Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

1. The EU carbon emission targets are no unachievable. 

 

2. Windfarms are not directed as an EU policies, they are a means of harvesting renewable energy that is efficient. Most of the coal burning power stations have been taken out of service and are now replaced by small combined cycle gas turbine driven generation units, these are taken in and out of service as demand arises/falls. Britain's use of fossil fuels is falling in direct replacement by renewables (of which wind is a significant part).

 

3. Bio energy is not mandated by EU energy policies. Yes bio fuel uses energy to produce and it takes land out of food production use. But a) Bio fuel provides more energy than is used in its production b.) The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates global food wastage at 13billion tons per year. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/02/no-time-leftovers-astonishing-scale-food-waste-uk-around-world/

 

4. My family background is farming. British farmers have been ploughing sewage into farmland for decades, if not for more than a century.

 

Here's some examples of the EU improving the environment:

 

*EU directives require Environmental Assessments for almost all development projects, housing, the signing of factories, industrial process, airports, roads etc. EU directives give 'concerned citizens' and 'concerned organisation' rights to be informed, consulted and a right to object to any development. EU directives place a duty on individual national governments to ensure the concerns of 'concerned citizens' and 'concerned organisations' are recorded and addressed. EU directives place a duty on individual governments to enshrine these rights in law and to provide 'concerned citizens' and 'concerned organisations' with a right to present their case before binding legal challenge in courts of law. 

These rights and duties are frequently used by local communities to protect their own environment.

 

*EU environmental directives place a duty on nation states within the union to conduct environmental impact analysis of projects within their own national boundary where the environmental impact may extend across their own national boundary. These directives place a duty on nation states to advise, consult, record and address concerns ... provide rights to legal challenges etc etc to any EU nation impacted by the project (in the same way as local communities are provided rights, nation states are provided rights), the EU commission and the EU courts arbitrate disputes where a project in an EU member nation impacts another EU member nation or any shared international spaces. 

These rights and duties are frequently used by EU nation states to protect their own environment (Hinkley B is an example of where this has been applied).

 

 

All inefficient and costly with minimal CO2 reduction.

 

I'd love to see the carbon footprint from all those EU parliament moves and unshared private jets. 

 

Blots on landscapes. Slag heaps in fields. What a beautiful environment.

 

[nauseus]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

As a member of the EU the UK participates in the promulgation of all EU laws and regulations. 

No EU law or regulation can be enacted in the UK without having been voted on and passed on in the UK's Parliament.

As a member of the EU the UK has an absolute sovereign veto on all EU law and regulations. 

 

The UK never gave up sovereignty when it joined the EU, though it is to be noted the Tory government has made multiple attempts to override the sovereignty of the UK parliament during the Brexit process and would have done so had not 'enemies of the people' forced the government into the high court and won their case that the UK Parliament holds the UK's sovereignty.

Back to the rhubarb patch with that lot. Must put some sewage on top.

[talahtnut]

47 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Back to the rhubarb patch with that lot. Must put some sewage on top.

Don't invite me to dinner.

[Airbagwill]

8 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

What are you (and your ilk) hoping to achieve with all this negativity about the UK? It certainly doesn't strengthen our negotiating position with the EU.

Serious question.

No negativity about the UK ....I (I don't have an ilk or any other stereotype) am concerned about the damage to the UK brought about by a few manipulative magnates who decided regardless of the rest of the nation, they'd personally be better off or more powerful if the UK left the EU.....they have brought about a catastrophe that is more disastrous than the loss of the American Colonies, debilitating than Dunkirk and more embarrassing than Suez.

Our "negotiating" position is brought about by the reality of UK's situation and the skills, or lack of them, of the leaders who think that Brexit is a viable proposition. The rest of the world is quite capable of seeing on their own the UK is on a hiding to nothing...they don't need me to tell them.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Airbagwill

[Airbagwill]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Back to the rhubarb patch with that lot. Must put some sewage on top.

Interesting that nowhere throughout the entire thread has a Brexiteer got beyond gainsaying to actually produce a coherent argument. See quote.... QED.

[Airbagwill]

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

All inefficient and costly with minimal CO2 reduction.

 

I'd love to see the carbon footprint from all those EU parliament moves and unshared private jets. 

 

Blots on landscapes. Slag heaps in fields. What a beautiful environment.

 

You do realise that due to the mega use of natural gas that EU has a tiny carbon footprint compared to other large economic blocs e. g. USA and China?

[Khun Han]

3 minutes ago, Airbagwill said:

Interesting that nowhere throughout the entire thread has a Brexiteer got beyond gainsaying to actually produce a coherent argument. See quote.... QED.

 

Didn't someone else use 'QED' a lot in these discussions? As I recall, Scott told us he was banned .

