2000 Eu Laws Scraped.

[webbo3]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12998589/Kemi-Badenoch-scraps-2-000-EU-laws-election.html

[youngmafbog]

//Yet we still have thousands of legacy EU laws.//

Yes and it will remain so.  Despite remainers claiming those that wanted to leave want to rewrite our laws, why would we.  Not all EU laws are bad, we just need to get rid of the odd ones.

[New Judge]

“In other words it is concerned with environmental protection.”

Let’s not rely on “other words.”  Let have a look at the actual words. Here’s the regulation that has been scrapped:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1988/1656/made

That regulation has nothing to do with protecting the environment. It is concerned solely with the loading and unloading of fish from boats.

If you read the purpose of the legislation from the government’s schedule, you will find it says this (as I’ve already provided):

“These Regulations implement in part Council Regulation (EEC) No.2078/92 (OJ No. L215, 30.7.92, p.85) on agricultural production methods compatible with the requirements of the protection of the environment and the maintenance of the countryside.”

No doubt there is other UK legislation which covers the rest of Council Regulation (EEC) No.2078/92 (OJ No. L215, 30.7.92, p.85). I chose this particular item because it was near the top of the list and its title amused me.

 Quite what the loading and unloading of fish has to do with “…agricultural production methods compatible with the requirements of the protection of the environment and the maintenance of the countryside” is anybody’s guess. It’s indicative of the ridiculous bureaucratic machinery that the EU uses to suck the life from the competitiveness of member states’ businesses.

Here’s the legislation that replaced it:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/2184/contents

You will see it contains similar provisions as the 1988 regulations. As an aside I have no idea why it is necessary at all. The 1974 Health & Safety at Work Act (drafted before the UK joined the EEC and enacted shortly afterwards) provides adequate protection in just about every working environment  so I can only imagine it was the EU that insisted on dedicated legislation for fishing boats. However, no matter.

In the very unlikely event that you find any EU legislation that has been revoked without replacement and that revocation has a serious detrimental effect on anybody in the UK (though do keep looking), I would still not agree that we should not control our own legislation. Lawmaking in the UK should be the sole preserve of one authority – the UK Parliament.  No other country outside the EU devolves its lawmaking to a foreign authority. It would be unthinkable and many people I have spoken to abroad who are unaware of the EU’s supremacy over national law are absolutely gobsmacked when they learn of it. Thankfully it’s a thing of the past in the UK now and our politicians must ensure it never happens again.

[New Judge]

“And the Government suddenly get round to thinking about replacing those laws and announce they will, just a few months before a general election.”

They have not “just got round to it”. The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill Had its first reading in the Commons in September 2022.

[tomus42]

//The issue under debate here is not one of the quality or value of the legislation //

Objection overruled. The issue under debate here is..

//2000 Eu laws scraped//

Which is wider topic than just the narrow aspect of it that you'd like to focus on.

[New Judge]

"The issue under debate here is..

//2000 Eu laws scraped//"

I think we may be at cross purposes (which may be my fault for not making my point sufficiently clear).

You began by saying “It's a bit weird that this is automatically assumed to be good when we don't even know what the laws are.”

I assumed that what you queried as perhaps not necessarily being “good” is the scrapping of those 2,000 laws. My view is that it is unconditionally “good” because, having considered those laws, the UK Parliament has decided they are either no longer necessary or not in the UK’s best interests. They were introduced as a requirement of our EU membership and with probably little or no regard as to whether they were necessary for or in the best interests of the UK. The UK Parliament has looked at them and decided that one or the other (or both) applies, so they are being revoked. So it doesn’t matter what they are. What matters is that the UK Parliament has examined them objectively and (most importantly) without the threat of the UK being prosecuted in the ECJ for not imposing them.

These laws were subsumed into UK legislation because the EU said we must do so. There was no consideration whether they were necessary in the UK or in our best interests. The powers to retain that discretion were signed away by UK politicians when they agreed to the various EU Treaties. Those powers have now been recovered so the legislation that stemmed from the EU is being examined – no longer under duress - and those which the UK believes are neither necessary nor in the UK’s best interests are being ditched. 

So what the laws involved are really doesn’t matter. What does matter is whether they are “good” or “bad” has been decided by the UK Parliament. If you think that’s irrelevant you need to consider this: none of those 2,000 laws have been scrutinised by the UK Parliament. MPs had no say in their drafting or implementation; their only role was to “rubber stamp” the UK equivalent (under threat of ECJ action against the UK if they refused). I don’t think that’s a particularly good way for any country to implement legislation.

[JACKSON-REACHER]

// we just need to get rid of the odd ones. //

2000 of them apparently.

[Raving-Mod]

ToraToraTora, you need a reminder.

"Any instances of members referring to other members as anything but their preferred names, preferred prefixes, or preferred pronouns will be removed. Repeated offences will result in suspensions."

If you do it again or you post anything relating to or questioning this deletion, I will suspend you.

[Togo]

^^ Does this include the ones who are banned or suspended but still post using another name? 

[Raving-Mod]

I'm specifically talking about ToraToraTora referring to JACKSON-REACHER by another, specific username. He will understand.

If you suspect a banned or suspended person is using another username, I suggest you contact the Ed with the details.