What if the will of the people is now for a second referendum on Brexit?

[Jimgward]

Despite the fact you ignored my argument about Belgium .... as you are want to do .... ignore what you can't argue against, I thought I'd pander to oh, see below.....

I did qualify in my original post that it wasn't just laws, but rules, regulations, directives etc.

How about the fact that our Supreme Court is not Supreme? The fact that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) is now Supreme?
and this is bad? I think there should Lways be a non specific country opportunity for justice. Look at Poland. If the UK is overused by the EU I'd be shocked if they were regarded by majority as wrong. I certainly don't trust the UK. Our justice system is sadly wanting.
What about the fact that we MUST levy VAT (with a minimum rate of 15%) on energy bills?
it is necessary where there is free movement to have close equality of retail prices with fair taxes. When you are in a consortia then you have to abide by fair rules. It saves disadvantages to some.
What about the free movement of people from the EU to travel in the UK?
fantastic. Otherwise our NHS, as one example, would collapse.
What about the fact that our fishing grounds may currently be used by any EU country?
yes, we lost out. Scotland more than any. Just like Scotland did on oil and gas. The disadvantage of being part of a union.
What about the Working Time Directive?
again. What's the problem? Fantastic way to stop exploitation by employers.
What about allowing welfare payments to anyone EU citizen resident in the UK - even Child Benefit which in many cases is actually being sent to where the children actually reside - in other EU countries?
I answered that re Belgium. You don't want answers that contradict
The list is endless...

so are the benefits. Why do you live in the EU then?

Go back to Blighty and join the disenfranchised, always grumpy, constant complainers at what life has dealt.

[Royal]

If this is the extend of your response, Jimgward - stick to the smileys. They are far more intelligent.

[Poppy]

Well I feel I must rectify the errors in some posts. Royal we don't pay 15% vat on utilities here in the UK but 5% can't remember what we paid in Cyprus.
Jimgward ,I have to take issue with you re the "disenchanted,always grumpy,constant complainers at what life has dealt" remark. Not so at all in fact the grumpy complainers seem to be those living in Cyprus judging by this forum!!

[Jim B]

I know I signed an opt -out of the Work Time Directive as we often work long hours in our industry; it was as Jim Ward stated to protect people who were forced to work long hours without recourse.
There are now about 11,000 people who work in the UK fishing industry (who will still have their jobs; Brexit or no Brexit) of which most of the catch is exported to Europe whereas in the Financial Sector there is approximately 480,000 workers of which many look certain to lose their jobs without the single market; not good maths.
I did check up on Electricity VAT and as was said 15% was the figure set by the EU but the government is charging 20% so it's not really an argument that holds water. I'm not disputing what you're quoting Poppy, there may be different deals available.
The Judges disagree about who has supremacy; they say it's the Supreme Court and I would be more inclined to believe the Judges who administer the law rather than any news sources. Everything I wrote is available on line if you look for it.

Jim

[Jimgward]

If this is the extend of your response, Jimgward - stick to the smileys. They are far more intelligent.

Yeah... I will in future.... since you disregard counter-arguments .... I thought I’d be wasting my time and I was - with you - maybe others will benefit from both sides of an argument....

[Varky]

If this is the extend of your response, Jimgward - stick to the smileys. They are far more intelligent.

Really, is this the extent of your counter argument? You do yourself no favours with such a response. Whilst I might agree with some of your postings this was uncalled for.

[Royal]

...you disregard counter-arguments .... I thought I’d be wasting my time and I was - with you - maybe others will benefit from both sides of an argument....

Disregarding what counter-arguments? Benefiting from both sides of what argument?

Let's just recap on a couple of things.

HIC stated that “nothing will change following Brexit; the UK is enshrining all current EU laws into the British constitution.” In response, I said that on 19 Mar 2019 as we exit the EU and cease to be subject to its rules, regulations and of course laws, we need something in place that ensures continuity whilst unpicking nearly 50 years worth” of such things - hence the Great Repeal Bill.

You asked me for examples of such laws and out of a list of 12,000 EU Regulations, 7,900 statutory instruments implementing EU legislation and 186 acts which incorporate a degree of EU influence I gave just a few examples (note: examples, as requested - not arguments for or against as you deem them to be). By trying to justify each one in turn, you clearly expected me to defend each one in turn. THATS NOT THE ISSUE HERE - it's a rabbit hole which I am not prepared to go down - especially as there are potentially so many of them. The simple fact is, that we cannot, after exiting the EU, have a period of legal vacuum where nothing applies because we have simply walked away from the EU and their legislation no longer applies to us. The Great Repeal Bill will allow either Parliament or the Government to decide for each of these laws whether to keep, amend or repeal in the fullness of time. If, as you state, the Working Time Directive (WTD) is a good law - then it will be kept. If not, it will be amended to suit the UK or repealed. It's really that simple. Whether you agree with it or not, whether I agree with it or not is neither here nor there. It, along with thousands of other laws will be scrutinised by our elected MPs and taking into account the specific needs of the country with input from business, unions and any other interested parties.

[geoffreys]

...you disregard counter-arguments .... I thought I’d be wasting my time and I was - with you - maybe others will benefit from both sides of an argument....

Disregarding what counter-arguments? Benefiting from both sides of what argument?

Let's just recap on a couple of things.

HIC stated that “nothing will change following Brexit; the UK is enshrining all current EU laws into the British constitution.” In response, I said that on 19 Mar 2019 as we exit the EU and cease to be subject to its rules, regulations and of course laws, we need something in place that ensures continuity whilst unpicking nearly 50 years worth” of such things - hence the Great Repeal Bill.

You asked me for examples of such laws and out of a list of 12,000 EU Regulations, 7,900 statutory instruments implementing EU legislation and 186 acts which incorporate a degree of EU influence I gave just a few examples (note: examples, as requested - not arguments for or against as you deem them to be). By trying to justify each one in turn, you clearly expected me to defend each one in turn. THATS NOT THE ISSUE HERE - it's a rabbit hole which I am not prepared to go down - especially as there are potentially so many of them. The simple fact is, that we cannot, after exiting the EU, have a period of legal vacuum where nothing applies because we have simply walked away from the EU and their legislation no longer applies to us. The Great Repeal Bill will allow either Parliament or the Government to decide for each of these laws whether to keep, amend or repeal in the fullness of time. If, as you state, the Working Time Directive (WTD) is a good law - then it will be kept. If not, it will be amended to suit the UK or repealed. It's really that simple. Whether you agree with it or not, whether I agree with it or not is neither here nor there. It, along with thousands of other laws will be scrutinised by our elected MPs and taking into account the specific needs of the country with input from business, unions and any other interested parties.

Excellent post Royal, but I fear it will fall on many deaf ears on this forum.
There are none so deaf as those who don't want to hear!
Geoff.

[Royal]

Apparently not, nothing it seems will change until after Brexit, the laws/rules that exist on the 18th March will be the same on 20th March. It will be later that rules, laws, regulations etc. will change.
Jackie

Correct, Jackie.

The Repeal Bill as such will not take EU laws verbatim, although that will be a starting point on its passage through parliament. As I see it the government will propose changes to EU existing laws and incorporate those changes into UK law so that on the day after we leave the EU the Repeal Bill will become law...As I see it this law will become applicable immediately after Brexit and any changes in the law, etc. will have already been passed by parliament. No further changes will take place thereafter unless through the normal parliamentary process, but outside the Repeal Bill.

No Varky.

The Great Repeal Bill is designed to ensure that all current laws, directives and regulations which pertain to membership of the EU will be copied over into UK law in order to allow the sovereign UK Parliament to decide which to keep, amend or repeal individually. The Great Repeal Bill will be effective on the day after we exit the EU (whenever that may be). Until that day, all EU legislation applies to us as EU members.

[Poppy]

Sorry Jim B but you are wrong re VAT on utilities. I have no special deal. All domestic usage is charged at 5% in the Uk and this came into force I believe in 1997 some 20 years ago although I do believe that business utilities are charged the higher rate of VAT.

[Jim B]

Sorry Jim B but you are wrong re VAT on utilities. I have no special deal. All domestic usage is charged at 5% in the Uk and this came into force I believe in 1997 some 20 years ago although I do believe that business utilities are charged the higher rate of VAT.

