News1 min ago
Brexit - Mp Has Attack Of Sanity - Shock!
67 Answers
Dr Sarah Wollaston has defected from the OUT campaign saying that the claims on the NHS, to wit
Vote Leave's claim that Brexit would free up £350m a week for the NHS "simply isn't true".
[ so what do MPs routinely do in the House of Lies ? sorry this is proper thread, oh and apolz to ABers for starting ANOTHER Brexit thread ]
the ref is here
http://
Vote Leave's claim that Brexit would free up £350m a week for the NHS "simply isn't true".
[ so what do MPs routinely do in the House of Lies ? sorry this is proper thread, oh and apolz to ABers for starting ANOTHER Brexit thread ]
the ref is here
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Peter Pedant. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Loss of sovereignty is not an all or nothing thing. A major part was handed over by Heath and subsequent PMs have handed over more. We still have a modicum left. But whether it matters if we are joining or planning to get out is highly questionable. This is the first time we, the public, have been asked if we like being controlled by EU law rather than make our own, so it is the first opportunity to choose to be or not be independent.
As for peace; I find it amazing that anyone puts that down to the EU. I don't see even how it has anything to do with the EEC before it either. It is down to mainly two things IMO. Understanding that allowing a nearby country to screw itself up causes problems for all, so international organisations need to exists to offer help to those who really want to turn their economy around. And the military agreements that ensure starting on one means starting on all. That's not to say we are no longer unaware of the problem of being dragging into conflict through such agreements, in the event of an attack there is more incentive these days to get around a table rather than simply respond immediately with military force. And of course the view of the collective UN, even if it isn't as useful as we might hope, at least has to be taken into consideration. It at least causes debate and statement of viewpoint before opting to go for hostilities after all. It's a breathing space.
As for peace; I find it amazing that anyone puts that down to the EU. I don't see even how it has anything to do with the EEC before it either. It is down to mainly two things IMO. Understanding that allowing a nearby country to screw itself up causes problems for all, so international organisations need to exists to offer help to those who really want to turn their economy around. And the military agreements that ensure starting on one means starting on all. That's not to say we are no longer unaware of the problem of being dragging into conflict through such agreements, in the event of an attack there is more incentive these days to get around a table rather than simply respond immediately with military force. And of course the view of the collective UN, even if it isn't as useful as we might hope, at least has to be taken into consideration. It at least causes debate and statement of viewpoint before opting to go for hostilities after all. It's a breathing space.
// This is the first time we have been asked if we like being controlled by EU law rather than make our own //
EU law is also our law because we are involved in formulating it, and our elected representatives vote on it. We can opt out if we do not agree, like we did with the Schengen Agreement.
The UK Government is quite happy to endorse most of what comes from the EU. Problem is, our MPs pass the buck onto the EU for THEIR failings. Everytime a Tory policy goes banana shaped, it is always Europes fault.
EU law is also our law because we are involved in formulating it, and our elected representatives vote on it. We can opt out if we do not agree, like we did with the Schengen Agreement.
The UK Government is quite happy to endorse most of what comes from the EU. Problem is, our MPs pass the buck onto the EU for THEIR failings. Everytime a Tory policy goes banana shaped, it is always Europes fault.
But we weren't. Our ministers can debate a potential law but they can only either pass or reject it. At most one can say that the laws our ministers voted in favour are accepted by us. Still not our laws though.
And the bigger issue is that other nations can vote the other way and override our right to set our own laws. Westminster has no rights to veto them. It is therefore not our law, but laws imposed by the EU.
If the UK government is "ok" with the law imposed then fine, but outside of the EU they could have chosen to introduce that same legislation anyway.
And the bigger issue is that other nations can vote the other way and override our right to set our own laws. Westminster has no rights to veto them. It is therefore not our law, but laws imposed by the EU.
If the UK government is "ok" with the law imposed then fine, but outside of the EU they could have chosen to introduce that same legislation anyway.
“One thing that puzzles me though is this. This woman is a GP, so why is a Tory MP in the first place ?”
Possibly, Mikey, because she enjoys the fruits of the ludicrous deal the last Labour government bestowed upon GPs (“work half as much and we’ll double your money”) and now wants to hang on to as much of her own dosh as possible (though she has a fat chance with the current “Conservative” administration).
The shortcoming here is that the “Leave “ campaign should not be proposing a manifesto with plans to spend the money they say we will save. That is the job of the government after the referendum. All the Brexiteers should be saying is that there will be extra dosh to spend as we think fit (which I assume nobody disputes).
Possibly, Mikey, because she enjoys the fruits of the ludicrous deal the last Labour government bestowed upon GPs (“work half as much and we’ll double your money”) and now wants to hang on to as much of her own dosh as possible (though she has a fat chance with the current “Conservative” administration).
The shortcoming here is that the “Leave “ campaign should not be proposing a manifesto with plans to spend the money they say we will save. That is the job of the government after the referendum. All the Brexiteers should be saying is that there will be extra dosh to spend as we think fit (which I assume nobody disputes).
“EU law is also our law because we are involved in formulating it, and our elected representatives vote on it.”
You keep on saying that, Gromit, and I keep on saying this (which I will repeat every time I see you post similarly so hopefully people will not blindly accept what you have said):
The UK is only involved in formulating EU law inasmuch as it has one (of 28) Commissioners. Ours is currently Mr Jonathan Hill (aka Baron Hill of Oreford) whose portfolio is “Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Union” (whatever that might be). Mr Hill has never troubled himself with the tiresome business of being elected by anyone in the UK (or, for that matter, anywhere else) because he’s never seen the need. After Trinity College Cambridge he became a “Special Advisor” to firstly, Kenneth Clarke and later John Major before being appointed Leader of the House of Lords and then Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Education. Baron Hill will not be found on the draughty hustings prior to the Bolton East by-election.
