Brexit 5

I suspect my views have very little in common with Paul Nuttall except for wanting to leave the EU. I don't propose to waste time finding out.

I have pondered fullfact.org/europe/eu-law-and-uk/ from the website kindly suggested. I have re-read it and it seems to show not how little sovereignty successive Parliaments have given up but how much. It confirms, in contrast to what has been stated here:

' ‘Regulations’ and ‘directives’ occupy a central position in the system of EU rules... ...Regulations and directives are legally binding. They normally apply in all 28 EU member countries, although some directives are addressed to particular members.

...And both types of law are based on articles of the EU treaties that give the EU institutions the authority to pass laws in the relevant field.'

I read from the UK Parliament website that there are about 1,000 submissions from the EU per Parliamentary session. There is 'scrutiny' and dialogue but:

'Two important ideas make this system work. These are ‘supremacy’, meaning the higher status of EU laws compared to national laws, and ‘direct effect’, meaning that EU laws can be relied on in court.'

It seems that, should the UK ever want to contradict EU law, it would be incompatible with continued membership. Before 23 June, people on all sides said we were voting on that issue.

Paul Nuttall says he's doing that, Cunco. He wants to talk about Exit, not Brexit, just leave with no article 50.

I am trying to think a little less about Brexit. When I saw yesterday's headline: 'Carney to push Bussels for a smooth exit', I thought he was talking about his Christmas dinner.

Azie, Cameron is doing the same as Osborne, earning lots of money for giving speeches about their failed attempt to keep us in the EU.
Cameron is given £120,000 for an hour's speech, and Osborne given £110,000. I wonder if there's a competition to see who can get the most.

Thank you for the link. I found this one very interesting too.

fullfact.org/europe/eu-law-and-uk/

fullfact.org/europe/how-eu-works-who-runs-eu/

V useful fact sheet written by Paul Craig, Professor in English Law at the University of Oxford.

I agree Whitewave, Theresa May was quite naive to think she could take Brexit on and waltz through. I wonder what David Cameron is up to these days, smug b.

Interesting article in today's Western Daily Press by a local cheese maker who voted Remain but was now going to make the best of it and thought they'd be okay as long as they had access to the single market. Fingers crossed then!

Thanks Cunco, I'd like to know more about that 2009 quote. I'll look it up when I've got a moment. I don't quite understand your last point about others. It seems rather pointed but I 'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant we should all be trying to widen our understanding of the complex situation we find ourselves in. Absolutely!

Others might like to do the same?
Some of us do, Cunco. In fact you will find that Whitewave took an excellent course, and put lots of it up on here for us to learn - or those of us who cared to.

I get the feeling that it is falling around her ears. I bet the right wing press knows more than it is publishing.

Just hearing that horrid Paul Nuttal has been elected head of UKIP. Can only hope that Farage retires now. But according to the Twitteri that I follow, he's v right wing indeed. And on record as saying he wants the NHS privatised because there are so many old people now.
Meanwhile the PM is apparently losing sleep and I can understand why. She came breezing into number 10, saying "brexit means brexit" as a crowd pleaser. You would think that while she was hiding in the girls toilets plotting to lead the party during the referendum campaign, she'd have spared a day to think about the prospect of being PM with the task of dealing with a Leave vote. Beginning to look at if the whole process is going to get bogged down in legal challenges while the PM and the 2 Brexiteers keep squabbling, lying awake at night, and wondering who to reconcile their terror about leaving the single market can be reconciled with the fact that they have been working so hard to whip up anti-immigration feeling.

Azie09: I agree that 'facts' can change over time but I think all that I stated as fact is still demonstrably true. You said:

'In fact, our Parliament has to debate and agree to every EU regulation that has legal jurisdiction in this country which is why we have vetoed various measures and made ourselves rather unpopular in the EU itself.'

By contrast, a lawyer writing for the BBC explaining the EU in 2009 said:

EU 'regulations have "general application". That means they are binding on individuals and effectively form part of domestic law as soon as they are made. It is generally only necessary to amend existing national provisions that are inconsistent with regulations, rather than make new legislation altogether.'

I do not pretend to know all there is to know about this subject and I endeavour to learn more from a variety of sources. Others might like to do the same.

There is now another legal challenge to the government relating to the single market. The argument is that parliament must have a say as to whether we stay in the single market, and should not be left to a couple of rag tags to decide. (Well they didn't say that, actually rag tag is my description of the useless lot of Brexiters)

As Trump is making the USA more protectionist, why shouldn't the EU control its borders more, and become protectionist?

Did you watch that James O'Brien video, roses? You should.

At what point in the future will all remainers accept the inevitable, that we are leaving the EU, and stop wittering on about percentages.
That is a rhetorical question, as the answer is....never.
The best thing for the country would be to get behind it and support it, we may stay in the single market or not, but whatever happens it will simply be a different way of trading.We are not leaving the continent of Europe, will still have ties there, family, and go for holidays there , but are just leaving a bureaucratic mess which is just as likely to implode in a few years.

Thanks for clearing that up, Azie.
That video is brilliant. James O'Brien is just so good at demolishing an argument, by asking the right questions. I watched all seven minutes of it. Definitely worth it.

PS. I'm very happy to give up the same amount of ability to govern ourselves as we have in the past! So what have we given up, cunco? I remember a load of stuff in 1975 about not being able to buy British sausages any more...or was it bendy sausages?

Errrmmm, just a point of order, cunco...statistically at least half of those who voted in 1975 are now dead. I was one of the youngest eligible to vote at the time.

This is three minutes of a very well argued exchange re the EU and UK law

www.youtube.com/shared?ci=GZyvh0DY69M

I think I read the article about Thatcher and the plan to privatise the NHS in The Times as it happens.

I hate to be pedantic, Cunco but these days, and perhaps always, facts are not set in stone but relate to what is available in the public domain, who has time to research them and research often turns up facts related to the question you asked, i.e. the perspective of the researcher/research organisation!

One of the points made throughout the referendum campaign was that it was about our ability to govern ourselves as opposed to being ruled by the EU. In fact, our Parliament has to debate and agree to every EU regulation that has legal jurisdiction in this country which is why we have vetoed various measures and made ourselves rather unpopular in the EU itself. What laws are there exactly which have been imposed upon us? Actually that's a rhetorical question of course, because there are none.

'A considerable number of that 33% did not accept the judgement of the large majority and spent the next 40 years working to reverse the decision; despite the fact that the UK did pretty well out of the EU.'

Fact: The Leave campaign in 1975 was largely, but not entirely, led by the Left and the Unions. Tony Benn was prominent and Jeremy Corbyn voted Leave. The Referendum was introduced to the UK by Harold Wilson, Labour PM, to quell unrest in his own party. Mrs Thatcher campaigned to Remain in the EEC in 1975.

'I wonder how many of the 33% ever changed their minds because they realised that we did pretty well out of the EU.'

Some will have but many thought a vote to Remain in the EEC in 1975 was only about joining a Common Market, not about loss of sovereignty and the ultimate aim of 'an ever closer Union'. Some who voted Remain in 1975 say now that they would have voted Leave had they realised the full story. Some over 59 years old voted Leave in 2016 who voted Remain in 1975.

I think too little is understood about the history and strength of Euroscepticism in the UK Electorate because it has been expressed by a relatively small number of MPS. For what they are worth, opinion polls have often shown more scepticism in the country than in Parliament.

A vote to Leave was not about just now but also about the future where the EU is headed for a close political and economic union, if it survives that long. Are Remainers happy to give up more of our ability to govern ourselves to the EU? This is an important issue.

None of us can see the future but we can at least be factual about the past.

And I've just read this, which supports what what you say.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/11/25/its-anti-democratic-to-say-that-brexit-has-been-decided-upon-once-and-for-all/

From one of the responses.

'Your point is proven by the simple fact (yes, fact) that the UK having voted in a referendum to join the EU (or common market as it then was) all those decades ago, those who disagreed with this outcome – mostly but not exclusively Tories and those on the right – never stopped arguing and agitating for us to leave. Clearly then they never accepted the result of that referendum so why should the situation be any different for those who voted remain this time around.

If anything can be said to be anti-democratic it is the role being played by the right wing press in seeking to suppress debate on possible interpretations, options and outcomes of Brexit, and alternatives, should the costs (economic, social, cultural, etc) and negative impacts of that course of action on the majority of the citizens of the UK be shown to be, or become, too great.'

And they've probably won now, Maizie. I wonder how many of the 33% ever changed their minds because they realised that we did pretty well out of the EU.

In 1975 two thirds of the people who voted voted to remain in the EU. This was a very clear majority, unlike the 48%/52% split in June of this year.

A considerable number of that 33% did not accept the judgement of the large majority and spent the next 40 years working to reverse the decision; despite the fact that the UK did pretty well out of the EU.

i2.wp.com/voxpoliticalonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/161127-Leave-Turkeys-voted-for-Christmas.jpg?resize=768%2C689