You are correct re domestic users but business users pay 20% according to the attachment. My point was that VAT costs are not decided by the EU as was suggested.

Jim

https://powerni.co.uk/globalassets/busi ... t-2014.pdf

[Royal]

My point was that VAT costs are not decided by the EU as was suggested.

Jim

But minimum VAT rates ARE indeed decided by the EU, Jim.

From the BBC:

Reality Check verdict:

EU rules mean the UK cannot reduce VAT on goods and services below 15%, the standard rate of VAT in the EU. The standard rate of VAT in the UK is 20%, so the government could reduce it by up to 5% today if it wanted. Domestic fuel is on a special list of pre-approved goods and services that are subject to lower VAT rates and it would require the agreement of all other EU members to reduce it further.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu- ... m-36430504

[Varky]

Apparently not, nothing it seems will change until after Brexit, the laws/rules that exist on the 18th March will be the same on 20th March. It will be later that rules, laws, regulations etc. will change.
Jackie

Correct, Jackie.

The Repeal Bill as such will not take EU laws verbatim, although that will be a starting point on its passage through parliament. As I see it the government will propose changes to EU existing laws and incorporate those changes into UK law so that on the day after we leave the EU the Repeal Bill will become law...As I see it this law will become applicable immediately after Brexit and any changes in the law, etc. will have already been passed by parliament. No further changes will take place thereafter unless through the normal parliamentary process, but outside the Repeal Bill.

No Varky.

The Great Repeal Bill is designed to ensure that all current laws, directives and regulations which pertain to membership of the EU will be copied over into UK law in order to allow the sovereign UK Parliament to decide which to keep, amend or repeal individually. The Great Repeal Bill will be effective on the day after we exit the EU (whenever that may be). Until that day, all EU legislation applies to us as EU members.

If you read what Jackie says it refers to changes taking place after Brexit (18/03/19). That is not correct. Any changes to any EU laws will be made prior to that (in parliament or by executive order of te government) but come into effect on 19/03/19

[Royal]

Jackie is correct.

No change to the individual laws can, or indeed will take place before 18 Mar 19 (or later if an extension to the negotiations is agreed). As a current member of the EU we cannot just disregard or repeal their laws...and we remain an EU member until the day after Brexit.

The Great Repeal Bill, as I have already stated, is going through Parliament now in order to enshrine current EU laws en masse into UK law on the day it will come into effect (ie on the day after Brexit happens). After that date, individual laws will be looked at and either retained, repealed or amended as the Government/Parliament sees fit.

There are over 50 years worth of legislation to plough through. That is NOT going to happen in the next 18 months.

[Varky]

Jackie is correct.

No change to the individual laws can, or indeed will take place before 18 Mar 19 (or later if an extension to the negotiations is agreed). As a current member of the EU we cannot just disregard or repeal their laws...and we remain an EU member until the day after Brexit.

The Great Repeal Bill, as I have already stated, is going through Parliament now in order to enshrine current EU laws en masse into UK law on the day it will come into effect (ie on the day after Brexit happens). After that date, individual laws will be looked at and either retained, repealed or amended as the Government/Parliament sees fit.

There are over 50 years worth of legislation to plough through. That is NOT going to happen in the next 18 months.

No one is saying that the laws will be operative before 18/03/19 only that the Repeal Bill will, hopefully, have passed all its readings in parliament and be enacted on 19/03/19. I bow to your greater knowledge that it will not happen within the next 18 months but it appears that you do acknowledge that progress in some form will take place between now and then, which is what I have been saying all along. By the way, to be pedantic, it is not called the 'Great' Repeal Bill but only the Repeal Bill

[Royal]

By the way, to be pedantic, it is not called the 'Great' Repeal Bill but only the Repeal Bill

Varky,

To be equally pedantic, it is neither called the 'Great Repeal Bill', nor the 'Repeal Bill'. The former title has been used by the press and the latter by the BBC. A google search of either term will show you that the terms are interchangeable and refer to the same bill.

