So out means remain

read up on why scargill wants out of the eu,then let me know your feelings.it is nothing like johnsons rhetoric and i certainly dont think you follow him blindly because of the strike.i do however think you are completely unaware of his reasons..

its wasnt us alone that stopped the germans,its was us,the americans and our allies in the west and the russians in the east,not some eu political union,it was the germans who tried to conquer europe,twice within 20 years,hence the subsequent stationing of troops in their own country.

you talk about 'its the pathetic we are right you are wrong attitude that makes them little englanders',which in my opinion is total ******.you fail to mention the otherside of the coin where the remainers brand leavers as xenophobes,racists etc etc,and now the uneducated accusations,there is no side worse than the remainers for taking the high horse,especially if they 'feel' they are educated because they've been to fcukin uni or read the guardian,when they run out of answers they start with the jibes,criticising grammer etc,like being good with grammer makes them have a better insight into whether we should or should not be in the eu..condisending pillocks pal.

i'll go back to my original point,had the eec or common market remained just that then there would never have been cause for a referendum,the fact that we have had a political union forced upon us is wrong,foreign politicians should not have influence on laws and practices in other countries imo,,who are we to tell other nations what to do and who are they to tell us,this is my main gripe,sooner or later the **** was going to hit the fan over the eu because there are too many people out there who are against it and not just in this country.

 

There are a number of misconceptions on here and in what is said by politicians particularly regarding making our own laws. There are very few EU laws which apply unilaterally, the only one that immediately comes to mind is the "Human Rights Act", which incidentally was drafted by British lawyers before we were members. The vast majority of legislation comes from EU directives, from which legislators from each of the member states drafts their version of the regulations that best suits their country's needs. For example the CDM Regs for the construction industry arose out of the TCMS Directive put together by our Health and Safety Commission. It is unique to us and not the same as the 27 other EU country's regulations and probably explains why UK construction sites are the safest in Europe. Go to any of the countries below the 'olive oil' line and you'll see the difference. I personally want higher legislative standards. Out of the EU our food safety standards will be dumbed down to do trade deals with non EU countries, we've already seen the Tories watering down safety legislation (albeit within the broad parameters of directives). Forget the nefarious arguments on immigration, the NI border or trade deals with whoever. By the way can anyone tell me how we can possibly do more trade with China than what we do at present. The safety and health of my family and friends are far more important than the divisive arguments we're hearing fron dogmatic leavers and stayers.

 

and irony is not yours. the other poster was counting non voters as not wanting to leave, so I implied they didn't want to stay

 

i'm interested in the notion that food safety will suffer once we are out of the eu,we already deal direct with places like austrailia,new zealand,south africa,brazil,argentina and chile for meat,fruit and veg from different areas of africa and the far east,spices from africa and the indian sub continent..so what will change if we are out of the eu? nowt as far as i can see,btw i deal with wholesale markets selling all this stuff on a weekly basis.

 

[QUOTE="Marlon, post: 2209817, member: 54031"

There has been other wars in non EU Eureopean countries .but non in EU , that’s not just a coincidence imo.[/QUOTE]

Nothing to do with the EU, more to do with modern democracy, there were no wars between modern mature democracies in Europe before the EU came into being...certainly in the 20th century.

 

All you say I can go along with to some degree. The idea of a "Common Market" only works though if you have the same rules. All this stuff from the 70's to the current vote (i'e. Good Friday agreement) were not even discussed. We had the bus with £350 million for the NHS.

 

Importation from Australia is covered by EU law, as are the other countries you mention.

 

and theres no need to stop or change these laws once we are out,we'd just adopt them accordingly

 

We would have to re-negotiate them. We have them as part of a trading block. Maybe we can, but you are speculating on that.

 

Nothing to do with the EU, more to do with modern democracy, there were no wars between modern mature democracies in Europe before the EU came into being...certainly in the 20th century.[/QUOTE]
That’s very debatable . The Eu was idea’d not long after the war so to try and dismiss that is very debatable considering that without EU corporation the peace only lasted 20 years after 1918
The recent Russian meddling in Ukraine by Russia was met very sternly by the EU with a civil war almost inevitable after annexing Crimea and poised to invade Eastern Pro Russian Ukraine.admittefly its an uneasy peace but with threatened sanctions from the EU is holding out .
The threat of being rejected from being considered for EU membership by the Baltic states has brought peace to the renowned volatile region . There’s plenty the EU have mediated and had influence upon and to just state that it’s nothing to do with European Unity because of the existence of the EU and it’s just modern politics is nonsense imo

 

i woudnt have thought it would be difficult,these countries wqould need to keep their standards or i doubt we'd take their stock,yes i'm speculating but no more than someone saying our food standards will be shot,ours have been in front of the most of europe for decades anyway and we have some of the most stringent laws to protect the consumer,i cant for the life of me see that changing.

