** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

[al_yrpal]

Adversarial claptrap from remain as usual. Its a glorious Sunday afternoon here and I would rather listen to the bells pealing.. Lots of support for Nigel, Tories who fudged Brexit should be very worried. Corbyn commeth!

Al

[slowster]

Mick, I'm no expert on EU laws, but I will answer your question once windmiller has answered. I'll even give an example of an EU law which I think should not have been issued and probably should be repealed.

The question has pointy ears and sneaky eyes

Windmiller, you quoted Orwell's 1984 above. Throughout this thread you have used the sort of language which about which Orwell wrote:

Political language — and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists — is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.

I am asking you to provide some substance instead of windbaggery. Given that this is a subject about which you evidently feel so strongly, I would expect you to be able to give us at least one good example of an EU law that should be repealed with an explanation why and an outline of what should replace it.

[Mick F]

Tories who fudged Brexit should be very worried.

Buggered up, more like.
It was the prospect of the Tories splitting and falling apart that started it.

People like me, were just people who preferred to be out than in.
They shouldn't have asked if they didn't like the answer.

[merseymouth]

Hello again, I'll cite one E.U. horror of a measure - The stupid catalytic converter rubbish! At a time when the British motor industry was making great strides with lean burn technology, use less fuel therefore less exhaust pollution, the E.U. fell for the Johnson Matthey con job. Create very expensive systems that use more fuel, use up large quantities of rare metals that JM held the rights to.
Coupled with the quite untruthful economy performance testing which bears no relationship to fact or practical reality we have events such as Dieselgate!
Makes Emma Thompson look like a candidate for Sainthood? IGICB MM

[thirdcrank]

... Corbyn commeth! ...

Your very own Project Fear. All these trots giving you the runs.

[windmiller]

Mick, I'm no expert on EU laws, but I will answer your question once windmiller has answered. I'll even give an example of an EU law which I think should not have been issued and probably should be repealed.

The question has pointy ears and sneaky eyes

Windmiller, you quoted Orwell's 1984 above. Throughout this thread you have used the sort of language which about which Orwell wrote:

Political language — and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists — is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.

I am asking you to provide some substance instead of windbaggery. Given that this is a subject about which you evidently feel so strongly, I would expect you to be able to give us at least one good example of an EU law that should be repealed with an explanation why and an outline of what should replace it.

I hate homework, You are evidently one of those THEDEVILISINTHEDETAIL types whose natural habitat is in the deepest darkest corners of the EU. No expert you say?

[al_yrpal]

... Corbyn commeth! ...

Your very own Project Fear. All these trots giving you the runs.

Aye, several Tory failures on the Trot and reds emerging from under the bed !!! Nightmare...

Al

[reohn2]

... Corbyn commeth! ...

Your very own Project Fear. All these trots giving you the runs.

[pete75]

... Corbyn commeth! ...

Your very own Project Fear. All these trots giving you the runs.

Aye, several Tory failures on the Trot and reds emerging from under the bed !!! Nightmare...

Al

And mine is your far right ERG/BXP pals gaining control of the country.

[al_yrpal]

Not my pals Pete. Never voted for either.

Who are yours?

Al

[slowster]

I hate homework

I don't understand why you refer to it as homework. You should not need to do any research. Given the strength of your views on the EU, you should already know and be able to give examples off the top of your head of EU laws that are harmful and should be repealed. I'm not asking you to do any homework, I'm asking you to answer what should be a fairly easy question for you.

While we are waiting, I'll give my answer to Mick. In general I would say the EU laws that come to my mind as being good examples are those relating to work related health and safety, environmental protection, and consumer protection (things like distance selling regs, flight delay refunds, mobile phone roaming charges etc.). I think the consumer protection ones have been very necessary to offset the growing power of big business, especially large multi-nationals. Without the EU legislating, I think that there would not have been the political will of individual governments to agree to such changes, and I think the transnational nature of many such laws often makes it impossible to make progress without all governments signing up.

