If there is a second referendum ...

A_Pandiculation

BobQ wrote: »

Yes I am , but the idea it is by stealth is only true if you regard the Treaties as being approved in secret. As far as I know the last changes to QMV were in the Lisbon Treaty and that was covered in the press over many years.

I think you need to read this:

We need to simplify our decision-making processes so that the European Union can also reach positions by qualified majority voting. Contrary to a widely held belief, this would not entail amendments to the Treaty, as Article 31(3) of the Lisbon Treaty allows the European Council to decide unanimously the areas in which decisions may in future be taken by qualified majority’

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/soteu2018-factsheet-qmv_en.pdf
That means that the European Council (the EU28 leaders + Donald Tusk and JC Juncker) can decide in which areas QMV can be used.
Juncker has already said he wants more QMV and said where.

A_Pandiculation

Herzlos wrote: »

I don't see any real problem with being intolerant towards intolerance.
He's not saying he has any problem with the people, just their attitude.

It is towards perceived intolerance though isn't it, because it isn't really intolerant it's just that they disagree with their POV, in other words it is their own attitude which is problematic.

Nobody (art least no sensible person) makes a point of being intolerant of someone because they like Brussels sprouts, Tottenham Hotspur or The Simpsons and calls these "pathetic" because it is unacceptable. Everybody knows it is unacceptable. A person's political stance should be given the same respect and a receive a civil attitude from those wanting to debate.

So much for the season of goodwill.
:xmassign:

Zero_Gravitas

A_Pandiculation wrote: »

...

A person's political stance should be given the same respect and a receive a civil attitude from those wanting to debate.

...

Which has to be the most hypocritical post of 2018, give the bile and outrage you direct at anybody who doesn’t share your particular view .

Herzlos

A_Pandiculation wrote: »

It is towards perceived intolerance though isn't it, because it isn't really intolerant it's just that they disagree with their POV, in other words it is their own attitude which is problematic.

There's some perceived intolerance, but there's unfortunately plenty of real intolerance.

I'm guilty of it too. I'm strongly intolerant towards those that parrot garbage from daily mail or feel that people are inferior based on where they were born. But then I'm one of those lefty types.

A_Pandiculation

Zero_Gravitas wrote: »

Which has to be the most hypocritical post of 2018, give the bile and outrage you direct at anybody who doesn’t share your particular view .

You're funny. Show me some of your alleged "bile and outrage" then or are you yourself being hypoctitical?
:xmassign:

Arklight

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Has it occurred to you that what you call nationalism is pride in a part of who we are? Scientists making discoveries are proud to be the first one to get there, and our "nationalism" is part of our identity, part of what we are. Do you think we would have got to the moon so quickly if there was not competition between countries? That competition drives developments.

No, we need to have a country to relate to, we need to have the ambition to be the first, we need to be allowed to be British and to be proud of that.

Your pride in "who you are" depends on the identities and actions of 60 million other people, almost all of whom you have nothing to do with, have little in common with, and will never meet?

Nationalism is stupid. It's peculiar non sequitur coming from right wingers. People who will go into apoplectic rage at the idea of a single mother claiming benefits for her child one moment, and demand foreigners are shut out because they "aren't one of us" the next.

pantaiema

5I was voting remain but shall there be another referendum I will be voting to leave the EU. Enough for me to see what EU is all about including insulting pm.

Enterprise_1701C

Arklight wrote: »

Your pride in "who you are" depends on the identities and actions of 60 million other people, almost all of whom you have nothing to do with, have little in common with, and will never meet?

Nationalism is stupid. It's peculiar non sequitur coming from right wingers. People who will go into apoplectic rage at the idea of a single mother claiming benefits for her child one moment, and demand foreigners are shut out because they "aren't one of us" the next.

And you, my boy, are wrong.

BobQ

A_Pandiculation wrote: »

I think you need to read this:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/soteu2018-factsheet-qmv_en.pdf
That means that the European Council (the EU28 leaders + Donald Tusk and JC Juncker) can decide in which areas QMV can be used.
Juncker has already said he wants more QMV and said where.

Maybe I am misunderstanding your above reference which states that:

" Contrary to a widely held belief, this would not entail amendments to the Treaty, as Article 31(3) of the Lisbon Treaty allows the European Council to decide unanimously the areas in which decisions may in future be taken by qualified majority"

Unanimously means all voting members agree. Yes?

Voting members are the representatives of the Head of State of each nation. For the UK it is elected PM.

So the areas to which QMV applies are those agreed by Treaty or by the EC. Unless UK agrees that certain issues will be resolved by QMV it will not happen.

Regarding your Nemesis Junker and Tusk, they are non-voting members so do not make decisions on QMV.

BobQ

A_Pandiculation wrote: »

You're funny. Show me some of your alleged "bile and outrage" then or are you yourself being hypoctitical?
:xmassign:

You need to look no further than #601 for an example

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/member.php?u=1645111

But that was quite mild......