Topic

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 19 of 2586 < 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 >

Topic Locked

Bexley Eagle Bexley Kent 23 Feb 16 3.50pm
Originally posted by Canterbury Palace Both sides have strong arguments and I daresay in the coming months we'll hear them both to death. Personally I feel that the country has long been in a gradual state of decay and that a lack of control over our own affairs is a big part of that. Additionally the arrogance of the EU irritates me and I don't see why we should continue to put so much into a club where we are despised by most of the other members. I couldn't agree more. It's an out for me.
Alert a moderator to this post

Bexley Eagle

Bexley Kent 23 Feb 16 3.50pm

Originally posted by Canterbury Palace

Both sides have strong arguments and I daresay in the coming months we'll hear them both to death. Personally I feel that the country has long been in a gradual state of decay and that a lack of control over our own affairs is a big part of that.

Additionally the arrogance of the EU irritates me and I don't see why we should continue to put so much into a club where we are despised by most of the other members.

I couldn't agree more. It's an out for me.

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 23 Feb 16 4.14pm
Originally posted by Canterbury Palace Both sides have strong arguments and I daresay in the coming months we'll hear them both to death. Personally I feel that the country has long been in a gradual state of decay and that a lack of control over our own affairs is a big part of that. Additionally the arrogance of the EU irritates me and I don't see why we should continue to put so much into a club where we are despised by most of the other members. Problem for me, is that I really enjoy the way that the ECHR destroys the hubris and arrogance of British Politicians. I'd happily vote out, if we retain the European Court. For me, that remains the single biggest reason to stay in - As it ensures that politicians and government abides by its own laws. Remaining in the European Court, and I'll be voting out. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 23 Feb 16 4.14pm

Originally posted by Canterbury Palace

Additionally the arrogance of the EU irritates me and I don't see why we should continue to put so much into a club where we are despised by most of the other members.

Problem for me, is that I really enjoy the way that the ECHR destroys the hubris and arrogance of British Politicians. I'd happily vote out, if we retain the European Court. For me, that remains the single biggest reason to stay in - As it ensures that politicians and government abides by its own laws.

Remaining in the European Court, and I'll be voting out.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

dannyh wherever I lay my hat....... 23 Feb 16 4.47pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 Problem for me, is that I really enjoy the way that the ECHR destroys the hubris and arrogance of British Politicians. I'd happily vote out, if we retain the European Court. For me, that remains the single biggest reason to stay in - As it ensures that politicians and government abides by its own laws. Remaining in the European Court, and I'll be voting out. Troble is Jamie they are fastly becoming "not our laws" but passed down bullsh1t from some faceless pr1ck called serge eating a croissant and smoking at his desk. "It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"
Alert a moderator to this post

dannyh

wherever I lay my hat....... 23 Feb 16 4.47pm

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Remaining in the European Court, and I'll be voting out.

Troble is Jamie they are fastly becoming "not our laws" but passed down bullsh1t from some faceless pr1ck called serge eating a croissant and smoking at his desk.

"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 23 Feb 16 5.01pm
Originally posted by dannyh Troble is Jamie they are fastly becoming "not our laws" but passed down bullsh1t from some faceless pr1ck called serge eating a croissant and smoking at his desk. Well yes, and no. The European Court rules where two or more laws are in conflict in UK law. For example the right to vote for all citizens, and the disenfranchisement of prisoners. Both of these are explicitly defined in UK law. If the UK courts and participants cannot sufficiently reach a ruling, then the court of appeal passes it to the European Court for arbitaration. The European court doesn't make laws, it rules on conflicts within nations laws. The mistake is that a lot of these stem from the European Human Rights Act of 1998, which sets down a series of rights applicable to all citizens - Which we agreed to and introduced through parliament. In fact the UK is under no obligation to accept the ruling, but the Judiciary usually implements it as precident or advises the Government to pass legislation resolving the conflict. Its not just conflicts with the Human Rights Act, any contradiction in UK law can be passed to the European Court for a ruling. Basically, the court only ever rules of cases passed to it from member states court. It doesn't create laws for the UK it rules on existing ones. Human rights make it easier to arbitrate because they're effectively like the US constitution (no law can override the constitution, that requires an amendment to be added). "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 23 Feb 16 5.01pm

Originally posted by dannyh

Troble is Jamie they are fastly becoming "not our laws" but passed down bullsh1t from some faceless pr1ck called serge eating a croissant and smoking at his desk.

Well yes, and no. The European Court rules where two or more laws are in conflict in UK law. For example the right to vote for all citizens, and the disenfranchisement of prisoners. Both of these are explicitly defined in UK law.

If the UK courts and participants cannot sufficiently reach a ruling, then the court of appeal passes it to the European Court for arbitaration. The European court doesn't make laws, it rules on conflicts within nations laws.

The mistake is that a lot of these stem from the European Human Rights Act of 1998, which sets down a series of rights applicable to all citizens - Which we agreed to and introduced through parliament.

In fact the UK is under no obligation to accept the ruling, but the Judiciary usually implements it as precident or advises the Government to pass legislation resolving the conflict.

Its not just conflicts with the Human Rights Act, any contradiction in UK law can be passed to the European Court for a ruling.

Basically, the court only ever rules of cases passed to it from member states court. It doesn't create laws for the UK it rules on existing ones.

Human rights make it easier to arbitrate because they're effectively like the US constitution (no law can override the constitution, that requires an amendment to be added).

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

johnfirewall 23 Feb 16 6.16pm
I struggled to understand the left's love for Maggie's cheap foreign labour club who bailed out eachother's banks but then saw the below which points out it's mainly about worker's rights. None of which I'm entitled to or benefit me. [Link] The trade aspect is bull. Conveniently highlighted by the Scotch Beef campaign funded by the EU £12bn to advertise our own produce to ourselves. [Link] Edited by johnfirewall (23 Feb 2016 6.19pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

johnfirewall

23 Feb 16 6.16pm

I struggled to understand the left's love for Maggie's cheap foreign labour club who bailed out eachother's banks but then saw the below which points out it's mainly about worker's rights. None of which I'm entitled to or benefit me.

[Link]

The trade aspect is bull. Conveniently highlighted by the Scotch Beef campaign funded by the EU

£12bn to advertise our own produce to ourselves.

[Link]

Edited by johnfirewall (23 Feb 2016 6.19pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 23 Feb 16 6.35pm
Originally posted by johnfirewall I struggled to understand the left's love for Maggie's cheap foreign labour club who bailed out eachother's banks but then saw the below which points out it's mainly about worker's rights. None of which I'm entitled to or benefit me. [Link] The trade aspect is bull. Conveniently highlighted by the Scotch Beef campaign funded by the EU £12bn to advertise our own produce to ourselves. [Link] Edited by johnfirewall (23 Feb 2016 6.19pm) There are differing opinions on the left about the EU. Bob Crow (RIP) was anti eu because it doesn't go far enough to protect workers rights.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 23 Feb 16 6.35pm

Originally posted by johnfirewall

[Link]

The trade aspect is bull. Conveniently highlighted by the Scotch Beef campaign funded by the EU

£12bn to advertise our own produce to ourselves.

[Link]

Edited by johnfirewall (23 Feb 2016 6.19pm)

There are differing opinions on the left about the EU.

Bob Crow (RIP) was anti eu because it doesn't go far enough to protect workers rights.

Alert a moderator to this post

johnfirewall 23 Feb 16 6.36pm
Originally posted by nickgusset There are differing opinions on the left about the EU. Bob Crow (RIP) was anti eu because it doesn't go far enough to protect workers rights. Because they still had to work?
Alert a moderator to this post

johnfirewall

23 Feb 16 6.36pm

Originally posted by nickgusset

There are differing opinions on the left about the EU.

Bob Crow (RIP) was anti eu because it doesn't go far enough to protect workers rights.

Because they still had to work?

Alert a moderator to this post

elgrande bedford 23 Feb 16 9.36pm
Originally posted by johnfirewall Because they still had to work? always a Norwood boy, where ever I live.
Alert a moderator to this post

elgrande

bedford 23 Feb 16 9.36pm

Originally posted by johnfirewall

Because they still had to work?

always a Norwood boy, where ever I live.

Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman Caterham 23 Feb 16 10.36pm
Kamal Ahmed: For politicians supporting Britain remaining in the European Union, the blessing of business leaders is seen as a positive step. And the list signing the pro-European letter - at least in part orchestrated by Number 10 - are certainly a hefty bunch. But, a few health warnings. First, many of the people who have signed have long been public advocates of Britain remaining in the EU - from Sir Roger Carr of BAE, to Iain Conn of Centrica, Dame Carolyn McCall of easyJet and Bob Dudley of BP. Second, some of the business leaders named say that although Britain would be better off economically in the EU, the UK is still a significant market and investment levels would remain high whatever the outcome of the referendum. Paul Polman, the chief executive of Unilever and one of signatories, told me that directly when I interviewed him a few weeks ago. The UK is the world's fifth largest economy with a 60-million strong population. As such, it matters. Third, many smaller businesses are much more sceptical about the advantages or otherwise of the UK's membership of the EU. A large number do not export to the rest of Europe and their only experience of Brussels is directives on employment rights which some say are over-burdensome. The British Chambers of Commerce represents many such businesses - and it has announced it will not be campaigning for either side in the referendum as "very real divisions" exist in the business community. 2 of the signatures are of 2 Goldman Sachs execs. You know, the Wall Street bank that hid Greek debts when they joined the EU. If we exit they're concerned they won't be able to do business as usual across Europe. They may go to Frankfurt or Paris. Paris with Socialist Hollande's heavy taxes. Oh and they made a large donation to the in campaign. London is where everyone wants to come to. Has everyone forgotten the property price trends here? COYP
Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 23 Feb 16 10.36pm

Kamal Ahmed:

For politicians supporting Britain remaining in the European Union, the blessing of business leaders is seen as a positive step.
And the list signing the pro-European letter - at least in part orchestrated by Number 10 - are certainly a hefty bunch.
But, a few health warnings.
First, many of the people who have signed have long been public advocates of Britain remaining in the EU - from Sir Roger Carr of BAE, to Iain Conn of Centrica, Dame Carolyn McCall of easyJet and Bob Dudley of BP.

