Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

What laws do the Brexiteers want to change? watch

    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by typonaut)
    Actually, most of them do have nice short titles that everyone uses. But, I don't know, you could maybe match the list of UK bills - ie find 21 EU pieces of legislation?

    Here are a couple of examples:

    The Treaty of Lisbon: Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community

    The InfoSoc Directive: Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society
    The "short titles" you offer are the long titles, the short title is just the "Directive 2001/29/EC" bit, the rest is the long title, which is admittedly shorter than ours. If, for instance, we take the Equalities Act 2010, the short title is "Equalities Act 2010", the long title is
    "An Act to make provision to require Ministers of the Crown and others when making strategic decisions about the exercise of their functions to have regard to the desirability of reducing socio-economic inequalities; to reform and harmonise equality law and restate the greater part of the enactments relating to discrimination and harassment related to certain personal characteristics; to enable certain employers to be required to publish information about the differences in pay between male and female employees; to prohibit victimisation in certain circumstances; to require the exercise of certain functions to be with regard to the need to eliminate discrimination and other prohibited conduct; to enable duties to be imposed in relation to the exercise of public procurement functions; to increase equality of opportunity; to amend the law relating to rights and responsibilities in family relationships; and for connected purposes."
    Oh, and BTW, that act combines several earlier pieces of equalities legislation pre-dating EU mandates for such legislation, both primary and secondary, into a single Act.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by typonaut)
    Please cite a source for this claim. Apart from anything else the EC cannot give permission - only the CJEU can say whether a measure a member state has taken is compliant or not.
    The European Commission has supervised Member States' massive bank bailouts under the EU's state aid rules to ensure that the bailouts did not give rise to major distortions of competition within the EU's Single Market. In particular, the Commission required substantial restructuring of banks receiving aid (including major cuts in their activities) to ensure their future viability without further public support and to offset distortions of competition caused by the subsidies received (Examples: Northern Rock – more than £30 billion, RBS – more than £20 billion, Lloyds - £23 billion, ING – over €22 billion, Hypo Real Estate – €175 billion, HSH Nordbank - €30 billion, LBBW – over €17 billion etc.). This ensured that healthy banks were not put out of business by unfair competition from banks receiving subsidies, whilst allowing the banking sector to continue to finance investment and so create jobs.

    The Commission has authorised up to €4.5 trillion (1/3 of EU GDP) of state support, of which €1.6 trillion has been used.

    http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/gloss...dex_2_en.htmō
    (Original post by typonaut)
    The point I was making about national security and subsidies to state industries is that national security is not an EU competence. So if you make that claim, and can defend it (as some states have), then there is nothing the EU can do about it.
    Competition policy is an EU competence.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    The "short titles" you offer are the long titles, the short title is just the "Directive 2001/29/EC":
    By short title I believe that you meant something other than a numeric document reference, that's why I used "The Lisbon Treaty" or "The InfoSoc Directive". These are common shorthand for the referenced legislation.

    Oh, and BTW, that act combines several earlier pieces of equalities legislation pre-dating EU mandates for such legislation, both primary and secondary, into a single Act.
    BTW, I do have a first class law degree, a compulsory module of that is EU law, and I did an optional module on human rights law as well as public international law. Thanks for putting me straight. ;/
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tamora)
    Competition policy is an EU competence.
    All you have pointed out is that national governments have had an eye on EU policy - not that the EC has given them permission.

    As I previously wrote, you can get away with state aid if it is dressed-up as something that is beyond EU competency - ie national security. I really don't think there is anything controversial in arguing that coal or steel production could be described as a national security issue. I also doubt that any government would pay much heed to the EC if its banking system were crashing - this is absolutely a national security issue.

    It does not matter that competition is an EU competence, if you say the problem at hand is outside that competence (ie national security).

    I think it was Clauswitz who said that "War is the continuation of politics by other means". Kissinger, referring to Lenin, said "politics is the continuation of war by other means" (turning Clauswitz on his head) and others have said "economics is the continuation of war by other means".

    Economics is a national security issue.

    You can read this press release from the EC which tacitly recognises this problem in the electricity generating sector:

    http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-1372_en.htm
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by typonaut)
    All you have pointed out is that national governments have had an eye on EU policy - not that the EC has given them permission.
    From my previous post ...

    "The Commission has authorised up to €4.5 trillion (1/3 of EU GDP) of state support, of which €1.6 trillion has been used."


    So when the Commission authorised state support, ie bank bailouts, that's different to giving permission in your mind? EU policy isn't advisory or optional ... it's mandatory.

    I'm really unsure how your reasoning works there. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    But... it is our own country?

    You couldn't even name a single law that we don't get to control, you've just resorted to spouting the usual catchy phrases that don't actually mean anything.
    Yea, it's supposed to be. But now we're governed not by westminister, but by an unelected, undemocratic council of corrupt outlanders who don't care about our interests. We're living under an authoritarian government now and that needs to change.

    The free movement policy. It's enabling immigrants to subtract from our economy by sending the money back home and thereby helping their economy instead of ours. Then there's the death of British culture, the increased crime rates immigrants cause, most of them have no skills and the way they refuse to integrate and then force the indigenous population to change everything just to make them happy. It's deplorable!

    (Original post by jamesthehustler)
    the bills are all needed what are eu bill like curved bananas are not saleable bananas and stuff like that mostly just rubbish that makes no sense to any normal person
    Exactly!

