Shopping & Style4 mins ago
Eu Relationship 'broadly Correct'
14 Answers
After commissioning an official study into our relationship with the EU the study has returned the conclusion that the existing arrangement is broadly correct.
http://
Should he accept the result of this stidy now and let the whole thing lie?
Should he actually stop commissioning studies if he's going to ignore them if they don't agree with him?
http://
Should he accept the result of this stidy now and let the whole thing lie?
Should he actually stop commissioning studies if he's going to ignore them if they don't agree with him?
Answers
1 to 14 of 14
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by jake-the-peg. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It depends on your view of the role of government.
If you think that government is there to carry out the will of the people then studies are irrelevant and a referendum would be the only way to decide what's required.
If you think that it's the governments job to make decisions (sometimes against the will of the people) then by all means commission studies to confirm your bias.
If you think that government is there to carry out the will of the people then studies are irrelevant and a referendum would be the only way to decide what's required.
If you think that it's the governments job to make decisions (sometimes against the will of the people) then by all means commission studies to confirm your bias.
"The reports – into the single market, taxation, animal health and food safety, health, international development, and foreign policy – are the first tranche of 36 studies on different aspects of Britain’s interactions with the EU that will be published over the coming months."
So, more to come?
I think any PM could be accused of not leading properly if they just did what some silly report said :) (even if they did commission it)
So, more to come?
I think any PM could be accused of not leading properly if they just did what some silly report said :) (even if they did commission it)
//The EU does need reforming - I can find few who can defend it as it stands... except in the broader senses.//
Is that a meaningfull comment?
Do you think the UK has no scope for improvement? that we have no institutions ripe for reform?
Is there any country that could not be improved?
The domocracy we have is not geared to perform the will of the people individually - you cannot rely on the majority view to guide what is best for the country overall.
There's a good reason for this - if what was best for an organisation could simply be determined by the wisdom of crowds the Royal Mail would be finely guided by canvassing the opinion of all the postmen in the country.
It doesn't work for businesses and it doesn't work for countries.
Therefore we elect people to manage the overall progress of the country against a general brief that may have specific elements outlined in a manifesto.
That manager cannot expect to uniquely know what the best course of action is and therefore will commission experts to produce guidance.
However in this case it sounds as if the guidance was not sought for the expertise but rather to justify a particular predecided course of action.
Unfortunately for DC this report rather looks as if it produced the 'wrong' result and he'll have to ignore his own advisors!
Oh well a good day to bury bad news I guess!
Is that a meaningfull comment?
Do you think the UK has no scope for improvement? that we have no institutions ripe for reform?
Is there any country that could not be improved?
The domocracy we have is not geared to perform the will of the people individually - you cannot rely on the majority view to guide what is best for the country overall.
There's a good reason for this - if what was best for an organisation could simply be determined by the wisdom of crowds the Royal Mail would be finely guided by canvassing the opinion of all the postmen in the country.
It doesn't work for businesses and it doesn't work for countries.
Therefore we elect people to manage the overall progress of the country against a general brief that may have specific elements outlined in a manifesto.
That manager cannot expect to uniquely know what the best course of action is and therefore will commission experts to produce guidance.
However in this case it sounds as if the guidance was not sought for the expertise but rather to justify a particular predecided course of action.
Unfortunately for DC this report rather looks as if it produced the 'wrong' result and he'll have to ignore his own advisors!
Oh well a good day to bury bad news I guess!
Have not read the report in full, but it is right to commission reports from business leaders, investors in Britain and others into the business case for and against our membership of the EU.
I think that successive governments and politicians have been guilty of not properly publicising what the UK gets from the EU, and the public rightly have begun to question whether we are getting value for money.
Some reforms are long overdue. They could clean house and do a lot to improve the image of the EU as a gravy train for a select few by cleaning up salaries, pensions arrangements, extremely generous expenses and allowances, and a very generous tax system for a start.
Then they could stop this ridiculous and symbolic movement of the parliament between Brussels and Strasbourg 12 times a year, at a cost of nearly 200 million Euros a year. shuttling papers and staff and representatives. They could settle on one official language so they do not have to produce official reports and suchlike in triplicate.
They could be much more hardheaded and businesslike about who they offer EU grants to, as well.
Personally, I think on balance it benefits the UK more to stay within the EU than to leave, but there are a lot of things that need to change and be renegotiated....
I think that successive governments and politicians have been guilty of not properly publicising what the UK gets from the EU, and the public rightly have begun to question whether we are getting value for money.
Some reforms are long overdue. They could clean house and do a lot to improve the image of the EU as a gravy train for a select few by cleaning up salaries, pensions arrangements, extremely generous expenses and allowances, and a very generous tax system for a start.
Then they could stop this ridiculous and symbolic movement of the parliament between Brussels and Strasbourg 12 times a year, at a cost of nearly 200 million Euros a year. shuttling papers and staff and representatives. They could settle on one official language so they do not have to produce official reports and suchlike in triplicate.
They could be much more hardheaded and businesslike about who they offer EU grants to, as well.
Personally, I think on balance it benefits the UK more to stay within the EU than to leave, but there are a lot of things that need to change and be renegotiated....
What does "broadly correct" mean in practical terms? Even the most ardent Europhile should surely accept that there are things that need to change. Broadly correct includes that presumably, but how little or how much does this survey reckon needs to change?
I think broadly is far too loose a description.
I think broadly is far too loose a description.
-- answer removed --
1 to 14 of 14
Latest Posts
Crosswords6 mins ago
Home & Garden7 mins ago
Food & Drink8 mins ago
Is Keir Starmer Really Going To Arrest...
News10 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.