3 ms·

What could european politicians have done differently at that point? Also polls in the UK are notoriously unreliable.

by phreeza 10y ago

cm2187 10y ago
Polls are generally unreliable, they are only recognised as such in the UK. They would have given him a better a deal on immigration, which they thought was an absolute non starter, and was the main grief against the EU. I think it would have made a difference.
- tonyedgecombe 10y ago
  They still could, there is no reason we couldn't have another referendum.
ptaipale 10y ago
Primarily, they could have called off the project for political union and concentration of political power in Brussels (including the ridiculous monthly ride to Strasbourg). Concentrate on enabling free trade, not building a federal superstate. Also, quit bashing "unpleasant" euro-sceptic elected politicians (by unelected EU officials). (As an example of the EU gravy train, the former prime minister in my own country, Jyrki Katainen, first screwed up things home and then landed on a nice job in Brussels - because he kept saying nice things about the European project. This is one more little thing that has turned me suspicious of the whole project, a project I didn't vote for when I voted for EU membership 22 years ago.) Simply: admit out loud that they got it wrong and they have to change direction. But that would have meant a loss of face.
- lunula 10y ago
  It really sounds like there is a need for more integration but of the democratic kind. A prime minister who screws things up at home should have no shot at being "elected" to a position in Brussels. This doesn't mean that the EU project is bankrupt though.
  - vsl 10y ago
    That's how most of the Brussels bureaucrat got there, it's common in my country too. And it does mean the project is bankrupt — the people in power, the ones actually making decisitions (i.e. the Comission and to a lesser extentent, EP), are out of touch with the people (or, frankly, reality). National parliaments have very limited ability to affect things, most of the law is pushed down on them as EC directives. That's the very definition of a dysfunctional political system. Yes, EU needs to be more democratic, very much so, but "more integration" would only accomplish the opposite. More power to "local" parliaments would be more democratic, or making the European Parliament matter (i.e. be the sole legislative body, which it isn't now) and make it visible locally so that voters care.

What could european politicians have done differently at that point? Also polls in the UK are notoriously unreliable.

by phreeza 10y ago

What could european politicians have done differently at that point? Also polls in the UK are notoriously unreliable.

Polls are generally unreliable, they are only recognised as such in the UK. They would have given him a better a deal on immigration, which they thought was an absolute non starter, and was the main grief against the EU. I think it would have made a difference.

tonyedgecombe 10y ago
They still could, there is no reason we couldn't have another referendum.

ptaipale 10y ago

Primarily, they could have called off the project for political union and concentration of political power in Brussels (including the ridiculous monthly ride to Strasbourg). Concentrate on enabling free trade, not building a federal superstate. Also, quit bashing "unpleasant" euro-sceptic elected politicians (by unelected EU officials). (As an example of the EU gravy train, the former prime minister in my own country, Jyrki Katainen, first screwed up things home and then landed on a nice job in Brussels - because he kept saying nice things about the European project. This is one more little thing that has turned me suspicious of the whole project, a project I didn't vote for when I voted for EU membership 22 years ago.) Simply: admit out loud that they got it wrong and they have to change direction. But that would have meant a loss of face.

lunula 10y ago
It really sounds like there is a need for more integration but of the democratic kind. A prime minister who screws things up at home should have no shot at being "elected" to a position in Brussels. This doesn't mean that the EU project is bankrupt though.
- vsl 10y ago
  That's how most of the Brussels bureaucrat got there, it's common in my country too. And it does mean the project is bankrupt — the people in power, the ones actually making decisitions (i.e. the Comission and to a lesser extentent, EP), are out of touch with the people (or, frankly, reality). National parliaments have very limited ability to affect things, most of the law is pushed down on them as EC directives. That's the very definition of a dysfunctional political system. Yes, EU needs to be more democratic, very much so, but "more integration" would only accomplish the opposite. More power to "local" parliaments would be more democratic, or making the European Parliament matter (i.e. be the sole legislative body, which it isn't now) and make it visible locally so that voters care.