Brexit has Officially become UK Law

[Seabag]

Is this the guy voted in to get stuff ?done??

Re Big Ben sounding (or not) on Friday

Asked about the controversy on Tuesday, the prime minister said the government was ?working up a plan so people can bung a bob for a Big Ben bong?.

Several crowdfunders were set up to help raise money, one of which had amassed more than ?227,000 by Friday afternoon. But in an increasingly heated and farcical atmosphere, it subsequently transpired that the government had no such plan, and the House of Commons commission had no way of accepting public donations.

In a bid to draw a line under the row, No 10 has now arranged a light show, featuring a clock counting down the minutes until 11pm ? midnight Brussels time ? when Britain will formally leave the European Union.

Expect a continuation of these kind of lies. He?s on the record clearly lying his way through a number of things. Ireland, the border, this above and many more things. Like Trump, it?s become the new standard of leadership.

Id like to say ?it?s a joke? but it?s not, it?s a reality.

[KidKruger]

No, I think Sepiroth was just quoting you Cat, she?s not making a statement on being reasonable or otherwise - that?s your chosen word, not his/hers.

[Sephiroth]

KK - cheers - I think Cat was being cheeky rather than literal. My first instinct was to correct them but felt a bit nitpicky

secondly - you think I'm a she? Clearly not everyone got the SeanMacGabhann/Straferjack memo

[exdulwicher]

Seabag Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As Fox says himself, his only gripe is with

> ?Brussels telling us what we can and cannot do?

>

> So let?s have what it is ?we? were trying to do

> before Brussels stepped in saying ?you can?t do

> that??

>

> Because personally (and we live in the same city,

> same country etc) I can?t recall going to do

> something and someone or anyone telling me I

> couldn?t do that.

>

> I run a business, import stuff, have a house, have

> children, went wherever I fancied pretty much. Ate

> drank lived, and to my recollection nobody ever

> stopped me.

>

> Did I miss something?

>

> Please tell me Fox, or anyone else, so I can wet

> my appetite for the things I didn?t know I

> couldn?t do, but will be able to do in this new

> era.

I asked a similar question a while ago but it got studiously ignored.

Maybe I could answer for him though?

Have you gone to buy s lightbulb and been unable to get incandescent bulbs, instead being FORCED (against your will obviously) to buy an energy efficient one? That's the meddling pesky EU.

Maybe you've bought a new car and found it had catalytic converters and daytime running lights? That's the EU, FORCING you to drive a safer and less polluting car. The interfering bastards.

Perhaps you've taken your children on holiday and seen, on the beaches, the Blue Flag indicating a clean beach? That's the EU, forcing Governments to clean up the water and preventing you from swimming in raw sewage! How very dare these unelected bureaucrats do that to your British seaside!

When you buy food there are certain standards. How dare they stop you buying chlorinated chicken!

There's probably a few more ways they've dared to improve your life. The unelected interfering bastards.

Just imagine how much better life will be when the Government can decide not to abide by these meddlesome things and can resume dumping raw sewage, stripping your working rights and generally running roughshod over regulations. You can look at your blue passport and your Brexit 50p piece (worth 20p due to the currency crash) and sigh with happiness at it all.

[DulwichFox]

Is EU law above UK law?

Yes, and it has done since 1972, when Parliament passed the European Communities Act.

Since then, if there has been a conflict between national law and European law

the UK courts have to give priority to European law.

6 Nov 2006

There are over 4,200 UK laws that are under EU influence.

[Sephiroth]

same is true with the other EU members - still don't see the problem. And neither do they. What is it about england that has it's bee in a bonnet about all of this?

[KidKruger]

? Since then, if there has been a conflict between national law and European law

the UK courts have to give priority to European law?

How is that a conflict ? It was part of the arrangement, providing parity across member countries, just as in any partnership.

Just slogans Foxy. Mottos, slogans and mantras.

I?m always on the lookout for something I?ve missed, an oversight on my part, a failing in my initial comprehension of an issue, in case there?s a key part of the ?other? argument that makes sense and requires further thought / consideration.

That?s why I ask you questions and press for answers. So I can see the alternative view and understand it.

However nothing you write gives any sensible basis for reconsidering my position - or even for understanding the basis for what your position actually is.

[stepdown]

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Since then, if there has been a conflict between national law and European law the UK courts have to give priority to European law.

Everybody in this thread understands that, the question you are unable or unwilling to engage with is which laws or conflicts specifically were unacceptable to you.

[stepdown]

.

[DulwichFox]

stepdown Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> DulwichFox Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Since then, if there has been a conflict between

> national law and European law the UK courts have

> to give priority to European law.

>

> Everybody in this thread understands that, the

> question you are unable or unwilling to engage

> with is which laws or conflicts specifically were

> unacceptable to you.

As I said there are over 4,200 of them.

I do not know what those laws are or how they affect us .... and that's the problem

[exdulwicher]

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> There are over 4,200 UK laws that are under EU

> influence.

Yes but the UK (by being part of the EU) ratified all of those laws and indeed wrote or co-wrote a lot of them. They're not FORCED on us, they're debated, amended, consulted on and eventually signed by all member states.

The people doing that are elected by one process or another (it varies across the various committees, councils etc but you can look it all up online).

But what you've failed to answer is the aspect of WHICH specific laws negatively affect you in your day to day life. Because most of them are esoteric measures aimed at Governments around things like environmental protection, medicine and food standards, trade rules, etc.

The UK retained the right to set all sorts of UK specific laws. Age of consent. Speed limits. Immigration. Planning regulations.

So without mentioning Sov-rin-ty or bendy bananas, which EU laws are you looking forward to the UK repealing?

[stepdown]

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I do not know what those laws are or how they

> affect us .... and that's the problem

Well, I suppose the first step is admitting that your ignorance is the problem.

[KidKruger]

? DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I do not know what those laws are or how they

> affect us

?

Well, I feel a lot better now about why I couldn?t understand Foxy?s reasoning.

[Blah Blah]

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As I said there are over 4,200 of them.

> I do not know what those laws are or how they

> affect us .... and that's the problem

And there you have it folks. The admission that DF didn't know what he was voting for. A simple bit of research is all it takes DF to educate yourself on EU directives. If you had done that, you would know that most EU law relates to trade, and environmental protections, Health and Safety etc. This is also precisely why you can not answer any question that demands you show an understanding of detail. It is also why you make stuff up,. like the EU telling us to sell houses to foreigners - quite ridiculous.

And the worst part of it is, that ignorant people like you are prepared to risk the future economy of the UK and livelihoods of who knows how many people for that ignorance. Totally selfish.

[JohnL]

Seabag Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Expect a continuation of these kind of lies. He?s

> on the record clearly lying his way through a

> number of things. Ireland, the border, this above

> and many more things. Like Trump, it?s become the

> new standard of leadership.

>

> Id like to say ?it?s a joke? but it?s not, it?s a

> reality.

The strange (and somewhat redeeming feature in my view) is since Boris wants to be the center of attention, some of them are keeping their heads down and getting on with the job for once.

[citylover]

Who is keeping count of every law that affects us negatively? Personally I've lost count of the number of times politicians have said in response to a complaint about this "We can't do anything about x,y, z because it's decided by the EU". Can't wait until democracy is restored and finally people can be held accountable again, i.e. voted out like Grieves, Soubry, Lee etc etc If anyone's upset that their personal priorities are missing from the withdrawal agreement then vote for a party that wants them re-enacted, at least now you have a choice.

[DulwichFox]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> DulwichFox Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > As I said there are over 4,200 of them.

> > I do not know what those laws are or how they

> > affect us .... and that's the problem

>

>

> And there you have it folks. The admission that DF

> didn't know what he was voting for. A simple bit

> of research is all it takes DF to educate yourself

> on EU directives. If you had done that, you would

> know that most EU law relates to trade, and

> environmental protections, Health and Safety etc.

> This is also precisely why you can not answer any

> question that demands you show an understanding of

> detail. It is also why you make stuff up,. like

> the EU telling us to sell houses to foreigners -

> quite ridiculous.

>

> And the worst part of it is, that ignorant people

> like you are prepared to risk the future economy

> of the UK and livelihoods of who knows how many

> people for that ignorance. Totally selfish.

I wasn't voting FOR the Rules.. I was Voting to get away from them.

it's like people signing up to contracts without reading the Small Print.

We never got to see the Small Print when we signed up to the E.U. (EEC) and the EU laws change constantly.

I doubt most of our Politicians know what they are.

It is a job for high level legal experts.

And yes there are some rules which make living conditions better.

But why do we have to pay ?Billions to have them inforced.

[stepdown]

citylover Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've lost count of the number of times politicians

> have said in response to a complaint about this "We

> can't do anything about x,y, z because it's decided

> by the EU".

It's true that the EU has been often been used as a convenient scapegoat, but I have similarly lost count of times where the politician is just blatantly lying. Here's a specific example:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-kipper-rant-eu-rules-uk-commission-speech-a9010436.html

The press has also been guilty of spreading falsehoods regarding EU regulation, lots of examples here:

https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/euromyths-a-z-index/

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I wasn't voting FOR the Rules.. I was Voting to

> get away from them.

...and you just admitted you still don't know what you were voting to get away from.

[DulwichFox]

I have lost the will to live.

Roll on Friday night 11.00 pm 00.00 Brussels time.

and No, I will NOT be celebrating. I don't care if there are no Bongs.

I know that if were say the World was Round, there are people on here would disagree with me.

Well they all laughed at Christopher Columbus , didn't they.

I know what he was up against.

[Sue]

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> I know that if were say the World was Round,

> there are people on here would disagree with me.

>

Nobody would disagree with you.

Because if you said the world was round, that would be demonstrably true.

People disagree with you on here because you write a load of absolute bollocks which when pressed you are unable to back up with facts.

It wouldn't matter so much if there weren't apparently so many people like yourself who have swallowed right wing lies hook, line and sinker and have led us to the terrible position we now find ourselves in.

Well, you will find out in due course how terrible it actually is.

And by then it will be too late. For you, and sadly, for us.

[TheCat]

exdulwicher Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> DulwichFox Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> > There are over 4,200 UK laws that are under EU

> > influence.

>

> Yes but the UK (by being part of the EU) ratified

> all of those laws and indeed wrote or co-wrote a

> lot of them. They're not FORCED on us, they're

> debated, amended, consulted on and eventually

> signed by all member states.

>

> The people doing that are elected by one process

> or another (it varies across the various

> committees, councils etc but you can look it all

> up online).

>

> But what you've failed to answer is the aspect of

> WHICH specific laws negatively affect you in your

> day to day life. Because most of them are esoteric

> measures aimed at Governments around things like

> environmental protection, medicine and food

> standards, trade rules, etc.

>

> The UK retained the right to set all sorts of UK

> specific laws. Age of consent. Speed limits.

> Immigration. Planning regulations.

>

> So without mentioning Sov-rin-ty or bendy bananas,

> which EU laws are you looking forward to the UK

> repealing?

So is it unacceptable to the crowd here that someone can vote on principle is sovereignty without necessarily knowing all the detail of EU/UK legislation? Surely many people voted remain becuase 'it would better for the economy' without being experts in economics or trade regulations?

Is voting on principle not acceptable? As I feel that's how most people vote in most elections.

[stepdown]

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well they all laughed at Christopher Columbus ,

> didn't they.

> I know what he was up against.

No they didn't, as per usual you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about!

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus#Flat_Earth_mythology :

Columbus is often credited with refuting a prevalent belief in a flat Earth. However, this legacy is a popular misconception. To the contrary, the spherical shape of the Earth had been known to scholars since antiquity, and was common knowledge among sailors. Coincidentally, the oldest surviving globe of the Earth, the Erdapfel, was made in 1492, just before Columbus's return to Europe. As such it contains no sign of the Americas and yet demonstrates the common belief in a spherical Earth.

[Sephiroth]

Cat

Isn't this the problem?

A) it wasn't an election. the outcome was much more serious and other countries would probably build in a super-majority requirement to change the constitutional affairs of the country

B) we might not be experts in economics or trades - but we can all read or absorb the message from the people who are. And that message was clear. But then you had people like Gove saying we have had enough of experts

So yes - I think it is unacceptable

It's the same as the climate change - you have vast majority of scientific data saying it's real and a few outliers saying it isn't - so people seize on the outliers and say "there are two sides"

Sometimes there isn't. Not equal sides anyway

If I was a leaver I would also ponder why, if it was such a good idea, other countries aren't picking up a similar baton

[TheCat]

Fair enough. At the risk of repeating myself )again) I think it is acceptable to vote on principle...So we disagree, and let's be reasonable:)

But I think the analogy to climate change is inaccurate. No scientists or experts have denied that EU influences UK regulation, and that is the principle some people voted on. If that was you key issue, then that's how you voted...

[TheCat]

Also, I don't disagree with the supermajority clause for such a big change. But we didn't....So what can you do....just argue on the edf I guess...