American Reacts The European Parliament explained
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 06. 2024
- Original Video: • The European Parliamen...
Discord: / discord
Patreon: / mcjibbin
Watch stuff and learn and chill hi whatsup ⚔️👋🧐
Hi everyone! I'm an American from the Northeast (New England). I want to create a watering hole for people who want to discuss, learn and teach about history through CZcams videos which you guys recommend to me through the comment section or over on Discord. Let's be respectful but, just as importantly, not be afraid to question any and everything about historical records in order to give us the most accurate representation of the history of our species and of our planet!
Having a diverse perspective is crucial to what I want to achieve here so please don't hold back! I want to learn about all I can! Keep recommending and PLEAESE join my Discord :) ( / discord )
#europeanunion
#politics
#europeanpolitics
#europe
#eu
#explained
#government
#american
#mcjibbin
#americanreacts
#reaction
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
4:06 like we say in the Netherlands: "France is a beautiful country, it's just a shame the French are living there"...
Most places say that 😅
but the french build France so it's contradictory
@@Kamonohashiii Well, the territory was already there.
@@mindtraveller100 But the French built the heritage and culture of the land. Otherwise the territory would be entirely forests
@@Kamonohashiii Nature and landscape builds itself over millions of years. The French had nothing to do with that.
Interesting video, you really need to watch a video about the commission as well, it's confusing when they just talk about the parliament. The commission suggests the laws, which are then sent to the parliament. There is also the Council of Ministers with representatives from each country's government.
Note for Connor to ease confusion: the commission also consists of a representative from each country. The difference is that the council of ministers consists of ministers from the governments (who have other duties) while the commissioners are just commissioners. Also, the ministers are appointed to the council just by their national governments while the commissioners are proposed by their national government and appointed by vote in the EU parliament. The commission acts as an unusually democratically chosen Cabinet for the EU
@@productjoe4069 Twaddle - the Commission if it is appointed by elsewhere than the EUroParl is NOT 'a Cabinet' for it because NOT responsible or accountable to it.
This tells me you have a very perverse interpretation of democratic governance or are an EU shill or probably BOTH.
Hi there. I've worked in the European Parliament for the past 10 years for different MEPs (I am not French and have not worked for a French MEP :) )and some of the things are a little out of date so will update a little and also provide a bit more context on certain things.
1. There are now 705 MEPs post-Brexit (this video is referencing pre-Brexit numbers and the Term of 2014-2019).
2. There is a kind of grand coalition in this mandate between the 3 biggest groups - EPP, broadly centre-right (now it has 176 MEPs), S+D (broadly centre-left (now it has 144 MEPs) and Renew Europe (formerly Liberals and Democrats, now it has 102 MEPs). Therefore in the majority of negotiations on legislation a majority will aim to be based on having the support of those 3 groups, with the Greens (now 71 seats) and ECR (Conservatives - now 64 seats) coming in depending on the policy area.
3. The Right-Wing/Eurosceptic parties are now mostly based in one Group called Identity and Democracy - it has 64 MEPs, while the Left Group (Also Eurosceptic at times but radically left mostly) now has 38 seats. The remainder of the MEPs are unaligned, or as we call it, 'Non-attached' - that can mean anything but either they don't identify with any group or they have been kicked out of a group and no other group would accept them.
4. The constructive parties (i.e. those who don't just vote negatively on every single text - generally that's the fringes on either extreme) tend to try to work together to come up with a Parliament position which will be used for the final negotiations of the law (that will be tri-partite negotiations between the Council of Ministers, the European Commission and the Parliament - with the Council basically being relatively similar to your Senate, and the Parliament to your House, while the Commission is like your Executive/Government).