My promised example of an EU directive that should not have been made is the one that resulted in the Display Screen Equipment Regulations in the UK. Although work related upper limb disorders associated with working using computers do exist, e.g. carpal tunnel syndrome etc., the extent of the problem probably did not warrant a dedicated set of regulations, and instead it was something which could probably have been adequately addressed by the HSE promoting awareness of the issues generally with information leaflets etc., making sure it was something covered by the recognised H&S training courses and exams, and just using the UK's existing general H&S legislation requirement to provide safe work equipment, proper training etc. for enforcement where companies clearly were not taking adequate precautions for workers sat at computers.

[Cyril Haearn]

I had an adjustable desk, I used to stand half the time and sit half the time
Plus One If the EU was responsible for that

[thirdcrank]

Hello again, I'll cite one E.U. horror of a measure - The stupid catalytic converter rubbish! At a time when the British motor industry was making great strides with lean burn technology, use less fuel therefore less exhaust pollution, the E.U. fell for the Johnson Matthey con job. Create very expensive systems that use more fuel, use up large quantities of rare metals that JM held the rights to.
Coupled with the quite untruthful economy performance testing which bears no relationship to fact or practical reality we have events such as Dieselgate!
Makes Emma Thompson look like a candidate for Sainthood? IGICB MM

In a roundabout sort of way, I know a bit about Johnson Matthey as one of my pals used to work for them in a senior role. I do know they are a British company, albeit with an international presence. If the EU was conned over catalytic converters, they were conned by a British company.

[kwackers]

Hello again, I'll cite one E.U. horror of a measure - The stupid catalytic converter rubbish! At a time when the British motor industry was making great strides with lean burn technology, use less fuel therefore less exhaust pollution, the E.U. fell for the Johnson Matthey con job. Create very expensive systems that use more fuel, use up large quantities of rare metals that JM held the rights to.
Coupled with the quite untruthful economy performance testing which bears no relationship to fact or practical reality we have events such as Dieselgate!
Makes Emma Thompson look like a candidate for Sainthood? IGICB MM

In a roundabout sort of way, I know a bit about Johnson Matthey as one of my pals used to work for them in a senior role. I do know they are a British company, albeit with an international presence. If the EU was conned over catalytic converters, they were conned by a British company.

From what I remember about "lean burn" it's main problem was that the combustion by-products weren't that great, in the end a catalytic converter might burn more fuel but the output was cleaner.
It's the usual; the here and now vs future promises.

All moot anyway, IC engines are dead they just don't know it yet.

[PDQ Mobile]

I hate homework

I don't understand why you refer to it as homework. You should not need to do any research. Given the strength of your views on the EU, you should already know and be able to give examples off the top of your head of EU laws that are harmful and should be repealed. I'm not asking you to do any homework, I'm asking you to answer what should be a fairly easy question for you.

While we are waiting, I'll give my answer to Mick. In general I would say the EU laws that come to my mind as being good examples are those relating to work related health and safety, environmental protection, and consumer protection (things like distance selling regs, flight delay refunds, mobile phone roaming charges etc.). I think the consumer protection ones have been very necessary to offset the growing power of big business, especially large multi-nationals. Without the EU legislating, I think that there would not have been the political will of individual governments to agree to such changes, and I think the transnational nature of many such laws often makes it impossible to make progress without all governments signing up.

My promised example of an EU directive that should not have been made is the one that resulted in the Display Screen Equipment Regulations in the UK. Although work related upper limb disorders associated with working using computers do exist, e.g. carpal tunnel syndrome etc., the extent of the problem probably did not warrant a dedicated set of regulations, and instead it was something which could probably have been adequately addressed by the HSE promoting awareness of the issues generally with information leaflets etc., making sure it was something covered by the recognised H&S training courses and exams, and just using the UK's existing general H&S legislation requirement to provide safe work equipment, proper training etc. for enforcement where companies clearly were not taking adequate precautions for workers sat at computers.

Thank you for this.
It is well considered and even handed I think.
Persausive too for anyone with eyes and ears half open.
I so wish the opposite view point could muster an argument as complete and well thought about.
For I am not closed minded about any criticism of the EU but after a 1000 pages not one of them has given much cogent argument that we will be better off out.

I know immigration was a concern.
I believe we could have negociated that.
Indeed powers we already had were not used under TM as Home Secretary. A failing of the UK side of things- another one.

But thanks again for taking time and trouble Slowster.