I actually don't remember the video, though I thought each campaign did a better job for their opponents.
Something about that video and voice over felt very early Command & Conquer to me, I thought I was about to get an update about the Global Defence Initiative's fight against Nod.
I remember Day 1 of the referendum campaign, when the Remain campaign Chair, Sir Stuart Rose, proudly told a room full of business leaders that leaving the EU will lead to wages going up for the low paid.
There was even churn in your head, when you went from "absolutely happy to leave the EU by voting YES" to "how dare they drag us out of the EU by voting Leave", in the space of just two years
It's fitting that someone who always was and always will be a tourist in Scotland can barely fill a postcard with any real insight on the place.
You seem oddly bitter
There's nothing odd about it. Look at the attitudes of remainers.
There is a definite echo....
To be fair to TUD - and Nats - and indeed Remainers, it must be very hard to have a much-valued political identity denied, or taken away. If indyref had gone YES I can imagine we'd have very depressed NO-voters on here. Sad either way
My takeaway from the last ten years of turmoil is NO MORE BLOODY REFERENDUMS. Certainly on constitutional matters. They are bitterly divisive. We have an ancient parliament, much revered around the world, through which we express our democratic rights. It has served us pretty well for 800 years.
Let it go back to doing that, now it has all its powers restored from Brussels. Enough turbulence and bile.
Served who pretty well for 800 years?
You and all of your ancestors. Me and all of my ancestors. Leon and all of his ancestors. We're all here to comment so the past can't have been that bad.
The past by definition has served us all well. We may have nasty stories to tell, or we may have nasty secrets - I'm sure if you dig back far enough we all have both.
Probably best to fix our eyes on the future, and that's not about leave/remain.
Everything that ever happened is right.. and the proof is Leon exists?
No.
"We" can't moan so much about everything that has ever happened.
Stuff that's happened just "is".
I thought we were praising our glorious past, not moaning? Wait, does Leon even exist? So confused right now.
Pull yourself together. Not everything is about your @Leon obsession.
Au contraire. 806 years of English history has been leading to exactly this moment. All our greatest hours: Dunkirk! Suez! The Somme! Yorktown! are mere paving slabs on the road that has lead us to this. This! This best of all possible worlds! For God, Leon, and St George!
There was even churn in your head, when you went from "absolutely happy to leave the EU by voting YES" to "how dare they drag us out of the EU by voting Leave", in the space of just two years
It's fitting that someone who always was and always will be a tourist in Scotland can barely fill a postcard with any real insight on the place.
You seem oddly bitter
There's nothing odd about it. Look at the attitudes of remainers.
There is a definite echo....
To be fair to TUD - and Nats - and indeed Remainers, it must be very hard to have a much-valued political identity denied, or taken away. If indyref had gone YES I can imagine we'd have very depressed NO-voters on here. Sad either way
My takeaway from the last ten years of turmoil is NO MORE BLOODY REFERENDUMS. Certainly on constitutional matters. They are bitterly divisive. We have an ancient parliament, much revered around the world, through which we express our democratic rights. It has served us pretty well for 800 years.
Let it go back to doing that, now it has all its powers restored from Brussels. Enough turbulence and bile.
Served who pretty well for 800 years?
You and all of your ancestors. Me and all of my ancestors. Leon and all of his ancestors. We're all here to comment so the past can't have been that bad.
The past by definition has served us all well. We may have nasty stories to tell, or we may have nasty secrets - I'm sure if you dig back far enough we all have both.
Probably best to fix our eyes on the future, and that's not about leave/remain.
Everything that ever happened is right.. and the proof is Leon exists?
No.
"We" can't moan so much about everything that has ever happened.
Stuff that's happened just "is".
I thought we were praising our glorious past, not moaning? Wait, does Leon even exist? So confused right now.
Pull yourself together. Not everything is about your @Leon obsession.
Au contraire. 806 years of English history has been leading to exactly this moment. All our greatest hours: Dunkirk! Suez! The Somme! Yorktown! are mere paving slabs on the road that has lead us to this. This! This best of all possible worlds! For God, Leon, and St George!
