apelike Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 They need us less than you think they do. Taking Renault as an example they need to sell 75,000 vehicles a year in the UK to be able to run a viable operation here. If they cant hit that they'll probably just walk away. Just like that. Other businesses will make similar decisions. Again. Brutal truths. According to the news the French government’s increased control of Renault could see it attempt to switch jobs and investment in Nissan from the UK to France. Moving production may already be on the cards despite the referendum. What sovereign powers have we ceded? The right of HMG to set our own VAT percentage on goods or zero rate some is one. Having HMG abide by the HRA where the British courts are bound by the European courts is another. Subsidising business such as a steel plant is another. I'm sure there are other examples as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 What sovereign powers have we ceded? We can make our own immigration policy now, and we do. It's the policy that tops up our net immigration by around 150,000 a year with non-EU migrants. The EU doesn't force us to let all of those non-EU migrants in We have ceded power to the EU who are now responsible for making non-trade related laws, which are imposed on us. We have also ceded supremacy of our own Supreme Court, which is now subordinate to the European Court. We do not have the power to make our own immigration policy. The EU dictates that we have open borders with other EU states and tells us their citizens are entitled to exactly the same benefits as UK nationals. We are also obliged to adhere to the Common European Asylum System, which dictates policy on dealing with refugees and asylum applications. Why does a trade body need such power over the sovereign member states? It doesn't It wants them, however, because it isn't content with being just a trade body and is seeking to rule Europe as a Federal power. Britain will no longer having the right to self-determination and it is completely unacceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 We have ceded power to the EU who are now responsible for making non-trade related laws, which are imposed on us. We have also ceded supremacy of our own Supreme Court, which is now subordinate to the European Court. We do not have the power to make our own immigration policy. The EU dictates that we have open borders with other EU states and tells us their citizens are entitled to exactly the same benefits as UK nationals. We are also obliged to adhere to the Common European Asylum System, which dictates policy on dealing with refugees and asylum applications. Why does a trade body need such power over the sovereign member states? It doesn't It wants them, however, because it isn't content with being just a trade body and is seeking to rule Europe as a Federal power. Britain will no longer having the right to self-determination and it is completely unacceptable. Of course we can make our own immigration policy, principally around non-EU immigration. https://fullfact.org/immigration/uk-migration-policy-2010-general-election/ What we can't do is restrict migration from the EEA but if we leave the EU and use either the Swiss or Norwegian models we still wouldn't be able to do so. The only way round that is to leave the single market altogether and rely on WTO rules. Even then there is no guarantee there would be no clauses around movement of people, and you would have to consider the possible curtailing of the freedom of UK citizens to live and work in EU countries. As for why a trade body needs to make provision for movement of labour, well that should be obvious. Supremacy of EU law that is an over-egged pudding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutty27 Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 Of course we can make our own immigration policy, principally around non-EU immigration. Its a bit pointless though if we can't control all immigration. ---------- Post added 05-03-2016 at 17:13 ---------- As for why a trade body needs to make provision for movement of labour, well that should be obvious. Be nice if you enlightened use instead of shirking the question by saying its obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASGOWOODS Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 Well the good news is that Cameron strengthened the agreement, meaning that the UK has a specific exclusion from 'ever closer union' that will be written into a future treaty. So we have moved further on from the 2014 European Council wording. I wouldn't trust a word the comes out of Camerons gob. ---------- Post added 05-03-2016 at 21:18 ---------- They need us less than you think they do. Taking Renault as an example they need to sell 75,000 vehicles a year in the UK to be able to run a viable operation here. If they cant hit that they'll probably just walk away. Just like that. Other businesses will make similar decisions. Again. Brutal truths. ---------- Post added 05-03-2016 at 15:51 ---------- What sovereign powers have we ceded? We can make our own immigration policy now, and we do. It's the policy that tops up our net immigration by around 150,000 a year with non-EU migrants. The EU doesn't force us to let all of those non-EU migrants in You keep harping on about this (my bold), but companies have been leaving the UK for years and setting up in Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeFrank Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 Interestingly having watched BBC Parliament last night and the committee investigating the economic impacts of a leave vote....one of the British EU Commissioners, Lord Hall I think was his name admitted, under pressure, that even if we vote to leave he'll carry on in his job for 2 years. He was pushed further and admitted that he is obliged to do what's best for the EU and not the UK when renegotiating trade arrangements.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kdv1 Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 Has not the EU set up a European Court to which the supreme courts of the sovereign nation member states are subordinate? Doesn't the EU dictate immigration policy to sovereign nation member states also? Are such powers over the sovereign member states actually necessary for the EU to function as a trade body? Is it no the case that the EU has exceeded the original mandate of a trade body and is now accumulating the powers necessary to run a federal European super-state? Which bit do you feel need to be qualified as an opinion and why? Yes but didn't the uk agree to all this? If it is such an issue why did the uk not use its veto...? ---------- Post added 06-03-2016 at 00:01 ---------- We import more than we export and the countries that want to sell to us will not want to stop selling to us, therefore they will buy in order to sell. That the uk imports more is a reflection of less manufacturing in the uk. So it all depends. If the uk is the only market for a product yes maybe, otherwise not necessarily. It all depends on the bottom line, how essential uk sales are.... ---------- Post added 06-03-2016 at 00:08 ---------- We have ceded power to the EU who are now responsible for making non-trade related laws, which are imposed on us. We have also ceded supremacy of our own Supreme Court, which is now subordinate to the European Court. We do not have the power to make our own immigration policy. The EU dictates that we have open borders with other EU states and tells us their citizens are entitled to exactly the same benefits as UK nationals. We are also obliged to adhere to the Common European Asylum System, which dictates policy on dealing with refugees and asylum applications. Why does a trade body need such power over the sovereign member states? It doesn't It wants them, however, because it isn't content with being just a trade body and is seeking to rule Europe as a Federal power. Britain will no longer having the right to self-determination and it is completely unacceptable. Yes, but again the uk agreed to this as member of the Eu. It appears that the problem here is not the EU but the UK government not following the will of UK citizens? So is the way UK governments are elected to blame, or is it that not many people bother to vote but like to complain, or... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quik Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 Of course we can make our own immigration policy, principally around non-EU immigration. https://fullfact.org/immigration/uk-migration-policy-2010-general-election/ What we can't do is restrict migration from the EEA but if we leave the EU and use either the Swiss or Norwegian models we still wouldn't be able to do so. The only way round that is to leave the single market altogether and rely on WTO rules. Even then there is no guarantee there would be no clauses around movement of people, and you would have to consider the possible curtailing of the freedom of UK citizens to live and work in EU countries. As for why a trade body needs to make provision for movement of labour, well that should be obvious. Supremacy of EU law that is an over-egged pudding. NAFTA seems to manage just fine without allowing unrestricted movements of people. It's nonsense that fta's need free movement of labour, it was a non destructive idea when a group of economically similar countries that were the EEC did it, it's now unsustainable and it will be stopped. Not only have 550m people got unlimmitted rights to come here including huge numbers who are dirt poor and romas, we are also exposed to unlimited third worlders who any of 27 nations choose to give citzenship to. See the 1/4 of a million plus 'dutch' somalians alone we have been lumped with if you think this secondary invaision threat is just scaremongering. If we want a Britain we will even vaguely recognise in 10 years we must leave now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutty27 Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 That the uk imports more is a reflection of less manufacturing in the uk. So it all depends. If the uk is the only market for a product yes maybe, otherwise not necessarily. It all depends on the bottom line, how essential uk sales are.... One of the reasons our manufacturing base fell was cheap imports, if no one want to import into the UK after we leave the EU the result will be growth in our own manufacturing base. It won't happen though because we ill continue to import and export all over the world. Business like to make money and trading in the UK makes them lots of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 NAFTA seems to manage just fine without allowing unrestricted movements of people. It's nonsense that fta's need free movement of labour, it was a non destructive idea when a group of economically similar countries that were the EEC did it, it's now unsustainable and it will be stopped. Not only have 550m people got unlimmitted rights to come here including huge numbers who are dirt poor and romas, we are also exposed to unlimited third worlders who any of 27 nations choose to give citzenship to. See the 1/4 of a million plus 'dutch' somalians alone we have been lumped with if you think this secondary invaision threat is just scaremongering. If we want a Britain we will even vaguely recognise in 10 years we must leave now. NAFTA makes provision for movement of people. Not as freely as the EEA but certainly for economic reasons people can move pretty freely, and even gain permanent residence in other NAFTA countries. Immigration is something that needs to be debated as it is one of the biggest issues driving the Brexit agenda. The problem is that the Brexit side of the debate is not being honest about the alternative on offer. The problem is we need a certain level of immigration so where are the economic migrants we need going to come from? There is a strong tendency for British people to emigrate and many of them move to other EU countries, so will that be possible in the future for work and retirement? What about the Brits who have already emigrated and their access to healthcare, benefits and pensions? What will happen to them? It isn't just about objecting to certain types of people coming here. The whole thing needs to be thought through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts