Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#1
A referendum in Wales resulted in a two thirds majority voting in favour of more direct law-making power for the Assembly.
Note-worthy is Nick Clegg's comment on the outcome:
"For the first time ever, laws that affect only Wales will be made only in Wales."
This must indicate that the localism bill will be more likely to achieve results in the whole of Britain, following the same desire of local people to have more say in their own local affairs.
Surely, this desire for local participation in one's own area's present and future must be indicative of a complete opposite trend to the centralisation of the EU, which has been trying to take over just about everything that has to do with law-making in 27 countries.
What surprises me with Nick Clegg, is that he doesn't realise this and state it. For that which applies to Wales, must surely apply to Kent and all the Shires of England, and to Scotland: that we want to be part of Independent Britain and have a sensible degree of local administration where central government does not lay down just about every iota and comma.
Surley, the EU must be on its way out!
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#2
Point 1. How about a referendum in England to ensure that laws which affect only England can be debated and passed without Welsh/Irish/Scottish MPs' voting on them?
Point 2. The British Consitition (written or unwritten according to your particular view) says a) that Parliament is the supreme lawmaking authority and b) that no government can bind its successor.
How then can any government claim that we cannot back out of the Treaties of Rome, Maastricht and Lisbon?
If we cannot legally leave the EU then the people who signed away our sovereignty are guilty of high treason and should be brought to book.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#3
Peter, your point 2 is interesting, because we are constantly told by ministers in the Government that the previous government has bound them to accept EU laws.
One example I came across in today's Daily Mail: from 1st May 2011, any EU citizen can claim housing benefits in Britain up to hundreds of pounds a week, plus 65 pounds a week unemployment benefit and council-tax benefits, and all they have to do is to be resident for 3 months in 'the UK' (as they all call it), and prove that they have been looking for work (nothing easier than that!)
Many are expected to come from eastern Europe, according to the Daily Mail.
Until now, they had to have worked at least 1 year in Britain to get unlimited benefits.
The competent minister explained that Labour bound the present Parliament into accepting this, because in May 2004, when the EU expanded East, a law was made in London by Labour that gave 7 years for Britain to introduce this clausus, and that it CANNOT be revoked, or repealed!
However, contrary to what Barry wrote recently, when stating that the European Court of human rights has nothing to do with the EU (it has), if Britain refused to conply with the laws of this Court, in theory Britain could even be expelled from the EU!
I informed myself on this, so there is at least one way out!
A number of signatures are on the Lisbon treaty, including that of the monarch.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#4
Then let us fail to comply, and thereby be expelled.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#5
alex,what has wales,the eu and a referendum got in common,i tell you its nothing.
when what ever goverment gets the balls to hold a referendum then i might put my mark on the ballot paper,depending on what the wording says depends on what result they the goverment wants.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#6
This whole EU business gets more and more ludicrous and scary every day.
I think it was on the front page of the Daily Express yesterday that stated the migrants from (Eastern, but not just Eastern) Europe can claim £250 per week - etc. from the British Goverment.
If that is not criminally insane, I don't know what is.
Please someone, tell me the "real" benefits to the UK and our citizens, of being members of the EU.
Financial, social, legal, anything; there must be a benefit - mustn't there ?
Brian, you're Dover's (and probably England's) biggest fan, what are the real benefits to us ?
Roger
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#7
roger,to answer your first part of your post,i have heard the same story a couple of days ago.i am sure its an anti eu scare story and nothing more.
to answer your second part,i am sure there are more benifits of staying in than coming out.if the goverment delved deep enough i am sure they can find some mony benifits to come inwards to outway the out goings that we pay for.if other european countrys can get these benifits why cant we,i tell you why goverment bodies are to lazy to reshearch and apply for such benifits and eu grants.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#8
Brian, the Daily Mail and Express make two papers that have put the story in the headlines.
If it were a scare-story, it would make those papers - and any others - liable.
To receive, for example, 10 billion pounds a year more EU benefits, a country would have to pay at least the same amount more each year to the EU. Little or no point in doing so.
But the news does add more problems: it means that the number of people searching for jobs in Britain is likely to rise, and that means more unemployment, and less chances for the already unemployed to find work, as well as paying out so much more on the benefit system (which you must contribute to with your tax).
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#9
65% of the Taffys failed to turn out to vote so logically they couldn.t careless about further devalution. It just creates another tier of of politicians.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#10
Alexander - you are mixing up the European Court of Human Rights with the European Court of Justice. The former is nothing to do with the EU and we were signed up to that long before the EU, EC, EEC, The Common Market, ever existed....
Peter - the one and only good thing about the Lisbon Treaty provisions is they it offer a way out of the EU.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#11
Not quite so, Marek! Many people in Wales who were asked poll-questions before the vote, said they had not received enough information on the referendum, which received poor coverage in the British media, and for this reason were not voting.
But I also found interesting Nick Clegg's comment, which could, possibly, be a prelude to a new way of law-making all over Britain.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#12
the figure of £.250 that roger refers to is not just the usual mail/express stuff, this figure originated from government sources.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#13
Which confirms my point and no one has yet come on here and advised of any REAL benefits of our membership of the EU.
Roger
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#14
roger,i have tried many times to explain the benifits of membership,but alas it falls on deaf ears.
peter,i dont think that anyone has been tried for treason latley,not in my life time any way.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#15
William Joyce, 1946. (Lord Haw Haw).
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#16
despite the fact that he was born in the states and was a naturalised german.
i have never worked out what was treasonable about his broadcasts, they were very popular with the british public.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#17
I don't recall you advising us Brian, perhaps you could avail us of your knowledge/reasons ?
Roger
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#18
peter,before my time.actuly 5 years before my time.
roger,read my posts more carefully.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#19
re; post 9 from marek.
when they had a referendum to have a welsh assembly only about half could be bothered to vote and the result was 51%/49% in favour if my memory serves me correctly.
so about 1 in 4 actually wanted devolution.
#20
Peter, your point 1 was also worth looking at - if all the others can be autonomous, why not England? It is incredibly messy to have so many sometimes conflicting "constitutions" and systems governing such a small territory as the UK, such as it is.