In reality, it is actually called the 'European Union (Withdrawal) Bill' and it may be viewed in its entirety here:

https://www.publications.parliament.uk/ ... /18005.pdf

[Royal]

...it appears that you do acknowledge that progress in some form will take place between now and then, which is what I have been saying all along.

Varky,

Yes, I freely acknowledge that some progress will need to take place between now and then - depending entirely, of course, on how the negotiations are going.

Amongst a whole host of other things will be our withdrawal from being bound by the rulings of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). This certainly needs to be effective from the date of actual Brexit in my opinion. I am amazed and appalled in equal measure that the EU negotiators seem to require us to retain the ECJ as the final arbiters of the future status of EU nationals in the UK. No doubt they expect this to apply to the children, grandchildren and all progeny of EU citizen's in the UK forever...

[Firefly]

Lloyd

Brexit was all about taking back control of our country from Europe, trade was only one factor amongst many more. We were heartily sick of being told by Europe what we can and can't do in Britain. For a lot of people it was about controlling immigration, no one understood the strength of feeling in Britain, and certainly Cameron was totally out of touch with the people. The younger generation never knew Britain before we joined the E.U. so naturally some were apprehensive about change, but we who do remember those days couldn't wait to rid ourselves of Merkel and her minions. We are not looking at the past with rose tinted spectacles, we know things will be difficult at first, but at last it will be our country once again.

You and many more might not like it, but it will happen, thank God.

Jackie

[Jimgward]

Being a child of the late 50’s, I grew up in relative poverty, in an area where few people had much..... like most of the UK at that time.

I think rose coloured specs are indeed worn by those who think life was better then. Workers were exploited, few took holidays, never mind abroad.

Generally, things would have changed in or out of the EU - we would have been better off as a nation - we will never know if worse or better off than now...

In my opinion, immigration is the reason many voted for brexit. It was getting out of control, but most have confused EU and worldwide immigration.

The getting control of other things I think is a red herring. We had control in the EU and will have control out of the EU - some things will be influenced by the EU both in and out.

We happened to apply rules stringently. That is the UK’s fault. Look at France. If they want to deport someone, they just do it and pay a menial fine afterwards. Similarly, the UK has stringent H&S regulations, much more than ANY other EU country.

We can’t blame all this on the EU. There are aspects of the EU that are terrible, like the waste, huge costs and long policy- making processes. That needs to change.

On the other hand, would Britain, outside the EU, ever have fixed the ills of the country as it was, before we entered?

All I see now, is the gulf wide widening between the classes (I hate saying that, but they still exist)

The rich are becoming super-rich. London is becoming a behemoth of a city, soon unable to support itself and vastly out of sync with the rest of the country. Property is vastly overpriced. The rich are ‘property-banking’ and I can only see this getting worse.

With restrictions on immigration from educated EU sources, I cannot see companies being happy.

[Firefly]

Jim

You say that as a child of the late 50s you grew up relative poverty, in an area where few people had much, like most of the UK at that time.

I don't know what area you grew up in, but I was a child of the late 40s. I grew up in a City in the North of England. We didn't have a car, not many did, so my Dad walked to work, my Mum walked to town to shop, and I walked to school. We didn't have a TV, we had a radio. My Dad didn't smoke or drink, nor my Mother, except a couple of sherries at Christmas. We didn't have computers, mobile phones, calculators, except our brains. We didn't go on foreign holidays, we stayed in Britain.

So what did we have, my parents owned their own home, presumably because their money went on the household bills, food and clothing, you know, necessities. I played out all day with friends in fine weather, if wet, we played games inside. We were safe in our neighbourhood, where everyone knew each other, and everyone helped each other out when needed. My Mum never locked the door when she went to town shopping. At eleven I got my first bike, and spent hours riding out and about, a sandwich and a bottle of pop in the saddle bag. I went to Saturday Morning Pictures, Brownies, Guides, ballroom dancing classes, youth club. We weren't wealthy, but what a happy childhood I had, would I change it ? not for anything. My parents loved me, cared for me and brought me up, I think they did a good job.

If you didn't experience my sort of childhood, I'm sorry, but I think you were the exception, not the rule.

Jackie