The Rise of UKIP

[DaDaIsMyBaYBaY]

9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, the Arab Spring, the sub-prime mortgage crisis, MP expenses scandal, peace in Northern Ireland.

In terms of actual impact, the single currency has been pretty unimportant. As a crisis, it has been bubbling away under the surface, but it's impact on Britain has been very small.

To say it defined the decade politically is tosh. The disappearance of Madeleine McCann was a more politically influential event.

 

[TerriYaki]

Could the EU continue to exist if countries could opt-out of an EU law? Or would that bring down the house of cards?

 

[swell6]

Also, I don't see how to improve the situation without an inevitable shift towards federalism. Once you start directly electing comissioners (who lets not forget ARE chosen by our elected officials) and president then the concept of national politics becomes antiquated.

 

[LizzyB]

The disappearance of Madeleine McCann was a more politically influential event.[/QUOTE]


Thats a pretty low way to try and score a political point.

 

[VanessaS]

The disappearance of Madeleine McCann was a more politically influential event.[/QUOTE]


Thats a pretty low way to try and score a political point,and only serves to weaken
your argument

 

[RachelZ]

What would be the arguments against Federalism?

 

[JackiesMama]

Hey, if you can't think of a rebuttal, just say so.

It's true. The Madeleine McCann case was more politically influential in the UK over the last 10 years than the single currency has been. It has touched issues of libel law, of press freedom, of international relations and of international law enforcement cooperation. It has seen a succession of politicians bring it up in the house of commons and it saw many MPs sporting yellow ribbons in an attempt to curry favour with voters.

 

[Auburn]

It very well could continue to the general election. However even if it does UKIP will be doing well if they get one seat in the commons. It will be business as usual with the exception that the winning party, Labour or Conservatives, will have to deliver on their promise of an EU in/out referendum.

I was going to say it would also mean we would have 5 UK wide mainstream political parties. But then I remembered the Liberals will likely be extinct. This coalition government business with the Conservatives is extremely toxic for their brand. Sadly Clegg doesn't have the nerve to pull out and leave the Tories fighting tooth and nail for every bill in the commons as a minority government.

 

[GoBlue]

I just want to jump in and be ridiculously pedantic, but it's actually the European Commisision, not the Council, that really holds the power in Europe. The Council essentially talks about the agenda for the next year while the Commission is the body that drafts new legislation that then gets taken through the EU parliamentary process. The Council itself doesn't have the power to draft new legislation. Though on the plus side, the European Parliament, unlike the UK version, can veto legislation indefinitely.

Hey, I guess my small amount of studying to become a solicitor paid off



I completely agree here. Outside of the EU, UKIP simply do not have a credible strategy for running the country and I am ashamed to say I sat down and read their entire manifesto at the last election - their pitch hasn't changed, they have no clue as to how to run an economy and have less leadership experience than the Lib Dems.

EDIT: Damn, I am seriously behind on the conversation at this point

The EU is in itself a good theory and was founded for justifiable reasons. In practice, the formation of it has fallen short. You either need it as a massive trade bloc where everyone gets what they want without lots of the political elements, or you need a "United States of Europe". Which in theory could work, but as long as people cling to their national pride and insist on running their country their way and all the rest of it, this will never work.

Though I do think the concept of the Eurozone is severely flawed. You can't have an economy like Germany next to an economy like Greece and NOT expect some awful doo-hickeys. Which we have all seen.

 

[thedukesrighthand]

The problem with the European Parliament is it feels remote and people don't understand how it works. It's a similar issue that is driving the independence referendum in Scotland. Westminster feels remote and Scots really aren't convinced Westminster is working in their interests. Which is why many unionists voted for the SNP giving them their historic majority in Holyrood.

 

[uerecrabs]

Not a massive amount. UKIP has gained a lot of support and I very much believe that given the current band wagon trend that UKIP will gain seats in the Commons - largely off the Lib Dems, BNP and disillusioned Tories.

But there's not enough reason to believe they will form a majority or even a party of significance. If anything, I expect them to get into the commons and suffer the same backlash that the Lib Dems did for years - there simply aren't enough of them to make the vote worthwhile. Which means eventually the band wagon will slow, people will realise that UKIP is just another bonkers party that doesn't get anything done and - in good time - they will go back to being a nobody party. At least in my opinion.



I see sovereignty as being linked to national pride, the idea of being able to say "our rules for our country, because we love our country", etc. Yes, I do think the EU reduces our sovereignty. I don't think losing sovereignty is a bad thing IF the who EU became a "United States of Europe", but as it currently stands...there are big advantages to being part of the EU and I don't think we can afford to be apart from the EU right now, but the whole system needs tidying up.

 

[WinoA]

The European Parliament elects the president and ratifies the commission. It can also effectively vote on a motion of no confidence, ending a presidents term in the process.

 

[hatethinkingofnicknames]

I can find this out but I think that the comment is a red herring. The truth of what was said has nothing to do with his political affiliations. It seems to be potentially true considering the remarks made by Mitch and others.

If the decisions are made and the MEP's aren't able to influence policy to any reasonable degree then we end up with a dictatorship by the bureaucrats. Funnily enough I seem to remember Marx was thought to have very clear ideas on this sort of situation:

''As in state capitalism, a bureaucratic collectivist state owns the means of production, while the surplus ("profit") is distributed among an elite party bureaucracy, rather than among the workers. Also, most importantly, it is the bureaucracy - not the workers or the people in general - who controls the economy and the state. Thus, the system is not truly capitalist, but it is not socialist either. It is a new form of class society which exploits workers, in Marxist theory, through new mechanisms. Most who hold this view believe that bureaucratic collectivism does not represent progress beyond capitalism - that is, that it is no closer to being a workers' state than a capitalist state would be. Some even believe that certain kinds of capitalism are more progressive than a bureaucratic collectivist society.'' http://encycl.opentopia.com/term/Bureaucratic_collectivism

Certainly doesn't sound like something that is in the best interests of the citizens of the member states.

I do believe that if the UK is to be part of the EU that we would be much better in an economic relationship (like what Norway foes through the EEU? EEC?) rather than through the type of state it appears to be developing into.

Just some observations.

LFD

 

[Je$$tc@]

Sovereignty is more than just national pride. It's control over your legislature, national resources, foreign policy and your economy. It's also control over the rights and freedoms your citizens or subjects enjoy.

If we look at the way France for example has handled issues like religious symbols and clothing or intellectual property infringement over the Internet. Would you want to live in France?

How about having to defend yourself in a legal system like Italy's where both convictions and aquittal can be appealed. Especially given the length of time the Italian appeals process seems to take?

State sovereignty is so much more than national pride. It's basically the reason your life is as it is right now.

 

[TheGreatMustachio]

Not sure if European Federalism works the same way as American Federalism did. But if so, the Anti-Federalist Papers lay out the arguments against Federalism quite well. (or at least most all the common arguments of the time. Newspapers also printed arguments against Federalism in editorials)
Readable free here: http://www.anamericanvision.com/freedom_documents/anti_federalist_papers/

 

[Nikir]

And they get to vote on a presidential candidate nominated by...

The Council isn't as powerful since the Lisbon Treaty, but it still holds a lot of the keys.

 

[SgtQuackers]

You're right, it is more than just national pride, but the two are so entwined that many people do not have one without the other. Admittedly I did over simplify it.

 

[Ishat]

I think this is the key.

The structures of the EU are inherently flawed. Either retreat to a Common Market approach or go the whole hog and aim for Fedaralism, but what we have now suits nobody and in some ways reminds me of oligarchy more than democracy.

Mitch

 

[RayD]

David you seem to be trying to suggest there is something dodgy about the way the European Parliament works. There isn't. It's not the same system we have here in the UK. Which frankly isn't that great either. But it is a legitimate democratic governing body.

It's only a Wikipedia entry. But I'm fairly confident it's accurate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament

 

[LifeChanges]

The problem is the way it's evolved from one treaty to the next. We've almost been sleep walking into a United States of Europe. Which is what the French and Germans want during the good times when they're making lots of money. During tough times however nobody really want the responsibility of fixing the mess. Nobody wants to pay for it and everybody is looking out solely for their own self interests.

Take the UK approach to the EU. We're happy to sign up to A,B and C. But D is a red line we'll veto and F is something you can only have if we can have Z. Which just happens to be a red line for someone else. Basically we're not ready to be a United States of Europe. The common bond between European states isn't as strong as it is in the USA. And even there, Texas pulled out at one point.