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

Gove tells a string of fibs in his "why we should leave the EU" statement Watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arsenal96)
    That's not possible as EU members are obliged to pass it as it got a majority. Do you know how the EU works? If we could pass our own laws then would have done long ago and Cameron would have not gone begging to Brussels. As an EU signatory we have to abide by all regulation unless it is nation or Eurozone specific
    Lol, no we don't. It is unlawful not to incorporate EU law into UK law because of the European Communities Act 1972 (this being an Act of the UK Parliament), so the UK Supreme Court would be correct to rule it unlawful if we did not implement the plastic bag directive.

    However if the UK Parliament then (or prior) passed a law saying they were going to ignore the plastic bag thing anyway and/or disapply the European Communities Act 1972 then the Supreme Court (and indeed the European Court of Justice) would be correct to rule it lawful.

    (By the way, this is not to suggest the UK Parliament is at the mercy either of its own Supreme Court or the ECJ. All the courts are doing is giving a professional legal judgement on whether the new legislation is in accordance with the existing body of law. Even if the Supreme Court or ECJ rules ad infinitum that a particular piece of legislation is unlawful, Parliament is sovereign and is free to press on regardless of this judgement.)

    Even failing that, since the EU is not about to kick up a fuss about a member not implementing some poxy directive about plastic bags, if the British government ignored the directive it would not be challenged in court at all.

    If it came to a head over a failure by the UK Government to implement this, or any other, directive, and the UK Parliament for some obnoxious reason decided it was not prepared to pass a domestic law disapplying the European Communities Act in this instance, then the most the EU could do would be to kick us out of the club - surely a dream scenario for you.

    So if you want out, why jump when you can just ignore EU laws until such time as, if it comes to that, you get pushed?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    The EU has nothing to do with the vast majority of organisations we're a member of. .
    That has nothing to do with the fact that if we leave the EU then we are no longer able to exert the same influence on those institutions.

    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    That's pretty vague. We're already not part of the Eurozone. We potentially take a hit on trade with them but we buy far more from Europe than we sell to, so it's in their best interests to play nice on that front..
    Well, I will just deal with the first one. The fact that we buy more than we sell to them is irrelevant.

    The fact is that circa 50% of exports leave to the EU and 20% of imports come from the EU. So any trade tariffs will hit us worse.

    Using your logic, if Malta left the EU, then the EU would have to play nice with Malta because they export more than they import from the EU.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    The UK has it's own privacy and family rights laws. There are no broad concepts of human rights that are lacking from UK law, only minute interpretations that have been made by the ECtHR.

    Saying that the HRA allows greater implementation of the ECHR is not really an argument against scrapping the HRA and pulling out of the ECHR.
    It does, but not all the same.
    Things like not being able to deport someone is only because of Article 8 ECHR, given effect to in national law by the HRA. That decision was made on the basis of the ECHR, not private UK Law.
    You can also argue ECHR case law in English courts and the courts must take this into account which they previously didn't have to.

    I'm not making an argument for or against the HRA, just saying it is quite significant which is why there is much debate about whether it should be scrapped or not, it places certain duties on our courts which they otherwise would not have.

    What has now happened is that since the ECHR, convention rights have become infused with our common law system.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    That has nothing to do with the fact that if we leave the EU then we are no longer able to exert the same influence on those institutions.



    Well, I will just deal with the first one. The fact that we buy more than we sell to them is irrelevant.

    The fact is that circa 50% of exports leave to the EU and 20% of imports come from the EU. So any trade tariffs will hit us worse.

    Using your logic, if Malta left the EU, then the EU would have to play nice with Malta because they export more than they import from the EU.
    Malta is an absurd comparison. It is such a small economy that the amount they import is immaterial.

    What the UK imports from the EU is very important to individual member states. And we all know that one member state in particular drives the agenda of the whole union.

    Germany exported more to the UK in 2013 than it did to the US or France...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21127037

    That is no longer the case, but they still sold the best part of 80 billion euros worth of "stuff" to us in the last year...

