The economic consequences of Brexit (Vol 2)

[anonymous-user]

Is that the high minded moral position of "no dirty foreigners and rule by Ministerial decree"? Seriously, what is the high principle that justifies fking the UK?

[anonymous-user]

Gargamel said:

...
The long term future of the EU is ever closer integration, things that I can't support, socialising debt, an EU Army, harmonising tax regimes and such like. Never mind the fundamental legal differences and overruling of what should in my opinion be a sovereign parliament.

...

1. Have you heard of the UK veto?

2. What are the fundamental legal differences?

3. Can you identify instances in which Parliament has been overruled? How has that affected you?

4. Do you prefer rule by Ministerial edict to collective democracy? If so, why?

[Gargamel]

Breadvan72 said:

Is that the high minded moral position of "no dirty foreigners and rule by Ministerial decree"? Seriously, what is the high principle that justifies fking the UK?

Gone a bit tabloid there BV. The high principle is that I want the UK Parliament to be the sovereign law maker for the the UK. Not simply be a rubber stamp for EU legislation or be overuled by the European Courts.

I think it was once referred to as "self determination" - you can look it up, I am sure it is in some of your history books....;)

[p1stonhead]

Breadvan72 said:

Gargamel said:

...
The long term future of the EU is ever closer integration, things that I can't support, socialising debt, an EU Army, harmonising tax regimes and such like. Never mind the fundamental legal differences and overruling of what should in my opinion be a sovereign parliament.

...

1. Have you heard of the UK veto?

2. What are the fundamental legal differences?

3. Can you identify instances in which Parliament has been overruled? How has that affected you?

4. Do you prefer rule by Ministerial edict to collective democracy? If so, why?

Parliament needs to be soverign, until it interefers with glorious hard Brexit in any way. Then Darth May gets the final say end of.

Keep up chap.

[anonymous-user]

Why is the concession of sovereignty over about fifteen percent of legislation a threat? How does a Henry VIII clause (under which legislation will recieve less scrutiny than it does in the EU) uphold Parliamentary Sovereignty?

[TTwiggy]

Gargamel said:

Gone a bit tabloid there BV. The high principle is that I want the UK Parliament to be the sovereign law maker for the the UK. Not simply be a rubber stamp for EU legislation or be overuled by the European Courts.

I think it was once referred to as "self determination" - you can look it up, I am sure it is in some of your history books....;)

And yet in those instances where parliament and due process has appeared to interfere with the glorious revolution, brexiteers have stamped their feet, gnashed their teeth and rejoiced in the right wing press bandying words like 'traitor' about.

[Gargamel]

Breadvan72 said:

Why is the concession of sovereignty over about fifteen percent of legislation a threat? How does a Henry VIII clause (under which legislation will recieve less scrutiny than it does in the EU) uphold Parliamentary Sovereignty?

In case you missed this ... I am unsure how "opt outs" operate in this context, but it is pretty clear on the direction of travel. How can the demos in the UK express dissatisfaction and see change in the EU, when this is in effect ? To me I was a supporter of the EU until the Lisbon Treaty, sine then I have wanted a referendum, and I am happy with the result.



Acquis communautaire

(Photo: European Commission)
Acquis communautaire
The "acquis communautaire"is a very important concept in the European Union. It covers all treaties, EU legislation, international agreements, standards, court verdicts, fundamental rights provisions and horizontal principles in the treaties such as equality and non-discrimination. In short: EU-law.

All member states and their citizens must obey the Acquis and all candidate countries must accept the full Acquis to become a member of the European Union. The complete body of the EU Acquis is composed of more than 108,000 documents.

There is no official number of valid EU legal acts. The full picture may only be assembled by bringing together different pieces of information from different sources. We have partly done that and you can see the result under Number of Laws.
The full Acquis is difficult to define. It can be described as the total body of European Union law applicable in the EU. It is constantly evolving and comprises:
· The content, principles and political objectives of the Treaties
· Legislation adopted pursuant to the Treaties and the case law of the Court of Justice
· Standards adopted and referred to in EU legislation and international agreements
· Declarations and resolutions adopted by the Union
· Instruments under the Common Foreign and Security Policy
· Instruments under Justice and Home Affairs
· International agreements concluded by the Community and those entered into by the member states themselves within the sphere of the Union's activities.

Thus it includes all treaties, all EU legislation valid today, all EU Court verdicts, all types of decisons arising from the Foreign and Security Policy and Justice and Home Affairs provisions of the Treaties, as well as so-called soft law.

The Acquis Communautaire is translated into the official languages of the European Union.

The concept of the Acquis Commaunautaire includes the primacy of EU law and all other principles developed by the Court of Justice, partly through the Court's significant legal activism. Member states are also bound to accept future majority decisions and future verdicts from the EU Court.

The primacy of EU law over national law was explicitly declared in the rejected EU Constitution Article I-6. This article was deleted in the Lisbon Treaty. Instead, it was inserted as a footnote with the same content and with a specific reference to the Court verdicts establishing the primacy of EU law. It can now be found in Declaration Number 17 attached to the Lisbon Treaty.

Adoption and implementation of the Acquis are the basis of the accession negotiations for new EU memmber states. This principle is included in the Lisbon Treaty. The different areas for which changes are needed in order to meet the accession conditions are called "chapters of the Acquis".

The candidate member countries are required to adapt their administrative and institutional infrastructures and to bring their national legislation in line with Community legislation in the areas of the different chapters. These are reviewed during the screening of the Acquis and are evaluated regularly up until the time each chapter is closed.

The Acquis concept is crucial to understanding the EU and the enlargement and constitutional processes it involves.

[p1stonhead]

TTwiggy said:

Gargamel said:

Gone a bit tabloid there BV. The high principle is that I want the UK Parliament to be the sovereign law maker for the the UK. Not simply be a rubber stamp for EU legislation or be overuled by the European Courts.

I think it was once referred to as "self determination" - you can look it up, I am sure it is in some of your history books....;)

And yet in those instances where parliament and due process has appeared to interfere with the glorious revolution, brexiteers have stamped their feet, gnashed their teeth and rejoiced in the right wing press bandying words like 'traitor' about.

[Garvin]

Breadvan72 said:

Is that the high minded moral position of "no dirty foreigners and rule by Ministerial decree"? Seriously, what is the high principle that justifies fking the UK?

Wow, touch a nerve there did it? The last resort of the defeated Remainer raised (yawn) again - racism. Give it a rest will you, it has nothing to do with that topic but if it's the only retort you have then I suppose we'll just have to keep laughing at it and feeling sorry for your bigotry.

The reasons for this 'high minded' approach have been written countless times in this and other threads so, as oft said before by others, go do your own research. The reason you can't remember them is you are obviously one of those who has discarded them out of hand and never given them any credence. Perhaps opening up one's mind to consider other's views more objectively wouldn't go amiss.

But, in a nutshell, some Leavers do not want to align themselves with a regime that has behaved as it has, currently does and seems intent on continuing to do so. Also some Leavers believe that staying in the EU will eventually fk the UK more than getting out now will.

[Gargamel]

Breadvan72 said:

Why is the concession of sovereignty over about fifteen percent of legislation a threat? How does a Henry VIII clause (under which legislation will recieve less scrutiny than it does in the EU) uphold Parliamentary Sovereignty?

I think if you include statutory instruments and "adoption" you could make a case we are over 50%, but lets not argue semantics.

Apprciate I am the next leaver over the parapet for you guys to shoot at. The question was - what is the high principle. I have provided one, self determination.

Not the narrow bigoted view of leavers that BV and others have repeatedly tried to portray.

I have no control over the front pages of the right wing press, any more than I do over Gorgeous Georges predictions that we'd be a third world country by now.

The operation of parliament and the passing of new or reformed legislation, from the executive, to the chamber and revised by the Lords has worked terribly well. So well that much of it is adopted elsewhere in the world.

In terms of impact in me personally ? Well the VAT change is a good example.

I see many many positives in what the EU has done - but I think lots of those great things could be achieved through a trade federation NOT a political union.

[Gargamel]

Breadvan72 said:

Why is the concession of sovereignty over about fifteen percent of legislation a threat? How does a Henry VIII clause (under which legislation will recieve less scrutiny than it does in the EU) uphold Parliamentary Sovereignty?

If you don't like it you can vote them out at the next election.

Please tell me the process for voting out the EU commission ? or the EU President ? for a UK resident.

[anonymous-user]

The figure is about 15% according to detailed research by the LSE and Parliament itself.

You seem to be unaware of the proposal to limit Parliamentary scrutiny and increase the use of rule by edict. Is that what you want? You are also perhaps unaware of the legislative process in the EU. A clue: it involves a Parliament.

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 7th December 13:32

[jjlynn27]

Garvin said:

Wow, touch a nerve there did it? The last resort of the defeated Remainer raised (yawn) again - racism. Give it a rest will you, it has nothing to do with that topic but if it's the only retort you have then I suppose we'll just have to keep laughing at it and feeling sorry for your bigotry.

You always seem very very angry. Ranty and angry. Immigration was number one reason for vote leave, according to the person with the actual access to data. I do like the use of 'we' in a desperate attempt to give your ranting more gravitas.

Garvin said:

Perhaps opening up one's mind to consider other's views more objectively wouldn't go amiss.

Ah the irony.

Garvin said:

Also some Leavers believe that staying in the EU will eventually fk the UK more than getting out now will.

Some people believe in chemtrails. Or that big bad EU is robbing NHS of £350m a year.

Others would love to read impact analysis.

