British and the EU

[Brighteye]

Actually in Europe, EU bureaucrats are more efficient and less wasteful than the national administrations

Whose administration? Yours maybe. And if we already have a government, then even a very efficient second government is a waste. We don't need two!

What are you talking about, seriously? Do you know how the EU works?

a) Rotating presidency - that's one thing that will stop with the new (constitutional) treaty. In the future, the president of the European Council will be elected by the member states for 2 and a half years.

And that's a worrying thought in itself. There are many small countries, and I wonder if they'll be over-represented in such voting.

b) EU courts can overrule the will of the people in any nation only if the will is against the EU founding treaties. If you don't understand, it's like if an US state passed a law which would be against the US Constitution, for example if Utah legalized slavery or something like that. Otherwise, the EU institutions can't intervene. What's undemocratic about it?

Oh no, EU law can override national law that has been in place for centuries. We've had a carefully refined and honed legal system, and then EU directives come along and change the way things are. Why do 'human rights' need to be organised on an EU level? It's not as if they're a competitive thing where we need to band together in order to preserve the power of our rights.
I don't care if this was agreed apon in the original treaties. It shouldn't have been.

EU is unquestionably good for all of its members. It deals with stuff that is often complicated and people are pretty ignorant about it. How could they possibly decide if they don't understand what's going on?

Indeed. It's good at the moment. So let's not 'fix' it.

What Europe is doing is simple. We take things the nation states can't handle themselves, and we hand them over to the EU. Subsidiarity rule applies - only things that are better handled by the EU are handled by it. The rest stays in the hands of the individual member states.

Actually, it's a process of federation-building.

Only there are some things that the EU does that nations can do by themselves. If it was only about free trade and a coherent trade policy that would be fine.

 

[Mirc]

The EU works mostly with their silly system of Roman law (civil law, if you like). The differences make it very hard for EU rules to apply well and effectively over here. Our lawmakers are stupid anyway, so its best not to give them further opportunity to make a mess by having them re-interpret EU laws into our system.

What do you mean? The great majority of the world uses the civil law!!

 

[Disenfrancised]

What do you mean? The great majority of the world uses the civil law!!

But the Uk doesn't, and he is talking about adapting Civil law based legalese into Common law being tricky and wasteful (perhaps).

Unless your refering to his 'silly' comment in which case - just because everyone uses Civil law doesn't make it objectiveily better .

 

[Steph]

just because everyone uses Civil law doesn't make it objectiveily better .

No, but as for the metric system, the fact it comes from the French makes it objectively better.

Spoiler :

Yes, I know the civil law doesn't come first from the French, and I also know civil law can be divided into different "modern origin", French and German being the most important

 

[Mozza]

I've not read seven page sof this, especially as the first few posts were spot on. There's a very vocal ignorant minorty of Sun readers who believe we should leave the EU, their arguments are along the lines of "well, French birds have hairy armpits and they smell, and the Spanish, well, they sleep all day, and the Germans started the war and the Eastern Europeans are all gypsies who live in castles and eat their own poo". However there is a much much larger, well informed, quiet majority that know the EU is the future for us and that's why all the Independance parties that gob off in the run up to elections do abysmally poor in the actual elections themselves.

 

[Joe Harker]

The problem is, is that many British people, actually think the EU is a good thing, they just don't speak about it. Bad news is always the first thing you hear on the news, and it is the same here. Many EU critics always point out the failings of the EU, of which there are many, lets not kid ourselves here, the EU is not perfect. The problem is that there is no real vocal pro europe voice in Britian that points out the good stuff the EU has done to us.

 

[Disenfrancised]

No, but as for the metric system, the fact it comes from the French makes it objectively better.

Britain has always been willing to take on the continents good ideas. The metric system is better, hence why we use it. Civil law...not so much .

 

[Steph]

The metric system is better

I know it is, it's French. So by definition it is better

 

[Winner]

Whose administration? Yours maybe. And if we already have a government, then even a very efficient second government is a waste. We don't need two!

Almost any national administration. Usually, the best go to Brussels (high salaries).

Your second objection is pointless - they have their own duties, different from what national bureaucracies do. These two are not redundant, they're complementary.

And that's a worrying thought in itself. There are many small countries, and I wonder if they'll be over-represented in such voting.

They won't - according to this new treaty, there will be double majority: 55% of countries having at least 65% of the EU population. It's a compromise, it ensures that the big countries won't dominate, but it also prevents the smaller countries from abusing their numerical superiority.

Oh no, EU law can override national law that has been in place for centuries. We've had a carefully refined and honed legal system, and then EU directives come along and change the way things are. Why do 'human rights' need to be organised on an EU level? It's not as if they're a competitive thing where we need to band together in order to preserve the power of our rights.
I don't care if this was agreed apon in the original treaties. It shouldn't have been.

Why not?

And I am not talking about Human Rights Declaration, which, from some mysterious reason get so much attention in the UK. There are many things that had to be included in the founding treaties. If you break them, then the ECJ will punish you. If you don't like it, leave, nobody is forcing you to stay.

Indeed. It's good at the moment. So let's not 'fix' it.

It's not good enough. World is changing, the EU has to keep evolving too.

Only there are some things that the EU does that nations can do by themselves. If it was only about free trade and a coherent trade policy that would be fine.

What exactly? Aside from CAP, which is indeed totally pointless, I can't think of anything else.

 

[Winner]

What do you mean? The great majority of the world uses the civil law!!

Thank God!

Common law is a mess. It's main flaw is, that it gets very complicated with time. Too many precedents and other stuff. Chaos.

 

[Joe Harker]

And I am not talking about Human Rights Declaration, which, from some mysterious reason get so much attention in the UK.

Cause it conflicts with new anti terror laws (although those laws are a piece of **** anyway.)

 

[Mozza]

Cause it conflicts with new anti terror laws (although those laws are a piece of **** anyway.)

Absolutely, it's thanks to the EU that we still have any freedom left in the UK.

 

[Disenfrancised]

I know it is, it's French. So by definition it is better

Of course, but civil law is tainted by Germanic and Roman influences :gasp:! So you can see why we want no truck with it.

 

[Joe Harker]

Of course, but civil law is tainted by Germanic and Roman influences :gasp:! So you can see why we want no truck with it.

Might as well get rid of the entire English language then.

 

[Mirc]

Might as well get rid of the entire English language then.

Funniest post in the thread!

 

[Thorgalaeg]

pwned!

 

[mdwh]

Why do 'human rights' need to be organised on an EU level?

They don't. But for some reason, it's taken the EU to give us what national Governments have failed to do for centuries. I don't know why it's had to take an EU level to get us any kind of written rights, but that's the way it is.

Absolutely, it's thanks to the EU that we still have any freedom left in the UK.

Agreed. What's really sad about this euro-phobia is that it seems to have made "human rights" a dirty word (or two).