Europe again. Unaccountable and undemocratic. This sums it up.

[Herr Tubthumper]

[/SUP]6994300]In which case your scenario is a million miles off and I'm not sure what point you're making. I said that the EU would not stop the UK from joining the EEA, you said that there are current cases that suggest otherwise and these being Switzerland and Norway.....but...but...neither country have ever been in the EU, they're both happily in the EEA and I can find nothing to suggest that either the two countries nor the EU are unhappy with this situation.

I'm not really sure what you going on about here.

Just to clarify. The EU will most likely allow a European nation to join the trade block. But, not without concessions. Current evidence suggests that to sit outside the EU block, but to trade with the EU block, you need to sign up to the 4 freedoms. Switzerland and Norway are the two examples of this. Both nations were not allowed to trade on favourable and competitive terms without signing these agreements first.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

"deals done behind closed doors" sounds very cloak-and-dagger, when in fact it's just the political process and you could say the same for pretty much any political appointment.



Assuming you're talking about the EC president.: no, you can't vote him out because the office has a 5-year term. But he can be removed by the (elected) MEPs.



Are you seriously suggesting this as a realistic expression of democracy with some likelihood of success?

Agree

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

What is an EU passport and what does it look like? Genuine question?

Really? You don't know? Ffs.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

I'm not really sure what you going on about here.

Just to clarify. The EU will most likely allow a European nation to join the trade block. But, not without concessions. Current evidence suggests that to sit outside the EU block, but to trade with the EU block, you need to sign up to the 4 freedoms. Switzerland and Norway are the two examples of this. Both nations were not allowed to trade on favourable and competitive terms without signing these agreements first.

It seems to me that many advocating EU exit would not find this acceptable (free movement of EEA citizens to settle/work being an example) and as for implementing future EU legislation as is, having had no input/vote etc at any level - really?

 

[pastafarian]

I'm not really sure what you going on about here.

Just to clarify. The EU will most likely allow a European nation to join the trade block. But, not without concessions. Current evidence suggests that to sit outside the EU block, but to trade with the EU block, you need to sign up to the 4 freedoms. Switzerland and Norway are the two examples of this. Both nations were not allowed to trade on favourable and competitive terms without signing these agreements first.

Lets not forget the Swiss people have voted for the freedom of movement to be removed and immigration controls and quotas to be put in place.

A Bill has been drafted and is now at the consultation stage.

However The EU has said it doesnt care about the vote and will not accept any compromise


Interesting to see how this one pans out

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

It seems to me that many advocating EU exit would not find this acceptable (free movement of EEA citizens to settle/work being an example) and as for implementing future EU legislation as is, having had no input/vote etc at any level - really?

Agree.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Lets not forget the Swiss people have voted for the freedom of movement to be removed and immigration controls and quotas to be put in place.

A Bill has been drafted and is now at the consultation stage.

However The EU has said it doesnt care about the vote and will not accept any compromise


Interesting to see how this one pans out

You are correct. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. But I cannot see the EU allowing one nation to cherry pick the 4 freedoms. If the club rules are not suitable for Switzerland I guess they'll leave. Why wouldn't they?

 

[Buzzer]

I'm not really sure what you going on about here.

Just to clarify. The EU will most likely allow a European nation to join the trade block. But, not without concessions. Current evidence suggests that to sit outside the EU block, but to trade with the EU block, you need to sign up to the 4 freedoms. Switzerland and Norway are the two examples of this. Both nations were not allowed to trade on favourable and competitive terms without signing these agreements first.

You've lost me. No idea what you're going on about. Sorry.

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

I am firstly English and secondly British. I do not think of myself as European. To me, we are an individual island race and always have been. We have never had anything in common with the large land mass and interlocking countries to our East. At different times, we have fought all of them ( some, over and over again ) bar Portugal. History shows that we are proud of our independence, our individual strength and our heritage.
There have been two great imperialist and colonising powers in history. The Romans and the British. The Germans have yearned for centuries to do the same and have tried twice, militarily, to expand. Twice, our greatest ally ( America ) have helped us to defeat this powerful and dangerous country. At the end of the Second World War, when the Third Reich lay in ruins, the Germans vowed to regroup and dominate again, but this time, economically.
They have succeeded. They dominate this group of disparate countries and do so to their economic advantage. They have become a superpower. They call all the shots. It is in their interest to have European union. They want us in with them, so they can try and control what we do. They respect and fear our historical alliance with the USA and want us under their wing.
It has been imbued in us in recent years that we are European. We have been brainwashed by politicians and self-seeking bureacrats that we are all in it together. Why can't we be proud to be English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish or British and have the strength and confidence to stand alone. We are big boys now. We don't need to be wet-nursed by a nanny super-state. We should have the self-confidence to recognise our proper identity.

I'm not sure any, or much, of that is true.

 

[pastafarian]

You are correct. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. But I cannot see the EU allowing one nation to cherry pick the 4 freedoms. If the club rules are not suitable for Switzerland I guess they'll leave. Why wouldn't they?

It may be more a case of getting thrown out rather than leaving the club voluntarily when the immigration laws come into place.
Would The EU kick the Swiss out of the club?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

It may be more a case of getting thrown out rather than leaving the club voluntarily when the immigration laws come into place.
Would The EU kick the Swiss out of the club?

