  • Country: nz
  • From the Fourth Necromantic House
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #130 on: June 25, 2016, 07:06:11 PM »
This was also quite the analysis. Yes, yes, Facebook, I don't use it either but bother through it. I may have to give Cameron at least some credit in his response, even if only to have him thrown into a volcano.
Quote from: @TracyAuGoGO
Tact is for people who are too slow witted to be sarcastic.
Drink
Knights Tippler
Quote from: Surviving the World
If you can't make fun of something, it's probably not worth taking seriously.

You have to love the smell of science in the morning. It smells of learning.... or perhaps a gas leak.

Offline Calamity

  • Concussor Concussed Dice | Captain
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3055
  • Country: gb
  • Cocking up miniatures since 1998
  • Armies: Kharadron Overlords, Bloodbound, Celestial Lions
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #131 on: June 25, 2016, 11:59:21 PM »
Apparently, there is a suggestion doing the rounds that says that there is a possibility that England and Wales could leave the EU but Scotland and N. Ireland could remain within it.  And all without breaking up the UK!

This idea uses the relationship between Denmark, Greenland and the Faroe Islands as its model. The latter are both dependencies of Denmark, but unlike Denmark they are not members of the EU.  And this arrangement seems to work out OK.

Obviously it's more complicated than that but it might work.  Maybe.   :-\
« Last Edit: June 26, 2016, 12:00:33 AM by Captain Calamity »

Offline The GrimSqueaker

  • The Badger on the Road | Staff Infection Officer | Debased Vassal Slayer | Title Barfly | XOXOXO Gossip Girl | Bent Over
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19053
  • Country: nz
  • From the Fourth Necromantic House
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #132 on: June 26, 2016, 12:20:23 AM »
Depends on timing, at the very least.

They're members of the EU based on being within the UK. Hence, if the UK leaves, they do as well. Now, if/when they become independent states, they'd have to apply for ascension on their own from the beginning. Sure, of the 35 chapters they'd probably be some if not all of the way there but they'd have to go through the process. That'd take some time due to, you know, bureaucracy.

It's a matter of jurisdiction basically.
Quote from: @TracyAuGoGO
Tact is for people who are too slow witted to be sarcastic.
Drink
Knights Tippler
Quote from: Surviving the World
If you can't make fun of something, it's probably not worth taking seriously.

You have to love the smell of science in the morning. It smells of learning.... or perhaps a gas leak.

Offline Calamity

  • Concussor Concussed Dice | Captain
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3055
  • Country: gb
  • Cocking up miniatures since 1998
  • Armies: Kharadron Overlords, Bloodbound, Celestial Lions
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #133 on: June 26, 2016, 12:36:36 AM »
But could it be done whilst maintaining the UK?

Also, the referendum result might revitalise the Liberal Denocrats.  They're the only party apart from ukip who are unanimous on their opinion of the EU.  They all agree that we should be in it.  They're the anti-ukip. 

All those people who voted to remain or voted to leave but now regret it could throw their weight behind them.  Personally I would like to see that.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2016, 12:40:40 AM by Captain Calamity »

Offline The GrimSqueaker

  • The Badger on the Road | Staff Infection Officer | Debased Vassal Slayer | Title Barfly | XOXOXO Gossip Girl | Bent Over
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19053
  • Country: nz
  • From the Fourth Necromantic House
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #134 on: June 26, 2016, 01:43:12 AM »
But could it be done whilst maintaining the UK?

Well, no. It's an either/or thing. Best to avoid it entirely.

The Lib Dems? Really?
Quote from: @TracyAuGoGO
Tact is for people who are too slow witted to be sarcastic.
Drink
Knights Tippler
Quote from: Surviving the World
If you can't make fun of something, it's probably not worth taking seriously.

You have to love the smell of science in the morning. It smells of learning.... or perhaps a gas leak.

Offline Lonewolf

  • Cthulhu cultist, The Final Solution | Swarmlord | Staff Soap Spotter
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4558
  • Country: de
  • Murdering armies since 2003 - retired since 2012
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #135 on: June 26, 2016, 02:54:08 AM »
Quote
Lonewolf: Specifically on the issue of bias, there were lengthy discussions about how to word the EU referendum question to avoid one side or the other being unhappy or saying that it favoured the other side.  A body has to oversee that and it cannot necessarily be the government, as it may favour one side or the other.  The UK has the electoral commission for such matters, but whether there would be enough personnel to regularly oversee questions is open to debate.  Either way, I suspect that it would need more funding to bolster its staffing and resources.  As for other European countries, they may have the necessary institutions in place, but if not, again there would be costs involved, which could be more significant than would appear to be the case.

