EU - where did it go wrong?

Anything that doesn't fit elsewhere - doesn't have to be AD related.
hir
Posts: 433
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: EU - where did it go wrong?

Postby hir » Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:01 pm

Gareth wrote:
hir wrote:The question that needs to be addressed is... are we going to attempt to negotiate free access to the single market, and if we are, how are we going to negotiate an exemption to the EU's condition of free movement of labour?

Although one of the four pillars of EEA membership is free movement of people, I heard today on Radio 4 "Law in Action" that member countries can restrict free movement in some situations.

Haven't yet found the clauses but anyone can read through the rules at http://www.efta.int/legal-texts/eea.


ETA - Article 33 says "The provisions of this Chapter and measures taken in pursuance thereof shall not prejudice the applicability of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action providing for special treatment for foreign nationals on grounds of public policy, public security or public health." - being a restatement of the same provision as part of Article 28.


I don't think there was ever going to be any mileage for immigration control in these provisions, otherwise UKIP would have told us about it:


"CHAPTER VI
RESTRICTIONS ON THE RIGHT OF ENTRY AND THE RIGHT OF RESIDENCE ON GROUNDS OF PUBLIC POLICY, PUBLIC SECURITY OR PUBLIC HEALTH
Article 27
General principles
1. Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, Member States may restrict the freedom of movement and residence of Union citizens and their family members, irrespective of nationality, on grounds of public policy, public security or public health. These grounds shall not be invoked to serve economic ends.
2. Measures taken on grounds of public policy or public security shall comply with the principle of proportionality and shall be based exclusively on the personal conduct of the individual concerned. Previous criminal convictions shall not in themselves constitute grounds for taking such measures.
The personal conduct of the individual concerned must represent a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society. Justifications that are isolated from the particulars of the case or that rely on considerations of general prevention shall not be accepted.
3. In order to ascertain whether the person concerned represents a danger for public policy or public security, when issuing the registration certificate or, in the absence of a registration system, not later than three months from the date of arrival of the person concerned on its territory or from the date of reporting his/her presence within the territory, as provided for in Article 5(5), or when issuing the residence card, the host Member State may, should it consider this essential, request the Member State of origin and, if need be, other Member States to provide information concerning any previous police record the person concerned may have. Such enquiries shall not be made as a matter of routine. The Member State consulted shall give its reply within two months.
4. The Member State which issued the passport or identity card shall allow the holder of the document who has been expelled on grounds of public policy, public security, or public health from another Member State to re-enter its territory without any formality even if the document is no longer valid or the nationality of the holder is in dispute.
Article 28
Protection against expulsion
1. Before taking an expulsion decision on grounds of public policy or public security, the host Member State shall take account of considerations such as how long the individual concerned has resided on its territory, his/her age, state of health, family and economic situation, social and cultural integration into the host Member State and the extent of his/her links with the country of origin.
2. The host Member State may not take an expulsion decision against Union citizens or their family members, irrespective of nationality, who have the right of permanent residence on its territory, except on serious grounds of public policy or public security.
3. An expulsion decision may not be taken against Union citizens, except if the decision is based on imperative grounds of public security, as defined by Member States, if they:
(a) have resided in the host Member State for the previous 10 years; or
(b) are a minor, except if the expulsion is necessary for the best interests of the child, as provided for in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989.
Article 29
Public health
1. The only diseases justifying measures restricting freedom of movement shall be the diseases with epidemic potential as defined by the relevant instruments of the World Health Organisation and other infectious diseases or contagious parasitic diseases if they are the subject of protection provisions applying to nationals of the host Member State.
2. Diseases occurring after a three-month period from the date of arrival shall not constitute grounds for expulsion from the territory.
3. Where there are serious indications that it is necessary, Member States may, within three months of the date of arrival, require persons entitled to the right of residence to undergo, free of charge, a medical examination to certify that they are not suffering from any of the conditions referred to in paragraph 1. Such medical examinations may not be required as a matter of routine."[/i]

Rolyan
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:45 pm

Re: EU - where did it go wrong?

Postby Rolyan » Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:25 pm

Gareth wrote:
Horse wrote:Well someone was telling porkies, weren't they . . .

It's possible they actually thought what they said, then when the unexpected circumstance arrived, they found they thought differently.

It's possible, but the timings suggest otherwise.

Rolyan
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:45 pm

Re: EU - where did it go wrong?

Postby Rolyan » Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:28 pm

mainbeam wrote:
Rolyan wrote:
mainbeam wrote:
Rolyan wrote:
I appreciate that you need to believe that.


It would be naïve to believe it didn't. I can appreciate why you need to convince yourself that those aspects of the Leave campaign had little or no affect on a sufficient number of people to result in a marginal difference. The difficultly you have is in convincing those who are neither naïve nor in denial that they must be wrong.

Yes, you're entitled to that opinion.


It would be absurd to opine that as you were not influenced by those reasons that others weren't also although you are of course entitled to hold the opinion.

I'm no longer surprised by the remain camp claiming to know more about why the leavers voted to leave, than the leavers do.

Rolyan
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:45 pm

Re: EU - where did it go wrong?

Postby Rolyan » Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:34 pm

mainbeam wrote:
Rolyan wrote:
mainbeam wrote:
Strangely Brown wrote:
That's the whole point! Your voice is not and cannot be heard by the EU. Further integration will only cement that yet you ask why it is such a bad idea?

That is also incorrect. Your voice is - and by implication can be - heard by the EU through our elected representatives. At the European Council, The Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.

If those in the UK parliament don't do what you want (or do what you don't want), you can vote them out. That isn't the case with the EU. That is the real issue for many, which I'm sure you know, even if you pretend that you think it's to do with being heard..


Do you also hold the opinion that our elected representatives representing us in these institutions cannot be voted out? NB I can only hope to vote out one of the UK Parliament's MPs out over 600 and none of us have a say in the hundreds of Lords who populate the other House.

There are various laws and rules and policies passed by (or obstructed by) the EU, that directly affect the UK. We cannot vote out or remove the people responsible.

I'm not happy with that situation, which is partly why I voted leave, but I'm happy for you to think it's okay and vote remain.

mainbeam
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:32 am

Re: EU - where did it go wrong?

Postby mainbeam » Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:37 pm

Strangely Brown wrote:I never missed that at all. You may think that it was only down to narrow party political interests but they were clearly born out of the massive rise in public disquiet. Yes, you are correct that they didn't *have* to allow a referendum but if they hadn't given one in this parliament then it was only a matter of time before a party was voted in that did offer it. One way or another the electorate eventually get heard.


If your belief is correct then I would expect the margin for 'leave' would have been much greater than it was.

It was only a matter of time before UKIP was elected? A matter of a long time with one seat in Parliament. It appears to me self-evident that the referendum was the consequence of narrow party-political interests.

What is your view in on the loss of sovereignty under NATO membership?

mainbeam
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:32 am

Re: EU - where did it go wrong?

Postby mainbeam » Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:39 pm

Rolyan wrote:I'm no longer surprised by the remain camp claiming to know more about why the leavers voted to leave, than the leavers do.


I've been listening to the reasons people have given for voting leave and many of them do not accord with yours. Maybe they are misleading us and you no better than they do about why they voted.

User avatar
Strangely Brown
Posts: 593
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 8:06 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: EU - where did it go wrong?

Postby Strangely Brown » Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:45 pm

mainbeam wrote:What is your view in on the loss of sovereignty under NATO membership?


We haven't lost sovereignty. NATO does not control the UK armed forces unless they are operating as part of a NATO operation. The UK armed forces can, and do, operate autonomously. Remember 1982? Are you suggesting that was NATO?

mainbeam
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:32 am

Re: EU - where did it go wrong?

Postby mainbeam » Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:46 pm

Rolyan wrote:There are various laws and rules and policies passed by (or obstructed by) the EU, that directly affect the UK. We cannot vote out or remove the people responsible.

I'm not happy with that situation, which is partly why I voted leave, but I'm happy for you to think it's okay and vote remain.


The laws are made with the help of our elected representatives. If you don't approve you can vote for different representatives. It is actually quite unusual for our elected representatives to be overruled in the EU and in those cases they believe it is a price worth paying and we elected them to make that choice. As I said above you may not be happy with the 5% of laws we have to accept as the price for being part of the single market but you are massively overstating the democratic deficit in the EU.

If it is a matter of principle not to give up sovereignty at all then how do you feel about the loss of sovereignty over who we go to war with under NATO?

Gareth
Posts: 580
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 2:44 pm
Location: Berkshire
Contact:

Re: EU - where did it go wrong?

Postby Gareth » Tue Jun 28, 2016 7:09 pm

hir wrote:
Gareth wrote:Although one of the four pillars of EEA membership is free movement of people, I heard today on Radio 4 "Law in Action" that member countries can restrict free movement in some situations.

Haven't yet found the clauses but anyone can read through the rules at http://www.efta.int/legal-texts/eea.


ETA - Article 33 says "The provisions of this Chapter and measures taken in pursuance thereof shall not prejudice the applicability of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action providing for special treatment for foreign nationals on grounds of public policy, public security or public health." - being a restatement of the same provision as part of Article 28.

I don't think there was ever going to be any mileage for immigration control in these provisions, otherwise UKIP would have told us about it

I hope the three law professors that took part in that program have a better grasp than most of us here about what might be possible, notwithstanding that I may have misunderstood what was said.
there is only the road, nothing but the road ...

Rolyan
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:45 pm

Re: EU - where did it go wrong?

Postby Rolyan » Tue Jun 28, 2016 7:18 pm

mainbeam wrote:
Rolyan wrote:I'm no longer surprised by the remain camp claiming to know more about why the leavers voted to leave, than the leavers do.


I've been listening to the reasons people have given for voting leave and many of them do not accord with yours. Maybe they are misleading us and you no better than they do about why they voted.

I can't comment on the ones you've listened to; I don't even know if you know all these personally, or if they are mainly the ones represented in the media. But I can comment on the ones I know personally, and the ones I've read on here, and their views are not what you say they are.


Return to “General Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests