The EU debate - Part III

How the **** would I know? Do you think I was sat in on the negotiations?

We will keep all the good **** the EU introduced anyway, I am not for one second saying the EU hasn't done some good.
The EU laws on employment are so embedded into UK law now it would be almost impossible to untangle it and make new "in house" legislation, especially when none is required in my opinion.

 

We did change our system in 2013

The EU have never had a say in the LEVEL of our benefits.

 

I have kept up. In fact I am well ahead of you.
Some countries have income per capita of over 200 times other countries.
That's not the same as areas within the UK.
Your idea is totally impractical.

 

So it's okay for Hungary and others to block changes in how the UK Government enacts it's mandated policies. Okey doke.

 

If you've no ****ing clue, then how can you claim that we were somehow compromised over that legislation?

I'll answer for you, the EU wanted a 48 hr maximum working week, we used our veto and opted out of it, So that UK workers can continue to flog their guts out for 60+ hrs per week if they agree to a disclaimer.

Rule Britannia

 

Did they succeed?

As our benefits laws for IMMIGRANTS changed in 2013

 

I have my own Ltd company so its alright

Sometimes more, sometimes less.

 

I agree its more of an Utopian dream than a practical policy, particularly if baby steps along the way like the EU create such turmoil.

 

Yep.

 

Is that the one Ken Clark refers to ij the clip I posted earlier, where he was bitter about their appeal failing because the Victoriana decided working hours were a health and safety issue?

 

I didn't watch the clip, but we gained the opt out, which was the point.

Whether you think that's a good or a bad thing is purely subjective.

 

Thats one aspect, of one set of laws.
So the UK have never compromised on any legislation?

 

Not really, they objected to the proposal that would see tax credits denied to EU workers for 4 years, as they claimed that was discriminatory -which it probably is.

However Cameron had negotiated a compromise. It was still ongoing at the time of the referendum iirc.

 

You're the one making the assertion mate, the burden of proof lies with you.

I'm not saying we never compromised, as of course we did. However, can anyone give me any piece of employment legislation that made a negative tangible difference to the average man?

All I'm hearing is that we're pissed because we've had to agree legislation with 27 others, not that what came out of it made our lives worse.

 

I seem to recall the UK getting shafted by the EU on Child benefits, where migrants to come to the UK and claim child benefits for children who are not even resident in this country.

 

The working hours and payments to migrants were not allowed in the way that our Government wanted.

It's not just a case of what has or hasn't changed, it's the fact it'll be our decision in the future.

 

Just seems wrong that our own government has to go begging to an outside union in order to negotiate what we can and cannot do with our own tax payers money!
The EU want ever closer union, yes, we can opt out of this and that, and kick up a fuss.
But I will use a weird analogy here.

Being in the EU is like having a kidnapped sex slave.

Yes you can get what you want from them, but they don't like you, they don't want you, they infact hate you and they would kill you and take everything you have given half a chance.

 

A case the Govt won on appeal in June

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36526158

 

Ever heard of percentages?
Why does it need to be a fixed amount?

 

You know that Pete only deals in absolutes and percentages are irrelevant.