What's so bad about EU regulation anyway?
Discussion
One problem is that the EU believes in legislation for it's own sake rather than to solve a problem. Look at aviation for examples.
A UK operation offering passenger flights in DC3s had to stop because the EU demanded a facility for automatically supplying oxygen to passengers should the pressurisation fail. An impossible requirement since the DC3 has no pressurisation
Mind you, the (quite serious) proposal to require airspeed indicators on hot air balloons was eventually blocked, but it took a lot of work.
A UK operation offering passenger flights in DC3s had to stop because the EU demanded a facility for automatically supplying oxygen to passengers should the pressurisation fail. An impossible requirement since the DC3 has no pressurisation
Mind you, the (quite serious) proposal to require airspeed indicators on hot air balloons was eventually blocked, but it took a lot of work.
I can see there are very specific and technical rules that affect business - and very often for very good reason.
Of course, business, whether it's a private port or a haulage company, can and does lobby on it's own behalf, here and in the EU.
This doesn't really apply to private individuals.
So far, it's vacuum cleaners then, that's the biggie of being told what to do by the EU, that we can identify that affects private individuals (other than immigration).
There must be some other domineering EU rules and regs that make all our lives more difficult.
Where I stand, I can't think of any, but I do want to know.
Of course, business, whether it's a private port or a haulage company, can and does lobby on it's own behalf, here and in the EU.
This doesn't really apply to private individuals.
So far, it's vacuum cleaners then, that's the biggie of being told what to do by the EU, that we can identify that affects private individuals (other than immigration).
There must be some other domineering EU rules and regs that make all our lives more difficult.
Where I stand, I can't think of any, but I do want to know.
mattmurdock said:
So, if there are a lot of regulations that people think we should never have voted for, it is down to useless MEPs in the main.
OREdited by mattmurdock on Friday 1st July 12:01
It's things which were to the benefits of other countries, but not ours, and we got outvoted. Again.
One size does not fit all across an entire continent comprised of different cultures, economies, and systems of government.
PS while the council does have a role in regulations, the idea that heads of state will explore things in any sort of detail is laughable. You only have to sit in a few business meetings to see this. Strategies are agreed at a high level (read "vague"), then by the time the devil in the detail is discovered, it's already a done deal.
footnote said:
Fundamentally, I agree with remaining in the EU............
But you have a different view?
I'm EU- rather than UK-born. I speak French & German, can understand many of the other languages.But you have a different view?
I've worked in France, Germany, Holland, Finland, Latvia & Switzerland (not EU but you see where I'm going). I've had GFs from all those countries.
I should be more pro-EU than the average. However, my view is that whilst the concept is admirable the reality is not. One size does not fit all very well and various factions will want regulations to suit themselves rather than the rest; an example is CAP rules massively favouring the French.
I want us to have the flexibility to choose which regulations suit us & which don't. We can cooperate whilst still being independent.
Dr Jekyll said:
One problem is that the EU believes in legislation for it's own sake rather than to solve a problem. Look at aviation for examples.
A UK operation offering passenger flights in DC3s had to stop because the EU demanded a facility for automatically supplying oxygen to passengers should the pressurisation fail. An impossible requirement since the DC3 has no pressurisation
.
Perhaps you would care to comment on the availability of flights on Lufthansa's definitely not pressurised Ju 52? A UK operation offering passenger flights in DC3s had to stop because the EU demanded a facility for automatically supplying oxygen to passengers should the pressurisation fail. An impossible requirement since the DC3 has no pressurisation
.
https://www.dlbs.de/en/Ju-52-Gift-Vouchers/Ju-52-g...
Blame the EU? Or is the problem closer to home, ie at the CAA?
Rovinghawk said:
footnote said:
Fundamentally, I agree with remaining in the EU............
But you have a different view?
I'm EU- rather than UK-born. I speak French & German, can understand many of the other languages.But you have a different view?
I've worked in France, Germany, Holland, Finland, Latvia & Switzerland (not EU but you see where I'm going). I've had GFs from all those countries.
I should be more pro-EU than the average. However, my view is that whilst the concept is admirable the reality is not. One size does not fit all very well and various factions will want regulations to suit themselves rather than the rest; an example is CAP rules massively favouring the French.