For God, Sean, and St George!
I think he pronounces the L in Leon as 'Sh' and the 'o' as 'or'
I remember Day 1 of the referendum campaign, when the Remain campaign Chair, Sir Stuart Rose, proudly told a room full of business leaders that leaving the EU will lead to wages going up for the low paid.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
I remember Day 1 of the referendum campaign, when the Remain campaign Chair, Sir Stuart Rose, proudly told a room full of business leaders that leaving the EU will lead to wages going up for the low paid.
Congratulations, Sir Stuart.
I remember thinking "That's a Ratner Moment".....
It was the classic non-politician mistake, of speaking to the audience in the room rather than the wider public.
Funnily enough, he never appeared in public for the rest of the campaign - except to repeat his comments in front of a Select Commitee hearing!
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
The reason the UK wasn't a good fit for the EU is that we actually respected the supremacy of EU law, rather than just ignoring it and overriding it when it doesn't suit our interests.
Though for the Poles to outright say it, rather than just ignore the EU when it doesn't suit them like France and Germany, is a new step.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
To lose lose one member in a decade is a little careless. To lose two is existential, as the rats leave the sinking ship.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
I think the Polish case forms around the Polish judiciary being a tool of the ruling party and not enacting the rule of law. The EU objects to this. But it's precisely that tool of the ruling party who decides on the instruction of their masters that it gets precedence on what passes for law in Poland.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
The UK wanted wider to stop deeper but got wider and deeper.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
The UK wanted wider to stop deeper but got wider and deeper.
I had that exact same thought, then continued it. It was Maggie's long play - set the EU on a path of not just deeper, but wider also, knowing the two were incompatible, then have the UK leave so it could watch from the sidelines as the whole edifice folded.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
The UK wanted wider to stop deeper but got wider and deeper.
I had that exact same thought, then continued it. It was Maggie's long play - set the EU on a path of not just deeper, but wider also, knowing the two were incompatible, then have the UK leave so it could watch from the sidelines as the whole edifice folded.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
The Poles love the EU. More than anyone else as I recall. But I agree with your suggestion. As with all membership organizations, the EU does need a way to cut members loose that don't share its values.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
The UK wanted wider to stop deeper but got wider and deeper.
I had that exact same thought, then continued it. It was Maggie's long play - set the EU on a path of not just deeper, but wider also, knowing the two were incompatible, then have the UK leave so it could watch from the sidelines as the whole edifice folded.
The woman was omnipotent. Did she predict Boris shitting on fiscal conservatism, in 79 or 82?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
The UK wanted wider to stop deeper but got wider and deeper.
I had that exact same thought, then continued it. It was Maggie's long play - set the EU on a path of not just deeper, but wider also, knowing the two were incompatible, then have the UK leave so it could watch from the sidelines as the whole edifice folded.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
The Poles love the EU. More than anyone else as I recall. But I agree with your suggestion. As with all membership organizations, the EU does need a way to cut members loose that don't share its values.
EU values is a bit oxymoronic though isn't it?
The EU has no values, its just pure politics as to self-interest of whoever is speaking at the time.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
The UK wanted wider to stop deeper but got wider and deeper.
I had that exact same thought, then continued it. It was Maggie's long play - set the EU on a path of not just deeper, but wider also, knowing the two were incompatible, then have the UK leave so it could watch from the sidelines as the whole edifice folded.
The woman was omnipotent. Did she predict Boris shitting on fiscal conservatism, in 79 or 82?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU should do better too, when stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
Why isnt there a video with the lies of Remain.. just for balance?
Remain lost.
Well would you believe it. So if Remain had won would you be running this?
Did you see the You gov poll where Labours vote has dropped considerably, people still support the Tories, and Labour are now less popular than Corbyn's loony.left.. takes some effort to get that bad... Green vote is increasing amd the Lib Dems are shipwecked with an unimpressive leader. who is going to challenge Boris???.. if not from within his own Party.?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
The UK wanted wider to stop deeper but got wider and deeper.
