Home News Forum Articles
  Welcome back Join CF
You are here You are here: Home | Forum | Brexit discussion

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most of the discussions, articles and other free features. By joining our Virgin Media community you will have full access to all discussions, be able to view and post threads, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own images/photos, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please join our community today.


Welcome to Cable Forum
Go Back   Cable Forum > General Discussion > Current Affairs

Brexit discussion
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-09-2017, 13:19   #1
Hugh
Hic Sunt Dracones
Cable Forum Team
 
Hugh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 61
Services: Premiere Collection
Posts: 30,428
Hugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden aura
Hugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden aura
Brexit discussion

New thread to discuss Brexit.

Guidelines

The constant baiting, belittling of either side of the vote needs to end. The new thread must be a reasonable and a frank debate, it's impossible to agree on this topic but none of this "he/she is thick" or "you're a snowflake". This is not Facebook or twitter.
__________________
The Dunning-Kruger effect - it explains so much....

If my post is in bold, it's a moderating decision - if not, it's not.
Hugh is online now   Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Old 08-09-2017, 13:46   #2
Ignitionnet
Pragmatist
 
Ignitionnet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire
Age: 39
Posts: 13,996
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Brexit discussion

For those of a legalistic mind here's a dissection of the Withdrawal Bill.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4OZS_HMQ2o

Government are trying to play games with standing committees to ensure they get their way - offer some compromise on the Bill, render it pointless by trying to rig committees.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entr...aafcf68a04?9fg

Robert Peston of ITV looks into these here: https://www.facebook.com/pestonitv/p...13633722294697

Ending with this:

Quote:
Having lost her majority in the general election she chose to call, for a while May talked the talk of reflecting the will of the people by trying to work consensually with MPs of other parties.

It is now a case of consensus conshmensus. With the aid of her most important minister, the wily chief whip, Williamson, she will attempt to rule by diktat via the gaming of parliamentary rules.

She has returned back from holiday with the spirit of the Venezuelan approach to democracy seemingly coursing through her veins.
Seems to make a mockery of demanding sovereignty and taking back control for our Parliament if we're going to simply hand it to appointed ministers. It's not much different from the EU commission - they were appointed to positions of power by elected representatives, so are ministers. MPs are elected to represent constituencies only, they are supposed to have to go through Parliament to produce legislation.

One thought: under the Bill there is nothing stopping a member of the House of Lords from being placed into the cabinet and bypassing Parliament entirely.

Another thought: would those who think all this is necessary and support the Conservatives in this trust Jeremy Corbyn and Labour with these powers? There is zero guarantee that the Conservatives will still be a minority government by 2019.
Ignitionnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2017, 15:04   #3
nomadking
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Northampton
Services: Virgin Media TV&BB V+ STB
Posts: 3,994
nomadking has reached the bronze age
nomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze age
Re: Brexit discussion

So leaving all those thousands of regulations in the hands of the EU is grabbing back sovereignty? That is the alternative.

Love to know what other way it can be done. Nothing is actually changing other than transfer of control to the UK Parliament. With transfer of powers within the UK, eg Scottish devolution, it is a lot simpler.

There are 12,000 EU imposed regulations. The obvious simple solution is to say as the EU no longer has any say, that those are all scrapped. That would be just silly. People might agree with a lot of those regulations. Grabbing back control of those is simple. Any amendments, additions, or removal can be done later by the normal Parliamentary process. The problem with the EU regulations is they are not specified in UK law, only in general that EU rules have to be followed. It is the EU that has set those rules, and will almost certainly specify that they only apply to EU(+other specified) countries, If those rules no longer apply, then what apply does instead of them? It would be an unsatisfactory free-for-all on those issues.
nomadking is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2017, 17:59   #4
Ignitionnet
Pragmatist
 
Ignitionnet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire
Age: 39
Posts: 13,996
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking View Post
So leaving all those thousands of regulations in the hands of the EU is grabbing back sovereignty? That is the alternative.
No, it isn't. I don't think any sane person would disagree that the Henry VIII powers are required, the issue is how little oversight and how few limitations are in place.

Any safeguards built into the Bill are meaningless as Ministers can, at their discretion, amend it and remove them.

