Anyone for a Brexit ?

[Pond digger]

Even Christopher Booker said that the Vacuum cleaner story was nonsense

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ight-and-its-not-banning-vacuum-cleaners.html

'In fact, there is no “ban” on powerful vacuums, kettles, hair dryers or anything else. What Brussels is doing, under its Ecodesign Directive 2009/125, is to encourage manufacturers to develop appliances that require less electricity to produce a much more efficient performance'.

As regards the costs or otherwise of EU legislation (and many other things) this is worth a read

http://www.global-counsel.co.uk/sys...Global_Counsel_Impact_of_Brexit_June_2015.pdf

"The UK has championed the single market, but outside the EU would no longer be an effective advocate of further liberalisation. UK critics often complain about EU regulatory excesses, but many regulations are intended to create the level playing field the single market requires. A paradox of UK euroscepticism is that following Brexit the UK would lose influence over EU regulation without gaining much freedom to regulate independently.

One estimate suggests national regulation is 2.5 times more cost effective than EU regulation. EU processes are criticised for being opaque and hard to influence, particularly for SMEs. However, under most Brexit scenarios the UK must choose between adopting EU rules or being excluded from the single market. Neither the Norwegian nor Swiss models avoid this dilemma. Common regulations are necessary for the single market in goods and services, which is a UK priority. An FTA scenario is only marginally different. This would give the UK more flexibility to choose whether to adopt EU regulation, but as TTIP shows the biggest prize for modern FTAs is regulatory convergence.

The public debate in the UK often fails to recognise the benefits from EU regulation. The 100 most expensive regulations cost the UK economy £27.4bn each year, whereas the benefits total £57.1bn, according to UK government impact assessments. Some individual regulations appear particularly costly, such as the Agency Workers Directive, which has a net cost of over £500m each year. The figures are contestable as the benefits are hard to estimate and some of the costs are due to gold-plating of standards by the UK.

The OECD regards the UK as the second least regulated product market after the Netherlands. Labour market regulation is comparable with the US, Canada and Australia and is much lower than other EU countries. This suggests there is no conflict between EU regulations and a highly-liberal market economy. Moreover, the OECD observes that one of the most heavily regulated areas in the UK - and one of the most damaging for productivity - is the system for obtaining planning permission, which has nothing to do with the EU."

Interesting stuff; you seem well informed.

 

[caveman]

It makes me laugh when folk constantly come up with all these rules and regulations that the EU have specifically dreamt up by Johnny Foreigner undermine the UK. The UK is one of major players in dreaming these regulations up, we have thousands of MEP's , civil servants, NGO members, lobby groups all based in Brussels actively participating in this, and making sure the UK's interests are upheld. If I pity anyone, it's all the small countries that often have very limited influence but were the consequences of these rule changes can often have devastating impacts.

Yeah
Right
It's just one great big den of corruption

 

[rob1]

Yugoslavia's states had been fighting like cat & dog for centuries. Under the benevolent dictatorship of Tito they held together for the rest of his life before trouble spilled over again ten years after his death.

Western Europe is not Yugoslavia! We're all in bed together for the time being, whatever the outcome of the vote.

A bit like Iraq, libya and persia (Iran for you young pups) were far less trouble when they had a strong man in charge

 

[Muck Spreader]

Yeah
Right
It's just one great big den of corruption

But you can level that accusation at any organisation or government. But the alternatives are far less palatable.

 

[Brisel]

A bit like Iraq, libya and persia (Iran for you young pups) were far less trouble when they had a strong man in charge

A benevolent dictator is the most efficient method of getting the job done IMO. No endless debate & bureaucracy, just a yes/no answer! Sometimes that has meant getting rid of your opposition by making them disappear but mostly it has led to a period of stability on the country's history.

 

[Muck Spreader]

A bit like Iraq, libya and persia (Iran for you young pups) were far less trouble when they had a strong man in charge

I hope you aren't recommending this solution for the the EU

 

[Pond digger]

But you can level that accusation at any organisation or government. But the alternatives are far less palatable.

To be fair, there is something sadly amiss if the accounts never get signed off: how are we supposed to have faith?

 

[Muck Spreader]

A benevolent dictator is the most efficient method of getting the job done IMO. No endless debate & bureaucracy, just a yes/no answer! Sometimes that has meant getting rid of your opposition by making them disappear but mostly it has led to a period of stability on the country's history.

I do agree, but it's a tad difficult telling countries they are not civilised enough yet to benefit from democracy. We probably shouldn't meddle with their politics in the first place.

 

[Andrew K]

I,m for out.

 

[rob1]

I hope you aren't recommending this solution for the the EU

Dont worry I will be kind to you when I'm in charge
Seriously the civil wars could erupt in Europe in the future if the economy doesnt improve in some of the poor areas or the rise of extremists carries on

 

[Muck Spreader]

To be fair, there is something sadly amiss if the accounts never get signed off: how are we supposed to have faith?

It's just a myth trotted out by the papers ever year.

 

[Chrisw]

It makes me laugh when folk constantly come up with all these rules and regulations that the EU have specifically dreamt up by Johnny Foreigner undermine the UK. The UK is one of major players in dreaming these regulations up, we have thousands of MEP's , civil servants, NGO members, lobby groups all based in Brussels actively participating in this, and making sure the UK's interests are upheld. If I pity anyone, it's all the small countries that often have very limited influence but were the consequences of these rule changes can often have devastating impacts.

Just like the recent dictat banning anglers from catching bass? It wasn't discussed or voted on by meps but brought in by the unelected commission as a regulation. Who does it effect? Millions of UK recreational anglers, it certainly doesn't effect the French and Spanish boats who can catch up to 1.3t/month!!

 

[RobFZS]

So if we leave the eu the emissions regs are going to go are they,I doubt it?. The Products the usa send here have to comply with the rules the same as we do but they have no say in their making.

We have no say in anything, but kindly ignore all the other issues.

Even Christopher Booker said that the Vacuum cleaner story was nonsense

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ight-and-its-not-banning-vacuum-cleaners.html

'In fact, there is no “ban” on powerful vacuums, kettles, hair dryers or anything else. What Brussels is doing, under its Ecodesign Directive 2009/125, is to encourage manufacturers to develop appliances that require less electricity to produce a much more efficient performance'.

As regards the costs or otherwise of EU legislation (and many other things) this is worth a read

http://www.global-counsel.co.uk/sys...Global_Counsel_Impact_of_Brexit_June_2015.pdf

"The UK has championed the single market, but outside the EU would no longer be an effective advocate of further liberalisation. UK critics often complain about EU regulatory excesses, but many regulations are intended to create the level playing field the single market requires. A paradox of UK euroscepticism is that following Brexit the UK would lose influence over EU regulation without gaining much freedom to regulate independently.

One estimate suggests national regulation is 2.5 times more cost effective than EU regulation. EU processes are criticised for being opaque and hard to influence, particularly for SMEs. However, under most Brexit scenarios the UK must choose between adopting EU rules or being excluded from the single market. Neither the Norwegian nor Swiss models avoid this dilemma. Common regulations are necessary for the single market in goods and services, which is a UK priority. An FTA scenario is only marginally different. This would give the UK more flexibility to choose whether to adopt EU regulation, but as TTIP shows the biggest prize for modern FTAs is regulatory convergence.

The public debate in the UK often fails to recognise the benefits from EU regulation. The 100 most expensive regulations cost the UK economy £27.4bn each year, whereas the benefits total £57.1bn, according to UK government impact assessments. Some individual regulations appear particularly costly, such as the Agency Workers Directive, which has a net cost of over £500m each year. The figures are contestable as the benefits are hard to estimate and some of the costs are due to gold-plating of standards by the UK.

The OECD regards the UK as the second least regulated product market after the Netherlands. Labour market regulation is comparable with the US, Canada and Australia and is much lower than other EU countries. This suggests there is no conflict between EU regulations and a highly-liberal market economy. Moreover, the OECD observes that one of the most heavily regulated areas in the UK - and one of the most damaging for productivity - is the system for obtaining planning permission, which has nothing to do with the EU."

They're not encouraging anything, the actual legilsation, is right here http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32013R0666, there doesn't seem to be any encouragement about it, you either do it or you cannot sell the thing.

We will still have to have the regulation in place to sell in to the eu, but those who don't won't, what have driving tests and smart motorways got to do with trading in the EU ? sweet fa, it's just another thing we let slip

 

[Chrisw]

It's just a myth trotted out by the papers ever year.

If that was the case I am sure the EU would jump at the chance to sue the papers for libel, but they haven't.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/11209248/EU-auditors-refuse-to-sign-off-more-than-100billion-of-its-own-spending.html

 

[Muck Spreader]

Dont worry I will be kind to you when I'm in charge
Seriously the civil wars could erupt in Europe in the future if the economy doesnt improve in some of the poor areas or the rise of extremists carries on

I hope this in the form of a sizeable backhander

I presume that's were the extra money from the wealthier states goes. It's a matter of controlling how much ends up in the local Mafia and gangster a/c's rather than projects that benefit the communities.

 

[Muck Spreader]

If that was the case I am sure the EU would jump at the chance to sue the papers for libel, but they haven't.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/11209248/EU-auditors-refuse-to-sign-off-more-than-100billion-of-its-own-spending.html

Well there is the 2013 audit no problems.
http://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/AB_2013/AB_2013_EN.pdf

 

[Muck Spreader]

If that was the case I am sure the EU would jump at the chance to sue the papers for libel, but they haven't.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/11209248/EU-auditors-refuse-to-sign-off-more-than-100billion-of-its-own-spending.html

I don't think governments often bother suing or they genuinely would never get any work done.

 

[its yourself]

A benevolent dictator is the most efficient method of getting the job done IMO. No endless debate & bureaucracy, just a yes/no answer! Sometimes that has meant getting rid of your opposition by making them disappear but mostly it has led to a period of stability on the country's history.

My first action as benevolent dictator will be to have you shot.


+Lots of authoritarians just like you will cheer on the firing squad.

 

[exmoor dave]

Just like the recent dictat banning anglers from catching bass? It wasn't discussed or voted on by meps but brought in by the unelected commission as a regulation. Who does it effect? Millions of UK recreational anglers, it certainly doesn't effect the French and Spanish boats who can catch up to 1.3t/month!!

Total ban on bass?
Or restrictions?

What if you catch one by mistake?

Not that it's a worry round here.......We are professional dogfish catchers.......we're so good at it, that's all we catch........any bait.....any season

 

[Chrisw]

Total ban on bass?
Or restrictions?

What if you catch one by mistake?

Not that it's a worry round here.......We are professional dogfish catchers.......we're so good at it, that's all we catch........any bait.....any season

Ban on landing until June, then 1 bass per person/day