I want us to have the flexibility to choose which regulations suit us & which don't. We can cooperate whilst still being independent.
I don't have the in-depth knowledge to say which regulations favour the French over us and which favour us over the French and I can't go down the 'poor me' route of imagining than none of the regulations favour us.
Negotiation, agreement, accord - it's give and take. You win some and lose some.
The reality was never going to be perfect for everybody - that's implict in the sacrifice we make for the overall improvement of all of us.
I go to Ireland on holidays, I'm able to walk on EU funded roads and pavements that weren't there when I was a child. They benefit. I drive there, my car isn't damaged. I benefit. They make more money from tourism. They come to England on holidays and spend their money here. We discover that we're not all bigoted haters. We get on. We learn and we choose not to go back to war over 6 counties.
It's not all about the money - it can't be. If it is, we give up now.
I would pay for peace rather than die for peace, unlike our grandfathers - it's a choice they didn't have. It's not one I would give up either.
footnote said:
And of course, if we can choose which regulations suit us and which don't, you'd respect the right of every other country to apply the same criteria
Yesfootnote said:
which results in no agreement...or an agreement to disagreement.
If an idea is good for all it's adopted by all. If not then not. Alles gut.footnote said:
The reality was never going to be perfect for everybody - that's implict in the sacrifice we make for the overall improvement of all of us.
Please prove that overall it's a benefit, as you claim.footnote said:
I go to Ireland on holidays, I'm able to walk on EU funded roads and pavements that weren't there when I was a child. They benefit. I drive there, my car isn't damaged. I benefit. They make more money from tourism. They come to England on holidays and spend their money here. We discover that we're not all bigoted haters. We get on. We learn and we choose not to go back to war over 6 counties.
It's not all about the money - it can't be. If it is, we give up now.
I would pay for peace rather than die for peace, unlike our grandfathers - it's a choice they didn't have. It's not one I would give up either.
None of this is about regulations, is it?It's not all about the money - it can't be. If it is, we give up now.
I would pay for peace rather than die for peace, unlike our grandfathers - it's a choice they didn't have. It's not one I would give up either.
Puggit said:
Speak to small business owners
I work in what's called an "Innovation Centre". Its specific purpose is to nurture small businesses and encourage/support their growth. We have around 40 businesses based at this site.Of my knowledge two individuals here voted leave. One is an older lady who is an accounts assistant in one of the businesses and her reasoning was immigration. Another was an accountant who said he didn't like the un-elected aspect of the EU (House of Lords, anyone?).
All of the small business owners I've spoken to are pro-remain. None of them feel constrained by "red tape", a majority of them benefit from EU funding in various forms. Indeed many of our centres are built using EU funding such as the ERDF.
romeogolf said:
I work in what's called an "Innovation Centre". Its specific purpose is to nurture small businesses and encourage/support their growth. We have around 40 businesses based at this site.
Of my knowledge two individuals here voted leave. One is an older lady who is an accounts assistant in one of the businesses and her reasoning was immigration. Another was an accountant who said he didn't like the un-elected aspect of the EU (House of Lords, anyone?).
All of the small business owners I've spoken to are pro-remain. None of them feel constrained by "red tape", a majority of them benefit from EU funding in various forms. Indeed many of our centres are built using EU funding such as the ERDF.
Any they are in favour of remaining in the EU? Who'd have thought it...Of my knowledge two individuals here voted leave. One is an older lady who is an accounts assistant in one of the businesses and her reasoning was immigration. Another was an accountant who said he didn't like the un-elected aspect of the EU (House of Lords, anyone?).
All of the small business owners I've spoken to are pro-remain. None of them feel constrained by "red tape", a majority of them benefit from EU funding in various forms. Indeed many of our centres are built using EU funding such as the ERDF.
Rovinghawk said:
footnote said:
And of course, if we can choose which regulations suit us and which don't, you'd respect the right of every other country to apply the same criteria
Yesfootnote said:
which results in no agreement...or an agreement to disagreement.
If an idea is good for all it's adopted by all. If not then not. Alles gut.footnote said:
The reality was never going to be perfect for everybody - that's implict in the sacrifice we make for the overall improvement of all of us.
