Concrete Achievements

Tag: referendums

  • Jim Cloos (answering my question on the role of participatory democracy at EU level) says…

    Jim Cloos (answering my question on the role of participatory democracy at EU level) says it has to be local and regional first, and based on deliberation that comes from expert evidence. Again, don’t agree – or at least not entirely – but a clear position. #SOU2019

    Why don’t I agree? Because elements of participation can be done on European issues at local and regional levels as part of the European policy conversation. There aren’t rigid levels any more.

    Moreover that participation at whatever levels depends on the openness and information that have to come from every level of government.

    Finally, the multiple levels of delegation that démocratise the European level just don’t work in the modern democratic mindset to give legitimacy. There is a need for more directness (in the sense of participation not referendums) – otherwise the current popularity won’t last.

    @AnnMettler and Anthony from @EP_ThinkTank positive about experimentation and most importantly openness.

  • Jim Cloos (answering my question on the role of participatory democracy at EU level) says…

    Jim Cloos (answering my question on the role of participatory democracy at EU level) says it has to be local and regional first, and based on deliberation that comes from expert evidence. Again, don’t agree – or at least not entirely – but a clear position. #SOU2019

    Why don’t I agree? Because elements of participation can be done on European issues at local and regional levels as part of the European policy conversation. There aren’t rigid levels any more.

    Moreover that participation at whatever levels depends on the openness and information that have to come from every level of government.

    Finally, the multiple levels of delegation that démocratise the European level just don’t work in the modern democratic mindset to give legitimacy. There is a need for more directness (in the sense of participation not referendums) – otherwise the current popularity won’t last.

    @AnnMettler and Anthony from @EP_ThinkTank positive about experimentation and most importantly openness.

  • Links from the week of 28 January 2019

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Links from the week of 28 January 2019

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Reading Rupa Huq (in today’s Observer) saying “there’s no appetite for a second…

    Reading Rupa Huq (in today’s Observer) saying “there’s no appetite for a second referendum, we just have to make a good fist of Brexit” reminds me of the history of 1914 where war had to start because the troops were already mobilised.

    There’s a possibility that with a deal like the PM’s, Brexit will only be a slow suffocation of Britain’s economic and social potential over maybe twenty years until the UK gets comes down from its nationalism high. However if no deal happens, or if a deal happens and

    the social and political consequences crystallise quickly (lots of labour shortages and investment redirection, the settled status scheme cocking up), then public opinion will snap away from apathy very quickly.

    And when that happens “I don’t agree but we should get on with it anyway” will be absolutely the worst opinion to have held.

  • More remain cake. “Brexit is a self-inflicted disaster, driven by liars and charlatans…

    More remain cake. “Brexit is a self-inflicted disaster, driven by liars and charlatans, which will harm Britain for generations, so the EU should do what we want.”
    theguardian.com/commentisfree/…

    The reform free movement insanity claims another victim. The answer to this choice is “it’s better to lose”.

    Freedland isn’t even pretending the UK can reform free movement, he’s arguing the remain campaign should just spin it that they can/could. HAVE YOU LEARNED NOTHING?

    If the UK isn’t able to bear free movement it should not be in the EU. Sorry, that’s bad for remainers, but so is winning on a lie and keeping the narrative that free movement is this terrible burden that for some reason only the UK sees.

    It’s the same sort of “oh Europe’s shit but I suppose we have to go along with it” argument that remain used in 2016 to such magnificent effect.

  • I can see from the 27 perspective the incentive to squeeze the Brexiteers.

    I can see from the 27 perspective the incentive to squeeze the Brexiteers. They believe that no-deal is unlikely (and given the immunity of May to challenge and the huge anti-no-deal majority in the Commons, you can see why). Also they, uniquely, can offer

    extension(?s) to A50 that the UK will take in a heartbeat to keep things going (and which would come with increasingly heavy hints about how they would welcome the UK back). So they have May’s deal as a minimum, which is fine for them. That’s still going to be

    on the table. Why throw May a bone now when a few weeks of pressure might end up with a second referendum or even a Parliamentary withdrawal? They read the British press, they can see how withdrawing A50 has become a respectable edge position not a crazy one.

    “Let’s see how things develop” is a good strategy for them, given their control over the extension button.

  • Links from the week of 4 June 2018

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • I see soi-disant “Liberal Leavers” are going through another bout of pearl-clutching…

    I see soi-disant “Liberal Leavers” are going through another bout of pearl-clutching about how dreadful Brexit is and how we should stay in the EEA. To which I say “are you ashamed of winning a referendum by riding on the back of illiberal xenophobia yet?”

    The dogs in the street knew that free movement would be impossible after a referendum driven by a press and politicians with hard anti-immigration messages. Apparently not “liberal leavers”.

    I guess they hoped that their weird sovereignty obsession would be smuggled through by politicians mugging anti-immigration leave voters. Well, I hate the outcome but at least voters are getting what they wanted.

    It won’t be what voters want when they get it, of course, and that will be when people will start asking hard questions of Leave campaigners who promised them all the benefits and none of the costs.

    I wouldn’t want to be a liberal leaver. Even if they don’t feel burning personal shame at what they’ve done to the country, they are going to have some very unpleasant conversations in their future.

  • These are debates that could have been had before the referendum but are now swamped by…

    These are debates that could have been had before the referendum but are now swamped by the urgent practical need to make Brexit happen. twitter.com/goodwinmj/stat…

    In fact I see all these issues being debated – not well, not perhaps as a national conversation, but they are. To say that they should be debated *ahead* of phytosanitary standards or Norway models sounds good but is wrong.

    The U.K. has all the time in the world to debate coastal towns. It had two years, exactly, to work out phytosanitary standards and Norway models, or risk an economic crash – and half of that has gone.

    To say “there should be a national conversation on 1-5” during the most complex negotiation in British history is a counsel of perfection.