[Khun Han]

13 minutes ago, Airbagwill said:

No negativity about the UK ....I (I don't have an ilk or any other stereotype) am concerned about the damage to the UK brought about by a few manipulative magnates who decided regardless of the rest of the nation, they'd personally be better off or more powerful if the UK left the EU.....they have brought about a catastrophe that is more disastrous than the loss of the American Colonies, debilitating than Dunkirk and more embarrassing than Suez.

Our "negotiating" position is brought about by the reality of UK's situation and the skills, or lack of them, of the leaders who think that Brexit is a viable proposition. The rest of the world is quite capable of seeing on their own the UK is on a hiding to nothing...they don't need me to tell them.

Yes, absolutely.

 

[talahtnut]

34 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

Yes, absolutely.

Could be worse.

[aright]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Yes I read the article it is replete with half truths, by example:

EU laws in areas for which the EU is responsible override any conflicting laws of member countries. Well yes that is true, but the reason it is true is, the EU law only becomes effective in the UK once the UK Parliament has voted to accept it.

Then, like all new laws, it overrides conflicting laws that already exist. 

 

Can you give me an example of new legislation which is law in the EU but not the UK?

No because there aren't any. If the UK does not accept a proposed EU law then the UK uses its absolute sovereign veto of that law and it cannot be made an EU law effective anywhere. 

 

There is no EU law that has not been approved by vote of the UK parliament.

 

It's called "Rubber Stamping" and hides the fact the EU is not democratic

 

"It is replete with half truths."

 

fullfact.org is a respected registered charity who actively seek a diverse range of funding and are transparent about all their sources of income.

They don't take sides in any debate and don't support any political party or campaign. They have been quoted by politicians on all sides and corrected people on all sides. They have a cross-party Board of Trustees and safeguards in place at every level of their organisation to ensure their neutrality.

Think on!

[aright]

6 hours ago, Grouse said:

I'm afraid that's another issue that was widely misunderstood. Volkswagen broke no rules. They were smart and beat the Americans. If you know anything about how EMCs have enabled all the recent advances, you will understand that multiple inputs affect the outputs to the engine. These vehicles "knew" when they were 5up being gunned uphill on the highway and delivered accordingly. They also "knew" when they were not moving in a station 1up on the flat and a quick gun of accelerator. We engineers think that's great! Don't you? You're going to see way more of this

 

I see BMW are the latest to be probed

 

Thete won't be any American cars though; they generally don't have the technology.

 

The tests specified are crap. The engineering is terrific

I see, installing a defeat device which detected when the engines were being tested so performance was changed to improve results was a misunderstanding was it? As a result the engines were emitting nitrous oxide pollutants 40 times greater than allowed in the USA. But that's ok only 10 million cars were recalled as a result of this misunderstanding and we all know Germany's heart for some is in the right place for other's it's the same as a Thai Bar girl's

I don't know anything about EMC's but I do know the difference between a misunderstanding and cheating.

 

[simoh1490]

2 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

Interesting that nowhere throughout the entire thread has a Brexiteer got beyond gainsaying to actually produce a coherent argument. See quote.... QED.

Amen brother.

[George FmplesdaCosteedback]

20 hours ago, nauseus said:

What are you on about? Read my other posts.

I have not read 223 pages of posts, however I did read the last few posts you made.

If you would enlighten me on you viewpoint on this subject that explains why you do not understand my reply I will be happy to reply and set you straight.

 

[inThailand]

Isn't the real reason this thread is so popular is because of the s....exchange rate against the Baht?

[George FmplesdaCosteedback]

14 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oh right, so when the UK Conservative Party complain about 'Regulations on business from the EU' that's right wing regulations is it?

 

Are the EU regulations protecting the environment right wing regulations?

 

How about EU regulations on the banks (that the Tories are eager to get rid of) are those right wing regulations. 

 

Let's not forget EU laws on human rights, gosh more rightwing stuff.

 

EU laws on protecting personal privacy, sickening righwing EU thinking. 

 

EU courts forcing corporations to pay more tax - a sneaky rightwing plot.

 

The EU and that idea they have to enact the Common Consolidated Tax Base and in doing so close loop holes businesses use to dodge tax - More EU rightwing laws thankfully delayed by the objections of Britain's left wing Tory government. 

 

Away with you and your nonsense claims George.

And the bill to include All EU laws to the date of the end of the "Transitional Period" that parliament will vote on any they wish to change thereafter.

I think you miss the point.

Brexit is a cross party, individual decision which has supporters and  dissenters on all sides.

The majority voted to leave (by a bigger voter margin than in any general election in living memory).

The argument time is over. The UK will leave the EU.

The next general election in 2022 is the only option to make a change which will mean reapplying to join if a party with a manifesto that puts that top priority wins, or can make a ruling coalition in a hung vote.