The future Conservative leader might build that straw man that it's that way or nothing but it's just wrong.

This is a wholesale power grab made all the worse by that the electorate refused to give the Conservatives a majority at the last election. If HMG didn't need this level of delegated power during either World War or during the Great Depression they don't need it now.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...e-doesn-t-have

What all this does prove is that we desperately need a written constitution to avoid this happening again. Right now the government of the day can, literally, re-write the rules as they go.

---------- Post added at 16:59 ---------- Previous post was at 16:52 ----------

Hat tip David Allen Green / @davidallengreen

Quote:
Imagine a general election.

Imagine Corbyn and Labour are largest party but with no overall majority.

Imagine a DUP-like deal with SNP.

Imagine Corbyn then brings forward a "Austerity (Withdrawal) Bill" providing ministers with widest powers to make or break law.

Imagine the minority Labour government rigging the committee system so that they have majorities, outside scope of that DUP-like deal.

Imagine the minority Labour government getting rid of Queen's Speech for two years, so that there was no chance it could lose that vote.

Imagine the minority Labour government legislating that *any* deal it does with EU can be implemented as law by ministerial discretion.

And now imagine what the Tories would say to any of that.
Ignitionnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2017, 14:39   #5
Ignitionnet
Pragmatist
 
Ignitionnet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire
Age: 39
Posts: 13,996
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Brexit discussion

Something that came to mind earlier: if the government is serious about all this they should be preparing to leave the customs union.

By this I mean the IT, the acquisition of sites for trucks awaiting customs clearance, hiring of staff, etc should already be in progress. That's just for customs / trade borders.

Then there's all the other stuff we have to do ourselves as we can no longer use shared EU systems. We will become a third nation so will have many things that were previously dependent on EU systems.

Where is all this preparation? We can't simply copy/paste unless we plan on trying to remain in the EEA.

As of right now we've made very little preparation for the WTO scenario and, indeed, thanks to the wonders of Leave.EU, etc, some people want us to leave right now and have no idea what that would entail.

Campaign groups have no reason to be honest. HMG do. What are they up to? A transition deal requires agreement of the EU-27 and, with the current demands the government are making, no deal can be struck involving customs.

Whatever your opinion on this HMG are either being incredibly cavalier over this or are misleading the UK for political reasons and will massively backtrack, likely trying to blame others when they themselves haven't even tried to prepare for the scenario they've tried to sell us.
Ignitionnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2017, 15:08   #6
nomadking
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Northampton
Services: Virgin Media TV&BB V+ STB
Posts: 3,994
nomadking has reached the bronze age
nomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze age
Re: Brexit discussion

So how on earth are 12,000 EU imposed regulations meant to make their way through Parliament? Just absurd. Just because something could be amended along the way, DOESN'T mean it will. If it does and in a major way, that would be the time to raise objections to that specific matter, and NOT the whole process.

It is rather perverse to argue that the UK Parliament isn't being allowed to consider matters, when it can't currently consider them anyway as they are purely under EU control.

Quote:
Article 288
To exercise the Union's competences, the institutions shall adopt regulations, directives, decisions, recommendations and opinions.
A regulation shall have general application. It shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
A directive shall be binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each Member State to which it is addressed, but shall leave to the national authorities the choice of form and methods.
A decision shall be binding in its entirety. A decision which specifies those to whom it is addressed shall be binding only on them.
People might not really have a problem with EU regulations on labelling on food and as such would be ok with the UK initially adopting the same rules. If the UK doesn't specifically adopt those same rules, then NO rules actually would exist in the UK.
nomadking is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2017, 17:06   #7
Ignitionnet
Pragmatist
 
Ignitionnet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire
Age: 39
Posts: 13,996
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Brexit discussion

Read my post again. You are disagreeing with something I didn't say, right from the first paragraph where I remarked that delegated Henry VIII powers are necessary.

Given we are supposedly taking back control and reasserting the sovereignty of Parliament it's not perverse in the slightest to expect Parliament, not the executive, to control the process where feasible. That's a pretty strong 'what about...'.

If you object to the EU sidelining Parliament it's far more perverse to not object to the executive doing so. If one is considered wrong both are as neither group were directly elected and given their power by the UK electorate. Ministers, the same as European Union Commissioners, are appointed.

Even more exacerbated by that the electorate explicitly denied any one party a majority, there is no coalition in place, the Conservatives want to ignore recommendations and convention with regards to committees and are avoiding any Queens Speech for two years to provide fewer tests of their authority and fewer opportunities for them to be brought down.

I consider the EU to be a flawed democracy. To replace that with the model the Conservatives set on pursuing, especially given their conduct to date, is crazy. If we must do this it should be done right, bringing as much of the population as possible along, not leaving it beholden to the internal politics of one party and at best ignoring, at worst demonising, dissent.

Last edited by Ignitionnet; 10-09-2017 at 17:16.
Ignitionnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2017, 18:55   #8
1andrew1
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,821
1andrew1 has reached the bronze age
1andrew1 has reached the bronze age1andrew1 has reached the bronze age1andrew1 has reached the bronze age1andrew1 has reached the bronze age1andrew1 has reached the bronze age1andrew1 has reached the bronze age1andrew1 has reached the bronze age
Re: Brexit discussion

I think Theresa May seems to be reverting to type, ie keep maximum control over everything with minimal involvement of others. This is a character flaw and the removal of her two advisers Fiona Hill and Nick Timothy hasn't altered.
Parliament not Theresa May and her close inner circle should control the Brexit process.
1andrew1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2017, 19:23   #9
Mick
Proud Mancunian
Cable Forum Team
 
Mick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 10,449
Mick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny star
Mick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny star
Re: Brexit discussion

Parliament is involved in brexit process, there is a major repeal bill, 2nd reading tomorrow.
Mick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2017, 20:03   #10
nomadking
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Northampton
Services: Virgin Media TV&BB V+ STB
Posts: 3,994
nomadking has reached the bronze age
nomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze age
Re: Brexit discussion

If it was just half a dozen things to be considered then Parliament would be involved. As it is 12,000 or more, that just isn't remotely practical in the time frame. How many DECADES would it take? The intention is introduce the SAME regulations. The whinges are not about doing that, but about the POSSIBILITY of changing something at the same time. It is NOT meant to be an ongoing "power grab" by the executive, but a one-off interim measure. So many of the regulations are likely to be the sort of things that can be introduced by statutory instrument and not involve Parliament anyway.

EU directives have to be passed at national level. Therefore UK laws already exist and have been passed by UK Parliament.

An area where there are a lot of EU regulations is food safety. If no equivalents are set out in UK law, then there would be a free-for-all on food safety. Is that what people want?
nomadking is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2017, 20:31   #11
Ignitionnet
Pragmatist
 
Ignitionnet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire
Age: 39
Posts: 13,996
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Ignitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny starsIgnitionnet has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick View Post
Parliament is involved in brexit process, there is a major repeal bill, 2nd reading tomorrow.
Parliament was involved in the Treaties of Lisbon and Maastricht, and the European Communities Act. Doesn't appear to stop people complaining about loss of parliamentary sovereignty as a result of those actions.

Perhaps this article puts it better than I am.

5 paragraphs from it:

Quote:
However, the Bill also recognises that a straightforward cut-and-paste approach would not work. Some EU law (e.g. that which relates to the single market and the customs union) is unlikely to be of any relevance post-exit, and will need to be repealed. Other EU law will need to be amended to make it fit for purpose following Brexit. Recognising that a great deal of surgery will need to be performed upon the body of EU law before exit day, and given that parliament will simply not have time to perform that surgery itself, the Bill hands the legislative scalpel to ministers, by investing them with delegated powers.

All of this is sensible. Indeed, it is imperative. If such a strategy were not adopted, then Brexit would amount to a legal cliff-edge—and falling over it would entail utter chaos, since it would open up enormous gaps in the statute book. However, the fact that the central aim of the Bill—that is, preserving EU law post-exit—is a necessary one does not place the Bill beyond criticism. And arguments to the contrary—in particular, suggestions in some quarters that objecting to the Bill equates to attempting to block Brexit—are entirely specious. Indeed, the Bill, in its present form, is profoundly problematic in legal and constitutional terms. It is an affront to parliamentary sovereignty. It eviscerates the separation of powers principle. And it risks destabilising the UK’s increasingly fragile territorial constitution.

