That referendum ...

[Amethyst]

Re: That referendum ...

Actually EU Directives have specific (sometimes negotiated) requirements on the Member State for imposition into their own laws, it is slightly more than just 'the aim' of the EU Directive.

eg The 2008 Consumer Credit Directive was adopted on 23 April 2008, replacing the 1987 Consumer Credit Directive. Unlike the previous Directive, the 2008 Directive is based on full (maximum) harmonisation. This means that Member States are precluded from adopting or retaining different national law provisions within the harmonised areas, other than to the extent permitted by the Directive.

Article 4 of the Directive providing that: Member States shall not maintain or introduce, in their national law, provisions diverging from
those laid down in this Directive, including more or less stringent provisions to ensure a different level of consumer protection, unless otherwise provided for in this Directive.

[Fred]

Re: That referendum ...

Million dollar question.....................what does it mean for new & ongoing cases, surely you can no longer use EU case law or import any legislation when there is serious doubt over what is going to happen ?

[Amethyst]

Re: That referendum ...

There will be no one left in Labour at this rate. 5 this morning so far ?

Benn / Murray / DePiero /Alexander / Powell ?

[Guest]

Re: That referendum ...

Whatever's going to happen just right now I think MPs are showing their true colours and imo it may just be a good thing and sort the wheat from the chaff before the real and very important decisions are to be put on the table for our future.

So far, no-one has come with anything positive, no wonder the economy is in disarray. All they've been doing is fighting each other, arguing and cowering. Surely the Tories who proposed the referendum should have had a plan already in place in case there was a vote to leave, and would have thought about the terms of the departure beforehand.

In short, UTCCR 1999 is an EU Directive but still a UK Regulation, ie law in the UK: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1.../contents/made

Part 8, sections 210 onwards, Enterprise Act 2002, provide protection to consumers by this primary UK legislation. I do not agree with your statement about ECJ, as ECJ case law has shaped the UK's case law/ common law system since round about 1972. The EU simply will not permit the UK to have any kind of new frame work, ie new course of negotiating from a Full Economic Union into alternatives (as per my commentary on the alternative Free Trade Agreement/ Common Market Agreement types with the EU), ie Treaty of Lisbon Amendments to TFEU/ Consolidat. version. According to constitutional experts EU is powerful and the EU's ECJ will have made law entrenched in the UK's legal system. Alternatively, it would mean that 40 years of case law affectively would be over-turned. Judges will have to go back to law school (ok that's a tad facetious).

EU Laws binding law on the UK legal system: Treaty, Treaty Article, Regulation, Regulation Article; European Court of Justice (ECJ) decision. Secondary EU legislation is a EU Directive. The Member State can choose how to draft the Directive but it must 'have 'the aim' of EU Directive. In any event, the UK makes the EU Directive into a UK Regulation (ie secondary legislation) see above.

Once EU directives are used to draft regulations, the regulations stay in place unless there is new UK legislation repealing them in part or as a whole, just like any other regulation. It doesn't matter whether the regulations originated from EU directives or not.

There's been so much argument about legislation being made in Brussels by people we didn't elect. Actually, secondary legislation in the UK, whether based on EU directives or otherwise, is made by people we didn't elect. Also a lot of law is not made by Parliament but by the courts. Case law is made by judges, which were not elected.

As with the arguments regarding whether 50/50 was enough for something like this, there's also the argument as to whether younger people, say, 16 and 17 year olds, should have been allowed to vote, as this decision affects their future. Maybe they'd thought about running a B&B in France like their uncle Fred or retiring to Tuscany like their gran. What was an option for the previous generation will no longer be an option for them and they didn't have a say in the matter.

Freedom of movement doesn't just work one way. The news always show people queuing up to enter the UK but, in reality, a lot of Poles, Czechs, etc. who came in 2004 went back to Eastern Europe after they found out that the salary that looked like a pot of gold when converted to their currency was barely enough to live on in the UK, let alone make a fortune to take back home. We are exposed to just one side of the coin, did anyone actually look at the other side?

[Kati]

Re: That referendum ...

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/26/the-pe...ivist-5967021/

The petition for a second EU referendum that has attracted nearly three million signatures was started by a right-wing activist a month before the vote.In an amusing plot twist, Vote Leave campaigner William Oliver Healey, an activist for the English Democrats, started the petition that has since become the last hope for millions of pro-EU voters.
On his Facebook page, posts by Mr Healey show that he set up the petition on May 23, with polls at the time suggesting a likely triumph for the Remain campaign.

[nemesis45]

Re: That referendum ...

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/26/the-pe...ivist-5967021/

He really looks a smug barsteward!!

nem

[Crazy council]

Re: That referendum ...

all the needed words

[Openlaw15]

Re: That referendum ...

