Is the EU a Force For Good In Today&#x27;s Society?

Original post by Jimmy66

Is the EU a Force For Good In Today's Society?

I've been given this essay title to 'extend my learning and also for UCAS' and I have no idea what to talk about, any help would be appreciated.
Please no sweeping statements, just valid points backed up by explanation/evidence.

At best its a neutral force.

Reply 2

OP

Original post by MatureStudent36

At best its a neutral force.

What do you mean by 'neutral force'?

Reply 3

Original post by Jimmy66

What do you mean by 'neutral force'?

Neither good nor bad.

Reply 4

al_94

No. The EU is just another step towards having a one world government.

Reply 5

OP

Original post by al_94

No. The EU is just another step towards having a one world government.

And why do you think that's bad?

Reply 6

al_94

Original post by Jimmy66

And why do you think that's bad?

Every people should be able to decide their own leaders.

Reply 7

OP

Original post by al_94

Every people should be able to decide their own leaders.

What about the economic benefits of integration such as a lack of tariffs, greater competition and lower prices for consumers?

Reply 8

William Pitt

Original post by Jimmy66

Is the EU a Force For Good In Today's Society?

I've been given this essay title to 'extend my learning and also for UCAS' and I have no idea what to talk about, any help would be appreciated.
Please no sweeping statements, just valid points backed up by explanation/evidence.

It is a force for good, examples:

•

Interim relief granted at Factortame I, II, III cases by the ECJ which did not exist under British national law (see Lord Bridge's judgement in the House of Lords)

•

the case of Viking in which Finnish trade unions and organized labour were defended against capital relocation to Estonia

•

the case of Marshall wherein British national was granted equal rights under the extension of the definition of the state as direct effect of an EU directive

•

The case of Francovich wherein Italian national was granted remedies and damages for the principle of state liability

•

The case of van Gend en Loos wherein tax levies where deemed in breach of free trade principles between Germany and the Netherlands

•

The case of British Gas wherein claimant could sue the British state (British Gas was then a public company) for discrimination in employment

•

The recent case of Polish Constitutional Court ruling on kosher slaughtering rights of shechita for the Jewish minority in Poland in line with Polish Constitution's principle of consistent interpretation with EU law

^ These are just some examples of EU as a force for good by law and by force. This stems from the EU regulations and EU directive and the doctrine of the supremacy of EU Law over national provisions which are in breach of Community law

You can find HUNDREDS more on the internet with regards to gender equality, minority rights, free trade agreements, freedom of expression, freedom of movement, rights of labour/capital etc.

Reply 9

OP

Original post by William Pitt

It is a force for good, examples:

•

Interim relief granted at Factortame I, II, III cases by the ECJ which did not exist under British national law (see Lord Bridge's judgement in the House of Lords)

•

the case of Viking in which Finnish trade unions and organized labour were defended against capital relocation to Estonia

•

the case of Marshall wherein British national was granted equal rights under the extension of the definition of the state as direct effect of an EU directive

•

The case of Francovich wherein Italian national was granted remedies and damages for the principle of state liability

•

The case of van Gend en Loos wherein tax levies where deemed in breach of free trade principles between Germany and the Netherlands

•

The case of British Gas wherein claimant could sue the British state (British Gas was then a public company) for discrimination in employment

•

The recent case of Polish Constitutional Court ruling on kosher slaughtering rights of shechita for the Jewish minority in Poland in line with Polish Constitution's principle of consistent interpretation with EU law

^ These are just some examples of EU as a force for good by law and by force. This stems from the EU regulations and EU directive and the doctrine of the supremacy of EU Law over national provisions which are in breach of Community law

You can find HUNDREDS more on the internet with regards to gender equality, minority rights, free trade agreements, freedom of expression, freedom of movement, rights of labour/capital etc.

Thanks, big help :smile:

Any ideas you think I should include that argue against the EU?