The notion of “taking back control” was axiomatic to Leave campaigners during the EU referendum. Central to that notion was the idea of parliamentary sovereignty: of making the UK Parliament supreme again, free from interference by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels and meddling judges in Luxembourg. Viewed against this background, the Bill is little short of astonishing. Far from cementing the sovereignty of parliament, it would, if enacted in its present form, result in an unprecedented transfer of power away from parliament, by placing extraordinary authority in the hands of the executive government. That, in turn, would fundamentally undermine the separation of powers—which holds, among other things, that it is for parliament to make the law.

That said, like many aspects of the British constitution, the separation of powers is not rigid, and it is far from uncommon for parliament to confer limited law-making powers on the government. But the Withdrawal Bill does not confer carefully demarcated powers: it invests the executive with immense law-making authority. As the House of Lords Constitution Committee puts it in a report published today, “The Bill weaves a tapestry of delegated powers that are breath-taking in terms of both their scope and potency.” Those powers include so-called Henry VIII powers, meaning that they can be used not only to amend EU law but also to amend, or even repeal, parliamentary legislation. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine wider executive powers: ministers are authorised to “make any provision that could be made by an Act of Parliament.” And it is plain that these powers will not be used merely to make minor, technical amendments to the post-exit statute book. The Bill, for instance, explicitly contemplates that ministers will be able to use their authority both to establish new regulatory regimes and institutions and to invest them with law-making authority. This amounts to a form of Henry VIII power on stilts.

One might expect such extraordinary ministerial powers to be accompanied by a correspondingly extraordinary system of parliamentary oversight and control. But one would be disappointed. A small number of matters will be subject to the so-called affirmative procedure, meaning that parliament will have to approve them—but since parliament cannot amend delegated legislation, the likelihood of outright rejection will be very slim indeed. Meanwhile, the vast majority of the law made by ministers under the Bill will be subject only to annulment by parliament, such that it remains in force unless parliament objects. But the chances of this are vanishingly small: it is nearly 40 years since the House of Commons rejected a statutory instrument. Calls for enhanced scrutiny—made by the Hansard Society and the Lords Constitution Committee, among others—have so far gone entirely unheeded. And although the exercise of these delegated powers is supposedly limited by a “sunset clause”—meaning that they lapse two years after “exit day”—ministers can choose what “exit day” means. They can even say (free from any parliamentary control) that it means different things for different purposes, thus enabling the sunset clauses to be circumvented.


---------- Post added at 19:31 ---------- Previous post was at 19:27 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking View Post
If it was just half a dozen things to be considered then Parliament would be involved. As it is 12,000 or more, that just isn't remotely practical in the time frame. How many DECADES would it take? The intention is introduce the SAME regulations. The whinges are not about doing that, but about the POSSIBILITY of changing something at the same time. It is NOT meant to be an ongoing "power grab" by the executive, but a one-off interim measure. So many of the regulations are likely to be the sort of things that can be introduced by statutory instrument and not involve Parliament anyway.

EU directives have to be passed at national level. Therefore UK laws already exist and have been passed by UK Parliament.

An area where there are a lot of EU regulations is food safety. If no equivalents are set out in UK law, then there would be a free-for-all on food safety. Is that what people want?
3rd time's a charm: I and anyone sane would entirely agree that delegated powers are required. It's the scope of them and the lack of controls and oversight that are the problem.

A Bill that gives powers so open ended that the executive could, without recourse to Parliament at all, in theory cancel Brexit and take us into the Eurozone and Schengen, or take the UK into EEA/EFTA is not necessary.
Ignitionnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2017, 21:16   #12
nomadking
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Northampton
Services: Virgin Media TV&BB V+ STB
Posts: 3,994
nomadking has reached the bronze age
nomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze age
Re: Brexit discussion

And how do you specify and oversee 12,000 NEW regulations?

If any untoward changes are indeed made, that is the time whinge and complain.

If Scotland had voted yes to independence, how would the Scots have dealt with the SAME situation. If anything their situation would have been worse as UK laws would also have to be transferred.

