Posted on 08/18/2019 3:20:07 PM PDT by Enlightened1
The 1972 Act is the vehicle that sees regulations flow into UK law directly from the EU’s lawmaking bodies in Brussels.
The announcement of the Act’s repeal marks a historic step in returning lawmaking powers from Brussels to the UK. We are taking back control of our laws, as the public voted for in 2016.
The repeal of the European Communities Act 1972 will take effect when Britain formally leaves the EU on October 31.
Speaking after signing the legislation that will crystallise in law the upcoming repeal of the ECA, the Secretary of State for Exiting the EU Steve Barclay said:
This is a clear signal to the people of this country that there is no turning back - we are leaving the EU as promised on October 31, whatever the circumstances - delivering on the instructions given to us in 2016.
The votes of 17.4 million people deciding to leave the EU is the greatest democratic mandate ever given to any UK Government. Politicians cannot choose which public votes they wish to respect. Parliament has already voted to leave on 31 October. The signing of this legislation ensures that the EU Withdrawal Act will repeal the European Communities Act 1972 on exit day.
The ECA saw countless EU regulations flowing directly into UK law for decades, and any government serious about leaving on October 31 should show their commitment to repealing it.
That is what we are doing by setting in motion that repeal. This is a landmark moment in taking back control of our laws from Brussels.
(Excerpt) Read more at gov.uk ...
Indeed they were, and a disgraceful and despicable episode that was. But Rotherham was over a decade ago, and many lessons have been learned from it. We’re constantly reminded of Rotherham as if nothing has changed since then: but the attitude, policies and procedures of all the relevant agencies have changed out of all recognition in the intervening years. Witness the Huddersfield trials saga, and the various others (Oxford, Telford, etc) which preceded it.
Well, as to two Brits wanting to stay in the EU, obviously there are some, in fact nearly 50%. I was, of course, referring to the referendum.
As to putting the UK in its place, I’ll throw it back at you and ask why that referendum passed, if the Brits thought they had such a great deal with the EU?
No, you’re subject to the laws of another - in this case the EU.
All the fancy footsteps to deal with one freaking regulation? Who’s going to do that with the mountains of regulations the EU has and will spew out?
Fugeddabouddit.
The referendum result was that narrowly leave won. Totally 37% of the electorate voted leave. It wasn’t a decisive decision like the 67% in 1975 UK Brexit referendum who voted to stay.
They should still leave, yes, as parliament in October 2016 voted to invoke article 50. But the referendum was narrow.
Why the 37 percent voted that way? Many were discontented with what they read in the MSM of the deal they had. The MSM as usual used half truths to ratchet up emotions and sell more papers. Some people definitely had real grievances, #1 being workers from central Europe taking over jobs.
Others used it as a protest vote against the UK government.
So many did think they had a good deal, others didn’t. They should leave in any case, with a no deal hard Brexit as there is no other way to resolve such a deadlock
Each country in the EU creates the regulations, and each country has veto rights to reject a regulation.
No fancy footsteps.
Congress or people ask the bureaucrats to work on a proposed regulation. Replace Congress with euparliament.
The proposed regulation goes to congess/eu parliament to pass by simple majority.
In the upper house, the EU council, each head of government has veto rights to swat down a regulation
This is because the thing is a confederation, not a country.
I differ with Winnie and my opinion is close to yours, Sam, but I know that
1. I am prejudiced against muslims and believe they are mollycoddled and let to get away with stuff
2. I live in a different country and don’t visit often enough to get the ground realities
3. I see all sides of media exaggerating things.
I think the Muslim rape gangs were horrific. These were nearly exclusively muslims whose grandparents came from Mirza pur in Pakistan, a very traditional Islamic place. They all came as mill workers.
Their descendents saw the white underclass with no religion or morals and exploited it
The police looked the other way, afraid to be labelled racists.
All the while they also targeted Asian ie brown skinned Sikh girls as well.
Sikhs and Hibdus objected to the media and police clubbing the rapists under the term Asian.
Hindus in the UK are law abiding and hate being clubbed with mirzapuris just because they have the same colour skin
To me the police are the worst part. That they carry water for the extremists. I also find it ridiculous that British cops and especially detectives don’t even carry weapons. They must think of themselves like cute little hobbits who live in some pleasant reality out of reality itself.
Something similar was said not long ago by one of Boris' cabinet members.
Hans-Olaf Henkel... has said the loss of Britain in the common market cannot be compensated by smaller nations stepping up.
They generally do not need to, and the relationship between British people and the police is much, much more friendly than in the USA.
Despite all the subsequent social changes, this tradition still persists. Even now, polls of serving police officers show a clear majority against routine arming, although that majority is smaller than it once was. And 'unarmed' is a bit misleading - there have always been armed officers, but the key thing is that the ordinary copper on the street isn't routinely armed. The view is that it's better that guns should be in the hands of officers intensively trained for the purpose, rather than every ordinary officer who has no special interest or training, only does the minimum range time necessary, will rarely if ever need his gun, but may use it inappropriately when he does.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of this (clearly there are sound arguments on both sides) the fact is that deaths and serious injuries to UK police officers while on duty are rare. Since 1945 only 250 have been fatally shot.
Teapots and vacuum cleaners were the final straw for the rank and file Brits.
It’s one BIG step closer, Boris Johnson ROCKS.
Thanks for that explanation! Sounds like it was a nod to the tradition of liberty in the UK compared to the continent.
Brit officials who try to torpedo the brexit are traitors and need to be treated as such.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.