I had that exact same thought, then continued it. It was Maggie's long play - set the EU on a path of not just deeper, but wider also, knowing the two were incompatible, then have the UK leave so it could watch from the sidelines as the whole edifice folded.
The woman was omnipotent. Did she predict Boris shitting on fiscal conservatism, in 79 or 82?
The video in the thread header is quite relevant to today isn't it? It was spot on.
The deficit is bad now, but that's after taking back control of our income. Just imagine how much worse it would have been if we hadn't stopped paying the EU?
How much worse would our deficit be if we were responsible for paying towards the EU bailout for Covid as well as for the EU budget contributions and for Covid?
We got out just in time to save the NHS didn't we?
Hadn't seen that ad before - they must have known the 5 new member stuff was hokum, but otherwise it's quite impressive - can see why it was effective.
This may be of interest to @Cyclefree though with luck her daughter is not in a similar position -:
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
The UK wanted wider to stop deeper but got wider and deeper.
I had that exact same thought, then continued it. It was Maggie's long play - set the EU on a path of not just deeper, but wider also, knowing the two were incompatible, then have the UK leave so it could watch from the sidelines as the whole edifice folded.
The woman was omnipotent. Did she predict Boris shitting on fiscal conservatism, in 79 or 82?
Fiscal conservatism died when the banks were bailed out ** since when its been just about who got the best places at the trough.
** well it died earlier when Gordon Brown thought he'd abolished 'boom and bust' but had only abolished the boom part.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
To lose lose one member in a decade is a little careless. To lose two is existential, as the rats leave the sinking ship.
Actually, I don't think that's true at all.
I think the EU would be a lot better off it only had countries that were broadly committed to "Ever Closer Union". Otherwise it will be forever attempting little carve outs.
I think they would also be wise to make it clear that treaty commitments are treaty commitments. If you can't do the time, don't do the... you know.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
The UK wanted wider to stop deeper but got wider and deeper.
I had that exact same thought, then continued it. It was Maggie's long play - set the EU on a path of not just deeper, but wider also, knowing the two were incompatible, then have the UK leave so it could watch from the sidelines as the whole edifice folded.
The woman was omnipotent. Did she predict Boris shitting on fiscal conservatism, in 79 or 82?
LOL. My comment was not entirely serious.
I think Thatch would have hated Johnson. His glib manner, the mindless banter, the jokes, the recklessness, the appalling attention to work and detail, the less than wholehearted focus on family life.
She was a deeply serious woman brought up in a strict Methodist household.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
To lose lose one member in a decade is a little careless. To lose two is existential, as the rats leave the sinking ship.
Actually, I don't think that's true at all.
I think the EU would be a lot better off it only had countries that were broadly committed to "Ever Closer Union". Otherwise it will be forever attempting little carve outs.
I think they would also be wise to make it clear that treaty commitments are treaty commitments. If you can't do the time, don't do the... you know.
Which countries do you think would prefer the UK's lighter touch? Just Sweden and Denmark? Can't really see the Eastern 6 preferring it without the monetary transfers.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
The UK wanted wider to stop deeper but got wider and deeper.
I had that exact same thought, then continued it. It was Maggie's long play - set the EU on a path of not just deeper, but wider also, knowing the two were incompatible, then have the UK leave so it could watch from the sidelines as the whole edifice folded.
The woman was omnipotent. Did she predict Boris shitting on fiscal conservatism, in 79 or 82?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU, stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
But Poles are the ones with the most favourable view of the EU. Why should they leave an organisation that is trying to defend an independent judiciary?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
The UK wanted wider to stop deeper but got wider and deeper.
I had that exact same thought, then continued it. It was Maggie's long play - set the EU on a path of not just deeper, but wider also, knowing the two were incompatible, then have the UK leave so it could watch from the sidelines as the whole edifice folded.
The woman was omnipotent. Did she predict Boris shitting on fiscal conservatism, in 79 or 82?