Second, some of the business leaders named say that although Britain would be better off economically in the EU, the UK is still a significant market and investment levels would remain high whatever the outcome of the referendum.

Paul Polman, the chief executive of Unilever and one of signatories, told me that directly when I interviewed him a few weeks ago.
The UK is the world's fifth largest economy with a 60-million strong population.
As such, it matters.

Third, many smaller businesses are much more sceptical about the advantages or otherwise of the UK's membership of the EU.
A large number do not export to the rest of Europe and their only experience of Brussels is directives on employment rights which some say are over-burdensome.

The British Chambers of Commerce represents many such businesses - and it has announced it will not be campaigning for either side in the referendum as "very real divisions" exist in the business community.

2 of the signatures are of 2 Goldman Sachs execs. You know, the Wall Street bank that hid Greek debts when they joined the EU. If we exit they're concerned they won't be able to do business as usual across Europe. They may go to Frankfurt or Paris. Paris with Socialist Hollande's heavy taxes. Oh and they made a large donation to the in campaign.

London is where everyone wants to come to. Has everyone forgotten the property price trends here?

COYP

Alert a moderator to this post

Sportyteacher London 24 Feb 16 7.13am
BBC to stage EU Referendum debate at...ahem...Wembley Arena: [Link] Ticket touts rumoured not to be exhilarated at the prospect.
Alert a moderator to this post

Sportyteacher

London 24 Feb 16 7.13am

BBC to stage EU Referendum debate at...ahem...Wembley Arena:

[Link]

Ticket touts rumoured not to be exhilarated at the prospect.

Alert a moderator to this post

the_mcanuff_stuff Caterham 24 Feb 16 9.41am
The problem for me is the question "what would Brexit look like". The leave campaign have a lot of work to do to explain exactly what would come after. Right now there seems to be no coherent policy. Without that, it is doomed to failure for the same reasons as the Scottish referendum, i.e. "the great unknown". The leave campaign need to get aligned in deciding what route they propose Britain to follow after Brexit. An agreement like Norway, or like Switzerland, or neither? But people need to know that before committing to putting a tick in the "leave" box. I myself am in the "remain" camp, until these questions are answered. Brexit could be successful or a complete disaster and the devil is in the detail.
Alert a moderator to this post

the_mcanuff_stuff

Caterham 24 Feb 16 9.41am

Send a Private Message to the_mcanuff_stuff

The problem for me is the question "what would Brexit look like".

The leave campaign have a lot of work to do to explain exactly what would come after. Right now there seems to be no coherent policy.

Without that, it is doomed to failure for the same reasons as the Scottish referendum, i.e. "the great unknown".

The leave campaign need to get aligned in deciding what route they propose Britain to follow after Brexit. An agreement like Norway, or like Switzerland, or neither? But people need to know that before committing to putting a tick in the "leave" box.

I myself am in the "remain" camp, until these questions are answered. Brexit could be successful or a complete disaster and the devil is in the detail.

Alert a moderator to this post

chris123 hove actually 24 Feb 16 10.14am
Originally posted by the_mcanuff_stuff The problem for me is the question "what would Brexit look like". The leave campaign have a lot of work to do to explain exactly what would come after. Right now there seems to be no coherent policy. Without that, it is doomed to failure for the same reasons as the Scottish referendum, i.e. "the great unknown". The leave campaign need to get aligned in deciding what route they propose Britain to follow after Brexit. An agreement like Norway, or like Switzerland, or neither? But people need to know that before committing to putting a tick in the "leave" box. I myself am in the "remain" camp, until these questions are answered. Brexit could be successful or a complete disaster and the devil is in the detail. Like this - at present split between Brussels, Strasbourg, Luxembourg and Frankfurt we have the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council of the European Union, the Commission, the Court of Justice, the Court of Auditors and the Central Bank. They all to a greater or lesser extent diminish from our own domestic governance. By exiting we can repatriate our law making to our own legislature and not be exposed to any law making that is not in our own domestic interest. Edited by chris123 (24 Feb 2016 10.15am)
Alert a moderator to this post

chris123

hove actually 24 Feb 16 10.14am

Originally posted by the_mcanuff_stuff

The problem for me is the question "what would Brexit look like".

The leave campaign have a lot of work to do to explain exactly what would come after. Right now there seems to be no coherent policy.

Without that, it is doomed to failure for the same reasons as the Scottish referendum, i.e. "the great unknown".

I myself am in the "remain" camp, until these questions are answered. Brexit could be successful or a complete disaster and the devil is in the detail.

Like this - at present split between Brussels, Strasbourg, Luxembourg and Frankfurt we have the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council of the European Union, the Commission, the Court of Justice, the Court of Auditors and the Central Bank.

They all to a greater or lesser extent diminish from our own domestic governance. By exiting we can repatriate our law making to our own legislature and not be exposed to any law making that is not in our own domestic interest.

Edited by chris123 (24 Feb 2016 10.15am)

Alert a moderator to this post

Topic Locked

Page 19 of 2586 < 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors