Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Llamas)
    Yes, horrible things like water purity laws. Do you honestly think that EU officials sit around all day thinking of ways to harm the UK?
    If you don't like a law (the British) parliament passes do you want to withdraw yourself from the United Kingdom?
    We can set our own water purity laws. And our own labour regulations for that matter. Why on earth do we need a beaurocratic EU dictating such common sense regulation?


    Yes, we have a lovely economy right now. Guess what? We're in the EU too.
    That's not to say we wouldn't even have an even better economy outside of the EU.
    Any compromise on our behalf should be met by one on theirs too.
    There's sometihng fundamentally wrong with that. If I put a knife to your neck and say "give me your wallet and phone." You have to compromise by emptying your pockets, but it doesn't mean it's fair that you compromise.

    I don't think there would need to be any childish punishment. The economic cost should be enough to discourage it.
    I think there would be one nevertheless. To warn off any other countries immediately.

    We've got free trade, and we don't have to sacrifice sound economic policy. I'm not advocating integration for integration's sake. I do however believe that many forms integration will be fruitful in the long term.
    We have? Why don't we import cheap agriculture produce from the 3rd world then?


    It was in one of the 'lil textbook things I had for my A-Level Econ. It's only an estimate anyhow, since something like that must be dreadfully difficult to calculate. Unless you're claiming we'd be better off without the EU then it doesn't really matter. But don't forget we entered as one of the poorer countries and now we're rich.
    It seems to directly conflict with the widely agreed term that we give out more than we get. We entered as one of the poorer countries? What are the stats on this? Even so, the EU was different back then. It didn't include 25 countries, most of which had GDP a tiny fraction of ours.


    It's not a good idea, and I never said it was. I just said abruptly stopping would be damaging.
    It's still possible to start moving away from integration, in a stable and sensible manner.

    You're right, but further integration along with good economic policy is the right direction!
    With further integration comes unsound economic policy. Inappropriate interest rates, fundamentally different ideas about labour market regulation.


    If British governments have been trying to abolish the CAP, I certainly havn't noticed it. Quite a few farmers in the UK get rich off the CAP too you know.
    We are the main contributers, the french/dutch are the main receivers.
    http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/6-12-2003-41618.asp
    This is the same old story, time after time when it comes to CAP reform. And to be fair, why would the rest of the EU agree to reform when it benefits them so? This is why the right wing in the rest of Europe is the pro integration bunch.

    The Bank of England's interest rates might not suit Manchester as much as London, Scotland as much as Wales, etc.
    We are inextricably a synched economy as a country, the difference between Manchester and London is utterly negligible, it's often the case that we're 100% out of synch with the EU. We are incidently, in 100% phase, and 80% in synch with the US.[/QUOTE]
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Scottus_Mus)
    I don't think that Godfrey Bloom is a man to be taken seriously! I mean he refers to the European Parliament as 'The European House Of Nonsence'.
    In fact the very opposite of what you say is true! Its because he calls it a house of nonsense that he should be listened to seriously! The European Parliament IS a nonsense, the Economist magazine correctly called the EU Parliament "a political freakshow" the reason being that it only gets in the news when bizarre things happen in it. The parliament is a nonsense because the MEP's have so little time to consider the vast volumes of legislation they have to vote on, so they rarely have the foggiest idea about what they're actually voting for! I'd call that a nonsense wouldn't you? When the EU parliament finds time to produce legislation on the curvature of vegetables don't you think we have gone off the scale of common sense?

    Incidentally, if you look at his profile you'll see Godfrey Bloom is a respected and established businessman and lectures in many european universities, so he knows what he's talking about!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greyhound01)
    In fact the very opposite of what you say is true! Its because he calls it a house of nonsense that he should be listened to seriously! The European Parliament IS a nonsense, the Economist magazine correctly called the EU Parliament "a political freakshow" the reason being that it only gets in the news when bizarre things happen in it. The parliament is a nonsense because the MEP's have so little time to consider the vast volumes of legislation they have to vote on, so they rarely have the foggiest idea about what they're actually voting for! I'd call that a nonsense wouldn't you? When the EU parliament finds time to produce legislation on the curvature of vegetables don't you think we have gone off the scale of common sense?

    Incidentally, if you look at his profile you'll see Godfrey Bloom is a respected and established businessman and lectures in many european universities, so he knows what he's talking about!
    I think that more people would listen to him and respect him if he tried to change Europe for the better and not just make a farce out of it. I'd listen a lot more to him if he offered ideas to improve Europe and used his knowledge and experience for the better rather than just voicing his opinions about how bad Europe is.