LOL. My comment was not entirely serious.
I think Thatch would have hated Johnson. His glib manner, the mindless banter, the jokes, the recklessness, the appalling attention to work and detail, the less than wholehearted focus on family life.
She was a deeply serious woman brought up in a strict Methodist household.
I think that is right. She would not even have made him one of the vegetables.
Neil Henderson @hendopolis · 6m INDEPENDENT DIGITAL: 60,000 could die from flu this winter #TomorrowsPapersToday
Could. Bloody hell.
Thousands die from flu every year. .. but critically personal sanitation is a lot better than it was. I think the story is more scary than factually based. We MIGHT get a new Asian flu that might kill.millions....its just speculation.imho. ⁰
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
To lose lose one member in a decade is a little careless. To lose two is existential, as the rats leave the sinking ship.
Actually, I don't think that's true at all.
I think the EU would be a lot better off it only had countries that were broadly committed to "Ever Closer Union". Otherwise it will be forever attempting little carve outs.
I think they would also be wise to make it clear that treaty commitments are treaty commitments. If you can't do the time, don't do the... you know.
Which countries do you think would prefer the UK's lighter touch? Just Sweden and Denmark? Can't really see the Eastern 6 preferring it without the monetary transfers.
Well, that's the thing with the Eastern 6. They want:
- free movement so that their people can remit money home - no Euro - fiscal transfers from Brussels - to do things that are not allowed in the treaties
And it's their call. They can choose the EU or our lighter touch regime. Or nothing at all. But they don't get to dictate that the rules only apply to them.
It will be a difficult call for them. Poland is very Atlanticist. I could see them joining with us. Hungary and Czechia, on the other hand, would probably stay with the EU. The Baltics have all joined the Euro, so they've kind of made their decision.
Now there's going to be many factors involved but I wonder if that explains why the number of Eastern Europeans working in the UK has been falling but the number of Western Europeans has been increasing.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU, stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
But Poles are the ones with the most favourable view of the EU. Why should they leave an organisation that is trying to defend an independent judiciary?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU, stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
But Poles are the ones with the most favourable view of the EU. Why should they leave an organisation that is trying to defend an independent judiciary?
Neil Henderson @hendopolis · 6m INDEPENDENT DIGITAL: 60,000 could die from flu this winter #TomorrowsPapersToday
Could. Bloody hell.
Thousands die from flu every year. .. but critically personal sanitation is a lot better than it was. I think the story is more scary than factually based. We MIGHT get a new Asian flu that might kill.millions....its just speculation.imho. ⁰
It's a plant to get uptake on the vaccine to be honest imho.
But fair enough, there could be a massive problem if we don't.
I actually think flu is quite probably going to be a bigger issue for NHS this winter than covid.
Now there's going to be many factors involved but I wonder if that explains why the number of Eastern Europeans working in the UK has been falling but the number of Western Europeans has been increasing.
Well, a lot of those countries unemployment rates are low because all the people of working age left to earn money abroad. The Polish diaspora is much larger than the Greek one.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
How unlike the ECJ, which is a rigorously independent court with absolutely no vested interest in extending the remit of EU law, and thus its own power, into every corner of national life, and with no desire to enable a truly united Europe
@stocky, @squareroot2,@Pulpstar. Completely missed the Super League GF discussion I was tagged in the other morning. I agree Saints probably should be slight favourites, given they've been there, done that more than once. Can't make it more than 55-60% though. 11-5 represents outstanding value for a Catalans win therefore. One thing from today. SL Player of the Year Sam Tomkins is in the Dragons 21 after injury. IF he plays that is another big plus. He's done it before several times. And against Saints, too. The other thing is that means Arthur Mourgue plays somewhere other than full-back. He's a huge, unpredictable young talent who can do almost anything with ball in hand. Except catch a high ball. Which is quite a drawback if he plays full back.
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU, stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
But Poles are the ones with the most favourable view of the EU. Why should they leave an organisation that is trying to defend an independent judiciary?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
The UK wanted wider to stop deeper but got wider and deeper.
I had that exact same thought, then continued it. It was Maggie's long play - set the EU on a path of not just deeper, but wider also, knowing the two were incompatible, then have the UK leave so it could watch from the sidelines as the whole edifice folded.
The woman was omnipotent. Did she predict Boris shitting on fiscal conservatism, in 79 or 82?
Who says she isn’t using Boris as a vessel?
The pellet with the poison’s in the vessel with the pizzle
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
How unlike the ECJ, which is a rigorously independent court with absolutely no vested interest in extending the remit of EU law, and thus its own power, into every corner of national life, and with no desire to enable a truly united Europe
What fucking cant and bollocks
Doesn’t it even have the express objective to further the European project?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU, stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
But Poles are the ones with the most favourable view of the EU. Why should they leave an organisation that is trying to defend an independent judiciary?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU, stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
But Poles are the ones with the most favourable view of the EU. Why should they leave an organisation that is trying to defend an independent judiciary?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I think the EU would do better as a smaller grouping, and the Poles don't really want to be part of "the project" anyway.
Why not split amicably now?
Rather ironic we pushed and pushed for expansion eastwards. Then buggered off.
Leaving behind an EU which resolutely speaks English, rather than French, which was the supreme language of the EU when we first joined
Our entire EU membership can be seen as an act of comical cultural sabotage of the French. No wonder they stole our vaccines
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
How unlike the ECJ, which is a rigorously independent court with absolutely no vested interest in extending the remit of EU law, and thus its own power, into every corner of national life, and with no desire to enable a truly united Europe
What fucking cant and bollocks
Doesn’t it even have the express objective to further the European project?
I thought it did. But Googling is not helping me find an actual reference to this, other than a line in a Civitas report about a majority of the ECJ's ruling increasing the power of the EU/EC. (Of course, if we're going to be pedantic, most of the ECJ's rulings are incredibly technical. But of the "real" cases, I'm sure that's completely correct.)
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU, stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
But Poles are the ones with the most favourable view of the EU. Why should they leave an organisation that is trying to defend an independent judiciary?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU, stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
But Poles are the ones with the most favourable view of the EU. Why should they leave an organisation that is trying to defend an independent judiciary?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU should do better too, when stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
I'm afraid this is LeaverFantasyLand.
There already a lighter-touch, less political free trade area called EFTA and we chose not to be part of that.
Why would Poland, for example, choose to align with the UK? Are we going to send them the subsidies or allow them the freedom of movement they get from the EU? No.
One thing I am not clued up on is the idea of the immune system being weakened over the last 18 months by not being so exposed to pathogens. Lots of people suggesting this, but how true is it? Does the immune system need constant work outs?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU should do better too, when stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
I'm afraid this is LeaverFantasyLand.
No it's PB, though perhaps it sometimes appears the same?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU, stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
But Poles are the ones with the most favourable view of the EU. Why should they leave an organisation that is trying to defend an independent judiciary?
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
How unlike the ECJ, which is a rigorously independent court with absolutely no vested interest in extending the remit of EU law, and thus its own power, into every corner of national life, and with no desire to enable a truly united Europe
What fucking cant and bollocks
Doesn’t it even have the express objective to further the European project?
Quite possibly
Buried deep in the EU Constitut, sorry Lisbon Treaty, is a requirement for EU Commissioners to have "an EU vocation" - ie they must be fully committed to Ever Closer Union and a United Europe
In other words, you can't be part of the rule-making, law-creating part of the EU government if you are eurosceptic.
Of course that makes sense if your absolute intent is to create a United States of Europe, but it is a democratic outrage if you are a country with wide eurosceptic sentiment. Half of your people - or whatever - can never be in the government. Not allowed
We were always going to exit, in the end. It seems others may follow, eventually. The EU shit is hitting the fan of the nation-state, the disbelief can no longer be suspended, the dream no longer sustained. Hard choices await
In a strongly-worded initial reaction, the European Commission said the decision on Thursday raised “serious concerns”. It reaffirmed that “EU law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions”.
