We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Brexit, the economy and house prices (Part 3)
Comments
-
Why put the decision in the hands of morons who don't know what the EU is? I hate this obsession with referendums.This is a system account and does not represent a real person. To contact the Forum Team email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com0
-
Why put the decision in the hands of morons who don't know what the EU is? I hate this obsession with referendums.
Suggesting that people are stupid is offensive. Precisely the mistake the political elite made. Money makes people detached from reality. Doesn't buy one common sense unfortunately. We are equals. All though some would prefer that we aren't.0 -
TrickyTree83 wrote: »Rusty.. consider this.
A UK party passes a law.
That party loses the next election and the party that won did so on the basis of repealing that law. They can do so once in government because it's part of our constitution to not bind subsequent parliaments.
During the parliament that enacted the law that got the government of the day ousted the EU also passed a law that we didn't want as a nation. It cannot be repealed by the subsequent parliament, the only way to do so is to cease to be under the political jurisdiction of the EU. Even your MEP can do nothing but advise and recommend, even when part of a pan-EU alliance of MEP's that would win any vote on the matter. The commission can simply say no, all that is required from the commission is a memo explaining why they said no. And I'm sure you're aware that on the commission you have just one un-elected voice amongst many representing every single person in the UK.
Where is the voice you speak of at the ballot box?
Presumably the new MEP has the same ability to repeal said law as a new MP would? Except there'd have been more scrutiny in the first place so the law may not have passed0 -
setmefree2 wrote: »PS didn't realise until the other day that Umunna is actually a posh boy who went to private school and played the cello. Just like Tony.
Well Umannna at least had the benefits of being educated in state schools in Brixon and Streatham. Hardly luxury boroughs. A decision to educate him privately is difficult to criticise because of the decade of decline in education presided over by Thatcher.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
Thrugelmir wrote: »That's not so much the issue. Rather.....“The EU's 'democratic' system that elected a president nobody wants
A catalogue of complacency, negligence, miscalculation and manoeuvring by national leaders over the past nine months conspired to deliver an outcome no one really wanted – Jean-Claude Juncker, Europe's accidental president.
Says it all
I can't remember folks electing TM directly either but it's very different for sure!
Who says nobody wants? Britain didn't but the rest? All of them did not want him?EU expat working in London0 -
TrickyTree83 wrote: »Rusty.. consider this.
A UK party passes a law.
That party loses the next election and the party that won did so on the basis of repealing that law. They can do so once in government because it's part of our constitution to not bind subsequent parliaments.
During the parliament that enacted the law that got the government of the day ousted the EU also passed a law that we didn't want as a nation. It cannot be repealed by the subsequent parliament, the only way to do so is to cease to be under the political jurisdiction of the EU. Even your MEP can do nothing but advise and recommend, even when part of a pan-EU alliance of MEP's that would win any vote on the matter. The commission can simply say no, all that is required from the commission is a memo explaining why they said no. And I'm sure you're aware that on the commission you have just one un-elected voice amongst many representing every single person in the UK.
Where is the voice you speak of at the ballot box?
Since each commissioner is chosen by their respective countrys government (so not directly elected, but not undemocratic since theyre chosen by the elected government) the new UK government can have their representative put forward the repeal of said law. Granted the commissioners have a duty to represent the EU as a whole, not only their respective nation, but im struggling to think of anything a national govt would want to repeal at EU level that has previously been agreed to by 28 countries, and would prove to be an issue of national vs EU interests.
How would this be any different to say, a new Scottish administration wanting to change something to do with devolution, and possibly not being able to secure it? It doesnt matter if they were elected on the basis that they would try but are unable to succeed (they obviously cant be elected legitimately on the basis of something they wouldnt have the power to change). Nobody gets their way all the time, compromise isnt a bad thing.
Can you give any examples of the sort of laws you think this situation would apply to? The one I can think of is that the UK cant get rid of the tampon tax, because country's arent allowed to introduce new zero rated VAT items... Now that makes sense when you pay VAT in the country of sale - nobody in the EU would want to allow one country to undermine a large tax base for everyone else. But that doesnt stop discussion of creating new specific exemptions or failing that there are still ways the government can work around the issue.
There are of course issues with the EU, but im yet to see anything which demonstrates a loss of freedom in the EU that wouldnt apply to a regiong within the UK when it comes to Westminster.0 -
Rusty_Shackleton wrote: »Why did you get rid of your original answer of 'Merkel and Macron to name two'? Is it because you realised you didnt have a say in the election 364 of the MPs in Westminster?
Actually it's worse than that, I didn't have a say in 649 of them.
I had a very nice chat today with a leaver (well, actually, I was out minding my own business and was accosted in a car park but I will be diplomatic about it) and it left me extremely confused.
How do people here explain 52/48 as being definitive for Brexit, an election in the US where the winner didn't actually win the popular vote means 'the people have spoken', yet in France a vote of 66/34 where the loser only won 2 of 100ish departments means France is divided?
I'm sensing a huge amount of anger at the domino defect as noone else is stupid enough to follow the UK. I'm also sensing a huge amount of anger that should be directed at David Davis rather than Remainers for the mess this country is getting itself in currently due to his incompetence.
I accept that Leave won the referendum however everyone here has to accept that there was no obligation for the government to act on that. My opinion is that not acting on it would have been the best course of action and as nobody has actually been able to give a benefit of leaving (other than pure speculation which doesn't seem in my experience to be turning into reality) it's clearly not in the best interests of anyone for this course to be taken any longer.
When Conrad says about all these exports and free trade deals we will have, maybe he'd like to tell us how leaving the worlds largest free trade area with further reaching trade tentacles than anyone else is helping the country to trade. Several countries have also said no, backing up everything you were told before the vote.
I've already put forward some back of a fag packet proposals for consideration, why aren't leavers doing the same?
Still, with talk of Jacob Rees-Mogg being the next Prime Minister I suppose at least he can modernise the country into the 19th century after Brexit
💙💛 💔0 -
CKhalvashi wrote: »yet in France a vote of 66/34 where the loser only won 2 of 100ish departments means France is divided?
If that's your interpretation then so be it.
Macron's current rating in his home country speaks for itself.I'm sensing a huge amount of anger at the domino defect as noone else is stupid enough to follow the UK.
Stupid to suggest that anybody would leave. Why would they? Only the UK has been committed to an excessive level of net contribution.0 -
LOL:rotfl:0
-
Presumably the new MEP has the same ability to repeal said law as a new MP would? Except there'd have been more scrutiny in the first place so the law may not have passed
Do you honestly think the MEP's have that ability?
They have zero, actually zero ability to propose new legislation. They rubber stamp most, suggest changes to some, they are directly accountable for some regarding budgets, accessions, trade deals etc... but they cannot propose.
Legislation can pass in one European parliament and be imposed on successive European parliaments without redress.
If you don't believe me you just need to look at the institutions own website for yourself.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards