Brexit!

[Spiritwalker]

1 hour ago, Will1981 said:

Sorry I have taken a while to reply to this as I have been busy with work etc, I can agree that the words "bullying" and "screwing" may have been a little OTT but I was replying to a post with was equally OTT about it being 1-1.

 

Anyway I have made a list with a few of the issues I have with the EU:

 

1. Free movement of labour law

Immigration was largely cited as a reason for people voting Brexit. As a member of the EU, the Government does not have control over the number or type of EU migrants who come to the UK seeking work. Leaders of the Leave campaign said they will introduce an Australian-style points system, where all migrants would be subject to the same rules, and could be selectively refused entry.

"This EU law affects UK citizens in low payed, unskilled and manual work greatly as from my experience UK employers will run their workers into the ground as there is a limitless line of immigrant workers to replace them with, it also gives our Trade Union's a much harder time when negotiating pay rises working conditions etc"

2. Child benefit for migrant workers law

Currently, EU citizens working in the UK can claim child benefit, even if their children are not living in the UK. This law could be scrapped as part of any changes to immigration.

"pretty sure everyone agrees this law is wrong"

3. Fisheries policy

The Common Fisheries Policy gives European fishing fleets equal access to the waters of all EU states within 12 nautical miles of the coast. Quotas are imposed to preserve fish stocks – which Boris Johnson has previously described as ‘crazy’. The Leave campaign promised that Brexit would help fishers ‘take back control’ of Britain’s fishing waters and fish stocks.

"surely the benefits of being an island nation is that we should be able to take advantage of one of our biggest national resources"

4. VAT on energy bills law

EU law says that the standard VAT rate must be at least 15 per cent. The reduced rate, which only applies to certain specified goods and services, must be at least 5 per cent. Governments aren’t given the freedom to decide that there should be no VAT on chosen items – this caused the argument on ‘tampon tax’, which was eventually scrapped. Outside the EU, the Government could make gas and electricity bills VAT-free. This move would be socially progressive, as the people most affected would be those on the lowest incomes. However, green activists could object, saying that it wouldn’t be green, as it may encourage people to use more electricity.

"the average UK dual fuel energy bill is £1254 per year with VAT at 20%, so if VAT on energy bills was reduced to 0% the average household would save £251 per year"

5. Climate change directive

The Open Europe think tank see the renewables directive as the most expensive piece of legislation imposed by Brussels. It sets targets for tackling climate change, such as achieving a 20 per cent share of energy from renewable sources by 2020. The cost required to achieve these targets is reputedly £4.7bn a year, and with Brexit campaigners tending to be sceptical about climate change, scrapping this directive could be seen as a useful way to save money – although green activists would disagree.

"while this is a good policy for the environment it is not for our energy bills and our impact will be tiny while hugh countries like the US and China ignore these issues"

6. Bananas regime

The European Commission drew up a ‘banana import regime’ which set out what constitutes a standard quality banana. Misshapen bananas weren’t banned under the rule – but they were categorised as sub-standard. Well, at least we can take back control over what makes a banana aesthetically pleasing.

"this law is causing thousands of tonnes of perfectly usable fruit and veg to be plowed back into the earth rather than be eaten"

7. The common fisheries policy. 

It mandated that if fish of the wrong species were caught accidentally, the dead fish had to be thrown overboard, and the fishermen carried on killing more fish, until they reached the “right” quotas of the “right” species.

"bizarre and wasteful law"

8. Water does NOT prevent dehydration 

If you've been on a mighty old work out or you're struggling with a sore heard from a heavy night out, drinking water will NOT ease your pain.

Well, that's according to the EU. 

In 2011 they passed a law, which claimed scientists had found no evidence to suggest drinking water stopped dehydration.

This meant manufacturers of bottled drinking water were prohibited from labelling their product with anything that would suggest consumption would fight dehydration. 

"another bizarre law"

9. Prunes will NOT fight your bowel problems

Meddling legislators made it illegal for prunes to be sold as a super food that acts as a laxative. 

And after a thorough investigation, the EU ruled: "The evidence provided is insufficient to establish a cause and effect relationship between the consumption of dried plums of 'prune' cultivars and maintenance of normal bowel function" 

But anyone who has ever taken part in a 'who can eat the most prunes' competition would surely disagree with this.

"bizarre law"

10. Turnips are NOT swede

In 2010 the EU decided to make sure one and all knew the difference between a turnip and a swede. 

Now supermarkets are encouraged to avoid confusion when labelling both vegetables. 

And this is because locals in Cornwall often refer to their swedes as turnips.

"bizarre law"

11. Eggs CANNOT be sold by the dozen

Fury erupted when shopkeepers were told all food must be weighed and sold by the kilo - instead of the number contained in the packet back in 2010. 

And even though British shoppers can still buy a dozen of eggs, it is now priced based wholly on the weight.

"as if EU law makers are just trying to justify their wages"

12. The Cost of Being in the EU.

"we just do not get our monies worth"

13. EU Parliament cost

"costs about £2m per menmber of the the EU paliamnet per year".

 

Having read your reply I think points 1 to 3 are fair arguments but not the rest.

If you think that gaining control of the shape of our bananas is good reason to 

throw the country into economic turmoil, risk the breakup of the U.K. and the peace

in NI then it is hard to take your argument seriously.

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, simFox said:

This is true. The Kremlin were constantly pestering me before I voted.

...which I'm sure had just as much influence on the overall situation as the newspaper article did. That's rather my point.

 

5 minutes ago, BlueSi13 said:

Because Russians? Let's not mention the George Soros funded remain campaign then.

 

Monday could be epic.  This new information coupled with the fact that Phillip Hammond had already let slip that he consulted with EU lawyers prior to the surrender bill makes it clear to those on the leave side that this is a genuine attempt to delay and eventually overturn the referendum.

 

Latest polls suggest the PM may feel encouraged to deny Royal Assent, especially if the opposition continues to run from a GE.

Yep, I'm not denying that both sides used and are using actors from other nations (current US administration are big Brexit fans and sticking their oar in too, fancy that), so I simply take issue with the dramatic "evidence of foreign collusion" as if it's some kind of smoking gun that will condemn one side or the other.

[Jimothy]

3 minutes ago, Spiritwalker said:

Having read your reply I think points 1 to 3 are fair arguments but not rest.

If you think that gaining control of the shape of our bananas is good reason to 

throw the country into economic turmoil, risk the breakup of the U.K. and the peace

in NI then it is hard to take your argument seriously.

1 isn't a great example because we were able to implement laws that would mean EU nationals couldn't stay longer than 3 months if they didn't have a job or funds and never did so.

[Carl the Llama]

Putin's Russia runs an anonymous social media disinformation campaign promoting leave with the aim of weakening their political opponents (us & the EU).  No problem.

 

Our mps negotiate with our political allies in the hopes of avoiding a worst case scenario.  Traitors! Collusion!

[l444ry]

 

[Wortho]

5 minutes ago, l444ry said:

 

Twaddle

[Salisbury Fox]

20 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

1 isn't a great example because we were able to implement laws that would mean EU nationals couldn't stay longer than 3 months if they didn't have a job or funds and never did so.

Agreed, I can only assume that they have not as it is impractical or impossible to enforce given the numbers.

[Jimothy]

4 minutes ago, Salisbury Fox said:

Agreed, I can only assume that they have not as it is impractical or impossible to enforce given the numbers.

Chicken and egg argument surely. If you implement the numbers would be lower. No point complaining about something if you can't be arsed to implement the solution.

[Salisbury Fox]

3 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Chicken and egg argument surely. If you implement the numbers would be lower. No point complaining about something if you can't be arsed to implement the solution.