That's the Guardian today on the Poland constitutional case. Just a reminder that those who think the EU is not an emerging state, and those who think everyone else is wonderfully happy with this conflicted and oxymoronic nightmare may be mistaken.
BTW, the SNP are unhappy with the UK having control over the Scottish constitutional settlement, while wanting the EU to 'have primacy over (Scottish) national law, including constitutional provisions'. Fascinating.
The problem with this analysis is that the Polish Constitutional Court isn't an independent body that deliberates before coming to reasoned and objective judgment. It's a kangaroo court stuffed with ruling party stooges who do precisely what they are told by their government masters.
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
I thought the German Constitutional Court had ruled a couple of times that EU law didn’t have primacy over German Fundamental Law
That is correct.
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU should do better too, when stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
I'm afraid this is LeaverFantasyLand.
There already a lighter-touch, less political free trade area called EFTA and we chose not to be part of that.
Why would Poland, for example, choose to align with the UK? Are we going to send them the subsidies or allow them the freedom of movement they get from the EU? No.
Yep. They correctly foresaw 10 001 of the last one countries to leave the EU. That nation A, B, C, right through to Z is leaving any moment now is a trope akin to the day of rapture is nigh.
One thing I am not clued up on is the idea of the immune system being weakened over the last 18 months by not being so exposed to pathogens. Lots of people suggesting this, but how true is it? Does the immune system need constant work outs?
With flu isn't it simply the case that the virus is continually mutating, therefore the longer you go without being in contact the latest flu variants the more likely you are to encounter a markedly different variety and the less beneficial your previously acquired immune response will be?
It's starting to feel like Johnson's speech has bombed.
But it will make no difference as he has framed the next election.
Only the forthcoming economic shitstorm can unseat him now.
Curiously, Boris's speech was better received on the Left (typical Boris but set the right tone) than on the Right (economic and political disaster area). Ultimately though I think Boris will prevail. What's left of the Thatcherite consensus will whither and die.
One thing I am not clued up on is the idea of the immune system being weakened over the last 18 months by not being so exposed to pathogens. Lots of people suggesting this, but how true is it? Does the immune system need constant work outs?
It is more that several infectious viruses that have been held at bay will hit simultaneously.
Covid will still be the big one. It is a long time in ICU, typically 3 weeks. A cardiac surgery or similar is usually out the next day, or day two. A covid case postpones a dozen major surgeries.
Flu cases are only a couple of days in ICU, if they get there at all.
One thing I am not clued up on is the idea of the immune system being weakened over the last 18 months by not being so exposed to pathogens. Lots of people suggesting this, but how true is it? Does the immune system need constant work outs?
Dunno. But I was slain by a very mild cold for two weeks.
It's starting to feel like Johnson's speech has bombed.
But it will make no difference as he has framed the next election.
Only the forthcoming economic shitstorm can unseat him now.
Curiously, Boris's speech was better received on the Left (typical Boris but set the right tone) than on the Right (economic and political disaster area). Ultimately though I think Boris will prevail. What's left of the Thatcherite consensus will whither and die.
The last bit of Thatcherism Boris and Sunak are currently pursuing is to end the UC and welfare uplift.
If Boris caves into the left on that too then fiscal conservatives will go beserk (personally I would keep the uplift for a few months through the winter and end it in the Spring if unemployment remains low)
Now there's going to be many factors involved but I wonder if that explains why the number of Eastern Europeans working in the UK has been falling but the number of Western Europeans has been increasing.
Well, a lot of those countries unemployment rates are low because all the people of working age left to earn money abroad. The Polish diaspora is much larger than the Greek one.
Sure, that one of the factors I referred to.
But I am curious that the number of Western Europeans working in the UK continues to increase - who they are and where they are working I'd like to know. They're obviously not working on farms or washing cars.
One thing I am not clued up on is the idea of the immune system being weakened over the last 18 months by not being so exposed to pathogens. Lots of people suggesting this, but how true is it? Does the immune system need constant work outs?
