So the UK is finished says Theresa Mayhem

[woody2]

2 hours ago, x-in-man said:

But they ain’t are they.  All the stupid EU laws are just being relabelled as British laws.  Every half baked EU rule ( which most of the EU ignore anyway ) stays the same. 

most of them are british laws before the eu nicked them......

[woody2]

25 minutes ago, Lost Login said:

You have to worry about what sort of empty life someone (lost nogin ) must lead to have to spend a fair amount of time posting complete rubbish on here, day in day out, as it must take time and effort to find articles etc. and then cherry pick bits out to misrepresent the article or choose to find facts and then argue that the exact opposite is true.   

Now I understand that at the start lost nogin could have fun from just being a troll, but once everybody cottons on that the chances are that whatever you post are complete bollocks or are probably 180 degrees from the truth you wonder what level of mentality would make you want to carry on.

[woody2]

that didn't take long......

may plan buried

Brexiteers' Customs Bill amendments accepted by government

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44845933

good old jrm.......

[woody2]

one for pk......

what happened to vince, rainbow tim and jo something or other.....

they could of beat the gov. last night if they had turned up.....

#limpdums

[woody2]

the trade bill has 40 eu trade deals on rollover until the uk negotiates new ones regardless of a deal with the eu.....

#ouchfreggy

 

[ballaughbiker]

Just wondered..... anyone got 10 examples of half baked eu laws?

[La Colombe]

1 minute ago, ballaughbiker said:

Just wondered..... anyone got 10 examples of half baked eu laws?

Here's one.

[woolley]

3 hours ago, La Colombe said:

Here's one.

" EC precludes national legislation............ "

That's the offensive bit. No expansion required on that.

[ballaughbiker]

That's quite a funny response Colombe. Well for MF it is....

[Freggyragh]

5 hours ago, woolley said:

" EC precludes national legislation............ "

That's the offensive bit. No expansion required on that.

The EU only makes laws in areas of competency ratified by international treaty, namely:

• customs union
• competition rules for the single market
• monetary policy for the eurozone countries
• trade and international agreements (under certain circumstances)
• marine plants and animals regulated by the common fisheries policy

Or, in areas of shared competency:

• single market
• employment and social affairs
• economic, social and territorial cohesion
• agriculture
• fisheries
• environment
• consumer protection
• transport
• trans-European networks
• energy
• security and justice
• public health
• research and space
• development cooperation and humanitarian aid

The EU also has to follow its ‘three principles’ when passing legislation:

• conferral – the EU has only that authority conferred upon it by the EU treaties, which have been ratified by all member countries
• proportionality – the EU action cannot exceed what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the treaties
• subsidiarity – in areas where either the EU or national governments can act, the EU may intervene only if it can act more effectively.

So in reality, the EU only precludes national legislation when facilitating the four freedoms and the pooling of resources. Any international free trade deal will require some compromises over sovereignty, but as has been explained to you, the EU does not take away the rights to control borders, to have blue passports, or even to eat misshapen fruit. 

 

[woody2]

5 hours ago, Freggyragh said:

The EU only makes laws in areas of competency ratified by international treaty, namely:

• customs union
• competition rules for the single market
• monetary policy for the eurozone countries
• trade and international agreements (under certain circumstances)
• marine plants and animals regulated by the common fisheries policy

Or, in areas of shared competency:

• single market
• employment and social affairs
• economic, social and territorial cohesion
• agriculture
• fisheries
• environment
• consumer protection
• transport
• trans-European networks
• energy
• security and justice
• public health
• research and space
• development cooperation and humanitarian aid

The EU also has to follow its ‘three principles’ when passing legislation:

• conferral – the EU has only that authority conferred upon it by the EU treaties, which have been ratified by all member countries
• proportionality – the EU action cannot exceed what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the treaties
• subsidiarity – in areas where either the EU or national governments can act, the EU may intervene only if it can act more effectively.

So in reality, the EU only precludes national legislation when facilitating the four freedoms and the pooling of resources. Any international free trade deal will require some compromises over sovereignty, but as has been explained to you, the EU does not take away the rights to control borders, to have blue passports, or even to eat misshapen fruit. 

 

the ecj does that.......

[woolley]

Thanks for setting out the case comprehensively, Freggy.

[woody2]

at least we now know the winners are stronger than the remoans....

[Freggyragh]

10 hours ago, woolley said:

Thanks for setting out the case comprehensively, Freggy.