Actually EU Directives have specific (sometimes negotiated) requirements on the Member State for imposition into their own laws, it is slightly more than just 'the aim' of the EU Directive.

eg [B][I][I]The 2008 Consumer Credit Directive was adopted on 23 April 2008, replacing the 1987 Consumer Credit Directive. Unlike the previous Directive, the 2008 Directive is based on full (maximum) harmonisation. This means that Member States are precluded from adopting or retaining different national law provisions within the harmonised areas, other than to the extent permitted by the Directive.

[/FONT]

What am saying is EU primary legislation is automatically legally binding, but to an extent the Member States (ie UK) has certain autonomy to draft the EU Directive - secondary legislation - to give effect to EU law but not necessarily the same wording, providing the UK drafts it with the Directive's Aim. If the EU wanted to make the law binding on the UK it would use an EU Regulation (not UK Regulation), or rely on a Treaty Article. It depends on the Directive - there can be one set of rules to protect consumers and another rule for EU drivers. In terms of EU drivers, the EU is careful to only apply to certain drivers, ie not domestic, as the UK Parliament has mainly sovereignty for domestic drivers.

[Openlaw15]

Re: That referendum ...

So far, no-one has come with anything positive, no wonder the economy is in disarray. All they've been doing is fighting each other, arguing and cowering. Surely the Tories who proposed the referendum should have had a plan already in place in case there was a vote to leave, and would have thought about the terms of the departure beforehand.


Once EU directives are used to draft regulations, the regulations stay in place unless there is new UK legislation repealing them in part or as a whole, just like any other regulation. It doesn't matter whether the regulations originated from EU directives or not.

There's been so much argument about legislation being made in Brussels by people we didn't elect. Actually, secondary legislation in the UK, whether based on EU directives or otherwise, is made by people we didn't elect. Also a lot of law is not made by Parliament but by the courts. Case law is made by judges, which were not elected.

As with the arguments regarding whether 50/50 was enough for something like this, there's also the argument as to whether younger people, say, 16 and 17 year olds, should have been allowed to vote, as this decision affects their future. Maybe they'd thought about running a B&B in France like their uncle Fred or retiring to Tuscany like their gran. What was an option for the previous generation will no longer be an option for them and they didn't have a say in the matter.

Freedom of movement doesn't just work one way. The news always show people queuing up to enter the UK but, in reality, a lot of Poles, Czechs, etc. who came in 2004 went back to Eastern Europe after they found out that the salary that looked like a pot of gold when converted to their currency was barely enough to live on in the UK, let alone make a fortune to take back home. We are exposed to just one side of the coin, did anyone actually look at the other side?

I did say that: "In any event, the UK makes the EU Directive into a UK Regulation (ie secondary legislation) see above." I did mention rather frequently too that UK case law is entrenched in the common law system, a source of the UK's unwritten constitution.

[Crazy council]

Re: That referendum ...

Nicola Sturgeon sayin she will use the Scottish parliament to block uk leaving EU

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-36633244

[wales01man]

Re: That referendum ...

Queen Nicola needs to get real no chance

[PAWS]

Re: That referendum ...

Read this, don’t read it - Spout nonsensical reams of badly phrased sentences at me or just simply call me stupid or wet. Sticks and stones at this stage. Blaming the wrong people, swallowing the hype, and believing the mud slingingis what caused this in the first place.
Last weekend one could not move without someone declaring they were voting ‘leave’. Now, neither myself nor my husband can find more than a couple. Even the vigorous Exciters said, “Oh I looked into it and changed my mind before I voted”.

I totally agree that having a second referendum is not just undemocratic, it will make us look incredibly stupid and childish.
I think the people of this country have spoken for better or worse. It is a natural reaction to blame all that ails us on others be it a European body or a migrant worker. It is also fairly standard to conveniently forget any involvement in causing the problems. We are part of the decision makers who pass EU legislation. We employ the migrant workers, we elect the Government who actually is responsible for most of the issues we complain about or worse still, do not vote at all and we do little to remind them who they actually work for and what we actually want.
Now we look like petulant children who have made the wrong decision at the sweet shop and will bang our heels on the floor until we are allowed to change our minds. Therefore even if we do have another referendum investors will see us as ‘flaky’and all our credibility in Europe will be blown. Could we really stand up in the EU parliament and expect to be taken seriously after this debacle? No.

This country’s only hope is that the EU dissolves and quickly. You will still be left with a problem however because the clowns that will be the last men standing in parliament do not have the experience or intelligence to run the proverbial and will not be taken seriously by the rest of the world. If you think we would be better going back to the Salad days of old then at least have an honest look back and you just might see that there was very little salad!
Lord knows there was plenty of opportunity to hear the arguments and both sides campaign was vigorous and loud. The power of the media is terrifying. Facts mean nothing if the Mail, Sun or the Express do not have it plastered across their front page in‘Scare Font’.
Yesterday I spoke to medical personnel -(and by that I mean clinical and not administrative staff) who are trying to find ways of getting out of the UK. These are the British staff who the Brexiters promised would be looking after us and they cannot get away quick enough. Now I know lots of highly qualified surgeons and Other specialists who left for Australia years ago and that was due to NHS mismanagement. Now skilled people from all walks of life want to get out because the economy is fractured. They are also worried about the integrity of the Electorate as well as those who will be in power by the end of the year.
It is too much to ask business and workers both skilled and non-skilled to trust in the future of this country. Many of us regret many decisions in our lives but as adults we have to work through those mistakes and make the best of it. Voting Leave was a mistake. What has been seen so far is nothing compared to what will happen once the investors, companies and workers start to leave. Now go ahead and call me what you will but I really no longer care. I doubt many will read past the first few lines but then who wants to hear the bad stuff?

[Amethyst]

Re: That referendum ...

pmsl - amusing that it was a member of the English Democrats that started the petition in case of a Remain victory....

Oliver Healey - English Democrats
6 hrs ·

***CAN I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE!!!***

Dear All
Re: EU Referendum Rules triggering a 2nd EU Referendum petition
This petition was created at a time (over a month ago) when it was looking unlikely that 'leave' were going to win, with the intention of making it harder for 'remain' to further shackle us to the EU. Due to the result, the petition has been hijacked by the remain campaign. Admittedly, my actions were premature however, my intentions were as stated above. THERE WAS NO GUARANTEE OF A LEAVE VICTORY AT THAT TIME!!! Having said that, if it had not been mine, it would have been orchestrated by someone on the remain campaign. However, since I am associated with the petition and before the press further associate me with it I felt the need to better clarify my position on the issue even if it looks bad. I am it's creator, nothing more! The logistical probability of getting a turnout to be a minimum of 75% and of that, 60% of the vote must be one or the other (leave or remain) is in my opinion next to impossible without a compulsory element to the voting system.

I have been opposed to the bureaucratic and undemocratic nature of the European Union as an institution privately for many years and for all of my political career. I have openly and actively lent my support to both Vote Leave and Grassroots Out campaigns - why would I do this if I wanted to remain in the EU? I am genuinely appalled by the behaviour of some of the remain campaign, how they are conducting themselves post-referendum not just with this petition but generally. The referendum was fairly funded; democratically endorsed, every vote was weighted equally and I believe this was a true reflection of the mood of the country. To my fellow leavers, now doubting their decision please keep the faith, we will be fine just stick with it. I believe what we need to do now for the good of the country; is get behind the will of the British people, unite, issue Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon and move forward, with the process of leaving the European Union.

William Oliver Healey

Creator of EU Referendum Rules triggering a 2nd EU Referendum petition

Dick.

[R0b]

Re: That referendum ...

We are all entitled to our opinions both good and bad. I voted out and that was not based on the misunderstandings of all the palava coming from the remain and leave camp but personal experiences. I have seen first hand what the EU is like, worked there for a period of time and in all honestly I did not like what I saw.

We have vote to leave and then we have all businesses both big and small jumping the gun and saying we have to shift people out of the country and relocate or to make redundancies right now due to the result. That in my opinion is a bit premature to say the least, considering we do not know what plan is going to be set out for UK's future. There's all this banging about saying we wont have any agreement relating to trade across europe but given the various other trade agreements in place with countries such as Switzerland and Norway, why can't we?

The EU say we won't have an agreement because they want to make an example of us but as already acknowledged, there is a bit of dissent in other countries like Holland and Italy and I don't think the EU will want to add to the current reaosns for them potentially wanting to leave.

Do I regret my decision to vote out? Absolutely not. I am young, and I am prepared to take the risk. Yes there is currently uncertainty as to what's going to happen but my view is that once that certainty is put in place, we will not be anywhere near as worse off as people are making out to be. I Won't den that the next few years might be difficult but for a potentially better future, that's worth the risk I would be willing to take. You can't please everyone and my comments might be disliked by many but hey that's just my view.

Get someone in who voted leave as the next PM and sort it out as soon as possible to prevent the markets spiralling out of control.

There's little to zero chance of a second referendum, and Nicola Sturgeon is just clinging onto anything she can at the moment, first another referendum and now a veto of the Brexit vote.. come on.

In the mentime, I guess just need to sit back and find out what's going to happen.

[Amethyst]

Re: That referendum ...

I agree with most of what you say there R0b. I think it is terribly sad that all Leave voters seem to be being tarred with the same brush.