It is more that several infectious viruses that have been held at bay will hit simultaneously.
Covid will still be the big one. It is a long time in ICU, typically 3 weeks. A cardiac surgery or similar is usually out the next day, or day two. A covid case postpones a dozen major surgeries.
Flu cases are only a couple of days in ICU, if they get there at all.
So not actually more susceptible but just arriving concurrently. Cheers
Comments
Something about that video and voice over felt very early Command & Conquer to me, I thought I was about to get an update about the Global Defence Initiative's fight against Nod.
Congratulations, Sir Stuart.
Italian Vineyards are hiring machines, as they can’t get the staff.
https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/21/10/07/1547245/robots-take-over-italys-vineyards-as-wineries-struggle-with-covid-19-worker-shortages
(Insert “Because of Brexit” joke here).
It is a massive problem for the EU however. A bigger threat to them in my view than Brexit. It can't really function if members don't respect the rule of law and and have a strong and independent judiciary.
Funnily enough, he never appeared in public for the rest of the campaign - except to repeat his comments in front of a Select Commitee hearing!
First time in years.
Why not split amicably now?
Though for the Poles to outright say it, rather than just ignore the EU when it doesn't suit them like France and Germany, is a new step.
But it will make no difference as he has framed the next election.
Only the forthcoming economic shitstorm can unseat him now.
The EU has no values, its just pure politics as to self-interest of whoever is speaking at the time.
REMAIN 48%
EU law has supremacy over national law only to the extent agreed in the treaties. If the EU claims powers that are not envisaged in its treaties, and which contradict national law (or countries' constitutions), then that it is the duty of national courts to slap the EU down.
When countries join the EU, they make certain treaty commitments regarding their legal systems, and the maintenance of an independent judiciary. I think there is a good case that Poland (and Hungary) are no longer in compliance with their treaty commitments.
I would suggest that the solution to this is that Poland and Hungary should cease to be members of the EU. They clearly aren't interested in "the project".
And I would suggest that the UK should take the lead in creating a lighter-touch, less political free trade area. One that - in the fullness of time - would hopefully have a very close relationship with the EU. One that was about a single currency and political integration, and one that was solely about free trade.
Done right, I could see a number of non-Eurozone members choose our grouping over the EU. And the EU should do better too, when stripped of all the complexity of managing two groups of members, who will often have opposing interests.
Did you see the You gov poll where Labours vote has dropped considerably, people still support the Tories, and Labour are now less popular than Corbyn's loony.left.. takes some effort to get that bad... Green vote is increasing amd the Lib Dems are shipwecked with an unimpressive leader. who is going to challenge Boris???.. if not from within his own Party.?
It's not an uncommon problem in the Western world.
Neil Henderson
@hendopolis
·
6m
INDEPENDENT DIGITAL: 60,000 could die from flu this winter #TomorrowsPapersToday
The deficit is bad now, but that's after taking back control of our income. Just imagine how much worse it would have been if we hadn't stopped paying the EU?
How much worse would our deficit be if we were responsible for paying towards the EU bailout for Covid as well as for the EU budget contributions and for Covid?
We got out just in time to save the NHS didn't we?
This may be of interest to @Cyclefree though with luck her daughter is not in a similar position -:
https://labourlist.org/2021/10/leaving-my-pub-i-made-it-through-lockdowns-but-cant-survive-the-recovery/
The point about businesses not being protected from fire-and-hire mistreatment is a strong one.
** well it died earlier when Gordon Brown thought he'd abolished 'boom and bust' but had only abolished the boom part.
I think the EU would be a lot better off it only had countries that were broadly committed to "Ever Closer Union". Otherwise it will be forever attempting little carve outs.
I think they would also be wise to make it clear that treaty commitments are treaty commitments. If you can't do the time, don't do the... you know.
She was a deeply serious woman brought up in a strict Methodist household.
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/10/14/the-european-union/
critically personal sanitation is a lot better than it was. I think the story is more scary than factually based. We MIGHT get a new Asian flu that might kill.millions....its just speculation.imho.