You’re welcome. Now let’s look at what areas might be possible or worthwile having sole sovereignty over outside the EU: 

• customs union - Any trade deal requires rules and compromises - sovereignty not possible.
• competition rules - See above. 
• monetary policy Not applicable. Sovereignty already with U.K. 
• trade and international agreements (under certain circumstances) - sovereignty not possible.
• marine plants and animals Prior to joining the EU the U.K. had a disastrous fisheries policy, but the current EU policy is hardly any better and countries outside the EU have generally been much more successful managing fishing stocks and the marine environment. On the other hand, the domestic market for domestic catch is weak and any hindrance getting fresh fish to the EU market would be damaging - sovereignty possible and desirable, (but so too is hindrance-free access the single market, at least as the industry operates at present)

In the areas of shared competency, I’d agree that sovereignty over all agriculture policy is desirable, but changes should be gradual and phased in over a decade or two. I support the pooling of resources for humanitarian aid (disaster relief), but I don’t agree at all with the joint development cooperation budget, and agree it would be beneficial to have sovereignty over development aid. Personally, I’m in favour of free movement (with Belgian style controls), open-skies, free trade and common standards of consumer protection - so sovereignty over such matters is not even desirable. 

In my opinion, given the huge costs, drawbacks and loss of influence and cash-saving collaboration that leaving EU entails, that it is just not worth it if the only areas of sovereignty to come back are fisheries, agriculture and development aid - although I do think the U.K. would make a much better job of legislating for these areas. Now, if there was a way of maintaining the trading advantages, the constructive collaboration and the freedoms of membership, but gradually getting back control over those three problematic areas - fisheries, agriculture and development aid - then I would understand brexit. Sadly, when I look at the political leadership in the U.K. I can only conclude such a benign outcome is impossible. 

[woolley]

Hmmm. That is at least a much more reasonable, balanced and nuanced assessment than we are accustomed to here.

customs union / competition rules - Any trade deal requires rules and compromises - sovereignty not possible. Don't agree. The compromises necessary can be made by sovereign states in negotiation, rather than by a supranational organisation over their heads.

monetary policy Not applicable. Sovereignty already with U.K.  Agree. For the moment. But who knows what happens in the future? We almost fell into the euro once, courtesy of Blair. The EU has form for being the slipperiest of slippery slopes. Treaty after treaty; keep voting until you get the right result etc.

trade and international agreements (under certain circumstances) - sovereignty not possible. Don't agree. Of course independent nations can make bilateral or multilateral trade and international agreements. It happens all the time, e.g. UN, NAFTA, EFTA etc.

marine plants and animals Prior to joining the EU the U.K. had a disastrous fisheries policy, but the current EU policy is hardly any better and countries outside the EU have generally been much more successful managing fishing stocks and the marine environment. On the other hand, the domestic market for domestic catch is weak and any hindrance getting fresh fish to the EU market would be damaging - sovereignty possible and desirable, (but so too is hindrance-free access the single market, at least as the industry operates at present) Largely agree, with the caveat that you cannot judge a new independent UK policy today by what was in place almost 50 years ago. It's a different world.

In the areas of shared competency, I’d agree that sovereignty over all agriculture policy is desirable, but changes should be gradual and phased in over a decade or two. I support the pooling of resources for humanitarian aid (disaster relief), but I don’t agree at all with the joint development cooperation budget, and agree it would be beneficial to have sovereignty over development aid. Personally, I’m in favour of free movement (with Belgian style controls), open-skies, free trade and common standards of consumer protection - so sovereignty over such matters is not even desirable.  Largely agree, except that who comes and goes should be a sovereign national competence. I think that what you have listed there is pretty much what we will end up with, but national parliaments throughout Europe will have the final say in the very long term.

In my opinion, given the huge costs, drawbacks and loss of influence and cash-saving collaboration that leaving EU entails, that it is just not worth it if the only areas of sovereignty to come back are fisheries, agriculture and development aid - although I do think the U.K. would make a much better job of legislating for these areas. Now, if there was a way of maintaining the trading advantages, the constructive collaboration and the freedoms of membership, but gradually getting back control over those three problematic areas - fisheries, agriculture and development aid - then I would understand brexit. Don't agree, of course, except to say that long term I believe that the EU in its present form will give way to a much looser arrangement of co-operation between nations with full sovereignty and free trade and co-operation and that would be wholly beneficial. Meanwhile you cannot make an omelette without breaking eggs.

Sadly, when I look at the political leadership in the U.K. I can only conclude such a benign outcome is impossible. Well, yes. But looking at political leaders all over the world, we are hardly alone in that!