Well the text of a referendum would need to be checked if its within the boundaries set by a countries laws as part of its registration process, but lets maybe talk about numbers. You tend to be very vague when you argue the costs safe, that they are high. About how many digits are you talking? If the UK already has an institution in place to handle such requests, when its just a matter of staffing. And honestly, once the further above mentioned equipment is in place, i doubt that we are talking about more than 10-20 additional personel to handle the registration. And they might be dwidling their thumps too often enough, because as said, the real work would only start once signatures are gathered and even then, if you manage to make the whole system mostly IT based, you dont even need people anymore to count votes, just a well working IT support if problems should arrive.

Also from an national economy point of view, as long as the money stays in the country, it will be recollected anyway in the form of taxes and creating additional jobs (Ha! Those 2 semesters with 2 hours weekly of national economys now really pay of! :P )

Quote
I just don't think that the potential benefits of referenda outweigh the risks when it comes down to it, especially in the UK.  There's just too much of a possibility of people exploiting them to protest, rather than to vote on the issue, and there is always the risk that complex issues could be resolved unsatisfactorily by misguided or ill informed voting.

Well then we have to agree to disagree on this point because I firmly believe that a higher participation of a countries population (if that country has reached a point, where the majority of people have a more or less high education and is stable) in the political process will weaken radical elements, not strenghten them.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2016, 02:55:27 AM by Lonewolf »


No problem, I'll give you a 100% increase in pay effective immediately and retroactive to 1999.

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11480
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #136 on: June 26, 2016, 05:34:40 AM »
This was also quite the analysis. Yes, yes, Facebook, I don't use it either but bother through it. I may have to give Cameron at least some credit in his response, even if only to have him thrown into a volcano.

That's actually an excellent piece of analysis.  Thanks for finding that gem amidst all the unhelpful comments that are posted there.  I think that there is a lot of mileage in what he is saying, and that Cameron has actually pulled off a very understated piece of revenge.  That doesn't let him off the hook, as you say, but it does make life very difficult for Brexit, which, after all their deceit, they are in no position to complain about.

Well, no. It's an either/or thing. Best to avoid it entirely.

The Lib Dems? Really?

Indeed.  The mechanisms are not in place in the treaties for dependencies or regions to join the EU.  Look at Gibraltar for example.  It would rejoin the EU if it could, because this result is very problematic for its people and trade, but it's not a nation state, so it cannot.

Scotland would have to become an independent nation state, not just be a region of the UK, to join the EU.  Even then, it still has to be accepted by all the EU member states, and it has run into a problem.  Spain is threatening to use its veto on any Scottish application.  This is not because the Spanish government has anything against Scotland though.  It's because Spain has its own concerns about Catalan independence and does not want to have Cataluña try to hold an independence referendum and subsequently join the EU as a separate state.

The Liberal Democrats, the party I have voted for ever since I was able to vote, are now saying that they will fight the next general election on a platform to take the UK back into the EU without a referendum.  I fully support that, even though the UK would never gain back the opt outs it has had up until now.

Well the text of a referendum would need to be checked if its within the boundaries set by a countries laws as part of its registration process

Who's going to do the checking?  The government couldn't do it, so this goes back to my point about having to have a separate body and all the costs that would entail.

Quote
You tend to be very vague when you argue the costs safe, that they are high. About how many digits are you talking?

The estimated cost of the EU referendum is £142 million.  That is not the final figure though, which doesn't seem to have been published yet.  Spending millions of pounds on referenda to decide on every piece of legislation is not sustainable or practical.

Quote
Well then we have to agree to disagree on this point because I firmly believe that a higher participation of a countries population (if that country has reached a point, where the majority of people have a more or less high education and is stable) in the political process will weaken radical elements, not strenghten them.

That argument relies heavily on the majority of the population being highly educated (not true for the UK) and on people voting on the issue and not casting protest votes (again not true for the UK).  It's one of those concepts which looks good on paper, but doesn't work when applied to reality.
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Lonewolf

  • Cthulhu cultist, The Final Solution | Swarmlord | Staff Soap Spotter
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4558
  • Country: de
  • Murdering armies since 2003 - retired since 2012
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #137 on: June 26, 2016, 07:42:39 AM »
Quote
Who's going to do the checking?  The government couldn't do it, so this goes back to my point about having to have a separate body and all the costs that would entail.

I dont see a particular reason why an official institution couldnt check the text, as long as they dont change it, but i could also see that the initiator simply has to fork out the money and go to a specialized lawyer to let it check over.

Quote
The estimated cost of the EU referendum is £142 million.  That is not the final figure though, which doesn't seem to have been published yet.  Spending millions of pounds on referenda to decide on every piece of legislation is not sustainable or practical.

