Brexit, for once some facts.

[daveboy]

Haven't you read my further post? 98% success in getting our own way over new EU laws?

You edited it after my reply you Cockwomble, so how could I have read it before my reply (my time machine is broken) go back and read my Edit below.
Edit.. You added a few paragraphs after my reply (as you usually do) past voting is no clue to future voting..( if they knew we would veto it then why propose it)

 

[oldgroaner]

You edited it after my reply you Cockwomble, so how could I have read it before my reply (my time machine is broken) go back and read my Edit below.
Edit.. You added a few paragraphs after my reply (as you usually do) past voting is no clue to future voting..( if they knew we would veto it then why propose it)

You've got me at it now! I did actually go back to read the very edit above!
Ah well insanity must be catching, but I would love to understand the logic behind (if they knew we would veto it then why propose it)
That's simply paranoia!
You could say that about any and every proposal, using the same logic suggests we bullied them into agreeing with us 98% of the time!
Obviously a Cockwomble is working on our behalf in Brussels
Edit:

 

[daveboy]

The Logic is... why propose a law that would massively disadvantage the UK when we had a Veto. I would be very worried if the EU could pass laws that massively disadvantaged us by a majority vote. For example a new immigration law.

 

[Danidl]

Why should that worry you? it's the way our parliament has always worked, since when did the opposition have a veto on the governent unless it has numerical superiority?
Why do you jump to the conclusion we will oppose new laws, when in fact we have only opposed
Here you are.....our influence over EU law making
"
Official EU voting records* show that the British government has voted ‘No’ to laws passed at EU level on 56 occasions, abstained 70 times, and voted ‘Yes’ 2,466 times since 1999, according to UK in a Changing Europe Fellows Sara Hagemann and Simon Hix.

In other words, UK ministers were on the “winning side” 95% of the time, abstained 3% of the time, and were on the losing side 2%."

Not very risky was it?


And you should be asking, why do we get a rebate? and what could be renegotiated ?
We have never behaved as real members of the EU have we? just Cherry picked, and now we will end up with nothing at all..

What your statistics are omitting OG, is that here is very extensive compromising and wheeler dealing before a topic even comes up for voting, so even those Nos ,will have been influenced by British wishes.

 

[oldgroaner]

The Logic is... why propose a law that would massively disadvantage the UK when we had a Veto. I would be very worried if the EU could pass laws that massively disadvantaged us by a majority vote. For example a new immigration law.

And why do you imagine they would do that any more than our own parliament are likely to?

 

[Danidl]

The Logic is... why propose a law that would massively disadvantage the UK when we had a Veto. I would be very worried if the EU could pass laws that massively disadvantaged us by a majority vote. For example a new immigration law.

The commissioners in the EU are continuously proposing laws. They are meeting with lobby groups, industry etc etc and are continuing to propose actions. BUT they do not make the laws. They set the agenda, but the Parliament votes on the laws. At every stage..be it speed limits on bikes, bike number plates etc, there is extensive negotiations,and the Commission only proceeds when it sees success. What they are continuously concerned about is giving any country an UNFAIR advantage,so for instance letting a country keep slavery, when others have to abolish it is unfair. If there were a new immigration law, then all countries should suffer equally... At present the bulk of this suffering is confined to our Mediterranean colleagues.

 

[50Hertz]

The Logic is... why propose a law that would massively disadvantage the UK when we had a Veto. I would be very worried if the EU could pass laws that massively disadvantaged us by a majority vote. For example a new immigration law.

I think you have a point. If there is no power to veto, then that could leave the U.K. exposed to anything, which makes no sense in business or life.

For example, would it be possible for the UK’s financial contribution to the EU budget to be set by a majority? Since the majority of members contribute nothing financially, it would be irresistibly for them to vote themselves extra cash. It sounds dangerous to me, IF ITS TRUE of course.

 

[daveboy]

And why do you imagine they would do that any more than our own parliament are likely to?

Because we get to vote them out...Look what happened to the Lib-vote when they went back on the promise of tuition fees.

 

[flecc]

Look what happened to the Lib-vote when they went back on the promise of tuition fees.

Oh dear, this old myth again.

The Lib Dems didn't go back on abolishing tuition fees, we failed to elect them into power, leaving them as a very small minority in coalition.

They did make the mistake of going into coalition with the Tories. If they'd taken the other option of joining with Labour instead, it's more likely that they could have had their ambition to abolish tuition fees, so we could perhaps blame them for that.
.

 

[daveboy]

I think you have a point. If there is no power to veto, then that could leave the U.K. exposed to anything, which makes no sense in business or life.