 

The big issue is US and their dreadful food standards. And similarly with chemicals and pesticides. It's not a difficult step to see the country accepting "cheap" food as an antidote to high inflation, unemployment and a recessionary dip.

 

but just how stable or cohesive is the EU - as Merkel's stranglehold on Germany is under threat from the AfD, as Orban promotes a nationalist agenda (and other Eastern EU member states will probably go down the same route), as Macron's popularity is at an all time low, Italian PM Conte at odds with the EU, Greece in a mess etc.
Why on earth would anyone want the UK to be part of this organisation - the EU's days are numbered!

 

theres unrest throughout the union mate and its not going to go away,i go to france every year,and there are posters and slogans daubed all over the place in the big towns and cities,all stating 'Frexit'..you are correct about Macron and Le Penn's popularity is on the rise again,owt could happen.

 

trade agreements would have to be passed through parliament and the government has already stated that animal welfare and food standards will not be compromised,i know the tw ts can let their gobs say owt but it would have to get past parliament

 

That’s very debatable . The Eu was idea’d not long after the war so to try and dismiss that is very debatable considering that without EU corporation the peace only lasted 20 years after 1918
The recent Russian meddling in Ukraine by Russia was met very sternly by the EU with a civil war almost inevitable after annexing Crimea and poised to invade Eastern Pro Russian Ukraine.admittefly its an uneasy peace but with threatened sanctions from the EU is holding out .
The threat of being rejected from being considered for EU membership by the Baltic states has brought peace to the renowned volatile region . There’s plenty the EU have mediated and had influence upon and to just state that it’s nothing to do with European Unity because of the existence of the EU and it’s just modern politics is nonsense imo[/QUOTE]

It's not nonsense....democracies have not attacked each other certainly in the 50 years prior to the EU...the best you've come up with is "mediated and had influence on"....quite generic terms, where things have not been so mild has been the former Yugoslavian Republics and it was NATO that had the influence . I do agree though that the possibility of EU Membership could temper some of their decisions tbf.

 

It's not nonsense....democracies have not attacked each other certainly in the 50 years prior to the EU...the best you've come up with is "mediated and had influence on"....quite generic terms, where things have not been so mild has been the former Yugoslavian Republics and it was NATO that had the influence . I do agree though that the possibility of EU Membership could temper some of their decisions tbf.[/QUOTE]
You can argue all day on what’s what but the facts are before EU Europe was war ravaged after it wasn’t tgaas good enough for me .

 

Nothing to do with the end of colonialism and the threat of nuclear doom? English and French would've been back on the fields of Agincourt and Waterloo? And how come the EU gets the credit, and not NATO, for example? Would be pretty daft for allies to start bombing one another.

 

Are you on any medication? or is any member of your family on any medication? - If they are, then I would advise you to read the leaflet that comes with it and tells you where it was manufactured. My wife has Type 2 diabetes and also has treatment for high blood pressure. Of the four tablets she takes daily, only one is entirely manufactured in the UK and likely to be available in the event of no deal (although I do not know the source of the ingredients used to make it). The others are partially or not at all made in the UK, and under a no deal scenario are likely to be scarce. This is due to several reasons:

1). Increased customs checks at the ports
2). Limited number of 3rd country haulage licences available (1300? for 30,000 UK hauliers to operate in the EU)

There are other reasons, but I can't remember them offhand.

So, a no deal brexit has the potential to be detrimental to the health of my wife. When you consider 3.9 million people in the UK are diagnosed with diabetes, and 95%+ of insulin is manufactured outside the UK (along with other medications), any delay in the distribution of this medication is likely to severely affect the health of these people. Can you imagine how much strain 1% of these needing urgent medical treatment would have on the NHS? Short term, it would be likely to collapse under the pressure.

Only about half of Europe was in NATO. The eastern half was in the Soviet Bloc, and both were enemies. Enemies do things like drop bombs on each other.

Art 101 does not apply to MEPs, but to the EU commission, Judges, Advocate Generals, and officials of the European Central Bank, so is basically Diplomatic Immunity as our officials enjoy in other countries.
Art 104 applies to assets, revenues and properties, not people.

 

And the Eastern Bloc weren't in the EU, so they can't have been responsible for keeping the peace either. So how does that show that the EU deserves the credit for a peaceful Europe and not NATO?