peterms Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 58 minutes ago, bickster said: I'll spell this out for you again. TRADE RULES, TRADE RULES, TRADE RULES the EU deal with TRADE RULES, not laws. Believe it or not, you've been lied to It's you yourself that isn't open to debate because you appear to be lacking in the fundamentals of the situation. The EU do not dictate our laws to us. This isn't up for debate, it's fact and when you realise this, you'll maybe see that you've been lied to The EU makes primary and secondary legislation, binding on member states, going well beyond trade. 13 minutes ago, desensitized43 said: Can you name examples of EU legislation that's been brought in that you don't like? Or is it just the concept of legislation being made elsewhere? It is often the case that people using the "sovereignty" argument can't quote specific pieces of legislation or directives or judgements that they disagree with, and we especially see this with vox pop arguments. That does not contradict the point above. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 18 minutes ago, desensitized43 said: Can you name examples of EU legislation that's been brought in that you don't like? Or is it just the concept of legislation being made elsewhere? Again, I am not arguing either way here - my post was asking about the problem of some people taking the moral high ground when discussing their views on Brexit. Having said that, there are reasons why some people feel the self governance is something that is missing while being within the EU structures. I simply feel that if we ridicule those people (and I feel this is often the case) then we are just as ignorant as the previously discussed 'racist bigots'. Quote The primacy of European Union law (sometimes referred to as supremacy) is an EU law principle that when there is conflict between European law and the law of Member States, European law prevails; the norms of national law have to be set aside. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primacy_of_European_Union_law Quote The legal doctrine of supremacy of EU law means that EU labour law takes precedence over domestic labour law. The creation of a new legal order of EU law and its supremacy means that EU institutions may create rules affecting employment and industrial relations, even where some Member States oppose such rules and vote against them in those EU institutions, provided that a voting procedure based on a majority rule applies to that specific field. Where adopted, these rules must be enforced in national courts, even where this involves overriding rules produced by domestic law-making institutions. In the course of time, national constitutional courts have accepted the principles of supremacy of the EU law affirmed by the European Court of Justice, but at the same time they have envisaged a limit to it in the fundamental principles of each national constitution. https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/supremacy-of-eu-law Quote ''by creating a Community of unlimited duration, having its own institutions, its own personality, its own legal capacity and capacity of representation on the international plane and, more particularly, real powers stemming from a limitation of sovereignty or a transfer of powers from the States to the Community, the Member States have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields, and have thus created a body of law which binds both their nationals and themselves.” 6 One thing deserves to be mentioned is that the ECJ defined EU law as a “new legal order” different from ordinary international treaties. According to Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a state cannot be bound by a treaty without its consent. However, from the ECJ’s perspective, member states are bound by EU law automatically as a result of establishment of EU http://nicholasnicoletti.com/EU Conference/Paper Submissions/Zhang, Aisi - Supremacy of EU Law.pdf 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitized43 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 4 minutes ago, peterms said: It is often the case that people using the "sovereignty" argument can't quote specific pieces of legislation or directives or judgements that they disagree with, and we especially see this with vox pop arguments. That does not contradict the point above. Very true. That's why I don't like the whole "sovereignty" argument and people saying they don't like primacy of certain EU legislation. From what I've experienced those arguments are cover for a little-englander attitude of a dislike of all things foreign (how dare they make our laws etc). Who's to say any legislation made in westminster by Brits is in any way superior to those made in Brussels by Brits and 27 other nationalities...Bad legislation is bad legislation regardless where it's made and what language the person making it speaks. As has been pointed out by others, the Brexiters made a big deal of saying we'd just leave and sign a free trade deal. In that scenario there's an alignment of standards that happens in the product areas covered by the agreement (that's what the essence of the deal is). 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitized43 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 21 minutes ago, Mic09 said: Again, I am not arguing either way here - my post was asking about the problem of some people taking the moral high ground when discussing their views on Brexit. Having said that, there are reasons why some people feel the self governance is something that is missing while being within the EU structures. I simply feel that if we ridicule those people (and I feel this is often the case) then we are just as ignorant as the previously discussed 'racist bigots'. I wouldn't call them racists. Xenophobic maybe. Certainly in a lot of cases there is a degree of ignorance. I had a discussion with a taxi driver the other day who was adamant (and I mean strongly adamant) that the French want to leave the EU...They've just elected a massive europhile ffs...what can you say to someone who thinks that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 Just now, desensitized43 said: I wouldn't call them racists. Xenophobic maybe. Certainly in a lot of cases there is a degree of ignorance. I had a discussion with a taxi driver the other day who was adamant (and I mean strongly