*sigh* I still wonder how you arrive at "referenda to decide on every piece of legislation". You seem to somehow believe that there are hundreds of people in the UK, who have the will, money and support to run a referendum on things like "required percentage of fruit, so that a fruitpie can be called "fruit pie"".

You have already a great limiting factor with the amount of signatures neccessary for a referendum (which is 100k in Switzerland at around 8 mio population, which would translate to around 700k for the UK). I just checked the last 10 years on Switzerlands referenda history. They have on average around 9 referenda a year and still arent bancrupt. They also combine the voting for several agenda to one day, which drastically reduces costs.

Quote
That argument relies heavily on the majority of the population being highly educated (not true for the UK) and on people voting on the issue and not casting protest votes (again not true for the UK).  It's one of those concepts which looks good on paper, but doesn't work when applied to reality.

Are you reffering to just the UK? Because there are countries with binding referendas, even Germany has them on all levels of government. And i assure you, after the Brexit debacle that just happened, the next time a referendum comes around, even the UK population you seem to have so little faith in, will take the time and inform themselves before they cast their vote, because know they have seen that their vote actually matters. Its called learning and growing.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2016, 07:55:07 AM by Lonewolf »


No problem, I'll give you a 100% increase in pay effective immediately and retroactive to 1999.

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11480
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #138 on: June 26, 2016, 08:38:32 AM »
I dont see a particular reason why an official institution couldnt check the text, as long as they dont change it, but i could also see that the initiator simply has to fork out the money and go to a specialized lawyer to let it check over.

Impartiality.  All institutions which are part of the civil service are perceived, rightly or wrongly, as favouring the government.  The result is that you have to have an independent institution, and that goes back to my previous point about costs and staffing.

The impartiality argument also applies to individuals hiring other individuals.  It might work if the highest court in the land were to decide, but that's kind of outside their remit.  Their role would be to adjudicate on legal challenges to the question or the result.

Quote
*sigh* I still wonder how you arrive at "referenda to decide on every piece of legislation".

I was under the impression that you were proposing that all legislation needed to be decided via referenda.  Have I misunderstood?

Quote
You have already a great limiting factor with the amount of signatures neccessary for a referendum (which is 100k in Switzerland at around 8 mio population, which would translate to around 700k for the UK). I just checked the last 10 years on Switzerlands referenda history. They have on average around 9 referenda a year and still arent bancrupt. They also combine the voting for several agenda to one day, which drastically reduces costs.

I'm sure that it works very well for Switzerland, but it's not a suitable model for other European states to follow.  If it were, they would have adopted it years ago.  Switzerland has a unique position in the world and Europe in terms of its neutral approach to global affairs and its economic and banking systems.  Other countries do not function like Switzerland.

Quote
Are you reffering to just the UK?

Yes.

Quote
And i assure you, after the Brexit debacle that just happened, the next time a referendum comes around, even the UK population you seem to have so little faith in, will take the time and inform themselves before they cast their vote, because know they have seen that their vote actually matters. Its called learning and growing.

Considering that had the opportunity to do that after the AV referendum (where nearly everybody stayed at home and the majority of those who did vote used it to punish Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats without making an effort to understand whether it would be a better electoral system), I am dubious that they would take the opportunity this time either.
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Lonewolf

  • Cthulhu cultist, The Final Solution | Swarmlord | Staff Soap Spotter
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4558
  • Country: de
  • Murdering armies since 2003 - retired since 2012
Re: The UK's EU Referendum
« Reply #139 on: June 26, 2016, 11:43:42 AM »
Quote
I was under the impression that you were proposing that all legislation needed to be decided via referenda.  Have I misunderstood?

I dont think that i said such a thing. The closest would be my proposal in my first post to make a referendum mandatory 10 or so years after joining the EU. The reasons for this i have stated before.

Quote
I'm sure that it works very well for Switzerland, but it's not a suitable model for other European states to follow.  If it were, they would have adopted it years ago.  Switzerland has a unique position in the world and Europe in terms of its neutral approach to global affairs and its economic and banking systems.  Other countries do not function like Switzerland.

Maybe, but as stated, Germany for example also allows binding referenda, though they arent that often. I didnt research other european countries, but wouldnt be surprised if there are a couple more.

Quote
Considering that had the opportunity to do that after the AV referendum (where nearly everybody stayed at home and the majority of those who did vote used it to punish Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats without making an effort to understand whether it would be a better electoral system), I am dubious that they would take the opportunity this time either.

I think the shock now was quite a bit larger. But time will tell.




No problem, I'll give you a 100% increase in pay effective immediately and retroactive to 1999.

 


Powered by EzPortal