O/T DDay for Brexit..well sort of...

[Exiletyke]

Not in the video I’ve just watched he calls for a closer working relationship - perhaps a bit like the Allied forces in World War II which was not one army but a close working relationship of several individual armies

Watch it again & read the subtitles
"Europe can no longer depend on the singular power & military capacity of individual member states"
Would you like it any clearer?

[ragingpup]

Did you not see the one where we can not pass a law to help our steel industry because the EU will not allow us to? Our parliament can only pass laws that do not infringe on EU law this alone infringes on our democracy or are you saying that is false?

How about the laws for fishing? We cannot make laws to our fisheries because we would step on the EU toes and many other such laws we cannot interfere with. I dont know about you but the right to make our own laws is what democracy means but I guess you do not agree with that FACT.

Did our parliament seek to pass a law and was stopped by the EU?

I'm aware that there are limits in the EU to what an individual country can do so as to stop them gaining a competitive advantage. This is all part of the agreed terms of a common market, that negotiates and acts collectively. True that a country can't suddenly cut their workforce pay or conditions. But where have we ever wanted to seek such an advantage prohibited under our agreed terms of entry?

More sinister, and this is the worry. We can improve our workforce pay and conditions as this doesn't give us an unfair advantage. But we seem determined to free ourselves off these agreements that effectively protect us from our own government.

Ask pros and cons. But am interested to see where we have actively sought to change a law and been actively prevented by the EU?

[BigLadonOS]

I'll have a look at the steel industry article when I get chance.

Re: fishing, I don't think that is a law imposition on us, that is the basic agreement drawn up by the EU? There are benefits and drawbacks for all countries in this way.

Re: right to make our own laws. What laws have we tried to make and been prevented by the EU against our will?

Here we go.

We do not try to make laws that would infringe on EU laws because it would be a total waste of time. The fact that we cannot make our own laws is what the point is. Or would you like the government to waste loads of time to try and make laws that would have no chance of passing.

[BigLadonOS]

Did our parliament seek to pass a law and was stopped by the EU?

I'm aware that there are limits in the EU to what an individual country can do so as to stop them gaining a competitive advantage. This is all part of the agreed terms of a common market, that negotiates and acts collectively. True that a country can't suddenly cut their workforce pay or conditions. But where have we ever wanted to seek such an advantage prohibited under our agreed terms of entry?

More sinister, and this is the worry. We can improve our workforce pay and conditions as this doesn't give us an unfair advantage. But we seem determined to free ourselves off these agreements that effectively protect us from our own government.

Ask pros and cons. But am interested to see where we have actively sought to change a law and been actively prevented by the EU?

Every time we have voted no to a new law or a change to existing law in the EU where yes has won. Does that not count in your book?

How about the fact that the UK government wanted to end austerity measures but were forced to continue them by the EU.

Like I have said many times on this thread I am sick and tired of educating people on here about what the EU does and if you really want to know these things go and find out for yourself instead of wanting everything put on a plate for you.

The problem here is that you are not willing to dig in to the workings of the EU but are more than happy to believe the brainwashing of remoaners and their propaganda machine.

Try thinking for yourself for once.

[Exiletyke]

Every time we have voted no to a new law or a change to existing law in the EU where yes has won. Does that not count in your book?

How about the fact that the UK government wanted to end austerity measures but were forced to continue them by the EU.

Like I have said many times on this thread I am sick and tired of educating people on here about what the EU does and if you really want to know these things go and find out for yourself instead of wanting everything put on a plate for you.

The problem here is that you are not willing to dig in to the workings of the EU but are more than happy to believe the brainwashing of remoaners and their propaganda machine.

Try thinking for yourself for once.

Keep up the education BL

[BigLadonOS]

[animallittle3]

I find raging a really good and intelligent poster with a real social conscience .

He's a supporter of Corbyn and his quest to fight the working class corner with the policies laid out in the Labour Party's last election manifesto .

What I find baffling is that Corbyn would find it impossible to implement his policies whilst in government and locked in to the EU in it's present form , even a People's Bank would be a non starter from what I've read recently .