5. The seat of the EP - it's also a little inaccurate what he is saying. There is only one week long plenary session a month of the European Parliament. It takes place in Strasbourg. Political Grouping and Legislative Committee weeks take place in Brussels, as well as a day every 2-3 months of plenary - plenary is basically when all MEPs gather to vote the Parliament's position on texts). NONE of us like going to Strasbourg. It's stupid. At the same time, it's not solely France to blame. The veto being held over a change to the European Union's Treaty on this is by both France and Luxembourg. Luxembourg doesn't want to lose its admin buildings/Parliament staff either. And the original idea was basically that the Parliament would only be in Strasbourg, but it became impractical as the Parliament grew through the decades and all the other principal institutions were in Brussels. So nowadays Strasbourg was an outlier, but at the beginning it was symbolic of bringing unity in Europe, in a city right on the French/German border. Now it's impractical as hell to get anywhere from it. It's at least a 2hr train raid to the vast majority of airports, with Frankfurt, Paris CDG and Zurich airports all being equidistant from Strasbourg by high speed train.
6. The legislative proposals - The Commission proposes the legislation (the Commission President is loosely generally chosen as someone from one of the winning groupings in the European Parliament elections, but they don't need to have been elected as an MEP. The Leaders of each Member state must decide together who becomes the President, then each member state has the right to nominate one Commissioner, which will deal with one subject area - and each Commissioner elect must appear before Parliament and can be de facto rejected by the Parliament committee of their subject, in which case the member state must propose another Commissioner - this happened with the first proposed French Commissioner and if I remember correctly the Hungarian or Polish Commissioner this mandate - so the Commissioner from France for example, was not the first choice of the French Government)
The Commission can propose as much or little as they want, but it must be assessed (aside from certain cases) by the Commission itself before being agreed to be proposed.
7. So for a majority vote it mostly needs to be a majority of MEPs present in the voting - the simple majority. That's the majority of the votes we have. And you generally have quite a few MEPs present - you can always check that on the EP website. It's generally between 500-700 present during these votes.
Usual twddle from a pro-EU shill. There s NO accountability or effective responsibility to the ordinary people of Europe through these institutions which is designed to rob them of their own national systems. Describing such a body of politiicans on a grift, gravy train a a system of parliamentary representation is utterly obscene.
Wow, good to know
The video is misleading as the difference between the European Union and organisations like NATO is that the European Union passes laws that are sovereign in EU member states and European law is the supreme law in those states. The EU is essentially a federal government which lacks control over certain key policy areas. The EU is not remotely like NATO.
Theres a very good video from TLDR News EU explaining the Parliament groups titled "Every EU Political Grouping Explained: What Do They Stand For".
There is NOTHING worthy of watching on TLDR.
@@uingaeoc3905 ?
@@uingaeoc3905 I disagree; it's an excellent channel!
@@micade2518 Obviously you are mentally imp[aired - TLDR = Tedious Load of Delirious Rubbish.
You are totally correct. It would be much more efficiënt if all EU institutes were centered in Brussels. But then politics messes things up... This is one of the reasons some people are fed up with the EU, even in my country. This is money unnesseraly spend. And we pay a lot to the EU. On the other hand, we also benefit a lot from the EU. So at the end of the line, we profit more from the EU and accept this expensive back and forth between the 3 cities. And yes, we can vote for the person to be in the EU, but until now most Europeans vote for someone of their own country. So there's a lot to improve.
I hope he knows he has ADHD. Watching his videos for months and every video confirms it.
He does.
Literally my thoughts every video I watch 😅
Only the Commission can propose new laws, which are then checked/amended in parliament. The commission president (Ursula von der Leyen) is appointed by the European council with a qualified majority (55% of member states with 65% of population) and has to be approved by the parliament as well. The commission is like the executive organ of the EU. The European council is the body with the heads of government or their special ministers. No law passes if either the parliament, the council or the commission is against it.
And don’t confuse the European council with the council of Europe (which has nothing to do with the European Union), that’s the body where Russia was part until the war started. It watches over the human rights in all European countries with the European Court of Human rights.
The European Union also has a judiciary, its the European Court of Justice. It watches the implementation of EU law in the member states and can declare national laws null and void if they go against the European Contracts. If member states don’t adapt, the Commission can start an infringement proceeding with approval by the European Council, which can lead to hefty fines or funding cuts for the national states. Example: Germany didn’t want to import Belgian beer because it’s against German purity law. The European Court of Justice ruled that not importing Belgian beer is against the European contracts, specifically against Article 28: the union shall comprise a customs Union, which shall cover all trade in goods between member states. Customs duties are prohibited. So Germany had to adapt and now import Belgian beer.
I visited the insititutions of the EU two months ago. Very interesting trip and very eye opening to see what the EU has done for all of Europe in it’s 70 years of existence !
i love that you don't do long and boring intros
A key difference between ‘impeachment’ and a ‘vote of no confidence’ is that impeachment requires some underlying crime or wrongdoing while a vote of no confidence doesn’t need such.
No, not France is the Troyan Horse....it was Charles de Gaulle who warned of British horses in european institutions. He was a wise man....I say this as a passionate european german. Always more european than german.
Yes, I think you are right to be ashamed of being German too.
@@uingaeoc3905 Why should I?
@@moewi75 What is it that the Germans have contributed to Europe apart from totalitatianism death and destruction.
The Brits actually had this vision of Europe first but they did not consider that they should be part of it.
@@helloweener2007 Not quite. The British suggested that the Europeans should get along with each other to maintain peace. The Brits then created the Council of Europe for this and then NATO by getting the US to stay in Europe, unlike in 1918, to defend it from Stalin.
The UK encouraged Germany and France mollify with industrial economic cooperation which did not mean the UK join some supranational project to enable that.
Good reaction, Connor, but the video is outdated: the UK has left the EU ...
Does not change the video significantly.
@@user-xi6nk4xs4s Uh ... yes, if you look at the chunk of seats they used to occupy.
I do not think that the previous years expenditure has ever been fully audited. It is a mess and a gravy train. When power is the goal you cannot trust any of them. Countries are paid to not produce things and overpaid for what they do produce. Thus poor non EU countries cannot compete and are made poorer because of EU subsidies. It's a beurocracy and like all of them they are inneficient and costly.
you think like a typical American, but the EU operates on different principles than the US
Yeah - anti-democratic bureaucratic principles.
@@uingaeoc3905 if it is anti-democratic, then so is every other representative government. It’s a potentially coherent position, as long as you criticise every ‘western’ country the same (although I would disagree, I could respect that approach). For some counter-points:
* the EU Parliament is elected through a proportional representation system (unlike the House of Commons)
* the Cabinet of the EU (the Commission) consists of members from each country proposed by that country’s national government. They are then approved and appointed by the elected parliament individually (unlike Westminster parliamentary systems where the cabinet is appointed by a single person). They can also be removed by the democratically elected parliament.
* the EU presidency rotates between member states and each member state has its elected national government sit on the council of ministers, providing national democratic direction and oversight on top of the other democratic mechanisms.
In spite of this, there are still deficits as mentioned in the video (mostly related to treaty opt-outs such as the UK previously had and general international politics), but so does every country. In the UK, we have prerogative powers that the executive can use without consent from parliament (and although parliament can technically override them, it would be after the fact and the executive would whip against it and likely win). In fact, one of the issues with the withdrawal agreement bills was that the executive tried to expand those prerogative powers (and the press painted those who questioned that as traitors)
@@productjoe4069 MEPs themselves called the appointment of Ursula von der Leyen as President undemocratic because like with the previous Commission President the Council effectively rigged the nomination so that Parliament could only vote for one candidate. Anyway, the problem with democracy and the EU could easily be solved if the position of EU Commission President was either directly elected or MEPs voted for a President from their own ranks. It's not difficult. Most EU member states go around the world telling other countries to do that.
As for prerogative powers, that was a British constitutional question and nothing to do with the EU's constitution. Anyway, the prerogative powers of the British executive are initiated by democratically elected MPs. The MPs in the House of Commons could have dismissed the government and forced an election if they didn't want the prorogation of parliment enacted. But the MPs didn't want to do that because they'd have lost their seats (which they duly did when an election was eventually called). The ruling of the Supreme Court on the matter was extremely controversial and its legitimacy was not aided by Lady Hale politicising the judgement.
