|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 11, 2022 11:11:58 GMT
Each member state is sovereign, Red. You correctly point out that the rules of EU membership require primacy of EU legislation. But that doesn't make the EU sovereign. Let's say that in 2013, Parliament decided that it wanted to ignore an EU regulation and legislated in a manner that was intentionally inconsistent with that EU regulation, making it quite clear that the intention was to ignore the EU's requirements. If the EU was sovereign, an English court applying the law would have ignored the inconsistent legislation from the British Parliament and applied EU law despite it. But that is not what would have happened. The English courts would have applied the law emanating from Parliament, not from the EU. This is because Parliament is sovereign in the UK. Each member state's Parliament is sovereign. Of course, there would have been consequences for breach of EU rules, but that is not the same as the EU being sovereign in the UK. That is factually incorrect, and I think you know it. Quote: The principle of the primacy (also referred to as ‘precedence’ or ‘supremacy’) of European Union (EU) law is based on the idea that where a conflict arises between an aspect of EU law and an aspect of law in an EU Member State (national law), EU law will prevail. If this were not the case, Member States could simply allow their national laws to take precedence over primary or secondary EU legislation, and the pursuit of EU policies would become unworkable.More - eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/primacy-of-eu-law-precedence-supremacy.html#:~:text=The%20principle%20of%20the%20primacy,)%2C%20EU%20law%20will%20prevail. EU states are not sovereign states. They cede sovereignty to the EU. Naturally, this is something Europhiles don't like talking about. It's entirely correct, Red. I hope you didn't cast your vote on the mistaken assumption that the UK wasn't sovereign. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Dec 11, 2022 11:12:49 GMT
Each member state is sovereign, Red. You correctly point out that the rules of EU membership require primacy of EU legislation. But that doesn't make the EU sovereign. Let's say that in 2013, Parliament decided that it wanted to ignore an EU regulation and legislated in a manner that was intentionally inconsistent with that EU regulation, making it quite clear that the intention was to ignore the EU's requirements. If the EU was sovereign, an English court applying the law would have ignored the inconsistent legislation from the British Parliament and applied EU law despite it. But that is not what would have happened. The English courts would have applied the law emanating from Parliament, not from the EU. This is because Parliament is sovereign in the UK. Each member state's Parliament is sovereign. Of course, there would have been consequences for breach of EU rules, but that is not the same as the EU being sovereign in the UK. That is factually incorrect, and I think you know it. Quote: The principle of the primacy (also referred to as ‘precedence’ or ‘supremacy’) of European Union (EU) law is based on the idea that where a conflict arises between an aspect of EU law and an aspect of law in an EU Member State (national law), EU law will prevail. If this were not the case, Member States could simply allow their national laws to take precedence over primary or secondary EU legislation, and the pursuit of EU policies would become unworkable.More - eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/primacy-of-eu-law-precedence-supremacy.html#:~:text=The%20principle%20of%20the%20primacy,)%2C%20EU%20law%20will%20prevail. EU states are not sovereign states. They cede sovereignty to the EU. Naturally, this is something Europhiles don't like talking about. Well yes obviously if you join a club you need to follow the rules the members have agreed. Your sovereignty remains in that you can leave the club anytime you wish. After that it comes down to how much sovereignty you lose. You agree on a maximum VAT rate to allow open trade between members because its broadly inline with what you wanted in the first place. The stupid myopic argument that any EU law means we have lost sovereignty is the most ridiculous one of all the Brexit arguments. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Dec 11, 2022 11:13:05 GMT
Each member state is sovereign, Red. You correctly point out that the rules of EU membership require primacy of EU legislation. But that doesn't make the EU sovereign. Let's say that in 2013, Parliament decided that it wanted to ignore an EU regulation and legislated in a manner that was intentionally inconsistent with that EU regulation, making it quite clear that the intention was to ignore the EU's requirements. If the EU was sovereign, an English court applying the law would have ignored the inconsistent legislation from the British Parliament and applied EU law despite it. But that is not what would have happened. The English courts would have applied the law emanating from Parliament, not from the EU. This is because Parliament is sovereign in the UK. Each member state's Parliament is sovereign. Of course, there would have been consequences for breach of EU rules, but that is not the same as the EU being sovereign in the UK. That is factually incorrect, and I think you know it. Quote: The principle of the primacy (also referred to as ‘precedence’ or ‘supremacy’) of European Union (EU) law is based on the idea that where a conflict arises between an aspect of EU law and an aspect of law in an EU Member State (national law), EU law will prevail. If this were not the case, Member States could simply allow their national laws to take precedence over primary or secondary EU legislation, and the pursuit of EU policies would become unworkable.More - eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/primacy-of-eu-law-precedence-supremacy.html#:~:text=The%20principle%20of%20the%20primacy,)%2C%20EU%20law%20will%20prevail. EU states are not sovereign states. They cede sovereignty to the EU. Naturally, this is something Europhiles don't like talking about. There is one, and only one, way in which the UK was ‘sovereign’ It is an absolute in terms of parliamentary power in the UK that NO parliament may bind the hands of a future one. Although it is fair to say that bastard warmonger Blair did his best on Capital Punishment to the extent bringing back hanging would make us a pariah state in Western Europe. However I have to concede we always had the right and power to have an MP bring a bill to void the terms of the 1971 act that joined us to the EEC and while the EU had the muscle to make life incandescently unpleasant and almost as costly as it is now, they had no statute power to stop us doing just that. The issue, though, which I think you will agree with me on, was that the spineless scum and snout in the gravy train arse lickers I’m SW1A 0AA has no spine or balls to DO that. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Dec 11, 2022 11:14:05 GMT
Why the heck should the EU bend or break their rules for the good of a nation that left and then spent its time saying they were dictators and tyrants. As for members obeying EU regulations, its no different in the United States, No state can usurp nationally agreed laws. Junkers much lied about words were to Greece in 2015 who wanted to remain in the EU while abandoning the Euro revaluing their own currency and thus writing off their debts. Money lent to them in good faith by the other EU members. I never said they had to bend the rules, it was clear from the get-go they were going to make Brexit as unpleasant as they could.
After all, they wouldn't want other member states getting ideas about their station, and wanting to leave.
They had to make a example of us, and they have, even at risk of destabilizing the GFA.
Not very nice people, are they?
You'd have to give examples. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Dec 11, 2022 11:18:42 GMT
It's entirely correct, Red. I hope you didn't cast your vote on the mistaken assumption that the UK wasn't sovereign. Ahh, progress. So we agree, what you said up the page ref each EU member state being sovereign is in fact, wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 11, 2022 11:23:18 GMT
It's entirely correct, Red. I hope you didn't cast your vote on the mistaken assumption that the UK wasn't sovereign. Ahh, progress. So we agree, what you said up the page ref each EU member state being sovereign is in fact, wrong. Law isn't for everyone, Red. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Dec 11, 2022 11:26:43 GMT
Well yes obviously if you join a club you need to follow the rules the members have agreed. Your sovereignty remains in that you can leave the club anytime you wish. After that it comes down to how much sovereignty you lose. You agree on a maximum VAT rate to allow open trade between members because its broadly inline with what you wanted in the first place. The stupid myopic argument that any EU law means we have lost sovereignty is the most ridiculous one of all the Brexit arguments. My point remains unchanged: A country or state who's laws can be overruled, cannot be sovereign. Sovereignty is ceded to the body, in this case the EU, who make the law. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Dec 11, 2022 11:27:56 GMT
I never said they had to bend the rules, it was clear from the get-go they were going to make Brexit as unpleasant as they could.
After all, they wouldn't want other member states getting ideas about their station, and wanting to leave.
They had to make a example of us, and they have, even at risk of destabilizing the GFA.
Not very nice people, are they?
You'd have to give examples. If I have to state the obvious then there is little point for further discussion, it sounds like you're one of those with your eyes wide shut. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Dec 11, 2022 11:28:15 GMT
It's entirely correct, Red. I hope you didn't cast your vote on the mistaken assumption that the UK wasn't sovereign. Ahh, progress. So we agree, what you said up the page ref each EU member state being sovereign is in fact, wrong. No, what is wrong is your definition of sovereign. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 11, 2022 11:36:31 GMT
Well yes obviously if you join a club you need to follow the rules the members have agreed. Your sovereignty remains in that you can leave the club anytime you wish. After that it comes down to how much sovereignty you lose. You agree on a maximum VAT rate to allow open trade between members because its broadly inline with what you wanted in the first place. The stupid myopic argument that any EU law means we have lost sovereignty is the most ridiculous one of all the Brexit arguments. My point remains unchanged: A country or state who's laws can be overruled, cannot be sovereign. Sovereignty is ceded to the body, in this case the EU, who make the law. But EU rules could have been overruled by the UK Parliament. EU rules were applied only on Parliament's sufferance and Parliament could have overruled any one of the EU's regulations at any time it chose. That would have breached the agreement with the EU, but Parliament was still sovereign because Parliament's laws, not the EU's, would have been applied by the British courts. The same is true of every member state. In short, EU rules apply only with the agreement of every member state, and the moment those member states disagree by parliamentary act, they stop applying. That means the parliaments are sovereign. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Dec 11, 2022 11:40:41 GMT
My point remains unchanged: A country or state who's laws can be overruled, cannot be sovereign. Sovereignty is ceded to the body, in this case the EU, who make the law. But EU rules could have been overruled by the UK Parliament. EU rules were applied only on Parliament's sufferance and Parliament could have overruled any one of the EU's regulations at any time it chose. That would have breached the agreement with the EU, but Parliament was still sovereign because Parliament's laws, not the EU's, would have been applied by the British courts. The same is true of every member state. In short, EU rules apply only with the agreement of every member state, and the moment those member states disagree by parliamentary act, they stop applying. That means the parliaments are sovereign. That is not true - the European Communities Act 1972 mandates that EU law is supreme in relation to all domestic laws. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Dec 11, 2022 11:40:48 GMT
There is one, and only one, way in which the UK was ‘sovereign’ It is an absolute in terms of parliamentary power in the UK that NO parliament may bind the hands of a future one. Although it is fair to say that bastard warmonger Blair did his best on Capital Punishment to the extent bringing back hanging would make us a pariah state in Western Europe. However I have to concede we always had the right and power to have an MP bring a bill to void the terms of the 1971 act that joined us to the EEC and while the EU had the muscle to make life incandescently unpleasant and almost as costly as it is now, they had no statute power to stop us doing just that. The issue, though, which I think you will agree with me on, was that the spineless scum and snout in the gravy train arse lickers I’m SW1A 0AA has no spine or balls to DO that. Indeed, I agree. Wasn't there something about joining the EU violated our basic freedoms as laid down by Magna Carta? or something like that. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 11, 2022 11:41:11 GMT
The 1992 General Election made it clear that the electorate overwhelmingly supported parties committed to Maastricht. So only a loonie would have then wasted £millions on a referendum ahead of our 1993 ratification Really ? My recollection of the 1992 election as recounted to me by members of the Tory party Milton Keynes was pretty much unilaterally that spoofed by Spitting Image’s show the weekend after. A shocked Geoffrey Howe puppet walks up the corridor of number ten in which the walls are plastered with graffiti and the portraits of past prime ministers wrecked and someone in the group says ‘what the hell happenned’ and then from the back a voice ‘oh fuck we trashed the place ready for THEM and fuck me WE won and now WE are going to have to clean it up” Unless you mean Labours 1992 party were the utter opposite, EU wise, of the 1983 shower whose promise to depart the EEC was hampered by Michael Foot being the man they chose to lead them to do it, and ‘the longest suicide note in history’ as the rejected (83) manifesto. Yes really. And your recollection of what you say Tory Party members told you really isn't worth diddly squat is it? You can't even recall that after Foot was ousted Labour very much did reverse its position on the EEC/EU. Foot hated the EEC because it was anti his pseudo communist wishes, the real Labour party under Smith, Kinnock and of course Blair embraced it because it was anti abusive employers. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 11, 2022 11:45:08 GMT
But EU rules could have been overruled by the UK Parliament. EU rules were applied only on Parliament's sufferance and Parliament could have overruled any one of the EU's regulations at any time it chose. That would have breached the agreement with the EU, but Parliament was still sovereign because Parliament's laws, not the EU's, would have been applied by the British courts. The same is true of every member state. In short, EU rules apply only with the agreement of every member state, and the moment those member states disagree by parliamentary act, they stop applying. That means the parliaments are sovereign. That is not true - the European Communities Act 1972 mandates that EU law is supreme in relation to all domestic laws. Yes. And who passed the 1972 Act? Was it parliament, by any chance? So, EU law applies because PARLIAMENT DECIDED IT WAS TO APPLY. Now, what's the golden rule of the Constitution, Doc? Is it that a parliament is not bound by a law passed by a previous parliament? I think it is. So, if the UK Parliament passed a law at any time after 1972 that said that all or any of its laws were to have priority over a EU regulation, that law would be applied by the courts. So, EU regulations applied in the UK only until such time as Parliament decided. That means that the UK parliament was always sovereign. Jeez. This is basic stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Dec 11, 2022 11:46:23 GMT
But EU rules could have been overruled by the UK Parliament. EU rules were applied only on Parliament's sufferance and Parliament could have overruled any one of the EU's regulations at any time it chose. That would have breached the agreement with the EU, but Parliament was still sovereign because Parliament's laws, not the EU's, would have been applied by the British courts. The same is true of every member state. In short, EU rules apply only with the agreement of every member state, and the moment those member states disagree by parliamentary act, they stop applying. That means the parliaments are sovereign. That is not true - the European Communities Act 1972 mandates that EU law is supreme in relation to all domestic laws. Precisely. Also, the Primacy of EU law was incorporated in the 2007 Lisbon Treaty, signed by all member states - on behalf of their electorates, but in most cases, not with their consent. |
|
