- This topic has 144 replies, 35 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Trackside there is a deliberate attempt by the eurocrats to hide what these so called treaties are all about. They never spell out what it really will mean to us in years to come .. who would have thought that the Maastritch treaty would end up with the government having to take ownership of the Tote and then sell it off, or another shabby unpublicised arrangement where VAT would be added to everyone’s fuel bills.
This treaty already ditched by the French, Dutch and Irish will transfer the following powers to unelected officials,
Immigration, the EU will decide how many immigrants will be allowed into the EU and where they will be settled. It will also create the framework for the militarisation of the EU.
For the record the Irish are already deployed in Chad under the EU flag, how they imagine they won’t be dragged into a war at some point in the future beats me.
As for guarantees .. 420,000 people work more than 60 hours a week in the UK. Our government negotiated an opt out clause from the working time directive. 15 years later they are now going to try and take that away from us, so the poorest people who need to make more money to make ends meet won’t be able to because some Euro fat cat thinks he shouldn’t.
Sovereignty (the ability to make or change law), in the EU lay with the Council of Ministers, elected in their own country. The idea that unelected bureaucrats make EU law is either naive or troublemaking. And if not…give an example.
[b:3g2mtwqq]Europa[/url:3g2mtwqq][/b:3g2mtwqq]
The main forms of EU law are directives and regulations. The rules and procedures for EU decision-making are laid down in the treaties. Every proposal for a new European law is based on a specific treaty article, referred to as the ‘legal basis’ of the proposal. This determines which legislative procedure must be followed.
.. the Treaties are the root cause of the problem. When we vote at elections we vote on national issues and then the Council create treaties that weren’t in their domestic manifestos, during the elections. The un-elected Commission then picks over the treaties to create new laws based on the treaty and pass these on to the parliament or the council (or both) for ratification. Because they have a basis in ‘law’ granted them by another treaty that never appeared in anyone’s manifesto.
So in answer to your question Pete, all of the laws are created by un-elected bureaucrats (the commission) because it’s the commission that interprets the treaty not the parliament or the council.
All of the treaties should be subject to a referendum, because they are never in any domestic manifesto and are therefore not open to the democratic process or public scrutiny.
Each day we move a step nearer to Orwell’s 1984. George may have been a century out but we’ll get there in the end I suspect.
Dave, I accept there is a democratic deficit in Europe. But, nothing happens in Europe without the agreement of national governments in the Council of Ministers. The idea that laws are somehow created out of thin air by faceless un-elected bureaucrats based on some treaty or other is not true.
It may be the case that the Commission interprets law based on the treaties but those interpretations are open to scrutiny in the courts by action of national governments or individuals.
Anyhow, back to the question in hand is it anything to do with us? If the Irish started poking their nose into our business I’d be the first to tell them to **** off – wouldn’t you?
Corm, I thought a tenet of Scottish independence was based on Type 1 European money (a wee country in Europe) to replace English Tax Dollars – seems to me you need them more than they (or us
) need youI assume that what you mean by ‘democratic deficit’ is ‘yes Dave your right, the EU law creation process is completely undemocratic’.
And presented with the facts I don’t see how you can come to this conclussion ..
The idea that laws are somehow created out of thin air by faceless un-elected bureaucrats based on some treaty or other is not true.
If the Treaties are not open to public scrutiny or the democratic process but just appear out of thin air and then the laws are drawn up by the faceless unelected commissioners based on the treaties. Thats exactly what happens, or am I missing something?
Your not one of these fanatical idealogic Europhiles are you, like Eddie the Idiot (Izzard)?
Dave, I’m neither for or against the EU. The simple reason being I don’t have (and don’t know how to get) the information to base an opinion on.
I don’t know if you’re winding me up but the process can’t be more simple. Elected National Governments, in the Council of Ministers with in most cases (but not all) the participation of Elected MEP’s makes EU Law. The Commission (the un-elected lot) interpret and implement the said laws. The Commission’s interpretations are accountable in the European Courts by either National Governments or individuals.
The democratic deficit, in my view, arises from the fact that when we elect our officials to represent us in the Council of Ministers’ we don’t do so solely on that basis and have no redress in isolation on the decisions made.
Anyway, you haven’t answered my question. What’s all this Irish business got to do with you?
The if the Irish accept the constitution in a referendum, then the agreement made in that will eventually become law where I live. So it’s got quite a lot to do with me and everyone else in Europe.
I’m not trying to wind you up at all. Merely putting forward an against debate based on facts. If you don’t have enough information, then the Europa link is there for you to read and everyone can draw their own conclussions from it.
Dave, the sort of information I’m after is twofold; a) what effect has membership of the EU had on Britain’s economy, are we richer or poorer for joining? b) Too what level, or otherwise, has EU law imposed itself above British Law? What I mean by this is how many laws over and above what we would normally be subject to is a direct result of EU membership.
For example, it could be argued that the EU has imposed a Directive upon me to hold a certain type of Driving License – and this would be true. However, without this EU Directive I would still be required to hold a British Driving License. So the imposition is in the detail rather than the act. I suspect, but don’t know, much of EU law takes this form and even if we weren’t members of the EU, British law would be mirroring what happens in Europe for the simple reason we live in a changing world and laws need to change to reflect this.
To get back to ‘The Irish Question’ it seems a bit rich to me for you to bang on about democratic accountability while relying on a process in which you have no franchise. As I understand it the decision for a new referendum was made by the Irish Government as they believe a Yes vote is in the Irish national interest. If you’re that concerned you should be lobbing parliament in this (democratic) country of ours for a referendum. Good luck with that
Dave, the sort of information I’m after is twofold; a) what effect has membership of the EU had on Britain’s economy, are we richer or poorer for joining? b) Too what level, or otherwise, has EU law imposed itself above British Law?
a) That question can’t be answered, as you know.
b) The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) was a direct result of the Maastritch Treaty and the introduction of the EU’s competition rules. As you know this has led to the destruction and plundering of public sector services. This Treaty which I thought was a good idea at the time, created a whole raft of legislation and beaurocracy that didn’t exist at all.On point b) the question is not quite right. EU laws aren’t above British laws they are British laws before they become legislation due to the Treaty process. That’s how the French have just been fined over GM crops, because the EU can tell a country to pass an internal law which satisfies an EU law within a given space of time. Secret treaties are legally binding, unless you negotiate an opt-out cause when you secretly sign up to it.
As to lobbying our government, how do you know I’m not lobbying it for a referendum?
.. don’t shoot the messenger ..
Dave, that’s a fair point about the OFT and one I hadn’t fully appreciated…I’ll have to think about for a bit and get back to you.
Anyway, on a seperate issue…I have today for the first time in 3 years of trying made an ediable loaf of bread. The missus can’t believe it but I’m over the moon
Well done with the loaf Pete .. we have a bread making machine that makes a bread type substance, that’s not bread. I like a challenge to bread might be a bridge too far.
I tend to agree and I am a BIG fan of the common European market. Better we work together as one big economic block that has a reasonable chance of taking on the might of the USA and emerging giants such as China and India than go it alone. Moreover after the experience of WW2 it is surely more preferable to have us all working as one than going to war with one another over economic expansionism.
Why would Ireland want to take on the might of the USA? They have been a major contributor to economic prosperity in this country for the last 15 years.
He has always said to me that the "economic" miracle of the past 30 years or so is down to one thing – EU grants. Given this he regards the "no" vote as a classic case of biting the hand that has fed you handsomely for 30 years or so.
I tend to agree and I am a BIG fan of the common European market. Better we work together as one big economic block that has a reasonable chance of taking on the might of the USA and emerging giants such as China and India than go it alone. Moreover after the experience of WW2 it is surely more preferable to have us all working as one than going to war with one another over economic expansionism.
The sooner the UK adopts the Euro the better – as is painfully obvious when one charts the comparative performance of the two currencies in recent times.
…is the correct answer. Ten points!
gc
Adoptive father of two. The patron saint of lower-grade fare. A gently critical friend of point-to-pointing. Kindness is a political act.
Given this he regards the "no" vote as a classic case of biting the hand that has fed you handsomely for 30 years or so.
.. the UK is a net contributor to the EU, about £14Bn a year, of which we get about £2Bn back .. the rest is squandered away or given to european third world countries like Poland.
The second world war was the result of the collapse of democracy and the replacement of that system of government with an idealogical un-elected one.
The EU to sterling exchange rate is pretty irrelevant as most of the world’s economy is priced in US$. The Euro is too strong to be competitive and becoming more untenable by the week. It will be interesting to see how deep this recession will bite in the Eurozone with their currency out of control.
With regards to the comments about ‘taking on India, China and the US’ .. you don’t ‘take on’ foriegn economies, you trade with them. If you wanted to take them on, you would simply devalue your own currency against their’s and then market forces run their course.
My Dad is Irish and was a an economic migrant to the UK because he grew up in relative poverty in rural West Coast Ireland.
He has always said to me that the "economic" miracle of the past 30 years or so is down to one thing – EU grants. Given this he regards the "no" vote as a classic case of biting the hand that has fed you handsomely for 30 years or so.
Just because we got handouts in the 70s doesn’t mean we should vote YES YES YES to every EU suggestion that’s dreamt up by Brussels.
That’s the same argument as people who won’t hear of complaints about immigration into Ireland because "sure the Irish did it for years" – this doesn’t make it right and most certainly doesn’t mean we should have to suffer for it for years to come.
This is the kind of rubbish I am talking about that comes from Europe that directly affects people in this country.
[b:zssivck8]Europe puts 50,000 postmen out of a job[/url:zssivck8][/b:zssivck8] .. this was news 8 years ago and our government has worked hard to wreck the post office and create the need to sell it off, to satisfy their own half-baked idealogical ends.Lord Mandy was on the box last night referring to the GPO as a business with a pension deficit. Firstly it’s a service owned by the government and not a business, secondly, it’s only got a pension deficit because the government have mis-managed and spent the money. I can’t think of anything more decieptful.
So, firefox .. what’s the message to the soon to be unemployed postmen .. eat cake, or my Dad says you might get a new uniform and a pay cut, so it’s not all bad?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.