What's so bad about EU regulation anyway?

What's so bad about EU regulation anyway?

Author
Discussion

Efbe

9,251 posts

165 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
DMN said:
Tuna said:
Some of those in the North blame the spate of flooding we've seen on the fact that such naturally flowing water courses are no longer capable of carrying the volumes of water you see each winter away.
And some of those here in the North are wrong. All dredging does is move the problem downstream, in ever greater volumes. In York, where the river Ouse is actually a basin as it flows through the City (its deeper than its exit point down stream), all dredging up stream would do is increase the flow of water into York making the problem worse. By not dredging, peak flow is reduced as it takes the water longer to reach the critical pinch points.
The flooding that hit Calderdale so badly was caused by the local estate owners many years ago deciding to cut down loads of trees on the moorland, then later removing water retention barriers.
Skip forward a decade or so, and the moorland no longer soaks up the water, comes straight into the valleys and causes flooding.
This river then flows down into the next causing more and more flooding across the north

williamp

19,213 posts

272 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
footnote said:
crankedup said:
The NFU rep' made an appearance on local television, apparently a significant number of farmers within the east Anglia region had voted to leave EU. Obviously confident that the UK Government will meet the subsidy requirements of the industry?
I saw a Cornish person on TV saying they'd voted Leave but wanted to keep getting the EU money too.

I've seen many Leavers on tv saying we're not all thick bigots - go figure.
Not that long ago, the mere suggestion of discusssing immigration in a negative way was called "racist". And controlling immigration was the same.

For a brief time during the referendum it was agreed by all the we can now talk about it, its not racist, everyone agreed immigration needs to be controlled.

But now, people voting for controls are now being labelled racists again, or thick bigots.

But quite a few remainers thought immigration is a problem (and can recognise the problems it caused). One such is Angela Merkel. who said multiculturalism has failed back in 2011:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/17/ange...

Cameron said so too in 2011:

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/201...

Cameron also said more later on in 2011. The racist bigot just doesn't know when to stop!!!

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/apr/14/da...


munky

5,328 posts

247 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
crankedup said:
footnote said:
Esseesse said:
footnote said:
It just made me consider that most EU regulation is probably for my own good - why should I want to throw that out just because it was created by a German and not a Briton?
I don't think anyones care who made the regs. You may think they're for your own good and be happy to be treated like a child. Wherever possible I would rather be free to make a judgement on whether something is too dangerous/risky.
I don't believe the individual citizen has any more power or say and is treated as any less of a child whether in Britain out of the EU or in the EU.
I can't see Theresa May giving me any more say over anything - in fact she and Corbyn will be popping round to check my internet usage on a daily basis.
If we disagree with something we can chuck the Government out, unelected EU suits we can't. For me that has always been a major gripe.
Erm... UK laws are created by elected MPs, EU laws are created by elected MEPs.

UK laws are essentially implemented by the unelected civil service and EU laws by the unelected suits as you call them. I see no difference really. We can chuck out the MEPs just like we can chuck out the MPs. It's only that the EU "we" is bigger.

In the USA, some laws are within the jurisdiction of individual states and some are federal. Much the same as the EU really.

Griping about EU laws is no different to the Scots or Welsh or NI griping about laws made in London.

What's next, individual counties leaving the UK so they get back their "sovereignty"?

Whether one draws the line at city level, county, principality, country or continent seems largely arbitrary to me and tweaking it is hardly worth leaving a hugely beneficial free trade area over.

munky

5,328 posts

247 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
boxxob said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Ah yes the inverted jingoist argument that the EU can obviously spend UK money in the UK much more wisely than the UK can.
Yes, and how much of the EU money actually stays in Cornwall or is spent appropriately?
Why not find out for yourself?

http://ec.europa.eu/contracts_grants/beneficiaries...

Click on the map and then choose which type of funding you want to look at. And then the region.

feef

5,206 posts

182 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
Puggit said:
footnote said:
But staying on topic I really would like to know what and why are the regulations (other than immigration) that Leavers object to?

I'm not taking the piss - I really can't think of anything imposed on me from the EU that genuinely affects my life for the worse that I can get hacked off at the EU about.
Speak to small business owners
There's a couple of EU regs that limits what we can make and sell but they are surrounding the safety of goods used by children so I have no issue with those.

We import stuff from the eu and have no issues with any of that stuff

As a small business owner, I'm unaware of this mythical red tape that I'm supposed to take umbrage and neither have any of the organisations that spout the red tape argument ever asked my opinion.

I'm sure there may be some businesses that are more directly affected but this small business isn't one. If anything it makes life easier from the import aspect.



gazapc

1,319 posts

159 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
munky said:
EU laws are created by elected MEPs.
Nope, the EU parliament does not have legislative initiative.

maffski

1,866 posts

158 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
biggles330d said:
Didn't the supermarkets and food producers try that before? They considered 'Horse' better branded as 'Beef'...
I'm another small business person who honestly cannot think of where an EU regulation affects me but I'm more sitting at a computer all day.
Anything like that is already covered by common law. You can't just lie to people. But do I need a law insisting that 'jam' is a minimum of 50% sugar (a specific UK exception, general EU law being 60%)? It has the sugar content on the label already if I care, and if I don't like it I can just not buy it.