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/germany/exports

    You talk as if the EU really is what is says it is, a Union. You do know that it is just a collection of individual countries fighting for their own narrow national interests and dominated by Germany, right?

    They don't care about "Union" wide trade numbers. They care about bilateral trade relations with the UK. And Germany, with the biggest trade surplus cares most.

    No, we will hold the whip hand in EU trade negotiations, try as hard as you might to talk our country down.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    That has nothing to do with the fact that if we leave the EU then we are no longer able to exert the same influence on those institutions.
    What institutions? What are these valuable institutions we'd miss so dearly?

    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Well, I will just deal with the first one. The fact that we buy more than we sell to them is irrelevant.

    The fact is that circa 50% of exports leave to the EU and 20% of imports come from the EU. So any trade tariffs will hit us worse.

    Using your logic, if Malta left the EU, then the EU would have to play nice with Malta because they export more than they import from the EU.
    No, that's not my logic. It's pretty clear the UK and Malta are not in the slightest in the same league. We have a £78 billion trade deficit with the EU, which hits £93 billion in goods alone if you ignore the surplus the UK has in services. That's about 13 years worth of Malta's entire economy, in our annual goods trade deficit with the EU. Our trade with the EU is worth almost £500 billion both ways, and like you said we account for 20% of their exports, which as an independent nation would be their single biggest export market.
    So no, the EU would not have to play nice with Malta, but the sheer magnitude of the value of trade at stake dictates it will with us.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    What institutions? What are these valuable institutions we'd miss so dearly? .
    Maybe you should try reading. I have mentioned energy at least twice.


    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    No, that's not my logic. It's pretty clear the UK and Malta are not in the slightest in the same league. We have a £78 billion trade deficit with the EU, which hits £93 billion in goods alone if you ignore the surplus the UK has in services. That's about 13 years worth of Malta's entire economy, in our annual goods trade deficit with the EU. Our trade with the EU is worth almost £500 billion both ways, and like you said we account for 20% of their exports, which as an independent nation would be their single biggest export market.
    So no, the EU would not have to play nice with Malta, but the sheer magnitude of the value of trade at stake dictates it will with us.
    Changing your argument as you are going along.

    First it is the account deficit, now it is the volume of trade that matters.

    And conveniently, you failed to mention that the EU accounts for 50% of our exports which doesn't even take into EU negotiated Trade deals with Non EU countries.

    Inevitably, the UK will be worse affected if trade barriers are erected and EU will have the advantage in any trade talks.

    Furthermore, there would be companies that would move to the continent if trade barriers are erected making the situation worse.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JezWeCan!)
    Malta is an absurd comparison. It is such a small economy that the amount they import is immaterial.
    .
    The comparison was meant to be absurd to illustrate the stupidity of his example.

    He talked SOLELY about Account deficit. A complete red herring.

    The fact is that we depend more upon them than vice versa so we will be at a disadvantage in any trade talks.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Maybe you should try reading. I have mentioned energy at least twice.
    'Energy' isn't an institution or organisation, simply the label of a field. Maybe you should try reading yourself. I'm asking for specific organisations within the EU framework that you think are valuable enough to warrant us staying in.

    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Changing your argument as you are going along.

    First it is the account deficit, now it is the volume of trade that matters.

    And conveniently, you failed to mention that the EU accounts for 50% of our exports which doesn't even take into EU negotiated Trade deals with Non EU countries.

    Inevitably, the UK will be worse affected if trade barriers are erected and EU will have the advantage in any trade talks.

    Furthermore, there would be companies that would move to the continent if trade barriers are erected making the situation worse.
    How am I changing my argument? The account deficit does matter. It's £93 billion in goods. I mentioned the volume of trading to elaborate on my point of how valuable the UK is to trading. In that respect they both matter. Stop being so rigid and trying to find ways to negate an argument on 'technicalities'. 'Oh you didn't mention that at the beginning'. So what?! It's completely and totally relevant to the point.

