skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I’ve never tried zzzz
Yes you can't defend their crookedness so zzzzz
Make your mind up.
Either we get a big say as you try to make out or we only get a small say as you say is wrong.
It was like when Juncker got his position. We protested that he shouldn't have got it as his dodgy dealings had cost us billions....And cost billions to countries throughout Europe. A very good reason for him not to get it however much you defend him. But we got outvoted. Would have been good to have a veto.
Zzzzzz Salmayr zzzzzzz
Lies, more lies and twisted statistics. Keep it up Tony.I’ve never tried zzzz
So what are we allowed to veto?I haven’t made anything out. I’ve made the point that we have the power of veto. Which we do. I’ve made the point that where we can use it it’s the final say. Which it is.
Let’s stop going on about it and get out with no deal,That will upset the remoaners and the bbc and maybe Martcov will start contributing on the CCFC general chat pages?
I reckon he doesn’t even like football just likes to moan.
The people spoke you win some you lose some,Deal with it
I voted out that doesn’t mean I am a racist football thug!!!
Make your mind up.
Either we get a big say as you try to make out or we only get a small say as you say is wrong.
It was like when Juncker got his position. We protested that he shouldn't have got it as his dodgy dealings had cost us billions....And cost billions to countries throughout Europe. A very good reason for him not to get it however much you defend him. But we got outvoted. Would have been good to have a veto.
Lies, more lies and twisted statistics. Keep it up Tony.
So what are we allowed to veto?
I said we don't get much of a say. That is true. But you say I am wrong as we have the veto. The veto which has been mainly taken away and they are planning to get rid of it altogether. Which when we spoke about it previously you thought it was a good idea so things can get pushed through without someone being able to block it. Without the veto we would have no say.
The veto only applies in certain areas since the Lisbon treaty.
Lisbon Treaty: more of Britain's powers surrendered to Brussels
So what are we allowed to veto?
I said we don't get much of a say. That is true. But you say I am wrong as we have the veto. The veto which has been mainly taken away and they are planning to get rid of it altogether. Which when we spoke about it previously you thought it was a good idea so things can get pushed through without someone being able to block it. Without the veto we would have no say.
I do like football, but can't get to Cov every week. Next week, 28.10, is St Pauli Hamburg v Kiel for me.
I am not moaning. Just that my home country is being ruled by a disunited government and has voted to leave a large trading bloc for no real reason.
What form of leave did the people vote for? We have 4 on the table all of which are incompatible with each other.
We had a say on everything through MEPs, Head of Government and ministerial representation in the European Council and a Commissioner in the EC.
VETO: ( Where we have veto rights )
- membership of the Union (opening of accession negotiations, association, serious violations of the Union's values, etc.);
- change the status of an overseas country or territory (OCT) to an outermost region (OMR) or vice versa.[27]
- taxation;
- the finances of the Union (own resources, the multiannual financial framework);
- harmonisation in the field of social security and social protection;
- certain provisions in the field of justice and home affairs (the European prosecutor, family law, operational police cooperation, etc.);
- the flexibility clause (352 TFEU) allowing the Union to act to achieve one of its objectives in the absence of a specific legal basis in the treaties;
- the common foreign and security policy, with the exception of certain clearly defined cases;
- the common security and defence policy, with the exception of the establishment of permanent structured cooperation;
- citizenship (the granting of new rights to European citizens, anti-discrimination measures);
- certain institutional issues (the electoral system and composition of the Parliament, certain appointments, the composition of the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee, the seats of the institutions, the language regime, the revision of the treaties, including the bridging clauses, etc.).
When did the EU say that?
And how about the celebrations on here when it looked like the EU signing a deal with the USA?
Like I have continually said it is all down to the details. But this is always forgotten about when needed.
Which version did we vote yes to remain in in the 70’s
Was it one with 28 countries and where we stuff money into useless corrupt countries to “support them”? One where there is a fiscal limitation in certain areas and supporting a gravy train cesspit in Brussels that makes laws we have no say in?
