advertisement


Brexit: give me a positive effect... V

Status
Not open for further replies.
Swiss voters reject EU immigration curbs
Referendum called by rightwing Swiss People’s party rejected by 61.7%

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...urbs-on-eu-immigration-switzerland-referendum

Swiss voters have resoundingly rejected an attempt to tear up the country’s agreement with the EU on the free movement of people, in a referendum that echoed the Brexit vote.

The largest party in the Swiss parliament, the rightwing, anti-immigration Swiss People’s party (SVP), called the referendum, arguing that the country must be allowed to set its own limit on the number of foreigners coming in to work.

However, the initiative – opposed by government, parliament, unions, employer organisations and all other political parties because it would put Switzerland’s overall relations with the EU in jeopardy – was rejected by 61.7% of voters, final results showed.

Non-nationals account for roughly a quarter of Switzerland’s 8.6 million inhabitants and the SVP argues the country is facing “uncontrolled and excessive immigration” that will drive up unemployment among Swiss nationals, increase housing costs and overwhelm transport and public services.
 
Juncker was the candidate for Commission President that nobody wanted, and he patently wasn't up to the job. His 'election' was effectively the result of a coup by federalist elements within the European Parliament, horse-trading amongst the national leaders - most notably Angela Merkel - and David Cameron's badly misjudged threats to leave the EU if Juncker got in.

Yet still he strangely managed to be more democratically elected than Cummings, who is having a much larger and far more corrosive influence on the UK.
 
Last edited:
Ah, a positive feedback loop. The exact opposite of what every other kind of governing mechanism from an amplifier to a central heating system, to the lever that controls your toilet cistern filler uses.

Wonder why nobody's thought of that before...

If there was a system approach by Remain in the referendum or by Labour in the last GE i must have missed it.

I don't think you need a system to avoid an unstable positive feedback oscillation loop, so much as a bit of basic nous.
 
I don't think you need a system to avoid an unstable positive feedback oscillation loop, so much as a bit of basic nous.
Basic nous is one method but how do politicians in the Westminster bubble get feed back on how a number of policies are performing at election time, which policies to push and which are not performing and need to be scaled back or dropped?
 
Basic nous is one method but how do politicians in the Westminster bubble get feed back on how a number of policies are performing at election time, which policies to push and which are not performing and need to be scaled back or dropped?
Surely, if they are doing what they are there for, they will do what they think is right, not what will get them re-elected.
 
Maybe the spectacle of Brexit has increased the Swiss vote in favour of keeping freedom of movement with the EU.
Yes, news has got round.

EgM1lre.jpg


John Bull still in hospital. Police are not looking for anyone.
 
Basic nous is one method but how do politicians in the Westminster bubble get feed back on how a number of policies are performing at election time, which policies to push and which are not performing and need to be scaled back or dropped?
Your post appears to challenge the basis of British parliamentary democracy. Voters > MPs > Government
MPs have constituency meetings with their voters should they have any doubts. Feedback at election time comes in the shape of a vote. Etc.
 
Your post appears to challenge the basis of British parliamentary democracy. Voters > MPs > Government
MPs have constituency meetings with their voters should they have any doubts. Feedback at election time comes in the shape of a vote. Etc.
What you say is true but waiting for election feedback is too late if it is a negative result. As recent as possible data on what the electorate are thinking helps to tweak the offering and target areas that need improvement.
 
Basic nous is one method but how do politicians in the Westminster bubble get feed back on how a number of policies are performing at election time, which policies to push and which are not performing and need to be scaled back or dropped?

Surely, if they are doing what they are there for, they will do what they think is right, not what will get them re-elected.
Good joke.

Your post appears to challenge the basis of British parliamentary democracy. Voters > MPs > Government
MPs have constituency meetings with their voters should they have any doubts. Feedback at election time comes in the shape of a vote. Etc.
I had a survey through the letterbox last week from the local (safe seated tory) requesting feedback on various issues, corona for example. I’ve lived here for 15 years and it’s the first one. I’ll complete it but I honestly don’t see the point. I have a different though process to the local tory MP.

I’ve never seen any constituency meetings advertised but I suppose they happen. As I say though, it’s a very safe seat here so it’s motivation for listening to people is probably low.

Doesn't it bother you if the UK breaks up,...
<snip>
It’s not allowed on pfm to be bothered by the UK breaking up.
 
Good joke.


I had a survey through the letterbox last week from the local (safe seated tory) requesting feedback on various issues, corona for example. I’ve lived here for 15 years and it’s the first one. I’ll complete it but I honestly don’t see the point. I have a different though process to the local tory MP.

I’ve never seen any constituency meetings advertised but I suppose they happen. As I say though, it’s a very safe seat here so it’s motivation for listening to people is probably low.


It’s not allowed on pfm to be bothered by the UK breaking up.

i think quite a few of us are very worried by the inevitable permanent Tory hegemony that Scotland seceding would bring about.

Stephen
 
It’s well hidden, then. I take all the flak from the nationalists for wanting to keep the UK as is.

Damage to the union was an important reason many of us voted to Remain. Dismissed, as usual, as 'project fear' by the leave campaigns.

It was discussed fully here and elsewhere before and after the referendum.

Since we have left, I suspect many are resigned to the loss of Scotland (and NI) and wish them well for a non-Tory/EU membership future.

I've said 'please don't go!' to Scottish friends many times and was relieved by the no vote in the Scottish referendum. But all the promises made then have been nullified by Brexit.

Stephen
 
Damage to the union was an important reason many of us voted to Remain. Dismissed, as usual, as 'project fear' by the leave campaigns.

It was discussed fully here and elsewhere before and after the referendum.

Since we have left, I suspect many are resigned to the loss of Scotland (and NI) and wish them well for a non-Tory/EU membership future.

I've said 'please don't go!' to Scottish friends many times and was relieved by the no vote in the Scottish referendum. But all the promises made then have been nullified by Brexit.

Stephen
You say that due to your hardline, immovable position on brexit. Fact is, brexit is not a reason for Scots for further damage their economy, and now we have corona, of course. Anyway, I digress.

Promises? More like undeliverable waffle during a campaign. I’ve recently seen Labour criticised here for failing to deliver on promises ahead of 2014. Laughable stuff.
 
You say that due to your hardline, immovable position on brexit. Fact is, brexit is not a reason for Scots for further damage their economy, and now we have corona, of course. Anyway, I digress.

Promises? More like undeliverable waffle during a campaign. I’ve recently seen Labour criticised here for failing to deliver on promises ahead of 2014. Laughable stuff.

My hardline immovable position?

I'm sure many of us would have accepted a Brexit based on the promises made by Johnson, Gove, Stewart and Hoey et. al. during the Leave Campaign—I certainly would.

Where have the compromises been from the leave side?

What have remainers (48% of voters) been offered from this process?

What has Scotland been offered?

Nothing.

The internal market bill and Tory power grabs will diminish the devolution powers.

You may not think it's not a valid reason for a country to secede, but some of us can see plainly why more and more Scottish people want to be shot of England.

And you were warned that Brexit might make this more likely. But dismissed it out of hand with empty slogans. You are still dismissing valid concerns of remainers and the Scottish on this forum every day with terms like 'hard remainers'.

I don't want Scottish sucession to happen, but Brexit is more likely to bring it about.

Stephen
 
My hardline immovable position?

I'm sure many of us would have accepted a Brexit based on the promises made by Johnson, Gove, Stewart and Hoey et. al. during the Leave Campaign—I certainly would.
The leave campaign was not in a position to deliver on promises of anything. The tory govt/cabinet have been remain supporters for most of the last 4 years.

Where have the compromises been from the leave side?

What have remainers (48% of voters) been offered from this process?

What has Scotland been offered?

Nothing.
The problem hasn’t been a lack of compromise by the leave side, it’s been a lack of acceptance of the referendum by a minority of remainers. If that minority of the 48% had not spent 4 years insulting the 52%, had accepted the result of a democratic referendum we would be in a better position now. It’s a bit rich such people complaining about a lack of compromise from the 52% given they have campaigned almost endlessly for the 52% to be ignored.

The internal market bill and Tory power grabs will diminish the devolution powers.
Doesn’t the internal market bill come into effect only if the EU won’t compromise on any of its red lines and a deal is not done? Sorry if I’m mistaken there.

You may not think it's not a valid reason for a country to secede, but some of us can see plainly why more and more Scottish people want to be shot of England.
You’ve ignored the reason I actually said why I think it’s a bad idea for Scots to break up the UK and have gone onto something else from your imagination. I understand very clearly why Scots want rid of Westminster control, I’ve said so dozens of times so I’m not sure why you see any reason to mention it. The reason I think it’s a bad idea is it will make Scotland economically poorer. That’s what I actually said. You may not think that is a valid reason.

And you were warned that Brexit might make this more likely. But dismissed it out of hand with empty slogans. You are still dismissing valid concerns of remainers and the Scottish on this forum every day with terms like 'hard remainers'.

I don't want Scottish sucession to happen, but Brexit is more likely to bring it about.

Stephen
Warned? Was I really?

Mate, Regardless of how stupid it is to write a post based on information you do not possess, I’m not going to say how I voted no matter how often you want to make out I voted leave.

What I will say is, I did not and do not dismiss anything out of hand, let alone with empty slogans, I’m not aware of even ever using slogans.

It’s pointless trying to discuss further. Until today I’ve made a point of not using the ‘hard remainer’ term for a few weeks now but, maybe I should crack on apparently dismissing people with it on a ‘daily basis’. :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top