    I've not conveniently forgotten anything. I've never said the UK wouldn't suffer or is immune from risk. Merely that a trade war with the UK is essentially the EU cutting off it's nose to spite it's face, which I highly doubt they will do. If they are that petty then they are hardly the group of nations we want to be co-operating with in matters anyway. Oh look now you're talking about companies red herring blah blah moving the goal posts blah blah.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    The comparison was meant to be absurd to illustrate the stupidity of his example.

    He talked SOLELY about Account deficit. A complete red herring.

    The fact is that we depend more upon them than vice versa so we will be at a disadvantage in any trade talks.
    Well you clearly have no idea what a red herring is.
    But let me know when Malta tabs up a £93 billion goods trade deficit with the EU, then you won't look so silly making such arrogant statements without any foundation.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    'Energy' isn't an institution or organisation, simply the label of a field. Maybe you should try reading yourself. I'm asking for specific organisations within the EU framework that you think are valuable enough to warrant us staying in..
    The Commission.


    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    How am I changing my argument? The account deficit does matter. It's £93 billion in goods. I mentioned the volume of trading to elaborate on my point of how valuable the UK is to trading. In that respect they both matter. Stop being so rigid and trying to find ways to negate an argument on 'technicalities'. 'Oh you didn't mention that at the beginning'. So what?! It's completely and totally relevant to the point.
    I've not conveniently forgotten anything. I've never said the UK wouldn't suffer or is immune from risk. Merely that a trade war with the UK is essentially the EU cutting off it's nose to spite it's face, which I highly doubt they will do. If they are that petty then they are hardly the group of nations we want to be co-operating with in matters anyway.
    Well, it isn't a technicality. They are two different arguments.

    Again, you have no evidence that they wouldn't put up tariffs. They are not going to give Free trade without any concessions especially when they are in the stronger position.

    The reality is that like most Anti EU posters, you don't care about what happens to the Economy in the event of a Brexit.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    Well you clearly have no idea what a red herring is.
    But let me know when Malta tabs up a £93 billion goods trade deficit with the EU, then you won't look so silly making such arrogant statements without any foundation.
    That wasn't your argument.

    Your argument was that we are in a strong position because " we buy far more from Europe than we sell to".

    Ignoring the volume of trade. Ignoring that > 50% of UK Exports go through the EU.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Well, it isn't a technicality. They are two different arguments.

    Again, you have no evidence that they wouldn't put up tariffs. They are not going to give Free trade without any concessions especially when they are in the stronger position.

    The reality is that like most Anti EU posters, you don't care about what happens to the Economy in the event of a Brexit.
    Two different arguments, about the same thing, focusing on the same point. You're merely being pedantic, even though you yourself have introduced numerous different arguments and threads of logic over the course of our debate.

    What evidence do you have that they will put up tariffs? That is merely conjecture on your part. I don't think they will want to mess with £500 billion in annual two-way trade value, and hurt their £93 billion goods trade surplus, but hey-ho that's just me.

    What a stupid thing to say. Of course I do. I simply have a different opinion to you on how the economy will be affected.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    Two different arguments, about the same thing, focusing on the same point. You're merely being pedantic, even though you yourself have introduced numerous different arguments and threads of logic over the course of our debate. .
    No, I am not being pedantic. The account deficit is completely meaningless.


    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    What evidence do you have that they will put up tariffs? That is merely conjecture on your part. I don't think they will want to mess with £500 billion in annual two-way trade value, and hurt their £93 billion goods trade surplus, but hey-ho that's just me

    What a stupid thing to say. Of course I do. I simply have a different opinion to you on how the economy will be affected.
    If you are outside the EU, then you will have Tariffs. That is obvious, unless something else is negotiated. That is fact.

    Actually, the really dumb thing to say is " they are hardly the group of nations we want to be co-operating with in matters anyway" when more than 50% of British Exports go to the EU.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    That wasn't your argument.

    Your argument was that we are in a strong position because " we buy far more from Europe than we sell to".