Here is an example of a couple of people that were prosecuted for selling horsemeat as something else. One was found guilty under forgery laws and one under general food safety. It wasn't necessary to have a law specifically for 'Lasagna'.

The point is all this micro management encoded in laws doesn't have to 'directly' affect you. It increases the costs of business and stifles innovation.

munky

5,328 posts

247 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
gazapc said:
munky said:
EU laws are created by elected MEPs.
Nope, the EU parliament does not have legislative initiative.
are you sure?
"Parliament has a power of political initiative

It can ask the Commission to present legislative proposals for laws to the Council.

It plays a genuine role in creating new laws, since it examines the Commission's annual programme of work and says which laws it would like to see introduced."

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/2...

Not all legislation follows the same process though, to be fair, but it's still voted on by MEPs.

V8RX7

26,762 posts

262 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
footnote said:
But staying on topic I really would like to know what and why are the regulations (other than immigration) that Leavers object to?
VOC in paint - so now white paint goes yellow in days

Health and safety that is ridiculously OTT - a step over 12" needs a handrail FFS ! We aren't supposed to use ladders etc It may not affect you but it's cost those of us in construction a lot of time, money and inconvenience for bugger all benefit.

Various weedkillers are banned or restricted - NOT because they were dangerous but because the costs to prove they meet the rules are too high.


crankedup

25,764 posts

242 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
It's going to be a mare when I want to have my old car resprayed in cellulose, surely ranks the biggest crime against all car enthusiasts.

Kermit power

28,634 posts

212 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
barryrs said:
I think the Norway and Iceland examples are quite good indicators of how Britain could free itself from excessive regulation; that's not to say its all bad just that one size doesn't necessarily fit all.

"According to the EFTA Secretariat, the EU generated 52,183 legal instruments between 2000 and 2013, of which Norway adopted 4,724 — 9 per cent. A written answer to a parliamentary question in Iceland found a similar proportion: 6,326 out of 62,809 EU legal acts between 1994 and 2014."
That's all well and good, but it doesn't actually tell you anything unless you also know how many legal instruments Norway and Iceland created domestically which do something broadly similar to EU legislation that they haven't adopted.

I'm assuming you don't actually believe that Norway and Iceland only have EU laws, and are therefore 90+ lawless?

crankedup

25,764 posts

242 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
munky said:
crankedup said:
footnote said:
Esseesse said:
footnote said:
It just made me consider that most EU regulation is probably for my own good - why should I want to throw that out just because it was created by a German and not a Briton?
I don't think anyones care who made the regs. You may think they're for your own good and be happy to be treated like a child. Wherever possible I would rather be free to make a judgement on whether something is too dangerous/risky.
I don't believe the individual citizen has any more power or say and is treated as any less of a child whether in Britain out of the EU or in the EU.
I can't see Theresa May giving me any more say over anything - in fact she and Corbyn will be popping round to check my internet usage on a daily basis.
If we disagree with something we can chuck the Government out, unelected EU suits we can't. For me that has always been a major gripe.
Erm... UK laws are created by elected MPs, EU laws are created by elected MEPs.

UK laws are essentially implemented by the unelected civil service and EU laws by the unelected suits as you call them. I see no difference really. We can chuck out the MEPs just like we can chuck out the MPs. It's only that the EU "we" is bigger.

In the USA, some laws are within the jurisdiction of individual states and some are federal. Much the same as the EU really.

Griping about EU laws is no different to the Scots or Welsh or NI griping about laws made in London.

What's next, individual counties leaving the UK so they get back their "sovereignty"?

Whether one draws the line at city level, county, principality, country or continent seems largely arbitrary to me and tweaking it is hardly worth leaving a hugely beneficial free trade area over.
Opps my mistake, but the principle remains, I want laws of the land where I live introduced by those we elect, I've our Parliament.
I agree that leaving the EU purely on the basis of the law making principles employed would be a nonsense. My dislike of being part of a federal state that seems intent on growing in size and Authority over the individual Countries I find somewhat unnerving. The continual stream of regulations along with the threat of our loss of the pound in favour of the euro as the creep of the super state continues.
Don't yet know what the cost will be in terms of our trading markets.

Edited by crankedup on Friday 1st July 17:33

Kermit power

28,634 posts

212 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
skilly1 said:
I have a couple which have affected me, I believe they are EU lead:

1. Great crested newt protection. We have no shortage in the UK, but the rest of Europe does. So they slap a preservation order on them. This cost me around £30,000.
Frustrating, I'm sure, but equally frustrating that we've voted to leave the EU when it seems that we're able to address the problem anyway without having to leave the EU.

biggles330d

1,525 posts

149 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
maffski said:
biggles330d said:
Didn't the supermarkets and food producers try that before? They considered 'Horse' better branded as 'Beef'...
I'm another small business person who honestly cannot think of where an EU regulation affects me but I'm more sitting at a computer all day.
Anything like that is already covered by common law. You can't just lie to people. But do I need a law insisting that 'jam' is a minimum of 50% sugar (a specific UK exception, general EU law being 60%)? It has the sugar content on the label already if I care, and if I don't like it I can just not buy it.

Here is an example of a couple of people that were prosecuted for selling horsemeat as something else. One was found guilty under forgery laws and one under general food safety. It wasn't necessary to have a law specifically for 'Lasagna'.

The point is all this micro management encoded in laws doesn't have to 'directly' affect you. It increases the costs of business and stifles innovation.
So could it still be Jam if the sugar content is 40%? 30%? 70%? I'm thinking american chocolate and cheese, which are nothing like the real thing but highly processed crap. And your example already indicates that the UK has negotiated a separate level, presumably at the request of UK jam making businesses and for local market reasons. Do we need a law? Probably not, but is it really that much of a hassle if you are in the business of making a jam unless you're trying to cut costs and make something that increasing becomes less like the Jam we actually want and think we're buying.

Balmoral

40,659 posts

247 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
munky said:
Erm... UK laws are created by elected MPs, EU laws are created by elected MEPs.
Nope.

Our elected MP's propose, debate, amend and then vote to make the laws, which are also debated and amended by the unelected Lords (who can't do the propose/make bit). In the EU it is the other way around, the elected MEP's do the debating/amending bit only, they cannot propose or make the laws, the unelected commission does that.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong because its important.

herewego

8,814 posts

212 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
Puggit said:
Efbe said:
genuine question...

for regs such as the ports one, have we had the chance to vote against it?
is it that we have useless MEPs, or do they not have a choice?
I haven't looked in to the ports one, but some EU laws are passed as 'regulations'. Once created by the (unelected) commission, they are automatically passed in to law in each country.

Some laws are passed as 'directives' - these are then left to individual member states to implement.
According to this:
http://container-mag.com/2016/03/09/european-parli...

MEPs voted it through and the article states there is a european private ports association who asked MEPs to back it so it appears Britain isn't the only member with private ports.

jjlynn27

7,935 posts

108 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
V8RX7 said:
VOC in paint - so now white paint goes yellow in days

Health and safety that is ridiculously OTT - a step over 12" needs a handrail FFS ! We aren't supposed to use ladders etc It may not affect you but it's cost those of us in construction a lot of time, money and inconvenience for bugger all benefit.

Various weedkillers are banned or restricted - NOT because they were dangerous but because the costs to prove they meet the rules are too high.
As for VOC in Paint, we have repainted all doors in our house last year with white paint from Screwfix, as well as 2 external doors, and a double garage door. Still the same white colour as they were on day one. Is it possible that they are selling dodgy paint?

As for weekillers, they are so many on the market if some can't get approval for whatever reason, that says to me that they are not competitive enough?

(no comment/idea) on step part.

FredClogs

14,041 posts

160 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
Cumberland sausage, Melton Mowbray pork pies, stilton cheese et al, all protected un EU law. What will happen to them?

anonymous-user

53 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
NickGibbs said:
skilly1 said:
I have a couple which have affected me, I believe they are EU lead:

1. Great crested newt protection. We have no shortage in the UK, but the rest of Europe does. So they slap a preservation order on them. This cost me around £30,000.
2. Wash down pad for golf machinery. I believe this is part of some European water legislation. Legislation that machines that are used for cutting grass have to be washed down in a closed circuit water system. Why, 100,000 mowers are used by people every day and they don't have too. Cars drive along wet roads every day and oil grease come off them and drains can manage. This would cost me around £20,000.
Well done for posting that. A genuine example (landscaping business?)
Let's here more. there has been a lack of examples of EU laws that negatively affect people. It would be good to hear more. Maybe farming?
There are many major highway schemes that have an additional year on programme for environmental monitoring and mitigation, which includes for several months of manual searches for GCN's. As said, they are not rare here at all, so most schemes have to have the monitoring, trapping, relocation etc. If we didn't have to do this, while it wouldn't save a huge amount of money, it would accelerate construction programmes noticeably.

(former GCN licence holder, yes really)

Crafty_

13,248 posts

199 months

Friday 1st July 2016
quotequote all
I presume that if British companies still wish to trade in the EU will have to comply with EU regulations/laws/directives ? Not only for their products/services but their business processes as well, for example accounting, supplier validation, security checks and all that (rather dull) stuff ?

So good or bad, businesses for the most part will still have to comply with whatever the Eu decides, but given we won't have any MEPs we get no influence whatsoever on future legislation ?

Presumably we'll need more civil servants to assess EU laws/regulations and help businesses understand them as well as to investigate if the UK should implement the same laws or laws that (roughly) achieve the same thing ? I don't expect we would take all of them (same as now).

This could turn in to a headache - if we deviate from Europe companies who operate in both jurisdictions would have two sets of laws/regulations to comply with - isn't that more red tape and cost ?

So in this respect the notion of "taking our country back" confuses me, to some degree or other we'll still be at the mercy of Brussels and bureaucrats, its just more of them will be UK based ?

I saw a comment or two about making it easier/cheaper to deal with the rest of the world if (when?) we are on our own - can anyone expand on how the EU currently makes it difficult/expensive ? I'm genuinely interested.