• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

REFERENDUM RESULTS AND DISCUSSION THREAD

For me, it comes down to the principle, do you want to be governed and adhere to British law, or by the jurisdiction of a foreign state.
Do you trust the EU, more than our demcratically elected UK politicians?

It was our democratically elected politicians that ceded that power to the EU.
 
I did answer it. The EU will have no jurisdiction over UK law. At the moment up to 70% of UK law involves the EU.

So you don't trust or want the UK government that UK citizens have democratically voted for, but you trust the unelected EU commisioners?

No you didn't answer it. Specifically, man. Not generally. Just one single law or regulation. There are so many to choose from!

I did you the courtesy of very clearly answering your question, please do me the same. Even if it's "I don't know which specific law that I object to, but I just object to all of them.". We both know that's the answer I want, anyway, and you've had long enough now to google for an answer to which EU law you are unhappy about. Shit, or get off the toilet.

I didn't say I trust them, but I do think that the more checks and balances that a government has to go through, the better, frankly. As we've seen with the unelected HoL putting the brakes on some recent Tory bastard-ing
 
No you didn't answer it. Specifically, man. Not generally. Just one single law or regulation. There are so many to choose from!

I did you the courtesy of very clearly answering your question, please do me the same. Even if it's "I don't know which specific law that I object to, but I just object to all of them.". We both know that's the answer I want, anyway, and you've had long enough now to google for an answer to which EU law you are unhappy about. $#@!, or get off the toilet.

I didn't say I trust them, but I do think that the more checks and balances that a government has to go through, the better, frankly. As we've seen with the unelected HoL putting the brakes on some recent Tory bastard-ing

I don't trust the Conservative party, but they are democratically elected. I trust the EU less and they are not democratically elected.
 
I have played this game before, a one way question game. My answer is that I want the UK to make their own laws and to be ruled by a democratically elected goverment, not by EU commisioners.

So if parliament signs Brexit through on the proviso that all laws and regulations stay exactly the same now as they are within the EU then you'd be happy?
 
I did answer it. The EU will have no jurisdiction over UK law. At the moment up to 70% of UK law involves the EU.

So you don't trust or want the UK government that UK citizens have democratically voted for, but you trust the unelected EU commisioners?

They may be unelected, but they are appointed by elected politicians. The commissioners are no different to the civil service.
 
I think it's pretty fair that some people are happy to be ruled by the EU and others prefer to be ruled by a UK parliament, regardless of the specifics. Lets face it, the chances are we'd probably adopt pretty much all the rules the EU bring in - well apart from the ones preventing farmers using all of their fields, and the ones that prevents them cutting hedges lower than a certain height.
 
Let's not forget that it was the sovereign, democratically elected parliament of the UK that agreed to the current EU legal framework, after first agreeing to join the EU following a referendum of the great British public no less! You can't get much more legitimate than that in a Brexiteer's eyes, surely?
 
Under EU law, local authorities are allowed to ban the composting of teabags if there are fears over the spread of disease.

Hahahhahah. I could be posting silly EU laws all day, but it isn't the point. What matters is, that there should be no supremacy over a democratically elected sovereign government, by an unelected foreign state.
 
Under EU law, local authorities are allowed to ban the composting of teabags if there are fears over the spread of disease.

They are allowed to, in fact encouraged to - but they don't have to. Cardiff council chose to, because of the advised BSE risk, but were under no obligation.

Have another go. There's loads to choose from.
 
Under EU law, local authorities are allowed to ban the composting of teabags if there are fears over the spread of disease.

Hahahhahah. I could be posting silly EU laws all day, but it isn't the point. What matters is, that there should be no supremacy over a democratically elected sovereign government, by an unelected foreign state.


Im not sure how a law that explictly grants the freedom to do something is an example of the EU state jackboot....
 
The point is, THM, that you're principally opposed to something that actually makes no material difference whatsoever. I'm yet to be advised of a single law or regulation which when removed, would have any positive effect on anybody in the whole fucking country. If you find one, it really will ruin my day tbh. But you won't.
 
Under EU law, local authorities are allowed to ban the composting of teabags if there are fears over the spread of disease.

Hahahhahah. I could be posting silly EU laws all day, but it isn't the point. What matters is, that there should be no supremacy over a democratically elected sovereign government, by an unelected foreign state.

What, even if the democratically elected sovereign government signs up to such rules following all the proper legislative processes? You make it sound as though this has happened by stealth at the behest of some shadowy organisation. It hasn't, it was brought about, quite legally and with the best interests of the country in mind (presumably), by the elected representatives of this country. You are free to disagree with that being done, you might even be right to do so (I don't think you are, but that's by the by), but don't make it out to be something it isn't. It weakens any argument you have.
 
What, even if the democratically elected sovereign government signs up to such rules following all the proper legislative processes? You make it sound as though this has happened by stealth at the behest of some shadowy organisation. It hasn't, it was brought about, quite legally and with the best interests of the country in mind (presumably), by the elected representatives of this country. You are free to disagree with that being done, you might even be right to do so (I don't think you are, but that's by the by), but don't make it out to be something it isn't. It weakens any argument you have.
http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-...weakens-parliamentary-supremacy-law-essay.php
 
Having a quick tally, I think we have had at least 59 EU directives relating to transport in the last 17 years, a lot of them are more towards harmonising paperwork between the EU states !
 
Under EU law, local authorities are allowed to ban the composting of teabags if there are fears over the spread of disease.

Hahahhahah. I could be posting silly EU laws all day, but it isn't the point. What matters is, that there should be no supremacy over a democratically elected sovereign government, by an unelected foreign state.

So you don't think Local Authorities should be allowed to do this? And you voted out? I see why some question the wisdom of the result.

Given you second statement I assume you also want out of NATO and the UN?
 
So you don't think Local Authorities should be allowed to do this? And you voted out? I see why some question the wisdom of the result.

Given you second statement I assume you also want out of NATO and the UN?

So because you wanted to remain in the EU, did you want to be part of NATO and the UN?
 
Back
Top