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

Brexit is the single biggest threat to the UK and Europe Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CherishFreedom)
    Link?
    https://fullfact.org/europe/two-thirds-uk-law-made-eu/

    Without counting EU regulations, which have a negligible effect on our daily lives, 13% of EU laws affect us.

    I would love for you to argue to me that 'EU regulations' on trade makes a drastic difference to our lives.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CherishFreedom)
    I think you better read this source:

    https://fullfact.org/news/what-propo...omes-brussels/

    The overall conclusion:

    'Indeed as the House of Commons Library concluded, it is "possible to justify any measure between 15% and 50% or thereabouts, depending on the approach.'

    I do not know where you got the 13% figure from.
    You're aware that many of these are specifications (many of which are/were British Standards) for design that we would still need to meet to trade right?

    As quoted from last nights debate, there have been exactly 4 bills out of the 100+ passed in the past 5 years which come from the EU and affect us.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elivercury)
    You're aware that many of these are specifications (many of which are/were British Standards) for design that we would still need to meet to trade right?

    As quoted from last nights debate, there have been exactly 4 bills out of the 100+ passed in the past 5 years which come from the EU and affect us.
    That's a pretty outrageous assertion there Mr Eliverycury would you care to actually provide a source for that? 4 bills? A 100 or more were passed in the 5 years? Do you think the EU only passed around 100 "bills" in the past 5 years (i'll give you a clue, they push more legislation through than that in a week let alone 5 years)

    Waiting for your sources xx
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    https://fullfact.org/europe/two-thirds-uk-law-made-eu/

    Without counting EU regulations, which have a negligible effect on our daily lives, 13% of EU laws affect us.

    I would love for you to argue to me that 'EU regulations' on trade makes a drastic difference to our lives.
    'One is the "regulation". This applies automatically in all EU member countries—so all EU regulations can be said to be part of UK law. As we'll see, this assumption is important for the end result of any calculation of EU-derived law in this country.'


    EU Regulations has a legal effect on the UK and they are decided by the EU, therefore I don't see why you would want to discount that from the overall figure. Your point of argument is about 'making our own laws' afterall.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elivercury)
    Nicola doesn't really have a mandate to have another referendum unless there are any significant changes with the UK. Leaving the EU would give her that mandate. Stating "well they'd probably do it anyway and it is their right to do it" doesn't change the fact it's a realistic outcome.

    Incidentally I voted yes in the referendum and would do so again if we left the EU.
    But are you saying that if the British majority wants to leave the EU, we should ignore this will in order to satisfy the Scottish people's views on the EU?

    Do you really think Cameron is going to be around long if he loses? He's already said he's off in a couple of years anyway, and that was without leaving the EU and breaking up the UK.

    That aside though, there is zero requirement for the conservative party to hold another general election should Cameron step down. Labour didn't do it when Brown was appointed after Blair. You vote for the party, not the prime minister.
    For another leader to be elected, the party must be certain that the person has to be electable and appeal to the majority. If not it will make the possibility of a vote of no confidence or a leadership challenge very likely. As I said, the last thing you would want to do in a democracy, is to go against the public.

    I don't actually think there will be a general election within the next year, sorry if I gave the impression I did. I think Gove/Boris will replace Cameron and ride it to 2020.

    I mean you can sympathise, but you've essentially agreed with what I have said. Not sharing my concerns over them happening is not the same as stating they won't happen.

    Also they haven't put "destroying the NHS" on either of their manifestos, but they are certainly doing a good job of it despite this. The claim that the public won't vote for them if they put "we're going to destroy the NHS" may be correct, but it's also ludicrous to think that would be their approach. Just look at the junior doctors debacle.
    I can sympathise because I agree that if those things truly happen it will be a bad thing. However I must look at this on the basis of likelihood and public opinions. Also I must consider the checks and balances in place in our electoral and democratic systems. Ultimately it will be the public who decides these things, not politicians.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by electrifeye)
    It annoys me when both sides make these grand claims about what will happen if we don't do the thing that they are campaigning to do. There are possible good and bad outcomes of either option, and we simply have no way of knowing what will happen no matter how long we debate it for.
    Ah I see you're new to politics / the world at large / human beings. Welcome to reality, Neo, enjoy your stay (I recommend the steak, it's organic)
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chris1479)
    That's a pretty outrageous assertion there Mr Eliverycury would you care to actually provide a source for that? 4 bills? A 100 or more were passed in the 5 years? Do you think the EU only passed around 100 "bills" in the past 5 years (i'll give you a clue, they push more legislation through than that in a week let alone 5 years)

    Waiting for your sources xx
    I gather your reading isn't up to par given you got my name incorrect, however as clearly stated it was quoted from last nights debate. If you want a finer break down of the assertion, I suggest you take it up with Ruth.

    Incidentally I didn't say the 100+ bills were all from the EU, I stated that out of the 100+ bills passed over the past 5 years that affect us, only 4 came from the EU. That was my understanding what what she said. This was immediately following citing the 13% from the HoC Library, so I would assume that is the ultimate source if you'd like to go have a poke around.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CherishFreedom)
    'One is the "regulation". This applies automatically in all EU member countries—so all EU regulations can be said to be part of UK law. As we'll see, this assumption is important for the end result of any calculation of EU-derived law in this country.'