We agreed an EEC arrangement and never had any say in any of the above.
We have no veto on VAT minimum levels or on the corporation tax “calculation”
Not interested. That is ancient history. The EU has evolved and all major alterations were agreed by our sovereign nation. Now answer the question.
Yes we have, but the decision on minimum VAT was unaminous. We agreed with it.
Of course you are not interested. Any freedom of expression abd democracy scares you. You believe in lack of free speech opinion and expression. You believe in totalitarian rule
No I don't. Making things up again.
No we haven’t as we now cannot reverse the decision so we are bound by it
Well your the best argument on here for leave with your bigoted tripe - believe me
No we haven’t as we now cannot reverse the decision so we are bound by it
We don’t even charge the minimum. Why are we going to want to reverse it?
Bigoted tripe? I told you we agreed to a minimum VAT rate. An undisputable fact as opposed to your usual crap. That makes me a bigot in your mind. You're nuts.
Because we may want to as we may want to nationalise under a labour government
Ha ha ha. Yeah OK. I’ll believe when I see it and I don’t believe for one minute that you believe that there’s the slightest possibility that it will ever happen either. Regardless of what you say.
That’s not the point. We also can’t nationalise anything without permission from the Eu can we?
In the end the government should have and still should approach this differently.
There is no need for a transition period as such. We should adopt the Norway arrangement as the interim model. We can join the EFTA and then the EEA
It solves all immediate issues. It’s impossible to see how it wouldn’t get through Parliament. Corbyn would look utterly ridiculous rejecting the most moderate option.
This does not have to be permanent and then the Irish question could be answered. The Irish under the Treaty of Surrender have the right to demand a referendum of its people. The people can support unification or accept they remain in the uk and go with any future arrangement regarding Eu separation. They can arrange another referendum every 7 years anyway.
Then political parties can decide the version of Europe they want in the future and put the view in their manifesto
This way we can gradually move aware and dissipate the bluster on both sides
In the end the government should have and still should approach this differently.
There is no need for a transition period as such. We should adopt the Norway arrangement as the interim model. We can join the EFTA and then the EEA
It solves all immediate issues. It’s impossible to see how it wouldn’t get through Parliament. Corbyn would look utterly ridiculous rejecting the most moderate option.
This does not have to be permanent and then the Irish question could be answered. The Irish under the Treaty of Surrender have the right to demand a referendum of its people. The people can support unification or accept they remain in the uk and go with any future arrangement regarding Eu separation. They can arrange another referendum every 7 years anyway.
Then political parties can decide the version of Europe they want in the future and put the view in their manifesto
This way we can gradually move aware and dissipate the bluster on both sides
Spot on. EEA members can also suspend freedom of movement under Article 112 of the EEA Agreement.
So the Norway Option ticks most boxes.
It's the perfect interim solution and the EU's least preferred because it nullifies their power to stonewall and deter others from exiting.
So a political party can run for election in the uk on a 4% VAT promise then?
In the end the government should have and still should approach this differently.
There is no need for a transition period as such. We should adopt the Norway arrangement as the interim model. We can join the EFTA and then the EEA
It solves all immediate issues. It’s impossible to see how it wouldn’t get through Parliament. Corbyn would look utterly ridiculous rejecting the most moderate option.
This does not have to be permanent and then the Irish question could be answered. The Irish under the Treaty of Surrender have the right to demand a referendum of its people. The people can support unification or accept they remain in the uk and go with any future arrangement regarding Eu separation. They can arrange another referendum every 7 years anyway.
Then political parties can decide the version of Europe they want in the future and put the view in their manifesto
This way we can gradually move aware and dissipate the bluster on both sides
Some members of the EEA have previously objected to the UK joining it though and it wouldn't be a given.
More sensible than usual. I agree with the Northern Irish being able to ask for a referendum. If they don't vote for reunification, then they have accepted Brexit. At the moment they are remainers.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?