Please prove that overall it's a benefit, as you claim.footnote said:
I go to Ireland on holidays, I'm able to walk on EU funded roads and pavements that weren't there when I was a child. They benefit. I drive there, my car isn't damaged. I benefit. They make more money from tourism. They come to England on holidays and spend their money here. We discover that we're not all bigoted haters. We get on. We learn and we choose not to go back to war over 6 counties.
It's not all about the money - it can't be. If it is, we give up now.
I would pay for peace rather than die for peace, unlike our grandfathers - it's a choice they didn't have. It's not one I would give up either.
None of this is about regulations, is it?It's not all about the money - it can't be. If it is, we give up now.
I would pay for peace rather than die for peace, unlike our grandfathers - it's a choice they didn't have. It's not one I would give up either.
footnote said:
None of this is about regulations, is it?
Well no, but beyond vacuum cleaners, which regulations are people bothered about?That the reality is that people didn't choose Leave because of regulations?
It's about the other stuff - the emotive stuff.
Perhaps you didn't mean that.
I'm actually doing the vacuuming at the moment! It's probably a carp hoover - it's taking it out of me.
One example would be the regulation on river courses, for environmental protection. As I understand it, the Environment Agency has not dredged many rivers for nearly a decade now, as the regulations encourage 'naturally flowing' water courses to support wildlife and plants. 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.
MY MIL worked for the EU commission, and the problem that led to 'straight bananas' is that getting 27 nations to agree to a policy is extremely hard. Rather than negotiating their way into an agreement, the approach is to have a civil servant come up with a wish list and then 'whittle' it away until people stop complaining. That gives us silly headlines and then leaves us with a least-worst option that is blanket applied across the zone.
"According to the EFTA Secretariat, the EU generated 52,183 legal instruments between 2000 and 2013...", if those laws were handled by our parliament sitting in session every day of the week, throughout the year they'd have less than ten minutes to consider each one. Of course it doesn't happen that way, but there is a risk that our representatives stop representing us, stop considering the differences in local circumstances and just fall into rubber stamping what is passed down to them. My personal experience of talking to MPs about stuff that I 'know about' is that they're busy people who tend to dismiss concerns with "I have been reliably informed...". Sometimes they're provably wrong.
As a 'small business', I'm not rabidly anti-EU. I'm fairly pragmatic about filling a lot of forms before I can start work for clients. However I generally believe in small government that gets out of the way of businesses (and people!) and encourages them to trade, rather than invasive government that slows business down to a crawl. I can't say we've had a good record with our own governments in the last couple of decades in that respect, but at least we can talk directly to them and make them responsible every few years.
MY MIL worked for the EU commission, and the problem that led to 'straight bananas' is that getting 27 nations to agree to a policy is extremely hard. Rather than negotiating their way into an agreement, the approach is to have a civil servant come up with a wish list and then 'whittle' it away until people stop complaining. That gives us silly headlines and then leaves us with a least-worst option that is blanket applied across the zone.
"According to the EFTA Secretariat, the EU generated 52,183 legal instruments between 2000 and 2013...", if those laws were handled by our parliament sitting in session every day of the week, throughout the year they'd have less than ten minutes to consider each one. Of course it doesn't happen that way, but there is a risk that our representatives stop representing us, stop considering the differences in local circumstances and just fall into rubber stamping what is passed down to them. My personal experience of talking to MPs about stuff that I 'know about' is that they're busy people who tend to dismiss concerns with "I have been reliably informed...". Sometimes they're provably wrong.
As a 'small business', I'm not rabidly anti-EU. I'm fairly pragmatic about filling a lot of forms before I can start work for clients. However I generally believe in small government that gets out of the way of businesses (and people!) and encourages them to trade, rather than invasive government that slows business down to a crawl. I can't say we've had a good record with our own governments in the last couple of decades in that respect, but at least we can talk directly to them and make them responsible every few years.
Getragdogleg said:
How about the regulation that altered all the wide angle mirrors on our trucks so they had to have a certain curve to them that happened to be different to what we had before meaning we had to change out all the wide angle mirrors across the fleet ? This gem led to the drivers complaining that the reflected image was so distorted it was harder to see anything in the mirrors and that they all preferred the old ones.
The Regulation that set the EU speed limit for trucks at 90kph when our own limit is 60mph, the EU limit is the one our limiters is set to so even though we are technically allowed to do 60mph we can only do 55.9mph.
Or the Working time directive that makes you log all the hours you work are on break or simply available for work ? This is done every day and has so far in the last 6 or 7 years never ever been looked at by an official yet needs to be kept for years.
This last one is doubly insane because the weeks of work must be grouped into 17 week periods and an average taken so as to make sure you work less than 48 hours. the 17 week period is to be viewed as random so you can take a block of any 17 weeks and it ought to be 48 hours or less. Except if you have a day off its 0 hours that day but if you take a week off its logged as 48 hours. My average is around 40 to 42 hours a week but if I take a couple of weeks off my average goes UP because of the 48s added.
This working time directive is different from our domestic drivers hours regulations so its possible to be legal on one but not the other.
Thing is, in this country we are not governed by the Working TIme Directive, but by the Working Time Regulations 1998. So, if/when we leave the EU the Working Time Regulations will stay in place and nothing will change.The Regulation that set the EU speed limit for trucks at 90kph when our own limit is 60mph, the EU limit is the one our limiters is set to so even though we are technically allowed to do 60mph we can only do 55.9mph.
Or the Working time directive that makes you log all the hours you work are on break or simply available for work ? This is done every day and has so far in the last 6 or 7 years never ever been looked at by an official yet needs to be kept for years.
This last one is doubly insane because the weeks of work must be grouped into 17 week periods and an average taken so as to make sure you work less than 48 hours. the 17 week period is to be viewed as random so you can take a block of any 17 weeks and it ought to be 48 hours or less. Except if you have a day off its 0 hours that day but if you take a week off its logged as 48 hours. My average is around 40 to 42 hours a week but if I take a couple of weeks off my average goes UP because of the 48s added.
This working time directive is different from our domestic drivers hours regulations so its possible to be legal on one but not the other.
Now, obviously, if we had never been in the EU then we may never have introduced the Working Time Regulations but we have done. At some point if we decide to amend team there will no doubt be gazillions of civil servants and lawyers involved, not to mention trade unions and the like. So, don't hold your breath.
I would also wager that even if we do change stuff like this, the changes will be minimal and we'll end up with something that's hardly any different to what we already have.
footnote said:
Sorry, I think that went over my head - that's what you meant isn't it?
That the reality is that people didn't choose Leave because of regulations?
It's about the other stuff - the emotive stuff.
Perhaps you didn't mean that.
I'm actually doing the vacuuming at the moment! It's probably a carp hoover - it's taking it out of me.
It's about a wide range of different things, some economic, some practical, some 'emotive'.That the reality is that people didn't choose Leave because of regulations?
It's about the other stuff - the emotive stuff.
Perhaps you didn't mean that.
I'm actually doing the vacuuming at the moment! It's probably a carp hoover - it's taking it out of me.
Edited by sidicks on Friday 1st July 14:06
handpaper said:
FredClogs said:
Part of my job is designing and testing electronics to certain standards and regulations, some of these are customer or industry specific and some are "government" mandated standards, US or EU or Australian it doesn't really make much difference but if you want to sell electronic goods in certain regions you have to show compliance to certain standards (unless you're going for the car boot end of the market)
Of course they're all annoying at times and can be expensive to design to and test for but they're almost always necessary to ensure either standards of interoperation, safety or quality.
I don't know about red tape in other industries but in engineering it would be to no ones benefit to just remove EU regulations in the medium to long term and restrict our ability (as small companies, corporate developers and as a nation) just just start knocking out s
te.
Out of interest, how many of these standards are mutually exclusive? Is it impossible to build a device that is universally compliant?Of course they're all annoying at times and can be expensive to design to and test for but they're almost always necessary to ensure either standards of interoperation, safety or quality.
I don't know about red tape in other industries but in engineering it would be to no ones benefit to just remove EU regulations in the medium to long term and restrict our ability (as small companies, corporate developers and as a nation) just just start knocking out s
te.There is still a cost in certificating for each territory though.
I understand that they forced us to stop pumping untreated sewage straight in to the sea and as a result we now have nice beaches. The unelected bureaucrat bds. British crap for British water.