⁰
- free movement so that their people can remit money home
- no Euro
- fiscal transfers from Brussels
- to do things that are not allowed in the treaties
And it's their call. They can choose the EU or our lighter touch regime. Or nothing at all. But they don't get to dictate that the rules only apply to them.
It will be a difficult call for them. Poland is very Atlanticist. I could see them joining with us. Hungary and Czechia, on the other hand, would probably stay with the EU. The Baltics have all joined the Euro, so they've kind of made their decision.
Greece 14.6%
Spain 14.3%
Italy 9.3%
France 7.9%
Bulgaria 5.9%
Romania 5.1%
Hungary 4.3%
Poland 3.4%
https://www.statista.com/statistics/268830/unemployment-rate-in-eu-countries/
Now there's going to be many factors involved but I wonder if that explains why the number of Eastern Europeans working in the UK has been falling but the number of Western Europeans has been increasing.
You either join a club and abide by its rules, or you don't join the club.
Government and Sunak in particular about to be hit by the full broadside.
But fair enough, there could be a massive problem if we don't.
I actually think flu is quite probably going to be a bigger issue for NHS this winter than covid.
What fucking cant and bollocks
Completely missed the Super League GF discussion I was tagged in the other morning.
I agree Saints probably should be slight favourites, given they've been there, done that more than once. Can't make it more than 55-60% though.
11-5 represents outstanding value for a Catalans win therefore.
One thing from today. SL Player of the Year Sam Tomkins is in the Dragons 21 after injury.
IF he plays that is another big plus. He's done it before several times. And against Saints, too.
The other thing is that means Arthur Mourgue plays somewhere other than full-back. He's a huge, unpredictable young talent who can do almost anything with ball in hand. Except catch a high ball. Which is quite a drawback if he plays full back.
So 60K would bd twice. which is a shitstorm for NHS as it currently is.
Our entire EU membership can be seen as an act of comical cultural sabotage of the French. No wonder they stole our vaccines
https://youtu.be/7LwUgsRtSQA
Overall there is a split on party lines. 50% of Conservative voters want the £20 UC uplift to end next month, just 17% want it to be permanent.
63% of Labour voters want the UC uplift to be made permanent, only 10% want it to come to an end next month
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/economy/articles-reports/2021/10/01/britons-want-keep-20-universal-credit-uplift-least
https://www.delish.com/uk/food-news/a30118962/christmas-dinner-in-a-tin-game-tinner/
There already a lighter-touch, less political free trade area called EFTA and we chose not to be part of that.
Why would Poland, for example, choose to align with the UK? Are we going to send them the subsidies or allow them the freedom of movement they get from the EU? No.
Buried deep in the EU Constitut, sorry Lisbon Treaty, is a requirement for EU Commissioners to have "an EU vocation" - ie they must be fully committed to Ever Closer Union and a United Europe
In other words, you can't be part of the rule-making, law-creating part of the EU government if you are eurosceptic.
Of course that makes sense if your absolute intent is to create a United States of Europe, but it is a democratic outrage if you are a country with wide eurosceptic sentiment. Half of your people - or whatever - can never be in the government. Not allowed
We were always going to exit, in the end. It seems others may follow, eventually. The EU shit is hitting the fan of the nation-state, the disbelief can no longer be suspended, the dream no longer sustained. Hard choices await
That nation A, B, C, right through to Z is leaving any moment now is a trope akin to the day of rapture is nigh.
Covid will still be the big one. It is a long time in ICU, typically 3 weeks. A cardiac surgery or similar is usually out the next day, or day two. A covid case postpones a dozen major surgeries.
Flu cases are only a couple of days in ICU, if they get there at all.
If Boris caves into the left on that too then fiscal conservatives will go beserk (personally I would keep the uplift for a few months through the winter and end it in the Spring if unemployment remains low)
What a day
But I am curious that the number of Western Europeans working in the UK continues to increase - who they are and where they are working I'd like to know. They're obviously not working on farms or washing cars.