No deal (n/g) | Page 8 | Vital Football

No deal (n/g)

I think it's only you that is misunderstanding the matter of laws being foisted upon us. Yes, we've adopted some elements of EU employment law, all elements of VAT rules and regulations and others relating to free movement of capital, goods and people and, yes, the supreme court can be overruled by the ECJ and there are many occasions when it upholds decisions of the supreme court. One of the reasons why they want the ECJ to have overarching powers is to ensure consistency on rulings throughout the EU in order to avoid rogue states going off track. Much of European domestic law is based on the Napoleonic code something quite alien to the statutes and common law that underpins the system in England & Wales and Scotland. I think you're fantasising over nothing but what's happening now in the UK is far worse. Brexiteers wanted our sovereignty back and the 'return' of power to the UK Parliament and what does May do? Takes the power to adjust the repeal act out of the democratic process of Westminster. The whole process stinks and the witch Thatcher would not have stood for any of this; she would have fought the EU from within and had Farage banged up in the Tower for treason.
 
Surreybob, you also conveniently forget the opt outs that we have sought and obtained for areas where we have an issue. Also there is a real danger that we will be excluded from pan European contracts where we do not accept the jurisdiction of the ECJ as the final arbiter for those contracts. That has already happened for some European Space Agency Contracts. Why on earth should the EU set aside a perfectly workable legal framework that works for the 27 to satisfy the whim of a 'third' country. This obsession with sovereignty is exactly that. An obsession.
 
TherealWaldo --- I absolutely disagree, taking the Euro as their currency was not optional for them, it was packaged up as part of the requirement to gain membership.

The benefits afforded to the Greek politicians, meant they could make all sorts of financial commitments that were unsound and ultimately detrimental to the people of Greece.

Without membership of the EU, the ultimate mismanagement of assets would not have happened.

As for the bloated bureaucracy, I cannot comment on your experiences and I fully respect you may have a different view; but I met two Euro-Bureaus not 10 days ago, who whilst on good salaries ... were afforded astonishing expenses ... it was a bizarre and somewhat troubling conversation..... and no, i paid for my drinks myself.

I would also add, that I have first hand experience of the EU purchasing vast quantities of top end wine... It makes perfect sense to hold stock for all the events they put on for sure, but I really dont see why soo much first growth Beaudeux needs to be purchased.

 
Airbus takes controlling interest in [Bombardier] C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership. With Brexit looming, is this good or bad news for thousands of jobs in Northern Ireland?
 
Strood, glad we're risking our countries future on the basis that some Eurocrats drink expensive wine. If only I'd known that.
 
Go to any officers mess and you'll see the best of everything [at our expense]; it's not just the so-called fat cats of the EU as you point out
 
With the pro-EU Kurz at the helm, "EU membership is not likely to be questioned," which means no stay or leave referendum any time soon in Austria now that the centre-right [not far right party Valencia] party is running the show.
 
It was quite interesting listening to an EU President of something or other on Newsnight last night.

When questioned by Evan Davis, he made it abundantly clear that it really is all about the money.

Davis said about May's 20 billion offer and he said that the UK could easily afford another 20 billion.
His exact words were 20 billion is peanuts to a country like the UK.

That makes it evidently clear to me that the EU are just pitching to see what they can get out of the UK taxpayer before we go.

So, it appears that it isn't much to do with obligations or long term commitments.
It really is just 'show me the money' before you go.

It really is just a huge scam isn't it.
Probably the worlds largest ever Ponzi scheme.

Here is how it works.

You give me some money and over a period of time, I'll give you some back, in bits and bobs, as I see fit.
I'll buy lot's of shiney things with the money you've given me but you won't actually ever have a stake in the shiney things. They will always remain my property.
I'll also give some of your money to poorer people so that I'll always have a hold over them and they will have to do what I say.
I'll get you to borrow some money so that I can put it in my European Central Bank and I can then lend it back to you.

So, what's in it for you, you may well ask.

Well, in return for all this, you can trade freely and tariff free with 27 other countries.
Oh, when I say free, I actually meant his will cost you about 8 billion a year for the privilege.
You will also be allowed to take in about 3 million of Europe's unemployed.
Won't some of them benefit the UK I hear you ask?
Yes, of course some will, but about 80% will be low skilled workers looking for minimum wage jobs so that they can have the wages boosted by the UK' generous in work benefit system.

" I don't think I like the sound of all that" you say to me, " I want to leave"

Ah Ha! here is the catch

If you decide to leave, you must give me loads more money for the privilege of leaving, because if I cannot continue to fleece you, I might have to reign in my spending a bit, and we wouldn't want that would we?

"But I've given you billions over the years. Surely that is enough"?

It's never enough.
Is it?
 
We want a divorce. Why should the people we want to leave be nice to us?

I'm not saying it's right but what did people expect?

Nave.

The leaders of the Hard Brexit group are rich enough not to have to worry about the outcome. Can you think of a more self centred politician than B Johnson at the moment? So bad that I feel sorry for May.

As for the low paid immigrants, my father in law's care home relied on them to look after him thanks.
 
People like those who work in care homes somehow get overlooked by the points system for non-EU immigrants because we can find such unskilled workers in the UK. Of course we can, my arse. Well, that doesn't work and can't work especially in the South East where we have the closest thing to full employment.
 
SurreyBOB - 16/10/2017 22:15

Trashbat - 16/10/2017 21:48

It?s also a fallacy that leaving the EU means that we can make all our own laws. Fact is our products will need to comply with EU standards if we wish to export there. So we?ll end up adopting most of their law if we have any intention of trading with the EU.
Click to expand...

NO NO NO NO.

Of course we have to comply with EU standards if we export goods there.

But just because we export goods there and receive them does this mean we have to delegate total legal supremacy to the European Union in all legal spheres other than the ones that are directly relevant to trade? Our constitution for all its imperfections (written and unwritten) is something that needs defending from the power-hungry dysfunctional EU.

It's exactly this type of misunderstanding of the EU and how it works that has led us to the situation in which we now find ourselves.
Click to expand...

If you read my post, it only relates to trade so I don?t see any misunderstanding on my part!

But, that said, the same argument can be applied to other areas aside from trade - areas where cooperation is essential... ...crime, tax, aviation.

In short we?ll need to adopt a whole heap of other legislation from the EU.



 
shotshy - 18/10/2017 15:34

It was quite interesting listening to an EU President of something or other on Newsnight last night.

When questioned by Evan Davis, he made it abundantly clear that it really is all about the money.

If you decide to leave, you must give me loads more money for the privilege of leaving, because if I cannot continue to fleece you, I might have to reign in my spending a bit, and we wouldn't want that would we?

"But I've given you billions over the years. Surely that is enough"?

It's never enough.
Is it?
Click to expand...

I suspected as much. However, what are we supposed to be getting for this 20 billion+?

If initial reporting is accurate, we have been told by the EU that they steadfastly refuse to move on their policy and ideals that we still have to accept unlimited immigration and their laws in order to for us to continue to have free trade and participate in the customs union or single market.

As I believe that uncontrolled immigration and EU Law as well as the high contributions were the matters that caused the majority to vote Leave in the UK, who will back down?

I think if we pay such a huge bill for "the cake" we should be able to "eat it" or otherwise we might as well just walk away.

No wonder they wanted to agree the Divorce bill before going on to the trade talks. We should only agree an amount in principle and on the basis that concessions will be made on both sides.

 
Brexiteer:

Monday: ?We want control to choose our own laws in our own parliament.?

Tuesday: ?Let?s leave the EU so we can choose to implement own own laws.?

Wednesday: ?Oh hang-on! Nothing?s really changed. Our trade laws are essentially the same as the EU?s. And we?ve gained our sovereignty at the expense of having a seat at the table to influence the very law we?re adopting.?

Thursday: ?The economy is nose-diving, but it?s fine because we?ll strike a trade deal in the next 20 years with another country. Probably a trade deal with a country that already has a deal with the EU. We?ll just have it on less favourable terms.?

Friday: ?Ah shit. Well, at least there are no foreigners now.?
 
The treaties that we signed up to set out the general principles of a state leaving. What the EU is seeking are legacy costs such as pensions where we would have been party to the employment of staff where there would be an on going long term cost. It also includes the cost of moving headquarters buildings where EU agencies will now move to mainland Europe. One of these was subject to a long term lease at Canary Wharf prior to the referendum. Relocation will involve both the cost of a new building and having to pay a long term lease on the former building. The divorce also includes the continued running cost of time limited programmes where we have previously agreed to those programmes. It's silly to think that there isn't a proper list of things that the EU would want to see funded. Clearly we're nowhere near the EU's valuation of these items.