Reply 10

Original post by William Pitt

It is a force for good, examples:

•

Interim relief granted at Factortame I, II, III cases by the ECJ which did not exist under British national law (see Lord Bridge's judgement in the House of Lords)

•

the case of Viking in which Finnish trade unions and organized labour were defended against capital relocation to Estonia

•

the case of Marshall wherein British national was granted equal rights under the extension of the definition of the state as direct effect of an EU directive

•

The case of Francovich wherein Italian national was granted remedies and damages for the principle of state liability

•

The case of van Gend en Loos wherein tax levies where deemed in breach of free trade principles between Germany and the Netherlands

•

The case of British Gas wherein claimant could sue the British state (British Gas was then a public company) for discrimination in employment

•

The recent case of Polish Constitutional Court ruling on kosher slaughtering rights of shechita for the Jewish minority in Poland in line with Polish Constitution's principle of consistent interpretation with EU law

^ These are just some examples of EU as a force for good by law and by force. This stems from the EU regulations and EU directive and the doctrine of the supremacy of EU Law over national provisions which are in breach of Community law

You can find HUNDREDS more on the internet with regards to gender equality, minority rights, free trade agreements, freedom of expression, freedom of movement, rights of labour/capital etc.

Such as the legalisation of homosexuality and the abolition of the death penalty? What about the equality at work act?

Oh, wait a minute we signed up to those by ourselves before the EU was in existence.

You can't just take random thinks that have happened in the last few years since the EU has been around.

It's like saying that the EU are responsible for steps reforming?

Reply 11

William Pitt

Original post by Jimmy66

Thanks, big help :smile:

Any ideas you think I should include that argue against the EU?

Of course the biggest argument against the EU is national sovereignty (in the case of the UK the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy = idea of 19th constitutional lawyer Dicey who said that parliament cannot make laws for the new parliament to follow, because British 'constitution' is uncodified but EU now makes some elements de facto an obligation for new parliaments to follow)

Then you have the legal certainty argument - EU v national law is so conflicting and mutually exclusive that people get confused and do not know which to follow etc and when/how a given eu directive is to be implemented.

Then you have the lack of democratic accountability to the electorate because of complicated relations between EU commission & EU Parliament etc. You have low turnouts at EU elections which also creates mandate problem.

The process can be time consuming/costly etc, so it is often referred to as the "elite" project, there was a case in which Italian mafia sued competition and totally destroyed them lol (I cannot remember the name).

It could also be argued that EU is good for geopolitical stability, but bad for the relocation of investment / capital which is bad for trade unions and good for business. Also, areas such as Common Agricultural Policy is bad for outside of EU competitors which makes us food more expensive (for consumers in general) and imposes levies and Ricardian protectionism on non-EU markets.

I would argue FOR EU because against is much more easier and less rewarding. Make a nice argument FOR the EU with some evaluation AGAINST it and you will be rewarded!

Original post by MatureStudent36

Such as the legalisation of homosexuality and the abolition of the death penalty? What about the equality at work act?

Oh, wait a minute we signed up to those by ourselves before the EU was in existence.

You can't just take random thinks that have happened in the last few years since the EU has been around.

It's like saying that the EU are responsible for steps reforming?

I'm not going to argue with you because you don't stand up to your name. You're not MatureStudent, you're just a EUrophobe. EU has by far been a force for good throughout the decades.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 12

Original post by William Pitt

Of course the biggest argument against the EU is national sovereignty (in the case of the UK the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy = idea of 19th constitutional lawyer Dicey who said that parliament cannot make laws for the new parliament to follow, because British 'constitution' is uncodified but EU now makes some elements de facto an obligation for new parliaments to follow)

Then you have the legal certainty argument - EU v national law is so conflicting and mutually exclusive that people get confused and do not know which to follow etc and when/how a given eu directive is to be implemented.

Then you have the lack of democratic accountability to the electorate because of complicated relations between EU commission & EU Parliament etc. You have low turnouts at EU elections which also creates mandate problem.

The process can be time consuming/costly etc, so it is often referred to as the "elite" project, there was a case in which Italian mafia sued competition and totally destroyed them lol (I cannot remember the name).

It could also be argued that EU is good for geopolitical stability, but bad for the relocation of investment / capital which is bad for trade unions and good for business. Also, areas such as Common Agricultural Policy is bad for outside of EU competitors which makes us food more expensive (for consumers in general) and imposes levies and Ricardian protectionism on non-EU markets.

I'm not going to argue with you because you don't stand up to your name. You're not MatureStudent, you're just a EUrophobe. EU has by far been a force for good throughout the decades.

So basically you're sticking your fingers in your ears and going 'laa laa laa laa.'

You've raised the benfits of being in the EU. I'm merely pointing out that those 'benefit' would've been along any way.

Reply 13