On CNBC there was a guy who was complaining about EU rules harming business. The presenter asked which rules he'd like to get rid of. The social charter, he answered. It makes it too difficult for small business to get rid of employees. I don't know the ins or outs of it, but it seems like a good thing to me. If someone is in constant fear of unemployment, how are they supposed to be comfortable taking on a mortgage, for example?
ds. British crap for British water.On CNBC there was a guy who was complaining about EU rules harming business. The presenter asked which rules he'd like to get rid of. The social charter, he answered. It makes it too difficult for small business to get rid of employees. I don't know the ins or outs of it, but it seems like a good thing to me. If someone is in constant fear of unemployment, how are they supposed to be comfortable taking on a mortgage, for example?
I thought it was a bit rich hearing Dyson complaining about EU regs affecting his business and using that as a reason as to why Britain should leave the EU. Does he intend to cease supplying his products to the remaining 27 countries in the EU?
If he does, his products will still have to comply with those regulations.
If he does, his products will still have to comply with those regulations.
Eric Mc said:
I thought it was a bit rich hearing Dyson complaining about EU regs affecting his business and using that as a reason as to why Britain should leave the EU. Does he intend to cease supplying his products to the remaining 27 countries in the EU?
If he does, his products will still have to comply with those regulations.
I detect an opportunity to smuggle British market vacuum cleaners into the EU.If he does, his products will still have to comply with those regulations.
Wasn't the regularisation of fire extinguisher packaging/colours an EU thing.
So to achieve a common standard everything went red. Improvement for countries with poor standards but wiped out the UK colour coding by type which I thought was pretty good.
The outcome of regularisation is rarely the best solution but usually the lowest common denominator with no options to 'meet or exceed'
Wasn't the stupidity of going to brown/blue fixed wiring plus the other crappy colour coding for multiway switch etc. an EU regularisation too?
Plus the system is built around making ever more rules and regulations - there is no point where we have enough hence more and more stuff being covered or quite often just banned from the market.
So to achieve a common standard everything went red. Improvement for countries with poor standards but wiped out the UK colour coding by type which I thought was pretty good.
The outcome of regularisation is rarely the best solution but usually the lowest common denominator with no options to 'meet or exceed'
Wasn't the stupidity of going to brown/blue fixed wiring plus the other crappy colour coding for multiway switch etc. an EU regularisation too?
Plus the system is built around making ever more rules and regulations - there is no point where we have enough hence more and more stuff being covered or quite often just banned from the market.
afrochicken said:
I understand that they forced us to stop pumping untreated sewage straight in to the sea and as a result we now have nice beaches. The unelected bureaucrat bds. British crap for British water.
On CNBC there was a guy who was complaining about EU rules harming business. The presenter asked which rules he'd like to get rid of. The social charter, he answered. It makes it too difficult for small business to get rid of employees. I don't know the ins or outs of it, but it seems like a good thing to me. If someone is in constant fear of unemployment, how are they supposed to be comfortable taking on a mortgage, for example?
But they are not in constant fear if they are a good employee that does their job, are they? Unless theres a serious inter-company reason, why would you need to get rid of an employee unless they are useless?ds. British crap for British water.On CNBC there was a guy who was complaining about EU rules harming business. The presenter asked which rules he'd like to get rid of. The social charter, he answered. It makes it too difficult for small business to get rid of employees. I don't know the ins or outs of it, but it seems like a good thing to me. If someone is in constant fear of unemployment, how are they supposed to be comfortable taking on a mortgage, for example?
The social charter is what has bought poor teachers to schools knowing that however crap they perform, the school will go through absolute hoops to keep them with them. The teacher knows this, so can do the very minimum and still go home and pay the mortgage. My other halfs school spent 16 months training and nurturing a teacher that somehow managed to pass an NQT, even though from day one it was clear she was not a competent teacher, let alone have suitable subject knowledge.
I run a small business, and am employed by another company. I want to employ someone to help me with my own business, and I don't have a bottomless pit of money to pay for someone not prepared to pull their weight. If I spend 3 or 4 months training them up and ultimately they sit in my office messing about on bookface all day, I want the ability to tell them to do one....not nurture them to find out why they choose to spend time on t'internet, rather than drumming up business for me. The same goes for my employer - if he thinks I am not pulling my weight, I totally understand that he would want to move me on and get someone else in.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff