Without talking about immigration, can anyone tell me......

[BertrandRussell]

........what laws or regulations have been passed by the EU which have been detrimental to the UK?

EU laws are partly there to protect citizens from the dodgy actions of their own governments.

See here eg. Pollution is killing thousands of people in the UK because our own government refuses to clean it up, so now British environmental campaigners are taking the UK government to court:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35689427

This argument boils down to "what's the EU for?" In my personal Leave campaign I've convinced many to vote Leave simply by asking them who their MEP is, and how their MEP represents them.

Clean air, clean waters, clean beaches - of course it makes sense to legislate for these at the highest level. Plenty of environmental protection is done at global level, after all. But why should that also mean ever-closer-union, one government, one size fits all social and economic policies?

EU treaties make it impossible for the UK to re-nationalise industries such as rail, steel, our post office.

Under intensive privatisation over decades we have seen British rail fares become the most expensive on earth, our extortionate utility bills flowing into German and chinese pension funds and a Post Office rip-off to benefit the hedge fund owning mates of Nick Clegg. Not to mention the privatisation of tuition fees which are now the highest on earth and students now looking at paying out £180 a month interest.

There are strong socialist reasons to vote leave. It's pro-Neoliberal anti-nationalisation stranglehold is just one of them.

www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/08/renationalise-railways-what-no-one-will-tell-you-we-cant-while-were-eu

I thought they've now decided we can renationalise the railways? There seems to be a lot of conflicting information about this - a problem throughout the campaign.

I'm not entirely sure what the eu had to do with tuition fees - but admittedly it's not an area I know a lot about.

Juncker, president of the EU Commission and former prime minister of Luxembourg (Europe's Tax-dodge central) has adversely affected the UK's ability to do anything about the problem of mass tax avoidance.

Juncker protects multinational corporates and independent millionaires from tax law, and holds a fundamental belief that paying tax is only for the wage-class.

It is impossible for Cameron (or whoever is prime minister here) to legislate this problem at domestic level while the EU prevents us.

clashcity no it would violate EU competition rules.

www.leftfutures.org/2015/09/eu-membership-means-no-renationalisation/

What's your problem MyHovercraft. Typical sarcasm.

I answered the OP's question. I did not say that was what I was basing my vote on.

But the EU didn't 'make' us privatise anything.

This is what I mean, this article directly contradicts it

labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/10/02/sorry-nigel-nationalisation-is-not-against-eu-law/

Not having a go at you btw, just frustrated with so little solid facts and so much hyperbole on both sides.

No, that was the Tories.

I'm not talking about privatisation, I'm talking about renationalisation.

clashcity Have you read that article? It's not possible under EU law to re-nationalise, unless you can magic up some sort of exemption such as environmental or extreme economic reasons. All of these exemptions would be hard to prove, it's not allowed simply because it's better for the British.

The EU have to decide if we're allowed to or not, and agree whether the exemption is valid. It is still their decision.

Yes Ive read both articles.

It would appear to me that renationalisation is allowed but subject to challenge from the ECJ if it is not deemed to comply with rules on distortion of competition and the private companies appeal against this - which I suppose would be a given - unless it falls into the exemptions.

I think it's a bit simplistic to say 'we cannot renationalise' - particularly as it has already been achieved in other eu countries. I believe remain advocates of renationalisation are confident that for the railways and utilities, it would be achievable, particularly as they are partially government funded anyway.

Although, to be honest i was just using it as an example of the conflicting information being given - and suspect you are right, that it would at the very least be made difficult.

I'm voting on the basis of the aspects I can be as confident as anyone can be that I understand and have some knowledge about not based on campaign posters - trying to pick out hard facts is like trying to find a needle in haystack.

"The EU have to decide if we're allowed to or not, and agree whether the exemption is valid. It is still their decision."

Why do people say "their decision"? It's "our" decision, surely? We are voting members of the European Parliament.........

The EU refuses to allow VAT to be removed from sanitary products. Have also not allowed Vat on fuel to be removed. And how on earth with this wonderful workers rights legislation that the EU is said to be a champion of can zero hour contracts exist. And I also heard today that America is about to do some deal with the EU to allow American medical private companies to take over part of the NHS. No wonder Obama is so keen for us to remain. And what's it to do with him in any case.

The EU wastes £150 million per year transporting the Brussels bureaucracy including all paperwork to Strassbourg, to a building that sits empty for more than 300 days per year, for 4 days every month. Lorries drive paperwork back and forth...... 10,000 tons of CO2...... We help pay for that - complete waste of money.

Lightbulbs!
I know it's not big in the grand scale of other things, but......

Viviennemary
That deal is part of TTIP which is dependent on the UK remaining.

Worst excesses of employment law are European in origin - the red tape for businesses is ridiculous

Can you name a time our parliament has been overruled by EU that you strongly disagree with.

Abu Hamza.

shiny - that's an argument for introducing paperless procedures (which already exist in several European bodies) rather than leaving the EU.

And in the future - TTIP aka The End of the NHS.

The thought of staying in makes me go cold.

Worst excesses of employment law are European in origin - the red tape for businesses is ridiculous

That does sound interesting. Could you tell us more?

"Abu Hamza"

So you don't like the law which says that a person can not be extradited to a country where they may receive a cruel or excessive punishment?

Once the course was satisfied that Abu Hamza would not be excited if found guilty he was deported. Unless I've got the story wrong.