adamant) that the French want to leave the EU...They've just elected a massive europhile ffs...what can you say to someone who thinks that? That't true. But then again I think my hypothesis that some people who want to leave are ridiculed regardless of their reasoning is true, primarily considering I have been accused of 'being lied to' just a few posts back And I didn't even make an argument for leaving! You have your taxi drivers who are xenophobic, but you also have the people who will call anyone who doesn't want to hold hands with Mrs Merkel a racist or a right wing facist. I just feel that there isn't any room in the public debate to present a leave argument without being called a backwards UKIP supporting right wing idiot, and that is not healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitized43 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 2 minutes ago, Mic09 said: That't true. But then again I think my hypothesis that some people who want to leave are ridiculed regardless of their reasoning is true, primarily considering I have been accused of 'being lied to' just a few posts back And I didn't even make an argument for leaving! You have your taxi drivers who are xenophobic, but you also have the people who will call anyone who doesn't want to hold hands with Mrs Merkel a racist or a right wing facist. I just feel that there isn't any room in the public debate to present a leave argument without being called a backwards UKIP supporting right wing idiot, and that is not healthy. Why do you perceive that you're being ridiculed? If I'd been lied to and someone told me that I'd been lied to I wouldn't automatically think that was an attempt to ridicule me. No one is calling you stupid. Even the most intelligent among us can be deceived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 2 hours ago, bickster said: I'll spell this out for you again. TRADE RULES, TRADE RULES, TRADE RULES the EU deal with TRADE RULES, not laws. Believe it or not, you've been lied to It's you yourself that isn't open to debate because you appear to be lacking in the fundamentals of the situation. The EU do not dictate our laws to us. This isn't up for debate, it's fact and when you realise this, you'll maybe see that you've been lied to that's not really true though is it .. if you wanted to split hairs you could say the EU lays down regulations and directives , but those regulations then apply to all 28 member states - so most(all) EU regulations become part of UK law.. EU Directives are more Corbyn like "aspirations" but even so they are supposed to be implemented into law so whilst they may not "dictate our laws to us" If you count all EU regulations, EU-related Acts of Parliament, and EU-related Statutory Instruments, then there is a case to say about 62% of laws introduced between 1993 and 2014 that apply in the UK are implemented EU obligations ... for balance some of those would have become UK law anyway ( which counters remainers claims about " we can thank the EU for xxxxx " ) .... Hence the usual claim from some is that around 13% of UK laws come from the EU and the claim from others of the above figure of 62% of UK law (Presumably the Farage types) ... either way EU law does have a presence and effect in UK law , and that isn't up for debate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 5 minutes ago, desensitized43 said: Why do you perceive that you're being ridiculed? If I'd been lied to and someone told me that I'd been lied to I wouldn't automatically think that was an attempt to ridicule me. No one is calling you stupid. Even the most intelligent among us can be deceived. 100% agreed - however, I didn't even express my view on Brexit here yet the assumption is I have been lied to, simply because I outlined an argument from the leave side. That is not healthy for the debate. I simply feel there is increasing hostility to anyone that wants to leave and people who want to remain are claiming much of the moral high ground. No one is calling me stupid, yet an argument that I backed and documented with 3 different sources has been ''ridiculed'' as bullshit. I guess that's my point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 4 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: that's not really true though is it .. if you wanted to split hairs you could say the EU lays down regulations and directives , but those regulations then apply to all 28 member states - so most(all) EU regulations become part of UK law.. EU Directives are more Corbyn like "aspirations" but even so they are supposed to be implemented into law so whilst they may not "dictate our laws to us" If you count all EU regulations, EU-related Acts of Parliament, and EU-related Statutory Instruments, then there is a case to say about 62% of laws introduced between 1993 and 2014 that apply in the UK are implemented EU obligations ... for balance some of those would have become UK law anyway ( which counters remainers claims about " we can thank the EU for xxxxx " ) .... Hence the usual claim from some is that around 13% of UK laws come from the EU and the claim from others of the above figure of 62% of UK law (Presumably the Farage types) ... either way EU law does have a presence and effect in UK law , and that isn't up for debate I backed this up with links on the previous side. Regardless of whether you are in or out, this is an argument to be discussed and not brushed to the side. Unfortunately, people who are not willing to look at both sides are often the loudest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 32 minutes ago, desensitized43 said: I wouldn't call them racists. Xenophobic maybe. Certainly in a lot of cases there is a degree of ignorance. I had a discussion with a taxi driver the other day who was adamant (and I mean strongly adamant) that the French want to leave the EU...They've just elected a massive europhile ffs...what can you say to someone who thinks that? tbf Macron himself said in similar context to the UK , France would probably vote Leave . so your taxi driver might have a point , all be it not maybe enough to be strongly adamant France would likely have followed the U.K. and also voted to leave the European Union if the opportunity had presented itself, French President Emmanuel Macron said in an interview Sunday. Macron said that, if the French people had been put in a similar situation and were asked to vote “yes or no” on EU membership, then they would probably have chosen to leave the bloc. “Middle classes and working classes and especially the oldest in your country decided that the recent decades were not in their favor and that the adjustments made by both the EU and globalization… wasn’t in their favor,” Macron told the BBC about the Brexit vote. When asked if France could take the same decision as the British people, Macron said: “Yeah, probably. Probably in a similar context, but our context was very different.