 

The points you make are not valid unless I had made the comparison with the EU a semi-communist dictatorship. I could easily do that, just have a look at the EU's record of undemocratic appointments.

Start with Junker's protege last month.

The bail out of the banks was done by an unelected labour PM Gordon Brown don't forget.

You need to study this situation more carefully.

Edited April 6, 2018 by George FmplesdaCosteedback

[George FmplesdaCosteedback]

20 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

Only a Brexiteer could use such impressive and nebulous words as, if they have any concrete value.

It is of course how the hard right manipulates the lumped masses.

You are well named.

"It is of course how the hard right manipulates the lumped masses."

And the hard left are not guilty of that or much worse?

Having laws decided by an overseas (and mostly undemocratic) power that is intent on European expansion is nothing to be considered??/

There were two world wars that started about that last century, which is not that long ago...

Read some history!

 

Edited April 6, 2018 by George FmplesdaCosteedback

[Grouse]

2 hours ago, aright said:

I see, installing a defeat device which detected when the engines were being tested so performance was changed to improve results was a misunderstanding was it? As a result the engines were emitting nitrous oxide pollutants 40 times greater than allowed in the USA. But that's ok only 10 million cars were recalled as a result of this misunderstanding and we all know Germany's heart for some is in the right place for other's it's the same as a Thai Bar girl's

I don't know anything about EMC's but I do know the difference between a misunderstanding and cheating.

 

That's the whole point, these adaptive controls delivered the power when required NOT when idling in traffic. The fact that this enabled them to pass the poorly designed emission tests is beside the point. Emissions tests COULD have been specified to be measured on a rolling road at 6000 RPM for example

[Odysseus123]

45 minutes ago, George FmplesdaCosteedback said:

You are well named.

"It is of course how the hard right manipulates the lumped masses."

And the hard left are not guilty of that or much worse?

Having laws decided by an overseas (and mostly undemocratic) power that is intent on European expansion is nothing to be considered??/

There were two world wars that started about that last century, which is not that long ago...

Read some history!

 

George,

 

I have often wondered just as to why they kept the Battle of Britain flight in such tip top condition and now I know..

 

With a Spitfire,Hurricane and Lancaster at England's command you should fear nothing from the foe..

Edited April 6, 2018 by Odysseus123

[transam]

3 hours ago, Odysseus123 said:

George,

 

I have often wondered just as to why they kept the Battle of Britain flight in such tip top condition and now I know..

 

With a Spitfire,Hurricane and Lancaster at England's command you should fear nothing from the foe..

The flight shows modern day folk an important piece of UK history, the fact that being totally unprepared the UK, with help, survived the onslaught of the prepared....The UK will do it again..Survive...

 

[nauseus]

8 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

You do realise that due to the mega use of natural gas that EU has a tiny carbon footprint compared to other large economic blocs e. g. USA and China?

We are not talking about the US and China, well I'm not.

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, George FmplesdaCosteedback said:

I have not read 223 pages of posts, however I did read the last few posts you made.

If you would enlighten me on you viewpoint on this subject that explains why you do not understand my reply I will be happy to reply and set you straight.

 

Nah. If you can't be bothered then neither can I. Don't jump in with responses to post replies that were not to you without looking at the history/context. If you had truly read my last few posts you would not have posted like that.   

[Odysseus123]

17 minutes ago, transam said:

The flight shows modern day folk an important piece of UK history, the fact that being totally unprepared the UK, with help, survived the onslaught of the prepared....The UK will do it again..Survive...

 

Transam,

 

Possibly,probably,whatever.

 

I was just having a bit of a joke with George-altho' I would say "With a hell of a lot of help from others" is nearer the mark.

Edited April 7, 2018 by Odysseus123

[transam]

1 minute ago, Odysseus123 said:

Transam,

 

Possibly,probably,whatever.

 

I was just having a bit of a joke with George-altho' I would say "With a hell of a lot of help from others" is nearer the mark.

Of course with a "hell of a lot of help from others", and that took a lot of  effort from the government of the day achieving their goal, and am sure the same will happen regarding Brexit.

Even Nelson didn't back down against the odds, just used his loaf...

[nauseus]

16 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

1. The EU carbon emission targets are no unachievable. 

 

2. Windfarms are not directed as an EU policies, they are a means of harvesting renewable energy that is efficient. Most of the coal burning power stations have been taken out of service and are now replaced by small combined cycle gas turbine driven generation units, these are taken in and out of service as demand arises/falls. Britain's use of fossil fuels is falling in direct replacement by renewables (of which wind is a significant part).

 

3. Bio energy is not mandated by EU energy policies. Yes bio fuel uses energy to produce and it takes land out of food production use. But a) Bio fuel provides more energy than is used in its production b.) The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates global food wastage at 13billion tons per year. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/02/no-time-leftovers-astonishing-scale-food-waste-uk-around-world/

 

4. My family background is farming. British farmers have been ploughing sewage into farmland for decades, if not for more than a century.