For example, would it be possible for the UK’s financial contribution to the EU budget to be set by a majority? Since the majority of members contribute nothing financially, it would be irresistibly for them to vote themselves extra cash. It sounds dangerous to me, IF ITS TRUE of course.

Don't forget, The article was written by somebody trying to defend the Lisbon Treaty.

Oh dear, this old myth again.

The Lib Dems didn't go back on abolishing tuition fees, we failed to elect them into power, leaving them as a very small minority in coalition.

They did make the mistake of going into coalition with the Tories. If they'd taken the other option of joining with Labour instead, it's more likely that they could have had their ambition to abolish tuition fees, so we could perhaps blame them for that.
.

But......and It's a pretty big but. If the Lib-Dems had voted against the increase it wouldn't have been passed. They sold out for a referendum on PR.

Tuition fees: How Liberal Democrat MPs voted

A full list of how Lib Dem MPs voted on tuition fees - and a list of the Conservative MPs who did not support the plans.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Danidl]

I think you have a point. If there is no power to veto, then that could leave the U.K. exposed to anything, which makes no sense in business or life.

For example, would it be possible for the UK’s financial contribution to the EU budget to be set by a majority? Since the majority of members contribute nothing financially, it would be irresistibly for them to vote themselves extra cash. It sounds dangerous to me, IF ITS TRUE of course.

No. Did you not get the memo on Qualified Majority Voting?. The ultimate veto is to leave. That the UK or any of the other 27 can do. By definition the bigger fish, UK, France, Germany have more clout in budget matters. Likewise the budget is balanced so that even small operators like Ireland are now nett contributors.
One of the privileges of a democratic organisation is that the members get the opportunity to decide on the level of taxation , AND HOW and What it will be spent on.

 

[daveboy]

No. Did you not get the memo on Qualified Majority Voting?. The ultimate veto is to leave. That the UK or any of the other 27 can do.

Yes......Should be easy

 

[oldgroaner]

Because we get to vote them out...Look what happened to the Lib-vote when they went back on the promise of tuition fees.

And you get to vote MEP's out too.
And yet some blithering idiots voted to send a crowd of football hooligans to represent us?

 

[oldgroaner]

Yes......Should be easy

Why do you think it isn't?
Do you really imagine the difficulties are due to some EU politicians?

 

[oldgroaner]

I think you have a point. If there is no power to veto, then that could leave the U.K. exposed to anything, which makes no sense in business or life.

For example, would it be possible for the UK’s financial contribution to the EU budget to be set by a majority? Since the majority of members contribute nothing financially, it would be irresistibly for them to vote themselves extra cash. It sounds dangerous to me, IF ITS TRUE of course.

Actually it is done by a formula not by majority vote
The EU must run a balanced budget, its revenues must cover its spending. The EU's largest source of revenue are the contributions made by Member States. Member States contribute a share of their adjusted VAT receipts and their Gross National Income (GNI) to the EU. They also collect customs tariffs on behalf of the EU.

 

[oldgroaner]

Don't forget, The article was written by somebody trying to defend the Lisbon Treaty.

But......and It's a pretty big but. If the Lib-Dems had voted against the increase it wouldn't have been passed. They sold out for a referendum on PR.

Tuition fees: How Liberal Democrat MPs voted

A full list of how Lib Dem MPs voted on tuition fees - and a list of the Conservative MPs who did not support the plans.

www.bbc.co.uk

The person who wrote the article didn't mention how the budget contributions are set, it is done by a formula applied to everyone.

 

[oldgroaner]

Why do you think it isn't?
Do you really imagine the difficulties are due to some EU politicians?

There's a little reason called economics at work that make it difficult, is that what you find funny?
literally we could have left the Monday following the referendum and the EU couldn't prevent it, article 50 procedure or no.
Why do you think we didn't? did they stop us?

 

[daveboy]

And you get to vote MEP's out too.
And yet some blithering idiots voted to send a crowd of football hooligans to represent us?

No we don't.....We get to vote in 87 MEP's out of 626...In a Parliament that has majority voting, (if we lost the Veto)That's not going to get us anywhere.

 

[oldgroaner]

Boris breaks another of his promises
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/scotland-article-50-brexit-extension-court-case-1-6306435
Government tells court Boris Johnson will send Brexit extension letter to stop no-deal Brexit

Presumably signed

With regards,
The dead body in the ditch?

 

[daveboy]

The person who wrote the article didn't mention how the budget contributions are set, it is done by a formula applied to everyone.

I think You answered the wrong person again.....NURSE