The Liberal Democrats - all discussion here please

[Mr Clowning 10]

So you didn't vote for a European representative? You are part of the EU, whether you personally like it or not.

 

Also: can I point to the Scottish referendum for independence where national representatives are interfering with the debate on a daily basis?

 

Because they are part of the UK, for over 300 years and with generations of consent, they did not get hood winked into it over night by saying that they were joining one thing and then getting snowballed with something far greater.

 

And as for your 'interfering' then I think you will find that if that was the case then we would be having a UK wide referendum on it rather than just the Scotts, its is actually part of the UK you know, we are not owned by Europe.

 

We recognise at least when the Scotts called for a choice to stay in or out that it was their choice to make, where's the choice on Europe on if we can opt out or not ?

 

---------- Post added 26-05-2014 at 20:53 ----------

 

I'd be quite happy to suggest we are not up to making our own minds on this right now. Basically nobody is in full possession of the facts of our EU membership and all the pro's and con's, and as such, we're unable to make a logical and thought out decision on our future membership.

 

And that goes for everybody on both sides of the debate.

 

What facts are we not in possession of ?

 

People have been calling on a referendum since we joined the common market and it grow like a cancer into something far different.

[dosxuk 10]

We recognise at least when the Scotts called for a choice to stay in or out that it was their choice to make, where's the choice on Europe on if we can opt out or not ?

 

Just vote UKIP into power, and you'll get one. That's how it worked in Scotland.

 

 

What facts are we not in possession of ?

 

Things like the economic impact of us leaving, the impact on trade, the impact on employment, how much we actually receive from Europe in the various deals and grants, and so on.

 

Then there's the stuff about how we would move forward, and the repercussions we could face.

 

All that needs to be decided, known and understood before you can make an informed decision on whether we're better off in or out.

 

People have been calling on a referendum since we joined the common market and it grow like a cancer into something far different.

 

Then why has it taken so many years for a party like UKIP to appear, and why are they only likely to take a few seats at best in Westminster?

[tzijlstra 11]

Because they are part of the UK, for over 300 years and with generations of consent, they did not get hood winked into it over night by saying that they were joining one thing and then getting snowballed with something far greater.

 

And as for your 'interfering' then I think you will find that if that was the case then we would be having a UK wide referendum on it rather than just the Scotts, its is actually part of the UK you know, we are not owned by Europe.

 

We recognise at least when the Scotts called for a choice to stay in or out that it was their choice to make, where's the choice on Europe on if we can opt out or not ?

 

You do know that the Scottish population never got a say on whether they wanted to be part of the UK don't you? Well, that is the Scottish population consisting of anybody that wasn't male with a title and significant wealth.

 

I realise you probably don't visit Scotland as often as I do, but listening to Radio Scotland a lot and having a keen interest in the whole debate I am astounded by the threats that come from both the British and the European governments regarding Scottish independence.

[GLASGOWOODS 10]

You do know that the Scottish population never got a say on whether they wanted to be part of the UK don't you? Well, that is the Scottish population consisting of anybody that wasn't male with a title and significant wealth.

 

I realise you probably don't visit Scotland as often as I do, but listening to Radio Scotland a lot and having a keen interest in the whole debate I am astounded by the threats that come from both the British and the European governments regarding Scottish independence.

 

I can comfortably say that 99% of scots I have spoken with do not want independence.

 

I too am astounded by the threats from the SNP cybernats. Oh! while Mr Soapy Salmond turns a blind eye.

[tzijlstra 11]

I can comfortably say that 99% of scots I have spoken with do not want independence.

 

I too am astounded by the threats from the SNP cybernats. Oh! while Mr Soapy Salmond turns a blind eye.

 

Oh don't get me wrong GW, it is nasty from both sides and I think the whole debate has a nasty sense of nepotism around it from both sides, same that would happen in an in/out debate for the EU and similar to what can be seen on these forums.

[convert 10]

Tim, Thank you for your links showing that the EU accounts for 2012 were signed off by the Auditors (ECA). I stand corrected.

 

However those links, as well as many others state that:-

 

“The Court concludes that the examined supervisory and control systems are partially effective in ensuring the legality and regularity of payments underlying the accounts"

 

and

 

“In the Court’s opinion, because of the significance of the matters described in the basis for adverse opinion on the legality and regularity of payments underlying the accounts paragraph, the payments underlying the accounts for the year ended 31 December 2012 are materially affected by error.”

 

"The error in question is 4.8% of the budget, up from 3.9% in 2011."

