3 ms·

I think you mean the ECJ. But either way, European courts aren't popular in the UK because they are able to override British law. Seems reasonable that the co

by marrs 9y ago

I think you mean the ECJ. But either way, European courts aren't popular in the UK because they are able to override British law. Seems reasonable that the country that invented the concept of human rights might want to retain her jurisprudence. As for the homemade jam, see above.

tpm 9y ago
Both ECJ and ECHR, but Theresa May has been fighting a long war against the ECHR: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-campaign-leave-european-convention-on-human-rights-2020-general-election-brexit-a7499951.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-ca... And given that many times ECHR was the court that sided with individuals against either corporations or states, it's really hard to frame this as supporting individual freedom. Yes, European courts are able to override British courts and British law, because the UK agreed to that. That's the mysterious element of UK's relation to anything European: the UK agrees to some rules and then complains about the consequences. As for homemade jam: - what laws banning DIY? Are they UK laws? Are you sure it's the EU who mandated the precise letter of the law? - Yes, the British have the HS2 to tender out to the whole EU (which it is still a part of you know), because that is actually a way to save money and decrease local connections between builders and politicians, also known as corruption. These are rules the UK has agreed to. But they don't have to build an inch of HS2 against their will, as the HS2 is not financed by Brussels and therefore they don't have the say. - laws promoting 'green' energy are a mixed bag, I agree with that. But they are getting better, Euro 6 for example has hit diesel car manufacturers hard. And not everything is about cars.
- marrs 9y ago
  ...but Theresa May has been fighting a long war against the ECHR I'm not often on May's side but I was in that case. How we got ourselves into the position where we were unable to expel a man as dangerous to civil society as that is beyond me. Yes, European courts are able to override British courts and British law, because the UK agreed to that. That's the mysterious element of UK's relation to anything European: the UK agrees to some rules and then complains about the consequences. It's not that mysterious. The establishment are very pro EU, the British people not so much. As for homemade jam: - what laws banning DIY? Are they UK laws? Are you sure it's the EU who mandated the precise letter of the law? At this point I don't really care. I get a bit tired of these circular arguments. If this really is just some parliamentary conspiracy theory to blame the EU for its own inadequacies then fine, let's take away the excuse. To bring the discussion back to sovereignty, we've never had a discussion in the UK about the issue with regard to the EU. I don't think you can deny that have ceded at least some sovereignty to the EU, otherwise we wouldn't have the institutions you have already mentioned. The question is: how do we feel about it? Do we think those institutions are better, worse or indifferent? You can't just take a country into a new political landscape and expect everyone to be just fine with it.

by marrs 9y ago

tpm 9y ago

Both ECJ and ECHR, but Theresa May has been fighting a long war against the ECHR: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-campaign-leave-european-convention-on-human-rights-2020-general-election-brexit-a7499951.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-ca... And given that many times ECHR was the court that sided with individuals against either corporations or states, it's really hard to frame this as supporting individual freedom. Yes, European courts are able to override British courts and British law, because the UK agreed to that. That's the mysterious element of UK's relation to anything European: the UK agrees to some rules and then complains about the consequences. As for homemade jam: - what laws banning DIY? Are they UK laws? Are you sure it's the EU who mandated the precise letter of the law? - Yes, the British have the HS2 to tender out to the whole EU (which it is still a part of you know), because that is actually a way to save money and decrease local connections between builders and politicians, also known as corruption. These are rules the UK has agreed to. But they don't have to build an inch of HS2 against their will, as the HS2 is not financed by Brussels and therefore they don't have the say. - laws promoting 'green' energy are a mixed bag, I agree with that. But they are getting better, Euro 6 for example has hit diesel car manufacturers hard. And not everything is about cars.

marrs 9y ago
...but Theresa May has been fighting a long war against the ECHR I'm not often on May's side but I was in that case. How we got ourselves into the position where we were unable to expel a man as dangerous to civil society as that is beyond me. Yes, European courts are able to override British courts and British law, because the UK agreed to that. That's the mysterious element of UK's relation to anything European: the UK agrees to some rules and then complains about the consequences. It's not that mysterious. The establishment are very pro EU, the British people not so much. As for homemade jam: - what laws banning DIY? Are they UK laws? Are you sure it's the EU who mandated the precise letter of the law? At this point I don't really care. I get a bit tired of these circular arguments. If this really is just some parliamentary conspiracy theory to blame the EU for its own inadequacies then fine, let's take away the excuse. To bring the discussion back to sovereignty, we've never had a discussion in the UK about the issue with regard to the EU. I don't think you can deny that have ceded at least some sovereignty to the EU, otherwise we wouldn't have the institutions you have already mentioned. The question is: how do we feel about it? Do we think those institutions are better, worse or indifferent? You can't just take a country into a new political landscape and expect everyone to be just fine with it.