Jump to content

Politics


Christmas Tree
 Share

Recommended Posts

To KCG obv.

 

Are you sure about that? I'm pretty sure that companies can, and indeed have, sued EU member states for not adhering to EU directives.

 

And you summary of the EU is not exactly accurate, there are thousands of unelected officials in the EU monolith, which isn't really a monolith anyway, it's a labryinth of different bodies, most of which are quite removed from any kind of political or judicial oversight. That includes the executive body - the Council of Ministers has as much control/oversight of its day to day workings as the Prime Minister here has over the various ministries and quangos here.

Edited by Mako
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious rant. You say people complaining about TTIP need a wake up call, and your reasons have nothing at all to do with TTIP. Just a rant against the EU, which in all fairness wasn't incorrect. Although as I mentioned elsewhere on the board, Britain has the 2nd worst worker rights record in the EU. It's not all the EU's fault that 26 member states of the EU have more workers rights than us.

 

The problem with TTIP is it'll take decisions and power and place even more of it in the hands of corporations. That's why it's an attack on sovereignty. It's a corporate power grab that will result in even more deregulation, even less rights for workers, even more privatisation and even less power for people at the ballot box. If a company wants to dump nuclear waste in the ocean because it's cheaper and the government says no, the ISDS clause will allow them to sue the government (and probably win) because they're infringing on profits.

 

TTIP is not about jobs or safety or regulations, or even trade as it says in the name. It's about money, money, money for the big companies, and any attempts to put people first when there is bad practice will result in a lawsuit.

 

Sure. And all the current EU directives were drafted in the interests of the people and the environment, and the various member state democracies all have ultimate control over how they're enforced. Come on. Even if TTIP gives ultimate power to corporations, which I seriously doubt, the idea that it's being taken away from 'the people' or even their elected politicians, in this day and age, is really laughable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea that companies suing governments over trade disputes is a new phenomena is open to debate, and that's putting it mildly.....

 

http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2014/11/27/support-ttip-companies-sue-governments/#.VVoSjblVh8M

 

It's laughable that there are people out there who thought this had never been done before. How long do people seriously think an international trade treaty would last if particular disputes were adjudicated by politicians representing one or the other side? (or even national courts of either side?). It stands to reason that the issues would be settled by an independent panel - that can be a supra-national court if you want, just as happens in the EU, but you might want to look at stories like http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32631029 before strongly advocating that that's the best way to do it for an EU-US deal.

Edited by Mako
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Sure. And all the current EU directives were drafted in the interests of the people and the environment, and the various member state democracies all have ultimate control over how they're enforced. Come on. Even if TTIP gives ultimate power to corporations, which I seriously doubt, the idea that it's being taken away from 'the people' or even their elected politicians, in this day and age, is really laughable.

Not to put words in your mouth, but I get the impression that your response to TTIP is along the lines of "it's already shit so what's the difference if it gets shitter?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My response is more geared to those people who seem to think TTIP is something that undermines democracy and sovereignty in ways that are somehow new. Based on my admittedly limited research, that seems to be a major misreading of the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reality right now is if the UK government awards a contract to a British company in a way that goes against EU competition law, the businesses that lose out can sue the UK govt for their losses in the ECJ (and indeed I think they even apply punitive damages). The same goes for issues about the environment and workers rights, albeit with organisations not companies as plaintiffs. This is how little sovereignty we have right now, this is how far removed the voters in each member state are from such issues. These are the realities of being part of a pan-European trade pact. I've not heard anything about TTIP that is any different to this, except the idea that instead of the ECJ it will be an independent panel, which, as I've linked to above, may not be a bad thing, since the ECJ is already taking years to decide on individual issues, most of which end up being moot because either the company goes out of business, or in cases like Microsoft/IE, the world has moved on beyond all recognition to that which was relevant to the judgement.

Edited by Mako
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To KCG obv.

 

Are you sure about that? I'm pretty sure that companies can, and indeed have, sued EU member states for not adhering to EU directives.

 

And you summary of the EU is not exactly accurate, there are thousands of unelected officials in the EU monolith, which isn't really a monolith anyway, it's a labryinth of different bodies, most of which are quite removed from any kind of political or judicial oversight. That includes the executive body - the Council of Ministers has as much control/oversight of its day to day workings as the Prime Minister here has over the various ministries and quangos here.

It's incredibly accurate being based on facts researched at university. The commission has agenda setting powers and a management role. Quite like our own civil service. The main power in the EU sits squarely with the council of ministers.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you genuinely think the council of ministers is what makes the EU accountable and democratic, and the various commissioners and their quangos are essentially just civil servants, then there's no hope for you. The recent changes to the power of the EU Parliament were made precisely because the level of accountability of the council to the EU citizen is in no way comparable to the level of accountability we have against our own politicians (which is hardly much anyway). And if you want to understand the power of the average commissioner, let alone the commission president, you only need to look at how hard countries fight to get their man in post. The posts are in no way comparable to the sort of civil servants we have permanently attached to each department here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that says absolutely everything you need to know about the older generation...

They're silly old racists?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Additionally, it makes the young disaffected, which makes them less likely to vote...... Rinse and repeat and suck up those 9k tuition fees and zero hour contracts.

Edited by Renton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's especially frustrating when you consider that they don't have to live with the consequences of their votes for as long as we do...

We're having a great time living with the consequences of the last Labour government :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's lovely after months of whining now seeing all these Labour politicians apologising for spending too much, abandoning "wrong policies" like the mansion tax and having to admit that the ONLY hope they have of getting back in is to be more like the Conservatives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're having a great time living with the consequences of the last Labour government :lol:

:lol:

 

You are a cartoon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's lovely after months of whining now seeing all these Labour politicians apologising for spending too much, abandoning "wrong policies" like the mansion tax and having to admit that the ONLY hope they have of getting back in is to be more like the Conservatives.

 

Only because the wider public are too stupid to understand what happened. How is mass stupidity any sort of basis for policy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's lovely after months of whining now seeing all these Labour politicians apologising for spending too much, abandoning "wrong policies" like the mansion tax and having to admit that the ONLY hope they have of getting back in is to be more like the Conservatives.

They're too spineless to tell it like it is because most people are like you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pensioners vote more than anyone out of self-interest and thereby deny the young opportunities and a decent future. Logan's run at 70 required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.