What's your current blood alcohol level?DaveDodo007 wrote:Freeing ourselves from bureaucratic rule from Brussels is authoritarian? I know you are a lefty but even you should realize how retarded this is.Brian Peacock wrote:Yeah, authoritarian rule is just so, you know, efficient and righteous eh?
You just said that you didn't care that the government is granting itself sweeping authoritarian powers. 
First, that's a complete non-sequitor. Second, I'm no fan of our appointed second chamber but with a executive necessarily holding the majority in the Commons the Lords offer the only possible barrier to these so-called Henry VIII clauses - even though the Commons can, by majority vote, overturn any amendment the Lords might add to the passage of the bill. Are we to assume that your view on whether it's OK for the executive to grant themselves powers to amend, repeal, and enact law without reference to Parliament depends on whether you support the political perspective of the executive? My view on that is that the political perspective of the government of the day is irrelevant to the issue.DaveDodo007 wrote:I'm no fan of the lords and we should get rid but one thing at a time eh.Brian Peacock wrote:...
Do you think that the executive granting themselves powers to amend, repeal, and enact law without reference to Parliament is a good idea or not? This is not a partisan question - so why are you avoiding it with all this irrelevant twaddle - it's a question about what you think is the proper scope of executive power.
To be clear, the government intends to integrate all existing EU legislation onto the British statue and then set about the business of sorting all that out. In the circumstances and in itself I don't think this is a bad idea. However, the proposed powers will also allow ministers to enact law by replacing one law with another. Now that may involve as little as changing the title and swapping all reference to the European Court of Justice with references to the UK Supreme Court. But without the oversight of Parliament they could also replace wholesale a piece of former EU legislation with something 'better' that they've come up with themselves. This is a bad idea. When the executive are not just in control of the legislature, but have the powers of a primary legislative body, bad things happen - laws are enacted for partisan reasons, and in extremis laws are enacted for the direct benefit of executive members and their friends.UK Parliament website wrote:The Government sometimes adds this provision to a Bill to enable the Government to repeal or amend it after it has become an Act of Parliament. The provision enables primary legislation to be amended or repealed by subordinate legislation with or without further parliamentary scrutiny.
Such provisions are known as Henry VIII clauses, so named from the Statute of Proclamations 1539 which gave King Henry VIII power to legislate by proclamation.
http://www.parliament.uk/site-informati ... i-clauses/
I know a drop in GDP of 4.5% doesn't sound like much, but to put it in perspective, this is on the assumption that the government will settle on a EU-lite association like Norway (which is not looking very likely at the moment but could happen), and that to cover that trade shortfall with the UK would have to increase trade with non-EU states by 37% just to stand still.Theresa May given stark warning about leaving customs union
Cabinet ministers have been given detailed warnings that the UK pulling out of the EU customs union could lead to a 4.5% fall in GDP by 2030 and the clogging up of trade through Britain’s ports.
The predictions were contained in a paper circulated at a meeting of Theresa May’s special Brexit cabinet committee, which concluded that ministers were not yet prepared to decide whether the UK should withdraw from the EU’s free trade bloc.
The 4.5% cut is the average prediction made in three studies that were carried out before Britain’s EU referendum, in a move that could anger Brexit supporting MPs who believe that the old estimates are out of date.
The studies, by the Treasury, the thinktank NIESR and the Centre for Economic Performance and London School of Economics, predicted the effect on the British economy if the UK was to opt for a Norway-style model. That would involve remaining inside the single market but outside the customs union, within which countries set common external tariffs and so do not require customs checks.
More...
6.8 km² of independence.Brian Peacock wrote:After Brexit the citizens of Gibraltar should be offered a referendum on the specific issue of whether they want to remain tied to Britain, whether they want to be integrated into Spain, or whether they want to become independent.
I suppose the rock could become a tax haven like Monaco. Failing that it'll be no more independent than Liechtenstein, subsisting on tourism and postage stamps. 
Nelson, Churchill and Cunningham will be turning in their graves!Brian Peacock wrote:Well, if the citizens think they have a unique and/or distinctive cultural identity then sure, offer them independence.
The irony is that the City of London has been bribing, sorry, funding the Conservative party for the last ten years to secure a beneficial regulatory framework and oversight system.Up to 100,000 UK jobs at risk as Merkel and Juncker ally warns on euro clearing
The future of an estimated 100,000 jobs has been plunged into doubt after a close political ally of the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, and president of the European commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, warned that a prized sector in the City of London must relocate to EU soil after Brexit.
Manfred Weber, the leader of the largest political group in the European parliament, to which both the German chancellor and the commission president belong, told reporters that euro-denominated clearing could no longer be undertaken in the City when the UK leaves the EU.
“EU citizens decide on their own money,” Weber said during a press conference in Strasbourg on Tuesday. “When the UK is leaving the European Union it is not thinkable that at the end the whole euro business is managed in London. This is an external place, this is not an EU place any more. The euro business should be managed on EU soil.”
Such a development would be a huge blow to the British economy. Six months ago, the head of the London Stock Exchange, Xavier Rolet, said at least 100,000 positions could be lost if the City’s clearing houses lost their ability to process euro-denominated transactions.
Clearing houses are independent parties that sit between the two parties in a trade and are tasked with managing the risk if one side defaults on payment. London clears around three-quarters of all euro-denominated trades.
Talking in September, Rolet said he was confident the City would not be stripped of the business, but he went on to say that job losses would not be limited to London but shed across the UK in risk management, compliance, middle office and back-office support functions.
A recent report from the accountants Ernst & Young echoed those comments, but additionally claimed that losing the business could have “a significant domino effect on jobs and revenue”, hitting up to 232,000 workers throughout the UK....
More...
...so no change then?Hermit wrote:6.8 km² of independence.Brian Peacock wrote:After Brexit the citizens of Gibraltar should be offered a referendum on the specific issue of whether they want to remain tied to Britain, whether they want to be integrated into Spain, or whether they want to become independent.
We are talking scope here, the smaller and the lesser is better. Rome wasn't build in a day.pErvin wrote:What's your current blood alcohol level?DaveDodo007 wrote:Freeing ourselves from bureaucratic rule from Brussels is authoritarian? I know you are a lefty but even you should realize how retarded this is.Brian Peacock wrote:Yeah, authoritarian rule is just so, you know, efficient and righteous eh?
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 27 guests