Should the UK leave Europe?
Yes, they'd be better on their
Side Score: 7
|
 |
No, we need each other
Side Score: 8
|
|
|
|
|
The English say they want the closest relationship with the European Union yet they want to leave??? You say they have left but then you say they will leave in March 2019??? Much confusion? Certainly. The English allowed a small ill-informed majority in a referendum to determine their relationship with their closest neighbors and biggest trading partners. The Scottish and Northern Irish voted to remain EU citizens but are being dragged out against their will. It is a disaster. Side: Yes, they'd be better on their
Yes Eloy , the paper work is done but much work has to be done yet before the final exit as in the border between my country the Republic of Ireland and Notherrn Ireland , also a lot of trade deals between our countries have to be finalised . When Britain signed up to leave they needed two to three years to put all the various treaties and frameworks into place before the final exit . Side: Yes, they'd be better on their
My concerns with the E.U. are mostly democratic in nature. The E.U. parliament does not propose legislation, rather legislation is drawn up by the E.U. commission, which is appointed, not elected. This means that the people have less power relative to regular parliamentary democracies because they are one step removed from the people who actually write and propose law. Simply put, commission members have less accountability to the electorate because their power is not dependent on the electorate, unlike in parliamentary democracies. The E.U. parliament; those that are actually elected to represent the people can merely vote on proposed legislation, they cannot propose legislation nor can they repeal existing legislation. As a result, if the E.U. commission proposes a horrible, unjust law, and the parliament passes it, the people and their elected representatives have no recourse for removal of that law. Another of my concerns about democracy in the E.U. also involves it's ability to represent the people. When one is governed on a smaller scale, one can be greater represented by their government. This is both because one makes up a larger percentage of the voting population and because different issues have different importance to people living in different areas. This is demonstrated by, for example, the cities of the U.S. being more left leaning while the countryside is more right leaning (Source 1). These contrasts are magnified when one considers the political and ideological differences between nations. It is also an immediately apparent fact that a government is more accountable to it's citizens when it is more local. A multinational government based in Brussels, for example, has less reason to be afraid of unrest in London than unrest in Brussels. Moreover, it is easily demonstrated that at larger numbers accountability and representation is reduced. If one has 100 citizens and one ruler, it merely takes ten outspoken citizens for a problem or concern to be made apparent. If one has one million citizens, however, it takes one hundred thousand protestors to have the same effect. Sources: (1) http://www.economist.com/blogs/ Side: Yes, they'd be better on their
In our little debate here on CreateDebate we cannot hope to cover all aspects of the European Union (EU), including its democratic deficit. The question put to us was whether the UK should leave. As to your concern with the EU and its lack of democracy, I have heard nobody claim that it is perfect without any need of reform. One of its problems is the lack of power in its Parliament, for example its inability to propose laws. I know why this is the way it is. Individual member governments did not want to surrender their sovereignty to the EU so they have put a lock on the Parliament from making laws which a member state would be bound by. So, the power resides in the British Tory government and the other governments such as the Spanish Partido Popular which, like its sister party in London, has no respect for democracy in the devolved national governments of Catalonia and the Basque Country, to propose laws for the EU through the Council of Ministers. I do see an imbalance there but to make a change it would be necessary to qualify the sovereignty of national governments. The right-wing governments do not like that. The individual states elect their national governments and their prime ministers and presidents, duly elected at national level, make up the Council of Ministers. These are answerable to the people in their respective states. If we cannot come together for meaningful regulations on a broad European scale then we cannot have a European Union in the first place. Most European people believe we can have a ever closer political union on the basis that we have more in common than not. I understand that English people have never thought this way (with the exception of their youth) and were always reluctant members. Side: Yes, they'd be better on their
"As to your concern with the EU and its lack of democracy, I have heard nobody claim that it is perfect without any need of reform." How do we reform something when we cannot elect representatives that can propose reforms? "One of its problems is the lack of power in its Parliament, for example its inability to propose laws." One many problems with the E.U. "democracy". "I know why this is the way it is. Individual member governments did not want to surrender their sovereignty to the EU so they have put a lock on the Parliament from making laws which a member state would be bound by. So, the power resides in the British Tory government and the other governments such as the Spanish Partido Popular which, like its sister party in London, has no respect for democracy in the devolved national governments of Catalonia and the Basque Country, to propose laws for the EU through the Council of Ministers." The power resides in the E.U. commission, appointed and unaccountable. While the P.M. appoints a commissioner, the laws are proposed by these commissioners, not the P.M. The E.U. council, as far as I am aware, merely makes some amendments to the text the commission proposes. "I do see an imbalance there but to make a change it would be necessary to qualify the sovereignty of national governments. The right-wing governments do not like that." National governments aren't sovereign under the E.U., the E.U. drafts laws through the commissioners which are then voted on by the E.U. parliament. These laws supersede national law. "The individual states elect their national governments and their prime ministers and presidents, duly elected at national level, make up the Council of Ministers. These are answerable to the people in their respective states." Yet since the treaty of Lisbon the E.U. commission is the entity that proposes legislation. "Most European people believe we can have a ever closer political union on the basis that we have more in common than not." Most people seem to assume that homogeneity of governance is a good thing, without considering the many benefits of diversity of governance. Side: Yes, they'd be better on their
|
About 44% of British goods and services go to the rest of the European Union and Britain depends on the EU for over half its imports. Leaving such a market is insane. Secondly, the Scottish were promised that if they voted in an earlier referendum to leave the United Kingdom that they would be stripped on their EU membership. They narrowly voted to stay in the EU with England and now they are being dragged out against their will??? The Northern Irish also voted to remain in the EU bur are being disregarded. English youth, the future, voted to remain in the EU but those who will not have to suffer the consequences for as long are getting their way. The damage is done. Side: No, we need each other
When I was in Spain (before the UK joined the EU), I bought a camera (to replace the one stolen in the Air France baggage dept.). The salesperson asked: "You're American, aren't you?" I said yes. She said "Good, it would cost you more if you were British." They were angry that the Brits were hesitant to join them. We NEED everyone to stick together in this time, as much as possible. NO! The UK should stick with their friends .... after all .... they're an island in the middle of a "bigly ocean", it's hard to help them .... IF you don't consider them a part of your country! ;-( Side: No, we need each other
If your argument is that the U.K. needs to remain in the E.U. for military reasons then I must disagree. Aside from being an island and hence an incredibly defensible position the U.K. military always ranks in the top ten strongest militaries (Source 1,2,3) and is one of the few countries that have a nuclear arsenal. The U.K. also houses many U.S. nuclear weapons which makes the U.K. of great strategic importance to the U.S. Sources: (1) https://www.globalfirepower.com/ (2) http://uk.businessinsider.com/ (3) https://www.wonderslist.com/ Side: Yes, they'd be better on their
It is funny ýou have interpreted it that way for so many years. The UK joined the EU about the years before Spain. I guess they asked if you were from an EU country for tax reasons - perhaps you don't pay the tax if you're not from the EU. Side: Yes, they'd be better on their
|