The best the Labour Party could do within the EU is a Blair type government .

The four so called freedoms which in turn gives access to the single market lock country's in to accepting the neoliberal rhetoric , it's as clear as the nose on your face .

I find it bewildering the left including the trade unions and many in the Labour Party can't see it .

[KerrAvon]

I’m sorry, Biggie, but you are just plain wrong on many of your points:

The UK government could not bail out British Steel in a manner that would amount to a state subsidy, but if the UK leaves on WTO terms, we would also be prohibited from acting in that manner (hence the litigation that has been ongoing between the US and the EU for the last twenty years or so in respect of alleged subsidies to Boeing and Airbus). Similarly, any future trade deals will include ‘level playing field’ provisions that have the same effect.

The UK agreed a deal with the EU over the support provided to British Banks. Lloyds TSB had to be broken up as did RBS. When the latter could not find a buyer for part of its business to allow that to happen, they were required to provide substantial funding to challenger banks instead.

The EU cannot change EU law to force the UK to take part in the creation of a European Army as Security and Defence matters are specifically excluded from their jurisdiction. It would need a treaty change to alter that position. Treaty changes can only be made by a unanimous decision and by ratification by national governments (and by referendum under the constitutions of some member countries). For the same reason the EU could not impose majority voting on tax matters as you envisage in post 2793.

The EU did not prevent the UK from ending austerity. They would not have the jurisdiction to do so. You may be confused with the Eurozone where the ECB imposed financial disciplines on countries such as Greece in return for bail outs. The IMF did a similar thing to the UK in 1976 in return for stopping the country going bust.

[KerrAvon]

Did our parliament seek to pass a law and was stopped by the EU?

I'm aware that there are limits in the EU to what an individual country can do so as to stop them gaining a competitive advantage. This is all part of the agreed terms of a common market, that negotiates and acts collectively. True that a country can't suddenly cut their workforce pay or conditions. But where have we ever wanted to seek such an advantage prohibited under our agreed terms of entry?

More sinister, and this is the worry. We can improve our workforce pay and conditions as this doesn't give us an unfair advantage. But we seem determined to free ourselves off these agreements that effectively protect us from our own government.

Ask pros and cons. But am interested to see where we have actively sought to change a law and been actively prevented by the EU?

The EU can't prevent a country cutting their workforces pay. If you are referring to the minimum wage, that is a product of domestic not EU law. The UK has accepted some EU employment law, notably the working hours regulations and driver hours regulations.

[Exiletyke]

I’m sorry, Biggie, but you are just plain wrong on many of your points:

The UK government could not bail out British Steel in a manner that would amount to a state subsidy, but if the UK leaves on WTO terms, we would also be prohibited from acting in that manner (hence the litigation that has been ongoing between the US and the EU for the last twenty years or so in respect of alleged subsidies to Boeing and Airbus). Similarly, any future trade deals will include ‘level playing field’ provisions that have the same effect.

The UK agreed a deal with the EU over the support provided to British Banks. Lloyds TSB had to be broken up as did RBS. When the latter could not find a buyer for part of its business to allow that to happen, they were required to provide substantial funding to challenger banks instead.

The EU cannot change EU law to force the UK to take part in the creation of a European Army as Security and Defence matters are specifically excluded from their jurisdiction. It would need a treaty change to alter that position. Treaty changes can only be made by a unanimous decision and by ratification by national governments (and by referendum under the constitutions of some member countries). For the same reason the EU could not impose majority voting on tax matters as you envisage in post 2793.

The EU did not prevent the UK from ending austerity. They would not have the jurisdiction to do so. You may be confused with the Eurozone where the ECB imposed financial disciplines on countries such as Greece in return for bail outs. The IMF did a similar thing to the UK in 1976 in return for stopping the country going bust.

The UK agreed a deal with the EU to sort out the banking issue
Shows a different mindset to sorting British Steel. That's the point
Litigation been going on for the last twenty years or so [any news of a breakthrough] laughs loudly