"I meant former EU Commissioners won't criticise the EU."
Okay thanks for clarifying your point.
Has this demand that Commissioners must not criticise the EU, ever been implemented? If so, when and what for? The reason I ask is that the paragraph I quoted is incredibly vague.
CHeers
D
Britain and the EU
Re: Essex Lad
I think that, as always, was the intention of the drafters. It allows them plausible denialibility - the creed of politicians everywhere.
I suspect none of the former commissioners have criticised the EU. Why take the risk of losing a large wodge of money for doing nothing? Cynical, me?
I suspect none of the former commissioners have criticised the EU. Why take the risk of losing a large wodge of money for doing nothing? Cynical, me?
David Johnson
Wonder if the Mail On Sunday hacks read this forum:
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Essex Lad
I love the way the Mail has a picture of the Kinnocks with their allowances and in a very small paragraph has
"They have been backed by pro-EU former Ministers including Michael Heseltine, who made a rare visit to the Lords last week to vote against the Conservative-led Coalition. He was joined by ex-Tory Chancellor Lord Geoffrey Howe and ex-Tory Cabinet Minister John Gummer, now Lord Deben" So they are definitely off the Mail's Xmas card list!!
Your argument appears to be that they are scared of losing their EU pensions and therefore vote this way. This is not provable one way or another is it? Especially in the absence of any evidence you have given of EU Commissioners being sanctioned over their pensions simply for voting one way as opposed to the other. Have you got any evidence of this?
They could have voted that way, simply because they wanted to vote that way. Or is that something you find impossible to believe?
Cheers
D
"They have been backed by pro-EU former Ministers including Michael Heseltine, who made a rare visit to the Lords last week to vote against the Conservative-led Coalition. He was joined by ex-Tory Chancellor Lord Geoffrey Howe and ex-Tory Cabinet Minister John Gummer, now Lord Deben" So they are definitely off the Mail's Xmas card list!!
Your argument appears to be that they are scared of losing their EU pensions and therefore vote this way. This is not provable one way or another is it? Especially in the absence of any evidence you have given of EU Commissioners being sanctioned over their pensions simply for voting one way as opposed to the other. Have you got any evidence of this?
They could have voted that way, simply because they wanted to vote that way. Or is that something you find impossible to believe?
Cheers
D
Re: Essex Lad
I am cynical enough to think that if someone stood to lose a substantial sum of money if they voted in their country's interests rather than their own financial interests, their bank accounts would win every time.
Is this the same Neil Kinnock who was anti-EU when he was a rising star in the Labour Party?
Is this the same Neil Kinnock who was anti-EU when he was a rising star in the Labour Party?
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Essex Lad
"I am cynical enough to think that if someone stood to lose a substantial sum of money if they voted in their country's interests rather than their own financial interests, their bank accounts would win every time."
Yeah, but again if you can't give me a single example of that happening then it isnt any kind of real threat, is it?
Nor does it provide any kind of proof for your view.
"Is this the same Neil Kinnock who was anti-EU when he was a rising star in the Labour Party?"
Well I dont recall it being part of Kinnock's campaign when he became leader of the Labour party. And it wasn't part of the 87 election manifesto. So maybe he had a different view 30 years ago, I don't know.
So should we be very critical of a politician who may have changed their view on the EU once 30 years or so ago? I don't think so.
Look at Cameron. He's changed his view on snatching milk from the under fives, selling off the nation's forests, completely rewritten his plans for the NHS, u-turned on 50% off sentences for people who plead guilty, u-turned on the free book scheme for kids, did an about term on mandatory jail sentences for people caught carrying knives, scrapped then reinstated School Sport partnerships etc etc.
And that is just in 1 year!!! Kinnock looks rock solid in comparison eh?
Cheers
D
Yeah, but again if you can't give me a single example of that happening then it isnt any kind of real threat, is it?
Nor does it provide any kind of proof for your view.
"Is this the same Neil Kinnock who was anti-EU when he was a rising star in the Labour Party?"
Well I dont recall it being part of Kinnock's campaign when he became leader of the Labour party. And it wasn't part of the 87 election manifesto. So maybe he had a different view 30 years ago, I don't know.
So should we be very critical of a politician who may have changed their view on the EU once 30 years or so ago? I don't think so.
Look at Cameron. He's changed his view on snatching milk from the under fives, selling off the nation's forests, completely rewritten his plans for the NHS, u-turned on 50% off sentences for people who plead guilty, u-turned on the free book scheme for kids, did an about term on mandatory jail sentences for people caught carrying knives, scrapped then reinstated School Sport partnerships etc etc.
And that is just in 1 year!!! Kinnock looks rock solid in comparison eh?
Cheers
D
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Lizard
First I dont know if your reference to "selective amnesia" refers to me or Neil Kinnock.
Second, I do not see any connection between your post and the purpose of the sub-thread between myself and Essex Lad.
Despite frequent requests from myself, Essex Lad has been totally unable to support his view that people who are/have been EU commissioners do not criticise the EU because they are worried about their EU pension.
Essex Lad has completely failed to come up with a single example of this so-called EU policy being enforced.
Instead both he and you come up with links suggesting Neil Kinnock is shite.
This may or may not be true. The views of the Daily Mail on the subject of Kinnock and the EU have to be treated with circumspection. The Daily Mail isn't particularly unbiased in this area, is it?
However whether Kinnock is shite or not, has nothing to do with proving a so-called "policy" that has never been enforced according to Essex Lad.
Given that we are obviously going round in circles, I have nothing more to add.
Cheers
D
Second, I do not see any connection between your post and the purpose of the sub-thread between myself and Essex Lad.
Despite frequent requests from myself, Essex Lad has been totally unable to support his view that people who are/have been EU commissioners do not criticise the EU because they are worried about their EU pension.
Essex Lad has completely failed to come up with a single example of this so-called EU policy being enforced.
Instead both he and you come up with links suggesting Neil Kinnock is shite.
This may or may not be true. The views of the Daily Mail on the subject of Kinnock and the EU have to be treated with circumspection. The Daily Mail isn't particularly unbiased in this area, is it?
However whether Kinnock is shite or not, has nothing to do with proving a so-called "policy" that has never been enforced according to Essex Lad.
Given that we are obviously going round in circles, I have nothing more to add.
Cheers
D
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Lizard2
Ive just re-read my post. While I think the underlying point is valid, I sound like a pompous arse.
Apologies!
Cheers
D
Apologies!
Cheers
D