[Digga]

Camoradi said:

I don't understand why people are judging the state of negotiations, and the outcome for that matter, based on the grandstanding and childish name calling that goes on in our parliament. I think (or at least hope) the actual negotiations are being carried out in a calmer manner behind closed doors. I have some confidence in Tim Barrow who appears to be well qualified for the task, and a pretty unflappable character

As I said before, media hysteria and spin. See the pre-Brexit "UK will never vote to leave the EU" stance and also "Project Fear" for further insight.

[Gargamel]

Breadvan72 said:

The figure is about 15% according to detailed research by the LSE and Parliament itself.

You seem to be unaware of the proposal to limit Parliamentary scrutiny and increase the use of rule by edict. Is that what you want? You are also perhaps unaware of the legislative process in the EU. A clue: it's involves a Parliament.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36473105 - debatable whether 15% is really a reflection of what is right - I could eaully claim 63% and have a decent argument.

As said - if you or I don't like rule by edict (which is pretty far from being passed) We have a process to vote it out in the UK.

I have voted in the EU parliamentary elections every time, has that changed anything ? Does it affect the commission - No. Nor the council of minsters - where the UK in recent times has been unable to secure beneficial changes.

So hence my leave vote.

Perhaps you are right and I am wrong, what I won't accept is the continuous assertion from remainers that everyone who voted leave is a racist. Control of migration is an important topic for the EU and the UK, that we can't debate from where and who we allow in to the UK is one issue, but wasn't a feature in why I voted to leave.

[crankedup]

“project fear” I recall the Nations former Chancellor announcing with clarity and certainty how, if the Nation. opted to leave the EU, that emergency budget would be immeadiate and negatively substantial. How we would all be very much less wealthy and SME would be significantly affected, again negatively. The sky didn’t fall in, the sun still shines, albeit occasionally, no change there. Dirty foreigners, whoever they are, are no longer wishing to come to work in the U.K. and we have an almost full employment stat to enjoy. The Banking Industry seem to be settling down again, indeed some are expanding in the U.K. and building to accomadate expansion.
No doubt that some will wish to continue to express alternative POV and why it’s all a big mistake to leave the EU, but it’s a fact that the U.K. is leaving. Best we can do is make the best of it, or emigrate.

[Tuna]

Breadvan72 said:

1. Have you heard of the UK veto?

EU: "We're all going down the pub, you wanna come? Germany's buying"

UK: "Nah, I want to stay in and have a curry"

EU: "OH, go on, it'll be great, we're going to get stfaced. It's Angela's birthday!!"

UK: "I really don't want to"

EU: "Look, there's 27 of us going, why don't you come and have some Jagermeister!"

UK: "I'm going to have to use my veto... sorry"

EU: "That's OK, we're going down the pub anyway. Give us 20 quid"

UK: "What?!"

EU: "It's your share of the bar bill."

UK: "But I'm not going"

EU: "Yes, but we 're all going, so you owe us 20 quid"

etc. etc.

[Tuna]

Breadvan72 said:

Talking of paradigm shifts, Daily Mail comments are starting to look increasingly pro Remain.

A serious question for any serious minded Leavers (those who treat Leave as a religious belief need not bother to reply). Given what we now know, isn't it time to think again?

What exactly do we now know? I've seen so many inaccurate claims over what people think is happening in the negotiations, it's not clear to me what you think has changed?

I'm not sure why you think any serious minded Leavers would want to reply, as your message was followed by ranting, sneering and mutual back patting from a bunch of Remainers (I presume, from their posts) who clearly have not the slightest intention of engaging with any ideas that contradict their own.

[Crackie]

Tuna said:

Breadvan72 said:

1. Have you heard of the UK veto?

EU: "We're all going down the pub, you wanna come? Germany's buying"

UK: "Nah, I want to stay in and have a curry"

EU: "OH, go on, it'll be great, we're going to get stfaced. It's Angela's birthday!!"

UK: "I really don't want to"

EU: "Look, there's 27 of us going, why don't you come and have some Jagermeister!"

UK: "I'm going to have to use my veto... sorry"

EU: "That's OK, we're going down the pub anyway. Give us 20 quid"

UK: "What?!"

EU: "It's your share of the bar bill."

UK: "But I'm not going"

EU: "Yes, but we 're all going, so you owe us 20 quid"

etc. etc.

Better make it £50...........JCJ might turn up.

[Digga]

Crackie said:

Tuna said:

Breadvan72 said:

1. Have you heard of the UK veto?

EU: "We're all going down the pub, you wanna come? Germany's buying"

UK: "Nah, I want to stay in and have a curry"

EU: "OH, go on, it'll be great, we're going to get stfaced. It's Angela's birthday!!"

UK: "I really don't want to"

EU: "Look, there's 27 of us going, why don't you come and have some Jagermeister!"

UK: "I'm going to have to use my veto... sorry"

EU: "That's OK, we're going down the pub anyway. Give us 20 quid"

UK: "What?!"

EU: "It's your share of the bar bill."

UK: "But I'm not going"

EU: "Yes, but we 're all going, so you owe us 20 quid"

etc. etc.

Better make it £50...........JCJ might turn up.