4 ms·

No. The Leave campaign was not about synchronisation of minor trading regulations when there's no real disagreement over policy. Plenty of Leave supporters and

No. The Leave campaign was not about synchronisation of minor trading regulations when there's no real disagreement over policy. Plenty of Leave supporters and campaigners actually support that strongly, hence the divisions within that camp over whether to try and become a part of the EEA. The UK's position is that lack of trade barriers does not require an ideological project to convert all of Europe into a single country under the rule of a non-democratic, unelected and all powerful executive branch, which is openly and proudly the goal of the EU project. That's why the same government that's (now) committed to Brexit is quite happy to consider joining Asian free trade zones. As for a "strong" regulatory system, the whole world just got to see in crystal clear detail what that looks like in the medical area. Pointless delays, failed obfuscation of contracts, lying about the contents of those same contracts, imposing hard borders on Northern Ireland without even bothering to tell the countries in question and then immediately backpedalling. There's no strength in this system, just incompetence, chaos and greed.

1shooner 6y ago
Just an aside, this is why I enjoy HN: an actual informative counterpoint to my casual pot-shot.
disgruntledphd2 6y ago
> non-democratic, unelected and all powerful executive branch This is just not true. The EU is run by the Council of Ministers primarily (who are the national ministers of the member states), with a side-order of democracy from the European parliament. If you're going to argue about something, please choose an accurate thing to argue about. > imposing hard borders on Northern Ireland without even bothering to tell the countries in question and then immediately backpedalling Again, this isn't what happened. One interpretation of a proposed order would have necessitated some kind of border. The Republic of Ireland vociferously objected, and the proposal was withdrawn. That being said, I think the EU could be a lot better, and am deeply sorry that the UK left (especially vis-a-vis the consequences for Northern Ireland).
- thu2111 6y ago
  I am completely accurate. The Council of Ministers does not run the EU. The EU is run by the Commission. Where does EU law come from - it comes from the Commission. Not the Council nor the Parliament (which means, it's not a Parliament). If the Council ran the EU then EU law would come from there, but it never does. The power to make law is the ultimate power, the source of all government power. The Council is in contrast a sideshow. Nobody even knows what they talk about. And the Commission is entirely undemocratic. How was von der Leyen selected again? Nobody can say. Oh, there was a vote. It was a vote in the EU Parliament in which vDL was the only candidate on the ballot sheet. That's not a democracy, is it? Again, this isn't what happened. One interpretation of a proposed order would have necessitated some kind of border. The Republic of Ireland vociferously objected, and the proposal was withdrawn. Are you aware that the Commission was condemned by everyone across the board including its own diplomats? The order wasn't proposed, it was made and the only possible interpretation was for a hard border, hence the immediate and strong objections. That, after 4 years of the EU constantly claiming a border in NI would create terrorism and must never happen at any cost.
  - disgruntledphd2 6y ago
    > The EU is run by the Commission. Where does EU law come from - it comes from the Commission. The Commission propose the laws. I agree that this is problematic, but since Lisbon, it's been a lot better in terms of directly elected representatives making decisions. Regardless, nothing the Commission propose becomes European laws/directive without the assent of both the Council and the Parliament. It's rather democratic, as a matter of fact, especially given the use of proportional representation for EP members in many of the member states. > If the Council ran the EU then EU law would come from there, but it never does. The power to make law is the ultimate power, the source of all government power. The Council is in contrast a sideshow. Nobody even knows what they talk about. I personally follow the council discussions, as they are where things actually get decided. I'm not unique. > And the Commission is entirely undemocratic. How was von der Leyen selected again? Nobody can say. Oh, there was a vote. It was a vote in the EU Parliament in which vDL was the only candidate on the ballot sheet. That's not a democracy, is it? Von der Leyen was selected by the Council of Ministers. They refused to go along with the proposal from the groups in the EP that whatever candidate they proposed should become the Commission President. Again, not a fan of that decision on democratic grounds, but it's what happened, and it rather puts the lie to your comment that the Council is powerless and nobody even knows what they talk about. Literally all of the consequential decisions made by the EU have been decided by the Council of Ministers. Those overnight summits that are particularly characteristic of the EU, are summits of the Council of Ministers. > Are you aware that the Commission was condemned by everyone across the board including its own diplomats? The order wasn't proposed, it was made and the only possible interpretation was for a hard border, hence the immediate and strong objections. That, after 4 years of the EU constantly claiming a border in NI would create terrorism and must never happen at any cost. Yes, because I live in the Republic of Ireland. It was super bad what happened there, and the proposal literally lasted 8 hours before being buried. And with respect to terrorism, there's no easy way out of that I'm afraid. The irish government lobbied for the EU to take NI into account in the negotiations, and that happened. Unfortunately, with the situation in Northern Ireland, any border anywhere was going to create tension (and the potential for smuggling/terrorism). I'm unhappy about the sea border as it's a provocation to Unionists, but it is maybe 100 times better than a land border.

1shooner 6y ago

Just an aside, this is why I enjoy HN: an actual informative counterpoint to my casual pot-shot.

disgruntledphd2 6y ago

> non-democratic, unelected and all powerful executive branch This is just not true. The EU is run by the Council of Ministers primarily (who are the national ministers of the member states), with a side-order of democracy from the European parliament. If you're going to argue about something, please choose an accurate thing to argue about. > imposing hard borders on Northern Ireland without even bothering to tell the countries in question and then immediately backpedalling Again, this isn't what happened. One interpretation of a proposed order would have necessitated some kind of border. The Republic of Ireland vociferously objected, and the proposal was withdrawn. That being said, I think the EU could be a lot better, and am deeply sorry that the UK left (especially vis-a-vis the consequences for Northern Ireland).

thu2111 6y ago
I am completely accurate. The Council of Ministers does not run the EU. The EU is run by the Commission. Where does EU law come from - it comes from the Commission. Not the Council nor the Parliament (which means, it's not a Parliament). If the Council ran the EU then EU law would come from there, but it never does. The power to make law is the ultimate power, the source of all government power. The Council is in contrast a sideshow. Nobody even knows what they talk about. And the Commission is entirely undemocratic. How was von der Leyen selected again? Nobody can say. Oh, there was a vote. It was a vote in the EU Parliament in which vDL was the only candidate on the ballot sheet. That's not a democracy, is it? Again, this isn't what happened. One interpretation of a proposed order would have necessitated some kind of border. The Republic of Ireland vociferously objected, and the proposal was withdrawn. Are you aware that the Commission was condemned by everyone across the board including its own diplomats? The order wasn't proposed, it was made and the only possible interpretation was for a hard border, hence the immediate and strong objections. That, after 4 years of the EU constantly claiming a border in NI would create terrorism and must never happen at any cost.
- disgruntledphd2 6y ago
  > The EU is run by the Commission. Where does EU law come from - it comes from the Commission. The Commission propose the laws. I agree that this is problematic, but since Lisbon, it's been a lot better in terms of directly elected representatives making decisions. Regardless, nothing the Commission propose becomes European laws/directive without the assent of both the Council and the Parliament. It's rather democratic, as a matter of fact, especially given the use of proportional representation for EP members in many of the member states. > If the Council ran the EU then EU law would come from there, but it never does. The power to make law is the ultimate power, the source of all government power. The Council is in contrast a sideshow. Nobody even knows what they talk about. I personally follow the council discussions, as they are where things actually get decided. I'm not unique. > And the Commission is entirely undemocratic. How was von der Leyen selected again? Nobody can say. Oh, there was a vote. It was a vote in the EU Parliament in which vDL was the only candidate on the ballot sheet. That's not a democracy, is it? Von der Leyen was selected by the Council of Ministers. They refused to go along with the proposal from the groups in the EP that whatever candidate they proposed should become the Commission President. Again, not a fan of that decision on democratic grounds, but it's what happened, and it rather puts the lie to your comment that the Council is powerless and nobody even knows what they talk about. Literally all of the consequential decisions made by the EU have been decided by the Council of Ministers. Those overnight summits that are particularly characteristic of the EU, are summits of the Council of Ministers. > Are you aware that the Commission was condemned by everyone across the board including its own diplomats? The order wasn't proposed, it was made and the only possible interpretation was for a hard border, hence the immediate and strong objections. That, after 4 years of the EU constantly claiming a border in NI would create terrorism and must never happen at any cost. Yes, because I live in the Republic of Ireland. It was super bad what happened there, and the proposal literally lasted 8 hours before being buried. And with respect to terrorism, there's no easy way out of that I'm afraid. The irish government lobbied for the EU to take NI into account in the negotiations, and that happened. Unfortunately, with the situation in Northern Ireland, any border anywhere was going to create tension (and the potential for smuggling/terrorism). I'm unhappy about the sea border as it's a provocation to Unionists, but it is maybe 100 times better than a land border.