    Ignoring the volume of trade. Ignoring that > 50% of UK Exports go through the EU.
    'A trade deficit is an economic measure of a negative balance of trade in which a country's imports exceeds its exports.' - Investopedia

    'We are in a strong position because buy far more from Europe than we sell to' and 'We have a trade deficit of £93 billion in goods so are valuable to the EU' are entirely related statements.
    Also I didn't realise I'm not allowed to elaborate or expand on points later on, otherwise I simply would have written you a treatise.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    'A trade deficit is an economic measure of a negative balance of trade in which a country's imports exceeds its exports.' - Investopedia

    'We are in a strong position because buy far more from Europe than we sell to' and 'We have a trade deficit of £93 billion in goods so are valuable to the EU' are entirely related statements.
    Also I didn't realise I'm not allowed to elaborate or expand on points later on, otherwise I simply would have written you a treatise.
    I didn't say they were not related. I said they were different. Try reading what I write.

    Maybe you should spend more time explaining why threatening 50% of British exports is going to improve the economy.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    No, I am not being pedantic. The account deficit is completely meaningless.
    You think the fact that the EU benefits massively from trading with us, with a £93 billion surplus in goods, in meaningless?


    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    If you are outside the EU, then you will have Tariffs. That is obvious, unless something else is negotiated. That is fact.
    No nation accounting for 1/5th of EU trade and a £93 trade surplus in goods for the EU has ever left the EU, that too is fact.

    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Actually, the really dumb thing to say is " they are hardly the group of nations we want to be co-operating with in matters anyway" when more than 50% of British Exports go to the EU.
    Actually what I said is that if they engage in a petty trade war with us because we leave the EU then they are... But nice quoting me out of context.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    You think the fact that the EU benefits massively from trading with us, with a £93 billion surplus in goods, in meaningless?
    As I have repeated many times, I said your original statement was meaningless.



    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    No nation accounting for 1/5th of EU trade and a £93 trade surplus in goods for the EU has ever left the EU, that too is fact.?
    No nation accounting for 1/2 or 5% has left the EU either. That too is fact?


    (Original post by pol pot noodles)

    Actually what I said is that if they engage in a petty trade war with us because we leave the EU then they are... But nice quoting me out of context.
    And even in that context, it is a dumb thing to say.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    I didn't say they were not related. I said they were different. Try reading what I write.

    Maybe you should spend more time explaining why threatening 50% of British exports is going to improve the economy.
    Ironically for someone who so arrogantly proclaims that I should try reading what you write, maybe you should do the same. My entire point is you are wrongly attempting to invalidate my argument through tedious pedanticism rather than focus on the actual substance, which any layman would easily be able to fathom. And you're proving my point with every post you write!

    Because we'd be free to focus trade efforts, and our resources in general, elsewhere.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    As I have repeated many times, I said your original statement was meaningless.
    I'm asking you to elaborate on that, clearly, since to proclaim a £93 billion trade deficit to be meaningless offhand is absurd.

    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    No nation accounting for 1/2 or 5% has left the EU either. That too is fact?
    That's a rather facetious remark to make for someone so pedantic about sticking to the topic. The UK's situation with the EU is unique. In that regards referencing how the EU behaves with nations that are clearly not in any way shape or form in a similar situation as the UK is irrelevant.

    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    And even in that context, it is a dumb thing to say.
    How? You want us to stay in bed with people you think would have no qualms screwing us over if we were to leave? Now that's dumb.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    Ironically for someone who so arrogantly proclaims that I should try reading what you write, maybe you should do the same. My entire point is you are wrongly attempting to invalidate my argument through tedious pedanticism rather than focus on the actual substance, which any layman would easily be able to fathom. And you're proving my point with every post you write!.
    OR maybe you should actually answer what I write instead of trying to insult me. You cannot though.

    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    Because we'd be free to focus trade efforts, and our resources in general, elsewhere.
    Being "free to focus trade efforts" is meaningless.

    The entire Anti EU argument is to place at least 50% of our EU and Non EU trade at risk to possibly get worse trade terms in other trade deals.

    IE It took 10 years to get a trade deal with South Korea. You have no evidence that outside of the EU, you could even get a similar one.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 2, 2016
  • 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
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • 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

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