 

Here's some examples of the EU improving the environment:

 

*EU directives require Environmental Assessments for almost all development projects, housing, the signing of factories, industrial process, airports, roads etc. EU directives give 'concerned citizens' and 'concerned organisation' rights to be informed, consulted and a right to object to any development. EU directives place a duty on individual national governments to ensure the concerns of 'concerned citizens' and 'concerned organisations' are recorded and addressed. EU directives place a duty on individual governments to enshrine these rights in law and to provide 'concerned citizens' and 'concerned organisations' with a right to present their case before binding legal challenge in courts of law. 

These rights and duties are frequently used by local communities to protect their own environment.

 

*EU environmental directives place a duty on nation states within the union to conduct environmental impact analysis of projects within their own national boundary where the environmental impact may extend across their own national boundary. These directives place a duty on nation states to advise, consult, record and address concerns ... provide rights to legal challenges etc etc to any EU nation impacted by the project (in the same way as local communities are provided rights, nation states are provided rights), the EU commission and the EU courts arbitrate disputes where a project in an EU member nation impacts another EU member nation or any shared international spaces. 

These rights and duties are frequently used by EU nation states to protect their own environment (Hinkley B is an example of where this has been applied).

 

 

They are underachieving; read this, it's even German media.

 

http://www.dw.com/en/europes-shocking-failure-to-act-on-climate/a-41905403

[Odysseus123]

15 minutes ago, transam said:

Of course with a "hell of a lot of help from others", and that took a lot of  effort from the government of the day achieving their goal, and am sure the same will happen regarding Brexit.

Even Nelson didn't back down against the odds, just used his loaf...

Transam..

 

Indeed,Sooner or later you could have unleashed your ultimate secret weapon-large loudspeakers erected on the Kentish coast endlessly broadcasting Brexit speeches-the Germans, comfortably ensconced in France for 78 years, would have crumbled under the psychological torture..

 

What's with the emoji's exactly-did HMS Victory bombard the Combined Fleet with them?

 

By the way-the government of the day was a "national" one.It had Conservative,Labour and Liberal cabinet ministers.

Edited April 7, 2018 by Odysseus123

[transam]

On 4/7/2018 at 9:22 AM, Odysseus123 said:

Transam..

 

Indeed,Sooner or later you could have unleashed your ultimate secret weapon-large loudspeakers erected on the Kentish coast endlessly broadcasting Brexit speeches-the Germans, comfortably ensconced in France for 78 years, would have crumbled under the psychological torture..

 

What's with the emoji's exactly-did HMS Victory bombard the Combined Fleet with them?

 

By the way-the government of the day was a "national" one.It had Conservative,Labour and Liberal cabinet ministers.

Wonder if they will let me......

[Odysseus123]

On 4/7/2018 at 9:26 AM, transam said:

Wonder if they will let me......

Hmmm..thanks for the spot of humour.Are you grudgingly admitting that your singing might have put the "beastly Boche" to flight?

 

Only a little emoji as I don't have an unlimited supply..

[transam]

1 minute ago, Odysseus123 said:

Hmmm..thanks for the spot of humour.Are you grudgingly admitting that your singing might have put the "beastly Boche" to flight?

 

Only a little emoji as I don't have an unlimited supply..

Depends what song I sing, it could be my Salvation Army rendition of "Onward Christian Soldiers"....

[nauseus]

9 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

Interesting that nowhere throughout the entire thread has a Brexiteer got beyond gainsaying to actually produce a coherent argument. See quote.... QED.

Read:

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-law-and-uk/

 

You said the UK has adopted all EU laws. Why do you think that is?

  

Edited April 7, 2018 by nauseus

[adammike]

5 hours ago, George FmplesdaCosteedback said:

And the bill to include All EU laws to the date of the end of the "Transitional Period" that parliament will vote on any they wish to change thereafter.

I think you miss the point.

Brexit is a cross party, individual decision which has supporters and  dissenters on all sides.

The majority voted to leave (by a bigger voter margin than in any general election in living memory).

The argument time is over. The UK will leave the EU.

The next general election in 2022 is the only option to make a change which will mean reapplying to join if a party with a manifesto that puts that top priority wins, or can make a ruling coalition in a hung vote.

 

The points you make are not valid unless I had made the comparison with the EU a semi-communist dictatorship. I could easily do that, just have a look at the EU's record of undemocratic appointments.

Start with Junker's protege last month.

The bail out of the banks was done by an unelected labour PM Gordon Brown don't forget.

You need to study this situation more carefully.

You forget the row over the Henry Vlll power grab.The government could then remove any laws they didn't like without any debate or approval from the house of commons.