Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

ukcarper

Herzlos wrote: »

Who knows if we'll be more of a security risk? The eu won't have any say over who we let in.

Which would be exactly the same if we were still in EU

The travel zone analogy is is not the same.

If it’s about security it should be applied to all non Schengen states.

cogito

ilovehouses wrote: »

Yes it's an unlikely occurrence but that's an awful lot of power for someone who has been elected let alone for someone who hasn't. How do you abolish the monarchy when, as an MP, you've pledged an oath of allegiance?

It would make brexit look like a walk in the park with scope for some 'unpleasantness'.

Iw would indeed be a very complicated situation but, of course, parliament abolished the monarchy in 1649 before reinstating it in 1660. One thing's for sure - the monarch wouldn't be beheaded next time.

westernpromise

ilovehouses wrote: »

If you look at the website for the Lords it's fairly obvious they have extensive powers in law making and holding the government to account. To suggest they have close to no executive competence is to dramatically downplay their powers.

Which in practice amounts to nothing. They can send bills back to be reconsidered but they can't actually block them.

In this respect an interesting comparison is the HoC versus the European Parliament. If the latter decides that MIFID II must be implemented, the HoC actually has even less power vis a vis Strasbourg than the House of Lords does versus the House of Commons. There is no means by which the UK Parliament can decline to implement a European regulation, and indeed, it cannot even block, delay, modify or reword it in any way. It just goes straight into UK law. The important difference here is that the House of Commons is elected by the UK and within its rights to push stuff through the Lords in this way, but the same cannot be said for the EU.

The Queen can refuse to dissolve parliament and call an election and she has the right to choose a Prime Minister. All MPs have to swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen. These are real powers and have real effects.

They have no real effects. There is no example of the head of state using any of these powers since, IIRC, Victoria tried to keep Disraeli in preference to Gladstone after the former had lost the election. In practice the person she appoints as PM is whoever can command a majority. The proof that she has no actual exercisable power is that UK sovereignty has been ceded steadily to the EU over the last 40 years which, as the person who supposedly wields it, she would have been within her constitutional rights to oppose. She has not.

I view the EU as more of a club where all the members are sovereign. If those members wish to change the club rules and can't they have to decide whether they want to remain a member. The UK has never shown much of an interest in changing the rules and decided to leave anyway.

This is far too sanguine, I think. Clubs don't punish you for wanting to leave, and they don't demand that their rules apply in your own home.

If the EU resembled the USSR 'democracy' in any way whatsoever you'd never hear a jot about disagreements.

Well, give me an example then of a disagreement about anything in the EU parliament. When was the last time there was a meaningful, lively debate on anything?

westernpromise

ilovehouses wrote: »

Our unelected second chamber in action...



The bill has already been voted through the HoC by the way.

And the headline of that article was
"EU withdrawal bill needs major rewrites, Lords committee says"

Rewrites. It needs to be rewritten, which is all the Lords can require, and which they'll be debating later this week. So it's a bit early to be suggesting they wield any power; and if they do, it's far less than the EU parliament wields.

tracey3596

ilovehouses wrote: »

Requiring the HoC to rewrite legislation which the HoC have already passed doesn't seem like an inconsequential power to me.

You're staw-clutching again.
Have a listen or a read of this enclosed via the Express, this being chosen because it contains a video as well as writing so it'll be easy to understand.

“I think we can expect several unhelpful amendments from people like Lord Adonis and his friends and then the bill will go back to the House of Commons where I expect those amendments will be taken out.”

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/911339/Brexit-news-EU-withdrawal-bill-House-of-Lords-Brexit-referendum

gfplux

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Well, if the eu decide to make us pay for this ETIAS then we will be far less likely to go to the eu on holiday, mainly because we tend to do last minute trips due to the nature of our business.

It is entirely up to them whether they do or not, but I would find it highly amusing if they suddenly find themselves without the British holiday trade, and I think we should not require the same, thereby making the holiday trade rather one sided.

We do however need to find a way of keeping track of anyone, not just Europeans, that comes to this country legally and decides that they do not fancy leaving and of tracing those that enter illegally.

I have always been in favour of ID cards, they would be a fantastic way of making sure people did not manage to claim things they should not, such as free NHS treatment etc. I think it has to be inevitable within the next 10 years or so, the only people that would not want an ID card has to be those with something to fear from it.

Enterprise, I do suggest you read the links. The ETIAS will be similar the the USA-ESTA. IT WILL BE VALID FOR TWO YEARS AND MULTIPLE TRIPS.

I do agree with you. The lazy attitude by the Home Office (Theresa May was in charge for 6 years. 2010 to 2016) to monitoring anyone who arrived in the UK is surprising given statements about controlling immigration during those years. I can only think that while the spirit was strong the money tree was empty. Now Britain is leaving the EU Britain will be (we think!) putting in place a proper record keeping system. This will probably require many more, properly trained border staff and some serious computing power all of which will cost loads of money.

I also could not agree more that an ID card system would have been very helpful in many ways. Obviously no system is perfect or 100% secure but they can come close. I live in a society with ID cards that links everything within that society. If you have nothing to hide you can and I have welcome how an ID card makes life very simple and seamlessly links everything together.

westernpromise

ilovehouses wrote: »

The Express? Why lower the tone of the discussion.

According to full fact the Lords amended bills despite the objections of the government 50 times in 2016.

In a third of those cases they were overuled by the Commons. Another third led to a negotiated change. In the remaining third the government conceded because they thought the amendment a good idea or because they didn't think they had the votes to overrule the Lords.

i.e. two thirds of the Lords amendments led to an amendment in a year when the government had a decent majority.

This isn't inconsequential power. Why do you think Rees-Mogg is issuing threats to the Lords?

Which is democracy in action. Why does the UK parliament not have this power in respect of laws from Brussels?

gfplux

Barnier was given his basis for negotiating the transition period today it took all of 2 minutes for the EU27 to vote yes to the guidence.
The EU will negotiate on the basis that the Transition period will end December 31st 2020. There might be room to negotiate around the edges but the EU have made it clear what the deal is on offer. Frankly there were no surprises at all.
The press conference was very interesting.

Herzlos

gfplux wrote: »

Barnier was given his basis for negotiating the transition period today it took all of 2 minutes for the EU27 to vote yes to the guidence.
The EU will negotiate on the basis that the Transition period will end December 31st 2020. There might be room to negotiate around the edges but the EU have made it clear what the deal is on offer. Frankly there were no surprises at all.
The press conference was very interesting.

They'll fall apart any day now and give us what we want. Whatever that is.

Herzlos

westernpromise wrote: »

Which is democracy in action. Why does the UK parliament not have this power in respect of laws from Brussels?

It largely does. Most directives from Brussels are guidelines and not implementations, And our parliament decides how to enact them.

If we don't like them, we can veto them, vote against them or otherwise kick up a fuss.