I seem to remember being told a deal with the EU would be one of the easiest things we have ever done. Oh, that was shortly before being told leaving the EU is more complex than the lunar landing. Both quotes from David Davis.

SurreyBob, you remain delusional about the level of concern on the continent. If they were so concerned why was Brexit not even worth a comment from any of the candidates in the German presidential election ? You continue to believe your own rubbish about they need us more than we need them. Nothing in the politics of any of the main European countries suggests the level of concern you mention. That's because the EU does not act as one political unit. It is simply the sum of the 27 member states. It isn't going to be a big issue for any one individual state. It's like saying if something very important was happening in Italy, we would be very concerned because of its effect on the EU. The truth is we'd only be concerned if it directly affected the UK. It's the same thing in play now.
 
Not sure there will even be many less foreigners. I worked last year at a warehouse of a major online retailer (yes that one)- most of the warehouse staff and drivers were eastern european. English workers didn't seem to stick it there very long and i can't see the government turning round to companies like this and telling them they have to employ British workers who will probably be de-motivated and not want to work there. What will happen is there will be a relatively small drop in immigration which will be hailed as a great success but in reality will make little difference to anyone.
 
You clearly think it's reasonable that the UK should pay all of these costs RW ?
Surely a common sense approach would be to deduct these costs from the millions held in assets in the EU.
After all, you paid for it in the first place.

Regarding pensions, simply transfer those to the UK treasury.
Obviously only for UK workers, or is it reasonable for your tax money to be used to pay the pension for some obscure Latvian EU worker?

My impression is that most Remainers cannot see the wood for the trees.
They are so obsessed with EU = good - UK = bad that they are losing touch with reality.

A good example is the EMA.
The EU (not the UK) signed a long term lease without a break clause.
Should the UK now compensate them because of their own negligence?

What should happen, in fairness is that the UK take over the lease and call it the UK Medical Agency. They should offer continued employment to all who work there, on the same terms and conditions, should they wish to stay.

The EU is then free to set up an alternative medical agency in an EU country and recruit from scratch.
Alternatively, accept that the need our help in this and actually negotiate.

A lot of cake and eat it seems to be coming from their side at the moment.
 
Pinhead - 18/10/2017 17:06

Not sure there will even be many less foreigners. I worked last year at a warehouse of a major online retailer (yes that one)- most of the warehouse staff and drivers were eastern european. English workers didn't seem to stick it there very long and i can't see the government turning round to companies like this and telling them they have to employ British workers who will probably be de-motivated and not want to work there. What will happen is there will be a relatively small drop in immigration which will be hailed as a great success but in reality will make little difference to anyone.
Click to expand...

The government would not need to have any direct talks with such companies.

The reason why UK workers often do not want such jobs is that they know that the companies get rich by exploiting workers that come from poorer countries and will accept atrocious contracts and conditions. A certain Mike Ashley is an obvious high profile culprit who has not cleaned up his act. The proliferation of zero hours contracts making income uncertain is another example.

If there is not such a ready supply of unskilled Eastern European workers and they actually needed UK labour the employers would soon come round to treating their staff in a civilised manner. Even paying them minimum wage will attract local people looking for work if they are appreciated and their welfare is looked is after. A promotion and bonus structure would help motivate them as well. Hardly rocket science.
 
Shotshy - re The EMA
I work in the pharma industry and we have been told that the EMA will be moving to the continent (probably Amsterdam). It will take with it everything concerned withe the EU, including staff. This will have serious impact on British research bodies such as The MHRA and VMD, as well as UK pharma manufacturers that get involved with research. It will also have an effect on patents and ownership, and sharing, of intellectual property. It may even have an impact on the potential investments planned by AZ and GSK in the UK. The fallout of all of this in the UK pharma industry could be disastarous, but we will have to wait and see. Let's hope all is ok, or should I say that ( so I am not accused of being a remoaner/traitor/commie/libtard/snowflake)everything will be fantastic and our pharma industry will take off and make us all millionaires
 
You must log in or register to reply here.