It is not chicken and egg if we do not have the infrastructure in the first place to manage this. I don’t believe that enforcement is practical when non EU migration is taken into account too. 

[Jimothy]

2 minutes ago, Salisbury Fox said:

It is not chicken and egg if we do not have the infrastructure in the first place to manage this. I don’t believe that enforcement is practical when non EU migration is taken into account too. 

Most other countries do it. Germany, France, etc. Like I say don't moan about something if you're not prepared to use the tools in place to fix it.

[Will1981]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Good to see a comprehensive response, but I'm going to zero in on this one:

 

Is the idea (not even the fact) that the US and China are "ignoring" climate change really an excuse for a Brexit-oriented UK to do likewise in ignoring this EU directive, engage in a race to the bottom and thus share in the blame when the consequences of this ignorance become very apparent?

 

While there are many arguments for Brexit as quoted, this particular one is particularly fallacious and will do the UK only harm in the long term.

I am torn on this one am all for green renewable energy but the government have removed the feeding tariff on soler panels and pretty much killed that industry in the UK, I know this was mainly due to farmers abusing the system and covering huge areas of valuable grazing land with soler farms just to take abvantage of the tariffs when this should have been aimed at smaller dometic households, we have hundreds of flat roofed huge warehouses in this country which should be covered in soler panels and not wasted on valuable farm land.

 

I like the idea of wind farms and think they look nice and produce an enormous amount of power but whenever they plan to build any the nimby's kick up a right fuss.

 

Nuclear is probably the best way to go but not sure if it is classed as green renewable energy.

[BlueSi13]

37 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Putin's Russia runs an anonymous social media disinformation campaign promoting leave with the aim of weakening their political opponents (us & the EU).  No problem.

 

Our mps negotiate with our political allies in the hopes of avoiding a worst case scenario.  Traitors! Collusion!

No evidence of Russian meddling on Facebook to influence Brexit vote.  That's from Nick Clegg of all people.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/facebook-nick-clegg-russia-interference-brexit-eu-referendum-a8971656.html

 

Remain MP's are not 'negotiating with our political allies' (I thought we Brexiteers were supposed to be naive ).  This is a clear attempt to undermine their own British government to sink negotiations so as to extend and potentially stop Brexit.  

 

Tell me how this bill is in the countries best negotiating interests?  How will this help us secure a better deal? How will handing the EU the power to determine when we may leave (with conditions attached) positively impact us?  

[Guest Electric Yetis]

1 minute ago, BlueSi13 said:

No evidence of Russian meddling on Facebook to influence Brexit vote.  That's from Nick Clegg of all people.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/facebook-nick-clegg-russia-interference-brexit-eu-referendum-a8971656.html

 

Remain MP's are not 'negotiating with our political allies' (I thought we Brexiteers were supposed to be naive ).  This is a clear attempt to undermine their own British government to sink negotiations so as to extend and potentially stop Brexit.  

 

Tell me how this bill is in the countries best negotiating interests?  How will this help us secure a better deal? How will handing the EU the power to determine when we may leave (with conditions attached) positively impact us?  

Nick Clegg, Head of communications at Facebook. 

[Salisbury Fox]

11 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Most other countries do it.  Germany, France, etc. Like I say don't moan about something if you're not prepared to use the tools in place to fix it.

Have you got a link to the figures?

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, Will1981 said:

I am torn on this one am all for green renewable energy but the government have removed the feeding tariff on soler panels and pretty much killed that industry in the UK, I know this was mainly due to farmers abusing the system and covering huge areas of valuable grazing land with soler farms just to take abvantage of the tariffs when this should have been aimed at smaller dometic households, we have hundreds of flat roofed huge warehouses in this country which should be covered in soler panels and not wasted on valuable farm land.

 

I like the idea of wind farms and think they look nice and produce an enormous amount of power but whenever they plan to build any the nimby's kick up a right fuss.

 

Nuclear is probably the best way to go but not sure if it is classed as green renewable energy.

Fair enough - personally if I saw that a Brexit-minded UK government were taking this seriously and regulating it in the way the EU might - because it is necessary - then I might look at them more kindly.

 

8 minutes ago, BlueSi13 said:

No evidence of Russian meddling on Facebook to influence Brexit vote.  That's from Nick Clegg of all people.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/facebook-nick-clegg-russia-interference-brexit-eu-referendum-a8971656.html

 

Remain MP's are not 'negotiating with our political allies' (I thought we Brexiteers were supposed to be naive ).  This is a clear attempt to undermine their own British government to sink negotiations so as to extend and potentially stop Brexit.  

 

Tell me how this bill is in the countries best negotiating interests?  How will this help us secure a better deal? How will handing the EU the power to determine when we may leave (with conditions attached) positively impact us?  

....and Cambridge Analytica?

[Heathrow fox]

1 hour ago, Facecloth said:

1 isn't a great example because we were able to implement laws that would mean EU nationals couldn't stay longer than 3 months if they didn't have a job or funds and never did so.

If my auntie had bollox etc rubbish argument could should didn’t.

[Jimothy]

30 minutes ago, Salisbury Fox said:

Have you got a link to the figures?

No, I can't find a definitive list of who is signed up. And I've just searched the net for the last half an hour. From various articles I know Belgium, Italty, Austria, Germany, Sweden and others that slip my mind now do, and we don't.

[Jimothy]

19 minutes ago, Heathrow fox said:

If my auntie had bollox etc rubbish argument could should didn’t.

How is it the EUs fault that we chose not to implement immigration control laws? We should have done it, it's our own fault we didn't  therefore not a legitimate reason to hate on the EU and what to leave.

[Leicester_Loyal]

51 minutes ago, BlueSi13 said:

No evidence of Russian meddling on Facebook to influence Brexit vote.  That's from Nick Clegg of all people.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/facebook-nick-clegg-russia-interference-brexit-eu-referendum-a8971656.html

 

Remain MP's are not 'negotiating with our political allies' (I thought we Brexiteers were supposed to be naive ).  This is a clear attempt to undermine their own British government to sink negotiations so as to extend and potentially stop Brexit.  

 

Tell me how this bill is in the countries best negotiating interests?  How will this help us secure a better deal? How will handing the EU the power to determine when we may leave (with conditions attached) positively impact us?  

And they wonder why we can't get a better deal

[Strokes]

2 hours ago, Facecloth said:

1 isn't a great example because we were able to implement laws that would mean EU nationals couldn't stay longer than 3 months if they didn't have a job or funds and never did so.

Who could we vote for that would have implemented it?

[Jimothy]

Just now, Strokes said:

Who could we vote for that would have implemented it?

You'd have to ask them why they never offered it. All I'm saying is the tools were there for us and they were never used. That's nobodys fault but ours.

[Strokes]

1 minute ago, Facecloth said:

You'd have to ask them why they never offered it. All I'm saying is the tools were there for us and they were never used. That's nobodys fault but ours.

But the first time British citizens had the chance to vote on it and have their say, since its introduction was the 2016 referendum. So wills point is very much valid.

[Jimothy]

Just now, Strokes said:

But the first time British citizens had the chance to vote on it and have their say, since its introduction was the 2016 referendum. So wills point is very much valid.

Well it's been around for over 20 years I believe. People could have campaigned for it if they felt that strongly about immigration. By putting it up as a reason to to leave the EU is placing blame in the wrong place.

[LiberalFox]

I wouldn't want us to implement that unless it could be shown that it was a genuine problem. 

[Jimothy]

1 minute ago, LiberalFox said:

I wouldn't want us to implement that unless it could be shown that it was a genuine problem. 

Well yes that is the other point. That fact that EU immigrants put more into the economy than they take out, and very little evidence that they were a reason behind wages falling or taking jobs off British nationals. But if that's not enough for some and it's not, then it's fair to point out this was possible.