Consequences of Brexit [part 7] Read first post before posting

[Top Cats Hat 10]

6 minutes ago, woodview said:

Full-on EU membership with no notice of the concerns of the majority who voted Leave. It's the opposite of a hard brexit or no-deal brexit.

Nobody is proposing that.

 

[bendix 10]

33 minutes ago, woodview said:

Can you explain the detail of this opting out of whatever we want please. And how we cherry pick what we want. That sounds interesting.

The UK currently has the ability to opt out of key policy decisions in four areas, including the EU, Schengen, Charter of fundamental rights of EU etc, all of which have been negotiated at various stages of our life in the EU, such as when Maastricht was negotiated, Lisbon etc.     More can and would be negotiated as and when signfiicant policy issues such as the EU army are developed.

The EU also provides another mechanism whereby member countries can opt out of policy decisions which have huge domestic opposition - it's called a legal guarantee.

 

The UK currently has opt out clauses in more areas than any other EU country.

 

 

 

Just now, Top Cats Hat said:

Nobody is proposing that.

 

On the contrary.  I suspect most Remain voters would welcome some kind of Remain and Reform option, including more focus on opt outs.

[woodview 10]

1 minute ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Nobody is proposing that.

 

What are you proposing then?

[Top Cats Hat 10]

2 minutes ago, woodview said:

That's right. Uncle EU will always look after us and only do good things. Until Le Pen, or the Italian, Greek and Bulgarian right wing nutters start having a say, then things won't look so bright. I don't want them influencing what happens here.

The paranoia among leavers is very strong, 😱

[bendix 10]

3 minutes ago, Gormenghast said:

Except they are moving towards restricting restricting the ability to opt out. Read their latest statements. 

Not true.  They did almost the exact opposite, with MEPs ruling that different types of membership and EU a la carte was entirely compatible with the principles of integration.

 

As for permanently ending opt-outs.  What they are doing is rebalancing it, by encouraging a an approach of flexible opting in, which suggests rules won't be dictated to all countries forcing them to opt-out, but instead countries will decide to opt in.  It's a completely different zeitgeist to what you are suggesting.

 

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20190109IPR23023/eu-integration-meps-want-to-end-permanent-opt-outs-from-eu-law

[woodview 10]

4 minutes ago, bendix said:

The UK currently has the ability to opt out of key policy decisions in four areas, including the EU, Schengen, Charter of fundamental rights of EU etc, all of which have been negotiated at various stages of our life in the EU, such as when Maastricht was negotiated, Lisbon etc.     More can and would be negotiated as and when signfiicant policy issues such as the EU army are developed.

The EU also provides another mechanism whereby member countries can opt out of policy decisions which have huge domestic opposition - it's called a legal guarantee.

 

The UK currently has opt out clauses in more areas than any other EU country.

 

 

 

On the contrary.  I suspect most Remain voters would welcome some kind of Remain and Reform option, including more focus on opt outs.

Yes, we opted out of shengen the € and justice/ home affairs. But stating we have a cherry picking type arrangement isn't a true reflection of the situation, and to someone who didn't actually know, they could read your original statement as we just pick and choose the bits we like.

3 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

The paranoia among leavers is very strong, 😱

So, don't you think the rise of the right in continental europe is a problem?

[bendix 10]

1 minute ago, woodview said:

Yes, we opted out of shengen the € and justice/ home affairs. But stating we have a cherry picking type arrangement isn't a true reflection of the situation, and to someone who didn't actually know, they could read your original statement as we just pick and choose the bits we like.

We can, to a large degree and we will be able to more and more if you read the link I just posted.

 

let me ask you instead woodview.  What piece of EU legislation can you name that materially impacts your day to day life?   Name one.

 

 

Edited March 27, 2019 by bendix

[Gormenghast 59]

3 minutes ago, bendix said:

Not true.  They did almost the exact opposite, with MEPs ruling that different types of membership and EU a la carte was entirely compatible with the principles of integration.

 

As for permanently ending opt-outs.  What they are doing is rebalancing it, by encouraging a an approach of flexible opting in, which suggests rules won't be dictated to all countries forcing them to opt-out, but instead countries will decide to opt in.  It's a completely different zeitgeist to what you are suggesting.

 

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20190109IPR23023/eu-integration-meps-want-to-end-permanent-opt-outs-from-eu-law

That was a non legislative resolution.

[woodview 10]

3 minutes ago, bendix said:

Not true.  They did almost the exact opposite, with MEPs ruling that different types of membership and EU a la carte was entirely compatible with the principles of integration.

 

As for permanently ending opt-outs.  What they are doing is rebalancing it, by encouraging a an approach of flexible opting in, which suggests rules won't be dictated to all countries forcing them to opt-out, but instead countries will decide to opt in.  It's a completely different zeitgeist to what you are suggesting.

 

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20190109IPR23023/eu-integration-meps-want-to-end-permanent-opt-outs-from-eu-law

That's a proposal isn't it, not the actual situation. Plus, it does say:

Any kind of differentiated integration agreed by member states should only be seen as a pragmatic, ‘second-best option’ open to all member states and a temporary step on the path towards more effective and integrated policymaking in a ‘limited number of policies’

[bendix 10]

1 minute ago, Gormenghast said:

That was a non legislative resolution.

Steady on.  You were the one saying read their statements.  Provide some yourself which back up your proposition.

1 minute ago, woodview said:

That's a proposal isn't it, not the actual situation. Plus, it does say:

Any kind of differentiated integration agreed by member states should only be seen as a pragmatic, ‘second-best option’ open to all member states and a temporary step on the path towards more effective and integrated policymaking in a ‘limited number of policies’

Sure it's a proposal, but it's a reflection of MEP's thinking.

 

Either way, it demonstrates clearly that the thinking that universal taxes or EU army being imposed on the UK is simply not likely to happen.  We always have been able to negotiate our own terms on the huge issues.

 

[RJRB 688]

6 minutes ago, woodview said:

Yes, we opted out of shengen the € and justice/ home affairs. But stating we have a cherry picking type arrangement isn't a true reflection of the situation, and to someone who didn't actually know, they could read your original statement as we just pick and choose the bits we like.

So, don't you think the rise of the right in continental europe is a problem?

I think the rise of the right is a constant threat in many parts of the world including mainland Europe and the U.K.

It is typified by nationalism and racism so why be led by the distorted views of our  own right wing extremists and closet racists?

Over the last 45 years we have dismantled so many barriers to create harmonious relations between countries.

Now there are those who wish to build the walls again.

This is not progress.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

15 minutes ago, woodview said:

So, don't you think the rise of the right in continental europe is a problem?

It is a problem and the Brexit project is part of that rise.

 

That is why a strong united Europe is more important than ever.