From an article about the split up of Czechoslovakia and it's relevance to Brexit.
Quote:
EU law after Brexit
From a legal point of view, one of the biggest challenges of Brexit is to ensure legal continuity in the legal system, which has incorporated many EU laws and regulations over the years.
Considering the timing of Brexit and to avoid legal loopholes, a “copy & paste approach” should be considered with respect to EU legislation effective in Britain. This is viewed as the standard approach in international law and was also used in the process of dissolving Czechoslovakia. In general, all pre-independence laws that were not in breach of the new constitution of each newly established country became part of its legal system. Some of the federal laws, albeit in amended versions, remain in effect even today, almost 25 years after the split.
nomadking is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2017, 10:57   #13
heero_yuy
Perfect Soldier
 
heero_yuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Worthing West Sussex
Age: 60
Services: VM 70M SHUB thingy in modem mode XL TV VboxHD Sony Bravia smart TV and M phone
Posts: 13,450
heero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny stars
heero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny starsheero_yuy has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Brexit discussion

Part of the irony here is that many of the workers rights that Labour are worrying about would be continued and confirmed by this bill. Curious that they would oppose it and lose those rights?

Of course this has nothing to do with that and is just a cycnical ploy to try and defeat the government and get a re-run of the election. Would anybody really trust Labour when they have proved to be even more duplicitous than the Lib-Dems in abandoning their promises, particularly to the young, that were fooled into voting for them the last time?
__________________
History is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.
However history will change with my coronation - Mariemaia Kushrenada
heero_yuy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2017, 11:18   #14
Damien
Remoaner
Cable Forum Team
 
Damien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 26,665
Damien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered stars
Damien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered starsDamien is seeing silvered stars
Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy View Post
Part of the irony here is that many of the workers rights that Labour are worrying about would be continued and confirmed by this bill. Curious that they would oppose it and lose those rights?
But that isn't their problem is it? Their problem is the amount of leeway the bill gives to the Government to pass/amend/scrap leglislation without so much as a trigger mechanism should Parliament object to any of those actions. There is generally an understanding that the Government needs some of this power given the amount they have to do but people should rightly be concerned about the power being abused.

Maybe Labour would still object if this bill were only concerned with confirming those rights but it's rather typically disingenuous to pretend it's that that they're objecting too in this massive bill.
Damien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2017, 11:20   #15
nomadking
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Northampton
Services: Virgin Media TV&BB V+ STB
Posts: 3,994
nomadking has reached the bronze age
nomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze agenomadking has reached the bronze age
Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy View Post
Part of the irony here is that many of the workers rights that Labour are worrying about would be continued and confirmed by this bill. Curious that they would oppose it and lose those rights?

Of course this has nothing to do with that and is just a cycnical ploy to try and defeat the government and get a re-run of the election. Would anybody really trust Labour when they have proved to be even more duplicitous than the Lib-Dems in abandoning their promises, particularly to the young, that were fooled into voting for them the last time?
Any workers rights as a result of EU directives, eg Working Time directive, are already enshrined in UK law. No changes needed.

Quote:
The Working Time Regulations (1998) implement the European Working Time Directive into GB law.
Was anybody saying that there would be a loss of workers' rights, if Scotland had voted for independence and left the EU as well as the UK? Sounds like there definitely would have been an issue as they would have lost UK laws, but lack the ability(legal competence/standing) to pass their own versions.

---------- Post added at 10:20 ---------- Previous post was at 10:18 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien View Post
But that isn't their problem is it? Their problem is the amount of leeway the bill gives to the Government to pass/amend/scrap leglislation without so much as a trigger mechanism should Parliament object to any of those actions. There is generally an understanding that the Government needs some of this power given the amount they have to do but people should rightly be concerned about the power being abused.

Maybe Labour would still object if this bill were only concerned with confirming those rights but it's rather typically disingenuous to pretend it's that that they're objecting too in this massive bill.
So have any changes been suggested? NO. Nothing being abused at all.

As I've already highlighted with regards to the split up of Czechoslovakia, the procedure is standard and accepted practice in international law.
nomadking is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:46.


Server: xenon.zmnt.net
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.