This remains to be seen. But I cannot see how you can cherry pick which freedoms as it's not fair on every other member. And it's not a case of anyone kicking someone out. More the Swiss deciding if the membership rules are for them or not. At the end of the day, no one is forced the be in the EU or the extended trading block.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

You've lost me. No idea what you're going on about. Sorry.

Alex Dawson and Pastafarian have both seemingly managed to comprehend my post and reply. It isn't that difficult surely? Unless of course you deliberately don't want to understand . I think you're being a little disingenuous here.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

You've lost me. No idea what you're going on about. Sorry.

Alex, Pasta, can you help?

 

[Simster]

I'm not sure any, or much, of that is true.

This.

Utterly laughable post.

 

[cunning fergus]

Eleven government defeats in the last session by the unelected House of Lords. I'll leave you to tab through the remaining years.

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/parliament/house-of-lords/lords-defeats

So your point is that because the UK's centuries old consitutional framework allows for a democratically elected Government to have its laws rejected by the unelected House of Lords, then we should have no concern with a relatively new constitutional framework (since 2009) that allows a foreign unelected law making executive to also impose its will on the same democratically elected Government?

Interesting logic..............had you been alive 70 years ago I can imagine you in the pub rattling on about the unelected Houses of Lords and suggesting we should give a the Germans and the nice Mr Hitler a try.

The Norwegians had a name for people like you...............

 

[Guinness Boy]

So your point is that because the UK's centuries old consitutional framework allows for a democratically elected Government to have its laws rejected by the unelected House of Lords, then we should have no concern with a relatively new constitutional framework (since 2009) that allows a foreign unelected law making executive to also impose its will on the same democratically elected Government?

Interesting logic..............had you been alive 70 years ago I can imagine you in the pub rattling on about the unelected Houses of Lords and suggesting we should give a the Germans and the nice Mr Hitler a try.

The Norwegians had a name for people like you...............

You're just obsessed with the Nazis aren't you?

Are you for The House of Lords? Simple yes or no.

 

[5mins-from-amex]

So your point is that because the UK's centuries old consitutional framework allows for a democratically elected Government to have its laws rejected by the unelected House of Lords, then we should have no concern with a relatively new constitutional framework (since 2009) that allows a foreign unelected law making executive to also impose its will on the same democratically elected Government?

Interesting logic..............had you been alive 70 years ago I can imagine you in the pub rattling on about the unelected Houses of Lords and suggesting we should give a the Germans and the nice Mr Hitler a try.

The Norwegians had a name for people like you...............

Quisling?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

The Norwegians had a name for people like you...............

Neshorn ?

 

[cunning fergus]

You're just obsessed with the Nazis aren't you?

Are you for The House of Lords? Simple yes or no.

I guess no more than you and Bernard considering your recent posts.

My “obsession” if you choose to call it that is that we learn from history and preserve our sovereignty at all costs. I think history would indicate that this county was always ultimately better off in resisting European hegemony in all of its guises over the last 800 years.

Our forebears had to fight hard over the years to preserve it and sacrificed a lot, so meekly handing it over to some unelected foreigners who are (a) in thrall to global capitalism (b) unaccountable to the British people, and (c) have no primary interest in the wellbeing of the British people is not in my view a route to the sunlit uplands.

If you don’t want to take history just look at Greece, and the other poor European countries that will ultimately have their sovereignty ground to the dust by the euro machine being driven by greedy EU politicians and monetarists.

So, if I have to choose between the unelected Houses of Lords and the UK Government’s constitutional ability to overrule its rejection of proposed laws in comparison to the unelected EU Commission which has authority under the Lisbon Treaty to implement law onto the statute book of member states without ANY agreement by the EU Parliament or more importantly the elected legislatures of member states then its YES all day long to the Houses of Lords.

What about you Sepp………..EU Commission or House of Lords? Simple yes or no?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I guess no more than you and Bernard considering your recent posts.

My “obsession” if you choose to call it that is that we learn from history and preserve our sovereignty at all costs. I think history would indicate that this county was always ultimately better off in resisting European hegemony in all of its guises over the last 800 years.

Our forebears had to fight hard over the years to preserve it and sacrificed a lot, so meekly handing it over to some unelected foreigners who are (a) in thrall to global capitalism (b) unaccountable to the British people, and (c) have no primary interest in the wellbeing of the British people is not in my view a route to the sunlit uplands.

If you don’t want to take history just look at Greece, and the other poor European countries that will ultimately have their sovereignty ground to the dust by the euro machine being driven by greedy EU politicians and monetarists.

So, if I have to choose between the unelected Houses of Lords and the UK Government’s constitutional ability to overrule its rejection of proposed laws in comparison to the unelected EU Commission which has authority under the Lisbon Treaty to implement law onto the statute book of member states without ANY agreement by the EU Parliament or more importantly the elected legislatures of member states then its YES all day long to the Houses of Lords.

What about you Sepp………..EU Commission or House of Lords? Simple yes or no?

You are talking absolute utter rubbish.

Please read how EU law is made for the sake of yourself and everyone reading http://europa.eu/eu-law/decision-making/procedures/index_en.htm


This bit is salient

"Both the Council (ie individual governments) and the Parliament (directly elected) can block the legislative proposal." So, the Commission has no authority to do anything unless individual governments reps and the directly elected members let them. They just propose and administer. They have NO power as such. This is pretty much the opposite of what you wrote. Where do you get your info from?