 

"It is the ECA’s opinion that payments underlying the accounts for the year ended 31 December 2012 are materially affected by error."

 

 

Now, having worked as an Accountant in the past, these errors worry me, especially when The EU president told the Europe’s Court of Auditors that he wants it to ensure that its findings get positive headlines and preach the benefits of European spending worth over £110 billion a year, stating:-

 

"Your reports are not released into a void but into the rough and tumble of political life and media reporting, Every year, they generate headlines that ‘yet again the EU’s accounts have not been signed off’, with deceptive allegations of fraud and mismanagement. You and I know that such headlines can be misleading.

 

Given this media handling of information, and its impact on public opinion in some countries, the court might want to give some further thought as to how it can encourage more nuanced reporting."

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

Few seem to agree with Nick, now. Time to pack it in?

[Mr Clowning 10]

 

Then why has it taken so many years for a party like UKIP to appear, and why are they only likely to take a few seats at best in Westminster?

 

Because parties have been blagging the electorate since we joined the EEC saying that their would be a referendum and then gone back on it or moved the goal posts, people have been wanting a referendum since what we joined became something else and they wanted us to become (as tzijlstra puts it) to become a Euro super state.

 

What I would be asking is why after such a short space of time a party like UKIP topped a nation wide election.

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

"Short space of time"? UKIP's twenty years old!

[Guest]

 

-------------------

Edited May 27, 2014 by Guest

[Mr Clowning 10]

 

However those links, as well as many others state that:-

 

“The Court concludes that the examined supervisory and control systems are partially effective in ensuring the legality and regularity of payments underlying the accounts"

 

and

 

“In the Court’s opinion, because of the significance of the matters described in the basis for adverse opinion on the legality and regularity of payments underlying the accounts paragraph, the payments underlying the accounts for the year ended 31 December 2012 are materially affected by error.”

 

"The error in question is 4.8% of the budget, up from 3.9% in 2011."

 

"It is the ECA’s opinion that payments underlying the accounts for the year ended 31 December 2012 are materially affected by error."

 

 

Now, having worked as an Accountant in the past, these errors worry me, especially when The EU president told the Europe’s Court of Auditors that he wants it to ensure that its findings get positive headlines and preach the benefits of European spending worth over £110 billion a year, stating:-

 

"Your reports are not released into a void but into the rough and tumble of political life and media reporting, Every year, they generate headlines that ‘yet again the EU’s accounts have not been signed off’, with deceptive allegations of fraud and mismanagement. You and I know that such headlines can be misleading.

 

Given this media handling of information, and its impact on public opinion in some countries, the court might want to give some further thought as to how it can encourage more nuanced reporting."

So they are fiddling about 5 billion ?

 

It will be being used to set up the superstate that they want to ambush us with.

[tzijlstra 11]

Tim, Thank you for your links showing that the EU accounts for 2012 were signed off by the Auditors (ECA). I stand corrected.

 

However those links, as well as many others state that:-

 

“The Court concludes that the examined supervisory and control systems are partially effective in ensuring the legality and regularity of payments underlying the accounts"

 

and

 

“In the Court’s opinion, because of the significance of the matters described in the basis for adverse opinion on the legality and regularity of payments underlying the accounts paragraph, the payments underlying the accounts for the year ended 31 December 2012 are materially affected by error.”

 

"The error in question is 4.8% of the budget, up from 3.9% in 2011."

 

"It is the ECA’s opinion that payments underlying the accounts for the year ended 31 December 2012 are materially affected by error."

 

 

Now, having worked as an Accountant in the past, these errors worry me, especially when The EU president told the Europe’s Court of Auditors that he wants it to ensure that its findings get positive headlines and preach the benefits of European spending worth over £110 billion a year, stating:-

 

"Your reports are not released into a void but into the rough and tumble of political life and media reporting, Every year, they generate headlines that ‘yet again the EU’s accounts have not been signed off’, with deceptive allegations of fraud and mismanagement. You and I know that such headlines can be misleading.

 

Given this media handling of information, and its impact on public opinion in some countries, the court might want to give some further thought as to how it can encourage more nuanced reporting."

 

I agree that there are shortcomings, can I ask you to apply the same scrutiny to UK accounts? You will find you can't because there is an enormous lack of transparency in the goings on - as an accountant, do you trust books of those that admit there are shortcomings more than those that simply don't provide precise overviews and statements?

 

My point isn't that the EU is better than the UK, my point is that it requires a similar level of scrutiny - keeping into account that the EU is a far more complex organisation (although far smaller in terms of turnover!).