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitized43 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 2 minutes ago, Mic09 said: 100% agreed - however, I didn't even express my view on Brexit here yet the assumption is I have been lied to, simply because I outlined an argument from the leave side. That is not healthy for the debate. I simply feel there is increasing hostility to anyone that wants to leave and people who want to remain are claiming much of the moral high ground. No one is calling me stupid, yet an argument that I backed and documented with 3 different sources has been ''ridiculed'' as bullshit. I guess that's my point I think people on all sides are just fed up of the whole thing tbh. When you've got a roughly 50-50 split of opinion on a binary issue led by shady figures on both sides of the argument with questionable vested interests and more than a hint that one side was breaking all kinds of rules is it any reason there's bad feeling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted April 30, 2019 Moderator Share Posted April 30, 2019 6 minutes ago, Mic09 said: I didn't even express my view on Brexit here yet the assumption is I have been lied to, simply because I outlined an argument from the leave side I didn't mention which way you voted or what your current preference was. That delusion is all your own Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 2 minutes ago, Mic09 said: Regardless of whether you are in or out, this is an argument to be discussed and not brushed to the side. Unfortunately, people who are not willing to look at both sides are often the loudest. I understand the sentiment and even the frustration , but I think that's also a bit too much of a sweeping generalisation , much as VT does love them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 4 minutes ago, bickster said: I didn't mention which way you voted or what your current preference was. That delusion is all your own I didn't say you did You said I have been lied to, and I don't understand how as I did not present my own personal point of view on matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 9 minutes ago, desensitized43 said: I think people on all sides are just fed up of the whole thing tbh. When you've got a roughly 50-50 split of opinion on a binary issue led by shady figures on both sides of the argument with questionable vested interests and more than a hint that one side was breaking all kinds of rules is it any reason there's bad feeling? This is it really. At least a vote to stay didn't destroy our economy and world standing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhatAboutTheFinish Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 1 hour ago, desensitized43 said: Can you name examples of EU legislation that's been brought in that you don't like? Or is it just the concept of legislation being made elsewhere? Do people trot out this line if they were in discussions with people opposed to, for example, a constitutional monarchy? Do you feel the way legislation is made, regardless of the areas it covers, should be a matter of public interest and debate or should it just be blindly accepted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted April 30, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted April 30, 2019 46 minutes ago, Mic09 said: considering I have been accused of 'being lied to' just a few posts back We've all been lied to. That is undeniable. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted April 30, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted April 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said: Do you feel the way legislation is made, regardless of the areas it covers, should be a matter of public interest and debate or should it just be blindly accepted? That's a really good point. It's one of the massive failings of the Leave people. Why? because when they said " we can leave and take back control and have all the benefits of trade etc. with the EU" they were lying, they were not doing what you say. Because if you're going to have the trade with the EU, have the same standards and so on, then those standards and the legislation has to be controlled by the trading block, not individually by nations like the UK. If that point had been acknowledged and discussed by the Leave people - the lie that you can leave and take back control of our laws and borders and have all the benefits, still, would not have taken off and been believed by many people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitized43 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 5 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said: Do people trot out this line if they were in discussions with people opposed to, for example, a constitutional monarchy? Do you feel the way legislation is made, regardless of the areas it covers, should be a matter of public interest and debate or should it just be blindly accepted? I'm just curious how people get to the positions that they do...nothing more than that. The way legislation is made is always subject to debate. It's called parliament (UK and EU). No legislation is just blindly accepted as it has to go through a process. I'm interested why people think our parliamentarians are more capable than those sat in Brussels or Strasbourg. I think if the last 3 years (and more tbh) has taught us anything it's that our parliament can't be trusted with more powers to make legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted April 30, 2019 Share Posted April 30, 2019 16 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: This is it really. At least a vote to stay didn't destroy our economy and world standing. economies aren't linear , but a vote to leave hasn't destroyed our economy either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts