Or alternatively login using...
Login or register using your Twitter account:
By clicking "Register" you are agree to the Yoosk Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Home » Leader Index » Neil O'Brien
Ask questions, see replies, give feedback.
Take a look at the current scores then add your own.
Each time you click your rating will be added to the votes of your fellow Yooskers.
What are your opinions on a potential referendum on Scottish Devolution?
Submitted by: dominic | 1 votes for this..
0 comments | Topic: Politics |
It was right to have a referendum on devolution and it would be right to have a referendum if the executive were going to go push for independence. Is the key motivation behind your campaign a desire... Show more »It was right to have a referendum on devolution and it would be right to have a referendum if the executive were going to go push for independence. Is the key motivation behind your campaign a desire to minimise the EU's strangehold over British legislation or simply an effort to give the people a democratic voice, whatever their decision? Show less »
It was right to have a referendum on devolution and it would be right to have a referendum if the executive were going to go push for independence.
Is the key motivation behind your campaign a desire to minimise the EU's strangehold over British legislation or simply an effort to give the people a democratic voice, whatever their decision?
- "A referendum was ruled out by the House of Commons, where does your campaign go from here?"
The whole question has been blown wide open again by the Irish no vote. We will be fighting to stop the verdict of the Irish people being circumvented by undemocratic means. The whole European political... Show more »The whole question has been blown wide open again by the Irish no vote. We will be fighting to stop the verdict of the Irish people being circumvented by undemocratic means. The whole European political class is involved in an effort to smear the Irish as ignorant, and to carry on as if nothing has happened. The French Europe Minister says, "I don't think you can say the treaty of Lisbon is dead even if the ratification process will be delayed.” The German Foreign Minister says, “We are sticking with our goal for it to come into force. The ratification process must continue.” What arrogance! Clearly, people who thought the treaty was dead, just because people had said no to it, were mistaken. The Irish no vote means nothing to the euro elite. We will be working to make sure the verdict of the Irish people is respected. Show less »
The whole question has been blown wide open again by the Irish no vote. We will be fighting to stop the verdict of the Irish people being circumvented by undemocratic means. The whole European political class is involved in an effort to smear the Irish as ignorant, and to carry on as if nothing has happened.
The French Europe Minister says, "I don't think you can say the treaty of Lisbon is dead even if the ratification process will be delayed.” The German Foreign Minister says, “We are sticking with our goal for it to come into force. The ratification process must continue.” What arrogance!
Clearly, people who thought the treaty was dead, just because people had said no to it, were mistaken. The Irish no vote means nothing to the euro elite. We will be working to make sure the verdict of the Irish people is respected.
Neil, would you support other referenda taking place at the same time- say on proportional representation, immigration and how to react to climate change? Like a kind of all encompassing 'Future of Britain'... Show more »Neil, would you support other referenda taking place at the same time- say on proportional representation, immigration and how to react to climate change? Like a kind of all encompassing 'Future of Britain' poll? Show less »
Submitted by: Londontowner | 18 votes for this..
I don’t think you should hold multiple referendums at once – take one issue at a time for clarity, a better debate and to avoid manipulation.
How would you vote in a referendum and why?
Submitted by: Macpherson | 16 votes for this..
I would vote no – (a) because the EU does not need more powers (b) to send a message that it needs reform and (c) because the process has been so dishonest. Cast your mind back - this whole business... Show more »I would vote no – (a) because the EU does not need more powers (b) to send a message that it needs reform and (c) because the process has been so dishonest. Cast your mind back - this whole business started when the Irish voted against the Nice treaty in 2001. In response the leaders of the European Union promised they would start to make the EU more democratic, more transparent, and start handing powers back to the member states. But things quickly went off course. Although the leaders of the EU had signed up to these fine principles, and had even written them down in a grand document called the “Laeken Declaration”, the great majority did not actually believe in them in the slightest. Instead, EU leaders appointed the federalist Valery Giscard d’Estaing to draw up an EU Constitution, which gave even more powers to the EU. Under the Constitution, everything from immigration to your electricity bill would become a subject for Brussels to decide on, by majority vote. When the Constitution was torpedoed by the French and Dutch, EU leaders simply dredged it up, gave it a fresh coat of paint, and had another go. I am not surprised the Treaty has been sunk again. Show less »
I would vote no – (a) because the EU does not need more powers (b) to send a message that it needs reform and (c) because the process has been so dishonest.
Cast your mind back - this whole business started when the Irish voted against the Nice treaty in 2001. In response the leaders of the European Union promised they would start to make the EU more democratic, more transparent, and start handing powers back to the member states.
But things quickly went off course. Although the leaders of the EU had signed up to these fine principles, and had even written them down in a grand document called the “Laeken Declaration”, the great majority did not actually believe in them in the slightest.
Instead, EU leaders appointed the federalist Valery Giscard d’Estaing to draw up an EU Constitution, which gave even more powers to the EU. Under the Constitution, everything from immigration to your electricity bill would become a subject for Brussels to decide on, by majority vote.
When the Constitution was torpedoed by the French and Dutch, EU leaders simply dredged it up, gave it a fresh coat of paint, and had another go. I am not surprised the Treaty has been sunk again.
Both. I would rather have a referendum and lose it than have no referendum at all. But I want people to be consulted. More generally I believe in decentralization – power flowing back down from ... Show more »Both. I would rather have a referendum and lose it than have no referendum at all. But I want people to be consulted. More generally I believe in decentralization – power flowing back down from the EU to the local and national level, and an increase in accountability and transparency not just in the EU but also more generally – for example the ever-growing number of quangos. Show less »
Both. I would rather have a referendum and lose it than have no referendum at all. But I want people to be consulted.
More generally I believe in decentralization – power flowing back down from the EU to the local and national level, and an increase in accountability and transparency not just in the EU but also more generally – for example the ever-growing number of quangos.
688 answers and counting...
Public figures are opening up and replying to direct questions. Ask yours now.
To:
The question
Choose a topic
Your question has been sent to the selected public figure. What next?
You have not rated this figure before:
Do you have an audience who would like to engage with this or other public figures?