EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

[enaid]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

Yep, we are hearing today the deal Cameron made maybe not be binding, another spoke in the works.
We need the truth, the facts, not fables and point scoring tactics, but am totally positive now non of them can provide anything we can fully base our decision on.
As the norm hoodwinked and blinded by them in charge, is it not time they accepted and we let them know who is really in charge, in other words buck up, or buck off.

[leclerc]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

https://fullfact.org/europe/explaini...gally-binding/ [MENTION=141]enaid[/MENTION]

Is it possible to extend the poll on this post until June 23rd or 22nd?

[enaid]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

https://fullfact.org/europe/explaini...gally-binding/ @enaid

Is it possible to extend the poll on this post until June 23rd or 22nd?

will try before due date

[leclerc]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFmDePLUNV0

Such a wazzock reporter(yes I know it's George Galloway)

[leclerc]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

Time for a parody(and poor singing)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBi-KXc0CRk

[Noah]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

I agree that we need the facts mainly to stop people believing what they read in the Daily Wail and the like.

Jules
What decisions are made on our behalf in some court somewhere that you don't like?

is it any different to decisions being made by a bunch of over paid out of touch politicians in westminster?

We are a great country but it will be a very long time, if ever before we are the hegemonic power that we were 200 years ago

[Fred]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

What utter rubbish............................months of it yet to come & no doubt changes to suit public opinion either way.

[PAWS]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

Jules mentioned the UK becoming a great nation again. –well….I know I complain about the NHS and the lack of funding for 3^rd level education but THIS IS A GREAT NATION. No seriously. Now I can hear you screaming at your screens but Wait a second. Food banks, dirty hospitals, lack of a fair social welfare system are all a disgrace but none of these are what make or break a county’s reputation. It is the people.
The people of this country have pulled it out of the doldrums time after time. You did so whether in our out of the EU. Crisis or celebration I have never seen a nation like the British for stoic solidarity or glorious nationalism. Look at the way the people of London pulled together after 7/7, look at the American police sending their top bods over to learn from the British police.
The people in power are mismanaging the budget but this is still a great nation (cue Elgar’s Nimrod) and No European organisation ever has or will destroy that
.

[Openlaw15]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

Ok
For the record I think anyone who thinks we are better out than in needs their bumps felt. ( that means they are mad)

Kati
ECHR has nothing whatsoever to do with the EU but I think you might have been saying that

As for the equality act, many parts of it are because of EU legislation and while there is no guarantee that it would be changed if we left, the whole argument of those muppets who want to leave is that they do not like the EU regulations and it would seem logical that over time these things would go.

Does that make sense?

Well EU Regulations per se are automatically binding on UK Courts, as are Treaties; Treaties' Articles; Regulations, Regulations' Articles, oh and ECJ Court decisions. Am rusty on EU law now but I believe the jargon is 'directly effective' or is it 'directly applicable, in any event it's automatic on UK Courts. So I can understand if people in the UK do not like EU Regulations as they essentially relegate their Parliament statute especially as Parliament is voted into their positions. Can you say the same about where the EU Regulations come from?

[leclerc]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

Well EU Regulations per se are automatically binding on UK Courts, as are Treaties; Treaties' Articles; Regulations, Regulations' Articles, oh and ECJ Court decisions. Am rusty on EU law now but I believe the jargon is 'directly effective' or is it 'directly applicable, in any event it's automatic on UK Courts. So I can understand if people in the UK do not like EU Regulations as they essentially relegate their Parliament statute especially as Parliament is voted into their positions. Can you say the same about where the EU Regulations come from?

Interesting the EU cannot be brought before the ECHR because the ECJ blocked membership for the EU to it. However, it does not stop them ruling in cases against individual member states.

[ahflibra]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

This Vote in June is a very important in our lifetime

But I remember when the vote was to join and it was told to us if we don't join, we won't trade, have no jobs it would be really bad

So if it's that good in the EU why are they not shouting from the roof tops about all the good things for stopping in

The look after themselves politicians and papers are putting out scaremongering stories of all the bad things that will happen if we leave

I want to hear all the good points for stopping in from our leaders in parliament at this moment in time ?

[enaid]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

You be lucky to ever get a straight reply from any of them tbh.
I was listening to the farmers arguments for and against yesterday and to me it was all so stupid.
Because we import lamb from New Zealand we can't sell ours it's too dear, that in itself seems incredible to me.
Then we give EU money so we can then give it back to the farmers as a subsidie (after taking out undisclosed amounts or what for)
I am not too bright I admit but none of this makes sense to me and that is what we need proper explanations instead of we stepping into the unknown lol
We be doing that for years and years now, in education, health, wealth and everyday living so a change is a foot imo x

[Openlaw15]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

Interesting the EU cannot be brought before the ECHR because the ECJ blocked membership for the EU to it. However, it does not stop them ruling in cases against individual member states.

ECHR = the most basic right that a citizen has in a free n democratic country. An example, the freedom of speech is an essential right in a free n democratic country, so it is a Convention/ human right. European Union = largely trade and economic relationships with other EU countries (member states). Example, Italian citizen who is a teacher wants to work in England. EU law is relevant. This same teacher encourage his Italian or English pupils to challenge state powers. This would be freedom of speech matter, so if the Italian or English school were to stop the Italian teacher from voicing his opinion, he could challenge the school based on the Human Rights' Act 1998 in England or an equivalent law in Italy. So ECHR is relevant and not EU law. I could say something else but it will only complicate matters. I just wanted to show the difference between an ECHR (convention) human right and an EU right.

[Openlaw15]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

You be lucky to ever get a straight reply from any of them tbh.
I was listening to the farmers arguments for and against yesterday and to me it was all so stupid.
Because we import lamb from New Zealand we can't sell ours it's too dear, that in itself seems incredible to me.
Then we give EU money so we can then give it back to the farmers as a subsidie (after taking out undisclosed amounts or what for)
I am not too bright I admit but none of this makes sense to me and that is what we need proper explanations instead of we stepping into the unknown lol
We be doing that for years and years now, in education, health, wealth and everyday living so a change is a foot imo x

New Zealand would have its own Union, ie Asia Union. So New Zealand could sell its lamb (export) buy other trade (import) to and from other Asia Union countries, ie Australia, which for farmers would be at reasonable cost, ie its farmers would be subsidised. Ergo, there'll be or is an Asian Union economic trade centre. The idea behind the various world Unions, including North American Union (eventually), in my view, is to create world trade relationships so that the cost for someone in Africa is the same as someone in England, potentially. So, again in my view, at some point the EU will link up with AU and African Union. In the interim there are individual entities such as the EU. If you're in the EU you have to pay for it. If you're out of the EU in the European countries then you will pay more. EU is just the start!

[MIKE770]

Re: EU: - IN or OUT ?? and WHY ??

New Zealand would have its own Union, ie Asia Union. So New Zealand could sell its lamb (export) buy other trade (import) to and from other Asia Union countries, ie Australia, which for farmers would be at reasonable cost, ie its farmers would be subsidised. Ergo, there'll be or is an Asian Union economic trade centre. The idea behind the various world Unions, including North American Union (eventually), in my view, is to create world trade relationships so that the cost for someone in Africa is the same as someone in England, potentially. So, again in my view, at some point the EU will link up with AU and African Union. In the interim there are individual entities such as the EU. If you're in the EU you have to pay for it. If you're out of the EU in the European countries then you will pay more. EU is just the start!

ASEAN