European Election Results

[glasshouse]

I hope this is irony..... i mean i really hope this is irony.....

Which bit?

 

[Yacker]

Subsidies = evictions

 

[glasshouse]

Subsidies = evictions

Lots of farmers have lost tenancies since lunatic area payments were introduced.
Farm managers have also lost out, workers too.
Area payments linked up to contract farming make farming risk free, hence a perfect investment tax avoidance model for the very rich
I can drive a long way before i find a farmer still working his own land, rented or owned

 

[Yacker]

Ok so what you meant to say was
"subsides = not renewal of tenancy"

Eviction indicates failure to pay rent.

However i agree with what you say and i have always said farming needs to function like any other business and that includes the inheritance tax situation.

 

[glasshouse]

Ok so what you meant to say was
"subsides = not renewal of tenancy"

Eviction indicates failure to pay rent.

However i agree with what you say and i have always said farming needs to function like any other business and that includes the inheritance tax situation.

Non renewal or eviction, it comes to the same thing
Non renewal of a lease when the tenant wants to renew is an eviction.
The CAP does not fit the uk landholding system

 

[yin ewe]

Non renewal or eviction, it comes to the same thing
Non renewal of a lease when the tenant wants to renew is an eviction.
The CAP does not fit the uk landholding system

I've always said that the sub ends up with the landowner one way or another. Same here in NI, lots of rented land here, most of which is let on a yearly basis so the landlord can give it to someone else next year if he gets another tenner for it. Removal of sub would certainly level the playing field but it could be squeaky bum time for a few years until it sorted itself out.
Sorry it's a bit off topic.

 

[Yacker]

Very on topic...

 

[yin ewe]

Very on topic...

I think the European Election Results were sidelined quite a few pages ago.

 

[Old McDonald]

As you often suggest to other posters - I suggest you find out a little more.

In normal circumstances to a poster who professes some ignorance about the matters I would give links, but your attitude towards those who voted Leave and still want to do so leads me to ask you to do your own research.

Begin at the beginning. The opening statement of the Founding Treaty of Rome tells all - see I am prepared to help your research. After you have read it all, or failed to find the relevant information, come back (not within at least 48 hours and several hours of your time in researching) and tell me what you cannot find, or what you can find to support your statements.

Bump.

You have had a lot more than 48 hours.

I will give you some more help. Try reading the Lisbon Treaty.

After that, tell me you still believe what you posted.

 

[Highland Mule]

Bump.

You have had a lot more than 48 hours.

I will give you some more help. Try reading the Lisbon Treaty.

After that, tell me you still believe what you posted.

Sorry sir, but I've been chasing pneumonia in my lambs and holding down a day job and haven't got time for your games. The Lisbon Treaty is what, twelve years old now, and has been in place for ten. If it was genuinely driving us that way, we would be there by now.

 

[Old McDonald]

Sorry sir, but I've been chasing pneumonia in my lambs and holding down a day job and haven't got time for your games. The Lisbon Treaty is what, twelve years old now, and has been in place for ten. If it was genuinely driving us that way, we would be there by now.

You are forgiven for not replying before now. That does not excuse your second and third sentences. Especially since you gave an immediate response.

I am not playing games. You are very vehement about this subject in all your posts. It is an extremely long slow process because those who wield power in such important things are well aware that it is necessary to convince the "peoples of Europe" that a single state is the desired outcome. They were nearly there a few years ago, but a few people who were equally slow to rise to a bait took the time to plan their opposition to the inexorable decree from way back in 1957.

If you are happy with the idea that you are to be forever more, and your descendants too, a citizen of the EU, and your younger descendants can be called upon to fight as part of the EU armed forces, then that is your choice. I only ask that you admit that that is the situation according to the EU Treaties which have been signed or accepted by all current EU member states, and that your posts which I quoted are incorrect. Otherwise, my challenge to you stands - you cannot support the posts I originally quoted.

 

[Highland Mule]

We've opted out of the permanent structured cooperation, as is our right. Any change to the european defence policy requires unanimous agreement of all members, so the UK has an absolute veto under the Lisbon treaty to the formation of an EU army. The likelihood that my descendants (population zero, thanks for assuming) be conscripted into something EU wide is exactly the same as into something UK wide as both would require changes to national law.

And given your first posting pointed me toward the Treaty of Rome (largely historic, and I'm not that familiar with), where your problem is clearly with Lisbon (which I have studied recently, hence the faster response), I think that's playing games.

Just to add, UK law requires that a common EU defence force would require both an act of parliament and a referendum. Section 6(2) of the European Union Act refers.