Our MEPs (who cannot propose or modify legislation, only accept or reject it) have about 10% of the votes in the EU Parliament. In more than 80% of the votes held in the EU Parliament in recent years where the UK has voted against the proposal on offer, the proposal has been passed anyway. This rises to 90% when considering solely financial matters.
Your contention that we have a blanket “opt out” from any particular piece of legislation (“We can opt out if we do not agree…”) is not correct. We were able to opt out of Schengen and the euro because those two major follies were foisted on the hapless citizens of the countries effected by means of treaty change. The UK would not have ratified the appropriate treaties if its opt out had not been agreed. However, the UK has no power of veto over “everyday” legislation (e.g. the banning of the sale of tungsten filament lightbulbs and powerful vacuum cleaners). Measures such as these are passed by majority voting in the EU Parliament (where, as above, we have 10% of the vote). To suggest the UK has such a veto is misleading. If the UK fails to adopt such measures and defies EU law it will face action by the EU which would ultimately be ruled upon by the European Court of Justice.
You have either been misled, or have misunderstood, or are deliberately misrepresenting the true position. It is not helpful to your argument to quote falsehoods, particularly if you have somebody like me reading them who is prepared to find out the facts, which are easily available.
If you believe that the situation I describe (which is somewhat different to your utopian vision) is somehow democratic and the wishes of the UK electorate are fairly reflected within the EU institutions and, most importantly, they have a modicum of control over those proposing them and voting on them then there’s not much I can say. My view is somewhat different and perhaps yours might be now you are acquainted with the facts.
You keep on saying that, Gromit, and I keep on saying this (which I will repeat every time I see you post similarly so hopefully people will not blindly accept what you have said):
The UK is only involved in formulating EU law inasmuch as it has one (of 28) Commissioners. Ours is currently Mr Jonathan Hill (aka Baron Hill of Oreford) whose portfolio is “Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Union” (whatever that might be). Mr Hill has never troubled himself with the tiresome business of being elected by anyone in the UK (or, for that matter, anywhere else) because he’s never seen the need. After Trinity College Cambridge he became a “Special Advisor” to firstly, Kenneth Clarke and later John Major before being appointed Leader of the House of Lords and then Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Education. Baron Hill will not be found on the draughty hustings prior to the Bolton East by-election.
Our MEPs (who cannot propose or modify legislation, only accept or reject it) have about 10% of the votes in the EU Parliament. In more than 80% of the votes held in the EU Parliament in recent years where the UK has voted against the proposal on offer, the proposal has been passed anyway. This rises to 90% when considering solely financial matters.
Your contention that we have a blanket “opt out” from any particular piece of legislation (“We can opt out if we do not agree…”) is not correct. We were able to opt out of Schengen and the euro because those two major follies were foisted on the hapless citizens of the countries effected by means of treaty change. The UK would not have ratified the appropriate treaties if its opt out had not been agreed. However, the UK has no power of veto over “everyday” legislation (e.g. the banning of the sale of tungsten filament lightbulbs and powerful vacuum cleaners). Measures such as these are passed by majority voting in the EU Parliament (where, as above, we have 10% of the vote). To suggest the UK has such a veto is misleading. If the UK fails to adopt such measures and defies EU law it will face action by the EU which would ultimately be ruled upon by the European Court of Justice.
You have either been misled, or have misunderstood, or are deliberately misrepresenting the true position. It is not helpful to your argument to quote falsehoods, particularly if you have somebody like me reading them who is prepared to find out the facts, which are easily available.
If you believe that the situation I describe (which is somewhat different to your utopian vision) is somehow democratic and the wishes of the UK electorate are fairly reflected within the EU institutions and, most importantly, they have a modicum of control over those proposing them and voting on them then there’s not much I can say. My view is somewhat different and perhaps yours might be now you are acquainted with the facts.
Jack....what it doesn't say is that the EU have banned curved bananas, an untruth that is trotted out from time to time by people too lazy to do some simple research.
What the EU directive does say is ::::
"The main provisions of the regulation were that bananas sold as unripened, green bananas should be green and unripened, firm and intact, fit for human consumption, not "affected by rotting", clean, free of pests and damage from pests, free from deformation or abnormal curvature, free from bruising, free of any foreign smell or taste"
And what could anybody argue about that ?
What the EU directive does say is ::::
"The main provisions of the regulation were that bananas sold as unripened, green bananas should be green and unripened, firm and intact, fit for human consumption, not "affected by rotting", clean, free of pests and damage from pests, free from deformation or abnormal curvature, free from bruising, free of any foreign smell or taste"
And what could anybody argue about that ?
TTT....no it didn't ! From your own link :::
"free from deformation or abnormal curvature"
People like you, in a desperate way to convince that the EU is horrid, always try to convince the rest of us to think that the interfering EU have tried to ban curvy bananas, and they never, ever, did !
As far as I can see, the spec for bananas included lots of things, all of which I would expect any regularity authority to do.
"free from deformation or abnormal curvature"
People like you, in a desperate way to convince that the EU is horrid, always try to convince the rest of us to think that the interfering EU have tried to ban curvy bananas, and they never, ever, did !
As far as I can see, the spec for bananas included lots of things, all of which I would expect any regularity authority to do.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.