    The whole "no GM food" thing too! GM food is better for you, more profitable for farmers and is resistant to diseases. But since the nerdy people in white coats made it, it must be 'bad.'

    (Original post by Louise12307)
    Hi, yes I know that it isn't EU legislation. Which is what makes it absurd. But that is what Brexit/ UKIP people are arguing for!
    Thing is, even the UN is heading towards sectarian policies. The whole "you can't say this because a minority might get offended" nonsense is just the tip of the iceberg. I will say what I want to, tyvm UN idiots.

    (Original post by jamesthehustler)
    maybe it the fact i have aspergers so have a far more rationalised complex mind and can see thing in the long term where the common market will still exist remain makes it the mercedes, versace and rolex will all just leave and not come back and we will do the same when we have rolls royces, mclarens, jaguars, minis, graffs
    to be fair rolex was founded in london for christ sakes
    Indeed. Asperger's is well known to cause significantly higher IQ and better reasoning ability. You shouldn't be so blunt about it though, neurotypicals are often hypersensitive to these things. It's illogical I know, but they're most often governed by emotion instead of logic.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peroxidation)
    The whole "no GM food" thing too! GM food is better for you, more profitable for farmers and is resistant to diseases. But since the nerdy people in white coats made it, it must be 'bad.'

    Indeed. Asperger's is well known to cause significantly higher IQ and better reasoning ability. You shouldn't be so blunt about it though, neurotypicals are often hypersensitive to these things. It's illogical I know, but they're most often governed by emotion instead of logic.
    and GM is cheap to produce overtime
    emotions can be a b***h and because i lack them it does make me more productive i mean just read the list of successes
    bill gates
    thomas edison
    henry ford
    michael jackson
    mark twain
    george orwell
    beethoven
    mozart
    thomas jefferson
    michelangelo
    jim henson
    satoshi tajiri
    charles darwin
    albert einstein
    jane austin
    isaac newton
    michael palin
    alfred hitchcock
    vladimir putin
    andy warhol
    robin williams
    abraham lincoln
    al gore
    tim burton
    bob dylan
    howard hughes
    jamie hyneman
    charlie chaplin
    alexander graham bell
    benjamin franklin
    friedrich nietzsche
    george washington
    marilyn monroe
    nikola tesla
    vincent van gogh
    LS lowry
    john denver
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamesthehustler)
    and GM is cheap to produce overtime
    emotions can be a b***h and because i lack them it does make me more productive i mean just read the list of successes
    bill gates
    thomas edison
    henry ford
    michael jackson
    mark twain
    george orwell
    beethoven
    mozart
    thomas jefferson
    michelangelo
    jim henson
    satoshi tajiri
    charles darwin
    albert einstein
    jane austin
    isaac newton
    michael palin
    alfred hitchcock
    vladimir putin
    andy warhol
    robin williams
    abraham lincoln
    al gore
    tim burton
    bob dylan
    howard hughes
    jamie hyneman
    charlie chaplin
    alexander graham bell
    benjamin franklin
    friedrich nietzsche
    george washington
    marilyn monroe
    nikola tesla
    vincent van gogh
    LS lowry
    john denver
    I know right! You can get so much more done when you don't have that useless emotional brain-fog pestering you. It took me a week's worth of free time to map out a simplified combustion mechanism for methane (I only went up to free radicals as improbable as peroxides, though they'd most likely dissociate right after forming if they even formed at all at those temperatures). But I'd wager that it would've taken me at least 2 weeks if my brain had to process all of the emotional baggage as well. Obsession is such a time consuming thing, I'm sure you know it well.

    We should probably stop derailing this thread though.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peroxidation)
    I know right! You can get so much more done when you don't have that useless emotional brain-fog pestering you. It took me a week's worth of free time to map out a simplified combustion mechanism for methane (I only went up to free radicals as improbable as peroxides, though they'd most likely dissociate right after forming if they even formed at all at those temperatures). But I'd wager that it would've taken me at least 2 weeks if my brain had to process all of the emotional baggage as well. Obsession is such a time consuming thing, I'm sure you know it well.

    We should probably stop derailing this thread though.
    the simple point is without emotions you can be
    powerful
    rich
    creative
    famous
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tamora)
    I'm really unsure how your reasoning works there. :rolleyes:
    It is pretty simple: the EC cannot "authorise" anything, it doesn't have the power to say "this is acceptable in EU law". The only body that has that power is the CJEU. The EC might be able to say "we don't care", but that's about the limit of its powers, if that.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peroxidation)
    The free movement policy. It's enabling immigrants to subtract from our economy by sending the money back home and thereby helping their economy instead of ours. Then there's the death of British culture, the increased crime rates immigrants cause, most of them have no skills and the way they refuse to integrate and then force the indigenous population to change everything just to make them happy. It's deplorable!
    Is this a particular EU migrant rant, or are you just ranting about migrants in general?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by typonaut)
    It is pretty simple: the EC cannot "authorise" anything, it doesn't have the power to say "this is acceptable in EU law". The only body that has that power is the CJEU. The EC might be able to say "we don't care", but that's about the limit of its powers, if that.
    Well that's a first ... an EU supporter effectively saying the Commission lied. Or how else am I supposed to interpret what the Commission says?

    Again, on bank bailouts, from the EC itself ...

    "The Commission has authorised up to €4.5 trillion (1/3 of EU GDP) of state support, of which €1.6 trillion has been used."

    Are you actually saying the EC had no power to authorise the bank bailouts despite what it says? What's your source for this?
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.