    They was an awful thing on Look North (Our local BBC News) where they talked to him live and he was just making a farce about Europe and spinning around in his chair and putting files in the bin. If he is that apposed to Europe as it stands then he either shouldn’t be in it or should be changing it for the better.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greyhound01)
    In fact the very opposite of what you say is true! Its because he calls it a house of nonsense that he should be listened to seriously! The European Parliament IS a nonsense, the Economist magazine correctly called the EU Parliament "a political freakshow" the reason being that it only gets in the news when bizarre things happen in it. The parliament is a nonsense because the MEP's have so little time to consider the vast volumes of legislation they have to vote on, so they rarely have the foggiest idea about what they're actually voting for! I'd call that a nonsense wouldn't you? When the EU parliament finds time to produce legislation on the curvature of vegetables don't you think we have gone off the scale of common sense?

    Incidentally, if you look at his profile you'll see Godfrey Bloom is a respected and established businessman and lectures in many european universities, so he knows what he's talking about!
    You do know that politicians have people employed to read these documents for them, right?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Scottus_Mus)
    I think that more people would listen to him and respect him if he tried to change Europe for the better and not just make a farce out of it. I'd listen a lot more to him if he offered ideas to improve Europe and used his knowledge and experience for the better rather than just voicing his opinions about how bad Europe is.

    They was an awful thing on Look North (Our local BBC News) where they talked to him live and he was just making a farce about Europe and spinning around in his chair and putting files in the bin. If he is that apposed to Europe as it stands then he either shouldn’t be in it or should be changing it for the better.
    Well enough people respect him and his stance to elect him in the first place! UKIP are trying to make a positive change to the continent of europe by abolishing the EU. This will improve democracy and prosperity throughout Europe. If, in his opinion the EU is inherently wrong as a concept why try suggest how to improve it when such "improvements" would be essentially superficial? The reason why it's good he's there is that for every UKIP MEP and eurosceptic from other nations that is in the parliament, the more we can expose the fraud, corruption and oligarchy that is inherent to the EU. Moreover, if UKIP has 11 MEP's this means there are 11 less federalists that can't be there!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Llamas)
    You do know that politicians have people employed to read these documents for them, right?
    Yes, I know that each MEP is allowed 4 full-time staff. But it is surely the job of the elected representative themselves to do the scrutinising and evaluating of legislation, if not, what's the point in elections when anyone can do the work of elected representatives for them?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greyhound01)
    Yes, I know that each MEP is allowed 4 full-time staff. But it is surely the job of the elected representative themselves to do the scrutinising and evaluating of legislation, if not, what's the point in elections when anyone can do the work of elected representatives for them?
    Unless you want to pay for each MEP to do a law degree it's never going to happen like that.

    The MEP's job isn't to scrutinise the legalese, they're not lawyers. The MEP is there to decide whether they think the legislation should be made law, because of what it stands for.

    Staff tell MEP that bill Y stands for X. MEP decides whether he should vote for bill Y on whether he agrees with X or not.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Llamas)
    Unless you want to pay for each MEP to do a law degree it's never going to happen like that.

    The MEP's job isn't to scrutinise the legalese, they're not lawyers. The MEP is there to decide whether they think the legislation should be made law, because of what it stands for.

    Staff tell MEP that bill Y stands for X. MEP decides whether he should vote for bill Y on whether he agrees with X or not.
    I think you misunderstand me slighty, when I say scrutinise all I mean is give a general evaluation of the pro's and con's, not the in depth legal evaluation you elude to. I agree with you about bill Y standing for X, but in the EU parliament even this simple process doesn't occur due to the vast volumes of legislation they have to rubber stamp.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greyhound01)
    I think you misunderstand me slighty, when I say scrutinise all I mean is give a general evaluation of the pro's and con's, not the in depth legal evaluation you elude to. I agree with you about bill Y standing for X, but in the EU parliament even this simple process doesn't occur due to the vast volumes of legislation they have to rubber stamp.
    What evidence do you have to back that up?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Obtaining evidence in the sense of getting MEP's to admit it is because they have always lied to protect the EU. Most MEP's (especially non-British ones) are such ardent federalists they would never dream of saying anything slightly negative about their beloved EU. The only people who tell us the truth about the EU are UKIP, one of their MEP's wrote about the voting procedure in an old edition of Independence News.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greyhound01)
    Obtaining evidence in the sense of getting MEP's to admit it is because they have always lied to protect the EU. Most MEP's (especially non-British ones) are such ardent federalists they would never dream of saying anything slightly negative about their beloved EU. The only people who tell us the truth about the EU are UKIP, one of their MEP's wrote about the voting procedure in an old edition of Independence News.
    Just because the UKIP MEP's are too lazy to do their work doesn't mean the hundreds of other MEP's are. I suspect the more towards the Eurosceptic end you get, the lazier the MEP gets.

    If there really is too much work, perhaps each party grouping of MEP's should get some extra staff to read it all for them to write synopses for their MEP's.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Llamas)
    If there really is too much work, perhaps each party grouping of MEP's should get some extra staff to read it all for them to write synopses for their MEP's.
    Or, the EU could stop meddling
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
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: August 8, 2004
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources

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.