    EU Regulations has a legal effect on the UK and they are decided by the EU, therefore I don't see why you would want to discount that from the overall figure. Your point of argument is about 'making our own laws' afterall.
    In other words, you are unconditionally Brexit regardless of how few laws are made or how negligible their effect on us is.

    Getting a tiny bit of democracy back is not important compared to economic integrity, don't come crying to me when you don't get a job or your NHS fails.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    In other words, you are unconditionally Brexit regardless of how few laws are made or how negligible their effect on us is.

    Getting a tiny bit of democracy back is not important compared to economic integrity, don't come crying to me when you don't get a job or your NHS fails.
    No, what I stated is exactly what I stated. Your argument is on 'making our own laws' however you have not counted EU regulations which has a legal effect in the UK, and are not made by the UK.

    Within context, the only thing you can discount from the overall figure is EU directives.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    In other words, you are unconditionally Brexit regardless of how few laws are made or how negligible their effect on us is.

    Getting a tiny bit of democracy back is not important compared to economic integrity, don't come crying to me when you don't get a job or your NHS fails.
    Hahahaha! What a turncoat! 'Isn't it worth trading just a little bit of your heritage as a free / democratic / liberal country for a cushy job in the NHS?' Come on man where is your backbone? Do you really believe that? Do you believe in Geld uber Alles to such an extent that you will literally give away your birthright as a free person in the cradle of democracy for the sake of an admin job in the NHS?

    I also like how you say "Getting a tiny bit of democracy back"... implicitly admits that the EU is undemocratic but that's ok because we get free money out of it. Mmkay.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elivercury)
    Will they? Plenty of people survive heart attacks and go on to live perfectly normal healthy lives. If you are happy to lower their chances of survival and dismiss it as "Oh well people die of heart attacks anyway" then I suggest you take a long look in the mirror and consider what your priorities really are.

    A handful of nutters shooting people at random is terrifying, and my heart goes out to anyone who has been/known a victim, but realistically they kill a very small number of people in the grand scheme of things when you're discussing a population of 500 million people.

    Incidentally I find it amusing you're against political change while voting leave...
    The issue is they agitate for bad political change, not all political change is equal in case you weren't aware. Do you wish to live under sharia? Because that's what they want.

    The way I see it, the terrorists are a threat to order, people dying of heart attacks are not.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    The issue is they agitate for bad political change, not all political change is equal in case you weren't aware. Do you wish to live under sharia? Because that's what they want.

    The way I see it, the terrorists are a threat to order, people dying of heart attacks are not.
    Elivercury is suffering from a severe case of confusion and not knowing what he's talking about, if that wasn't clear already. I mean a minute ago he said his source for Remain came directly out of the mouth of Ruth the Rotund Socialist at the debate last night. That's his source. He refused to justify it or say where it came from, but just the fact that a politician said it was enough for him. Make of that what you will.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chris1479)
    Hahahaha! What a turncoat! 'Isn't it worth trading just a little bit of your heritage as a free / democratic / liberal country for a cushy job in the NHS?' Come on man where is your backbone? Do you really believe that? Do you believe in Geld uber Alles to such an extent that you will literally give away your birthright as a free person in the cradle of democracy for the sake of an admin job in the NHS?

    I also like how you say "Getting a tiny bit of democracy back"... implicitly admits that the EU is undemocratic but that's ok because we get free money out of it. Mmkay.
    The EU is a bit undemocratic, but that's the least of my concerns. We already have like 90% of what constitutes a democracy.

    i hope you don't come crying and blaming liberals when Scotland vote to be independent within 24 months of Brexit.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JRKinder)
    Ironic how the leave campaign has branded Remain as 'project fear', yet they're the ones spreading the lies about Turkey 'imminently joining'; if this isn't scaremongering then I don't know what is. Turkey are NOT joining the EU and they NEVER WILL. They have been a candidate country for years and have made no progress at all towards becoming a member. They are highly authoritarian, anti-democratic and have a shakey human rights record. All of this will need to be overcome before they can even think of becoming EU members. Besides, I think we have a right to be scared of a gigantic economic downturn that will be caused by leaving.
    Talks on the 30th
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    The EU is a bit undemocratic, but that's the least of my concerns. We already have like 90% of what constitutes a democracy.

    i hope you don't come crying and blaming liberals when Scotland vote to be independent within 24 months of Brexit.
    Crying and blaming liberals when Scotland votes for independence?

    Are you kidding me? I'm English and would be jumping for joy if Scotland voted to go independent as, if you've looked at the polling map of the UK, Scotland (Wales as well actually) are completely at loggerheads with England viz the EU. They are europhiles, they LOVE the EU, whilst England is sitting in the metaphorical departure lounge with their bags packed and ready to go.

    So in short: PLEASE vote independent I can't wait to be rid of the whingers.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chris1479)
    Crying and blaming liberals when Scotland votes for independence?

    Are you kidding me? I'm English and would be jumping for joy if Scotland voted to go independent as, if you've looked at the polling map of the UK, Scotland (Wales as well actually) are completely at loggerheads with England viz the EU. They are europhiles, they LOVE the EU, whilst England is sitting in the metaphorical departure lounge with their bags packed and ready to go.

    So in short: PLEASE vote independent I can't wait to be rid of the whingers.
    You are truly clueless if you think a scottish referendum is good for us.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CherishFreedom)
    But are you saying that if the British majority wants to leave the EU, we should ignore this will in order to satisfy the Scottish people's views on the EU?



    For another leader to be elected, the party must be certain that the person has to be electable and appeal to the majority. If not it will make the possibility of a vote of no confidence or a leadership challenge very likely. As I said, the last thing you would want to do in a democracy, is to go against the public.



    I can sympathise because I agree that if those things truly happen it will be a bad thing. However I must look at this on the basis of likelihood and public opinions. Also I must consider the checks and balances in place in our electoral and democratic systems. Ultimately it will be the public who decides these things, not politicians.
    I'm saying that Scotland leaving is likely to happen if the Brexit happens. People want many things and they need to choose their own priorities. If they value leaving the EU over keeping the union together that is their choice. If they value the union over leaving the EU then that is also their choice. Unfortunately you can't isolate them from each other and as is always the case differing wants may conflict.

    How exactly would the new leader have to get majority public support? They have to get elected by a majority of their party and as they have a majority provided they have the support of their party they cannot face a vote of no confidence and will not face a leadership challenge. The public don't get a say in matters unless it goes to general election.

    I mean sure, if they force an unpopular candidate into PM position they'll get murdered in the next general election - just look at Brown. But after 10 years the odds for the conservative party gaining another term aren't likely to be fantastic (although who knows what the next 4 years hold?).

    Personally I don't have a huge amount of faith in our checks and balances. Unreasonable bills get forced through with as little discussion as possible on a semi-regular basis and ridiculous situations such as the junior doctors debacle happen. The junior doctors debacle which something like 80% of the public were against and they sided with the doctors. Clearly public opinion mattered there didn't it?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FqAaD_lsRw

    Attachment 554854

    In summary:

    - Scotland will have a second referendum if they vote majorly to remain, and they will leave us with a comfortable independence vote. The UK will break up.

    - The current Tory leaders will be replaced with even more right wing leaders, David Cameron and George Osbourne are pretty daft characters, but it could be so much worse.

    - There will probably be another general election within the next year, the majority of the Tory party will almost certainly flip to Boris Johnson's camp and rebel against David Cameron - and they will almost certainly win by a comfortable margin.

    - The NHS will crumble. Boris Johnson, Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Gove each separately tried to cut the NHS or otherwise undermine it. The extra '£350 million', accurate or not, would be spent compensating for the economic losses as a result of leaving.

    - Other EU countries will be inclined to do their own referendums, and the last few decades of European peace will be severed in two. Putin will take advantage of this.

    - Other things include the blatant economic crisis which will occur, we will have no leverage in the EU to deal with the migrant crisis and global warming, fascist/right-wing politics will succeed and these new leaders will be thriving on this destructive attitude.




    These are very real risks, do you honestly think getting 5% more democracy is worth it? Voting to leave is NOT an 'anti-establishment' vote, you are simply replacing the already unfavourable characters with even worse ones.

    We can't control immigration, no matter how much 'control' we have over it - this is proven by the Conservatives failed non-EU migrant aims. The extra money to be gained will be negligible compared to the following economic crash, and it certainly won't be spent on the NHS.
    What utter Betty Swollocks.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elivercury)
    I'm saying that Scotland leaving is likely to happen if the Brexit happens. People want many things and they need to choose their own priorities. If they value leaving the EU over keeping the union together that is their choice. If they value the union over leaving the EU then that is also their choice. Unfortunately you can't isolate them from each other and as is always the case differing wants may conflict.

    How exactly would the new leader have to get majority public support? They have to get elected by a majority of their party and as they have a majority provided they have the support of their party they cannot face a vote of no confidence and will not face a leadership challenge. The public don't get a say in matters unless it goes to general election.

    I mean sure, if they force an unpopular candidate into PM position they'll get murdered in the next general election - just look at Brown. But after 10 years the odds for the conservative party gaining another term aren't likely to be fantastic (although who knows what the next 4 years hold?).

    Personally I don't have a huge amount of faith in our checks and balances. Unreasonable bills get forced through with as little discussion as possible on a semi-regular basis and ridiculous situations such as the junior doctors debacle happen. The junior doctors debacle which something like 80% of the public were against and they sided with the doctors. Clearly public opinion mattered there didn't it?
    The public holds the government accountable by direct (elections) and indirect challenge. If Boris and Gove are very unpopular, this makes their leadership very unlikely because the Conservative Party as a whole would consider the electability of their leader. There is no point electing someone who is clearly unelectable. Politicians are afterall very concerned with their careers and the last thing they would want is for their party to lose governing power.

    If they do get elected, another point to consider, is that maybe Boris/Gove are not as unpopular as you think.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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.