As for 'treaty-opt out,' I fail to see how democratically elected parliaments of member states deciding something is less democratic than the EU.
@@productjoe4069 Your ignorance is magnificent. There are three tests of your proposal of the EUs democratic legitmacy - if it has such. and the EUroParl fails on them all. Firstly, it is not 'representative' at all, it was designed not to be so. Secondly, it has no role whatsoever in the legislative process. Thirdly, the executive branch is neither chosen nor responsible to it.
The executive of the EU, the Commission, is not chosen by the electorate - please do not repeat the twaddle peddled by the Barlaymont that it is 'indirectly' elected, there is no such thing.
So whatever criticisms there are of any western - ie Westminster descended system - the EUroParl is not so in the same arrangement so it s not that it is a matter of it having some minor failing or other of most forms of representative government or legislative assembly, the fact is it has none whatsoever.
It is a totalitarian, unaccountable and irresponsible bureaucracy.
Go and check what its advocates tell us what it is about - not a conspiracy, but in fact transparent:-
1) Van Rompuy told us that “the era of the NATION STATE IS OVER”.
2) Jean Monnet said that “Europe’s nations should be guided towards the super state without people understanding what is happening”.
3) Jacques Delors said “We are not here to make a single market - that doesn’t interest me - but to make a Political Union”.
4) Valery Giscard D’Estaing in drafting the EU Constitution, said “Public opinion will be led - without knowing it - to adopt the policies we would never dare present to them directly.”
5) “We decide on something leave it lying around and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most don’t understand what has been decided, we continue step by step, until there is no turning back.” Juncker.
6) “There can be NO DEMOCRATIC CHOICE against the European Treaties..” Juncker.
7) “The EU intends ultimately to control every country on the Western Flank of Russia. If the public doesn’t want it then WE DO IT ANYWAY.” Van Rompuy.
8) Barroso promised to move further “towards a federation of nation states and a POLITICAL UNION….. with a coherent foreign and defence policy.”
9) “The British (through their Referendum) have VIOLATED THE RULES. It is not EU philosophy that the crowd can decide its fate”. Shultz
10) This is the Ranting Fanatic Verhofstadt certainly ain’t fake news. Just watch his lips: czcams.com/video/74mAwIBou1A/video.html
The EU will only reform towards ever closer Fiscal, Political and Military union. Their answer to every problem is more EU.
@@uingaeoc3905 WRONG!!! Unless you didn't bother to go and vote for your country's representatives?
How EU is ruled: the individual countries elect their national government, each national government elects a member of the the Council of Ministers. These negotiate legislative proposals. The national governments also propose members of the EU commission (kind of a government), and they sort of negotiate between each other who the members of the commission are to be. There is also a direct election to the EU parliament, which is just a control function over the commission. It cannot propose laws or regulations. It can only accept or reject the proposals of the commission.
The REAL Trojan Horse is Hungary, and you can throw Serbia in there too.😒😒
Good on them..
@@MrIaninuk Minority Brexiteer, I presume?
Serbia does not belong to the E.U.
Typical EUromaniac. Doesn't even know which 27 of the 54 recognised European countries are in the EU. Serbia isn't.
@@neuralwarp 😂😂 EUromaniac? And again with the weird spelling.🤷 I know Serbia isn't in the EU, that's why I'm throwing them on in addition, because they both want to sabotage both the EU and NATO for the same reason, they like cozying up to Putin. Kind of relevant these days, if you hadn't noticed.🤷
hello, We have elections every 5 years for the European Parliament. Every years ending with either a 9 or a 4. Not sure if it is in may or April but it is next year.
Strangely enough, the Commission introduces EU laws. Normally, a national Parliament introduces and votes on laws, but in the EU case the Parliament only approves or rejects (some of) the laws.
Give me an example of a law rejected by the EUro Parliament?
@@uingaeoc3905- The new copyright law (with the infamous articles 11 and 13) in 2018, a proposal against energy-intensive cryptocurrencies in 2022... Google is your friend
@@uingaeoc3905 That's a good question. They did block the EU Commission's Comprehensive Investment Agreement with China in one rare move of sanity from Western politicians but can't think of anything else.
@@user-fg5zx4gz1z I think that was not actually not legislation but a 'treaty' without the sanction of the Council .
@@uingaeoc3905 Yes it was treaty but it still need to be considered by the parlimanet.
On the topic of right to initiate legislation which was skimmed over a bit in this video, in my opinion, in sensible parliamentary democracies, the right to initiate legislation should lie with executive, that is then passed to the parliament (and possible "upper house", here the council). Parliamentarians with no knowledge of the matters initiate some grandstanding law to further their political career. The parliament basically being used as a place for them to showboat. No thank you. I'd rather have the executive tasked with formulating the law, sometimes at request of parliament, but they are responsible of formulating it, passing it through the right working bodies and institutions, to then have the parliament fully briefed, and have its working bodies double check it, along with the council to ensure it is viable and passable law. And again, if the executive is not performing to what parliament requires, then parliament can always call for a vote of no confidence and kick out a non-working executive.
Why is this so important, well simply, the parliament should be of the people for the people. not just lawyers, bankers, executives or whatever. It's that bloke down the street, it's that one guy from the fish shop etc. They might not all be matter experts, but they are the representatives of the people. So frankly, I will trust them as my representatives to vote on well formulated proposed laws that they then study as best they can, and then vote on, but not to have them create the proposed laws. It also comes back to: if they would be creating the laws, then themselves voting on it. What are the checks? The upper house? Maybe, but in my opinion, not a good enough system.
When are you planning on reacting to the inbetweeners movie haha
I am not sure about the other EU countries, however here in the UK before we left, it was slightly different to how it was described in the video, but not by much. In the UK, our MEP's were members of a UK political party, ie Labour, Conservative (Tory) etc. The UK parties were then affiliated with the EU parties mentioned in the video so the Tory MEP's were considered members of one of the EU parties and Labour were members of a different one, so in reality about 99% of people in the UK had no idea what EU party they were voting for, they were voting on the usual UK political lines.
It’s the same in all EU-countries as far as I know.
It's the same in Denmark, but I don't feel it contradicts what was said. In Denmark we can (if we want) select parties or members of parties for MEP posts, but I don't think most people do, which means some posts are delegated per party according to the general election instead, basically to make up for low MEP voter turnout.🤷
The vast majority in the UK knew who they were voting for with Farage's Brexit Party which got the largest landslide in British politics/ elections and was the largest single party in the EUroParl in 2019.
@@uingaeoc3905 And yet, as soon as Brexit actually happened, huge numbers regretted it, or got something completely different from what they were lead to believe they would, and would have rather stayed IN the EU.🤷
Im other words, Farage and Boris lied their asses off to get Brexit through, then forced it through despite it being unpopular as soon as the actual consequences became apparent.
@@uingaeoc3905 And saying they got "the largest landslide in British politics/elections" with not a single MP elected is a bit of a stretch, isn't it?🤔
EU is hard to understand without knowing the history.
In short: Some countri3es in Europe made different treaties that brought their economie closer and over the time they also become political closer.
EU parliament might have some flaws but it improved over the time.
I think is a great aspiration to try to learn how things work i the world, this being the largest economic entity in the world after the US, it’s a good choice to get into. Good content, keep up the good work! 🇪🇺🇸🇪
The UK played a major part in all of this… until Brexit :(
Being a part of this is not something we're proud of.
@@jamesg9468 Of Brexit? Yeah it was embarrassing.
In the beginning, the heads of state made the decisions.
But over time, the European Parliament has become more powerful and carries more decisions.
Farage, European Parliament is a must see 😂
For a good giggle?
I don't know why you have a laughing emoji - Nigel Farage was articulate, and told it how it was.
@@omegasue Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!
The European Parliament is designed to look and feel like a democratic parliament. And on the face of it, that’s exactly what it is. It’s very difficult to pinpoint exactly where the democracy falls apart, because it is really just a huge bureaucracy with everything decided by committees and the individual votes of members of those committees, who are themselves elected by committee. Everyone appears to have their say and then vote on it. On paper, it can’t be faulted. The Westminster parliament is often criticised for being too confrontational and boisterous, but, it can and does get immediate answers to MP’s questions, because the relevant minister can be confronted and he knows he can be forced to resign before sunset. Personal accountability is a major part of democracy, but EU committees and commissions don’t need to worry about that. The equivalent EU process is similar only at the asking stage. No-one is there to answer questions. The answers come by communique, days or weeks later, and are usually in the form of references to previous communiques or directives. Confronting the relevant ‘minister’ personally could be likened to a video game where the player must choose to open one of ten closed doors leading to a room with ten more closed doors, and so on, to the next level. We found a door marked EXIT a few years ago.
Well said.
it is intentional. EU isnt a federation (yet). power lies in the member states (not brussels) via the council.
You are not telling 🇬🇧anything about 🇨🇵WE KNOW!!
Whilst constructing your post, practise and test before posting.
I see that you have been reacting to Government matters recently. What do you think about reacting to the elections in China? I am suggesting that because I know that there are elections going on in China and that President Xi is actually elected and not appointed contrary to what we have been thought. This I’m sure will surprise many people around the world.
Nevermind that he changed the constitution and is on for his third term.
Pretty sure in a few years he changes it to indefinitely.
Very democratic, and in no way surprising.
Anyone opposing him has been removed from public life.
It is more of a surprise if the CC candidates were not elected and that Xi was not re-elected either as they are the only candidates. In short you write twaddle.
I cannot watch this just let it play right through for once.
Connor.
No access to my discord
Hmm you blocked me, ok
Signed off, you did not say a thing
It doesn't 😂
Historian Dominic Sandbrook jokingly declared that in the morality tale of the 'Scorpian and Frog crossing the river' that the French represent the Scorpian in all international agreements - its always in its nature too sting, even if if damages itself. 😂
It was not so much France that fought everyone in Europe; in fact France was invaded far more often than it invaded and is part of the oldest still extant military alliance on the planet between France and Scotland which was a defensive alliance against the country which was in reality constantly at war with the entirety of Europe England. England was in fact so regularly at war with European countries that by the later 16th century the closest capital city that could be termed friendly was Istanbul
But the oldest alliance is between England and Portugal. The capital of Portugal is far closer to England than Istanbul is.
@@bignumbers The oldest alliance that between Scotland and France dates to 1296
@@davidmcintyre8145 The Anglo-Portuguese alliance is apparently the oldest diplomatic alliance still in force today. English aid to Portugal began in 1147. A series of treaties made it official. "In May 1386, the Treaty of Windsor sealed the alliance first started in 1294, renewed in the Treaty of Tagilde in 1372 and the ensuing Anglo-Portuguese Treaty of 1373 and confirmed at the Battle of Aljubarrota (1385)"
This is just completely false. The oldest lasting alliance today is between England and Portugal.
You seem to be ignorant of the small part of history where Scots were at war with France non-stop for nearly TWO CENTURIES, as part of the United Kingdom, formed by the Scottish King James.
My fellow Scottish countrymen have fought the French in campaigns across the planet.
"work" is a relative concept which can certainly be debated. As a European I just wish people would critizise it coming from a rational head space rather from a knee jerk one.
How it works Germany and France say jump and the rest say how high.
So you love the frogs ,you must be the only one good old France never let any down
democratic, lol
649: _"At first: that's a problem isn't it?"_ - right, that is a problem. Lot's of stuff in EU is pretty opaque and confusing, and that's a problem, undeniably. It gives an impression of democracy, but is it really?
I think calling it ‘democratic’ is pushing it a bit 😂😂. But, we in the UK are no longer part of it 😃
Yes, the House of Lords is a bright example of democratic representation...
An absolutely ridiculous idea. I’m going to say it…thank gosh for Brexit 🤣
It doesn’t work 😂😂😂😂
I have relatives from France, Belgium and the Netherlands. None of them like the EU. Just sayin.......
I lived in South of France and never met any French people who supported the EU.
They're an absolute minority...
They're probably not bothered enough to learn its use.
Most of us don't like governments full stop, but it's a good thing they are there, otherwise it would be like the wild west without them, where corporations and rich elites rule far more than they do already.
As for the EU, I'm grateful that we have it, without it, it would be a lot harder for Europeans to protect their political, economic and social interest, and I'm saying this as a Brit that thinks Brexit was a massive mistake for the UK.
On the plus side, since Brexit, Brits seem to be changing their tune on the EU, before Brexit, I was the minority when it comes to arguing in favour of the EU, now things have swung the other way where Eurosceptics are losing their voice in the UK, mostly because people are waking up and are seeing the negative impacts Brexit is having on the UK.
The irony in all that, if momentum continues, the UK over the long run, could become a very pro EU country, which would be a nightmare for the ones that pushed for Brexit, but then, they lied to get the UK into this mess, whiles not delivering on the so-called promises of Brexit, hence the public is slowly turning against the Brexiteers, in a sense, Brexit was needed for the UK to wake the people up to what they had, most only do that when it's gone and too late.
Oh no, whatever are those 5 people gonna do
Yes. You are just saying. But your claim doesn’t tally with polls or, indeed, reality.
The majority of people in the UK want to rejoin the EU
no thanks
You can't say that. What you mean is you want to rejoin the EU. Be sensible
@@chrisallanson9902 well i said it
I was replying to the original comment not you. Sorry for the confusion
cause the old farts that voted brexit have died
To be fair, the grand grand granson of Napoleon is very much still alive and still considers himself emperor. 😂
Erm, none of his sons survived to have children. The nephew Napoleon III had a son who was killed in British uniform in the Zulu Wars.
@@uingaeoc3905 house of bonaparte is headed by the descendants of the youngest brother of napoleon I
Napoleon 's only official son died in Austria in his early twenties and never had any children,teach yourself some history.
I stand corrected, it was a nephew indeed...
@@Snaakie83 Thank you,but Napoleon's well-known nephew,who became Napoleon III,had only one official son as well,who died,fighting in South Africa (As a member of the British army ) ,before he had any children.There are still members of the family,named Bonaparte,rather descendants of another brother,but they only claim their name and no title,since Napoleon was never able to establish a dynasty.
It's a Pseudo Parliament.
As is every parliament.
@@user-xi6nk4xs4s Ummm no. In real parliaments elected MP's or whatever they're called can propose legislation based of the concerns of their constituents. That is not possible in the EU.
@@thetruth6417 If that's your only reason for calling a parliament a Pseudo Parliament, than you are correct.
@@user-xi6nk4xs4s Thank you! As that is the basic principle of a parliament. If your elected representative has no right to propose legislation you basically have no representation.
@@thetruth6417 That's the same as saying the only function of a parliament is to propose legislation. That's BS.
a dangerous and expensive institution, we hope it collapses as soon as possible
Sometimes dreams can come true, but that's all it is, a dream.
The idea of the EU collapsing is quite small, especially since Covid, Brexit and the war in Ukraine, where the support for the EU has gone up in more or less every EU country and by a lot in some countries, and even the UK that left the EU, support is growing for the EU that there's a majority that wants to rejoin the EU, even thought that's not going to happen for at least 2 decades.
Why don’t you leave it? Emigrate to a country outside of it.
@@paul1979uk2000 and who knows?
@@Dreyno your brain has migrated
@@fabriziopastorino3792 That’s all you’ve got? What are you? 12 years old?
Why don’t you leave the EU? If you can’t abide by it, don’t. Show us how much better you can live in Africa or Asia.