what does sovereignty mean?

[ssd]

does it making the Uk making its own laws?

in other words the Conservative government making up the laws?

is that what leavers voted for?

I ment irrelevant.

grrr a double negative. Ignore my correction.

If everyone either loved or didn't care about the EU, why did even the Lib Dems promise a referendum on handing over more powers? Particularly as parliament always was and always would be sovereign?

MaizieD Fair enough

Dannythechampion sovereignty was a smokescreen for a right wing coup..
. (not the Leave party wanted the responsibility of power, just a bit more leverage. They never thought they'd win)

I'd agree Theworld.

I also think that "democracy and sovereignty" with the implication that parliament wasn't sovereign, and without disclosing the fact that actually all trade agreements lead to an extremely small ceding of sovereignty was cover for something else.

Mainly a cover for the anti immigrant sentiment.

The post earlier regarding people not liking freedom of movement is proof of that. People don't like freedom of movement not because of any factual basis, but because of their prejudices. the D and S argument allowed them to make a (false) claim which covered this.

If you are right and

People don't like freedom of movement not because of any factual basis, but because of their prejudices

there are a lot of these prejudiced people. For example in Scotland, which voted 62% remain, a recent poll found

It turns out that Scots are not so keen on freedom of movement after all. As many as 64% believe that, post-Brexit, anyone from the EU who wishes to live in Britain should have to apply to do so in the same way as anyone from outside the EU. Even more, 72%, think that the same rule should apply to any British citizen who wants to go and live in the EU

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/30/scots-back-sturgeon-brexit-polls

So I suppose we can guess that the numbers in England and Wales who are not keen on freedom of movement will be higher.

I suppose, at the end of the day, your judgement on why the vast majority of people want what they want is neither here nor there.

My judgement is spot on, because when you ask people WHY they aren't keen on FOM, they spout the same old turgid crap. Wages, stealing jobs, claiming benefits, taking social housing.

Pretty much what the Daily Mail repeat.

Its funny that in the areas of highest immigration, the votes were far more overwhelming to remain, that they leave vote over all was.

Even in much discussed Boston the "pressure" on wages, NHS, schools was massively over egged in comparison to what the council data says, oh and immigration was highlighted as the highest problem for the area by voters in 2001 ! Far before the EU 8 accession.

Generally incorrect, much as the D and S claims.

I think most leavers are getting a bit bored of being called racists. And the 50% of remain voters who dislike freedom of movement will probably not be too impressed. But of course, it is your right to carry on trying to slur and denigrate. I'm totally flummoxed as to what you hope to a give by it though.

" the 50% of remain voters who dislike freedom of movement"

Nobody asked me about this, so my likes and dislikes are not being taken into account in that poll. Your poll is incomplete and may therefore be incorrect..

Hubbie wasn't asked either. Maybe there should be a referendum on it. To have an official clarification on the issue, like.

"I think most leavers are getting a bit bored of being called racists"

Then don't give counterfactual justifications for the reasons for your vote, then. The lady doth protest too much.

I thought leave voters were all about how incorrect polls were, especially when it shows how many people might change it, or regret it, but when its convineint, ah yes out you trot them

Being opaque about what you actually mean seems to be a bit of an art. In fact you raised the freedom of movement, but seem to be unable to justify the reasons WHY people don't like it.

Misinformation, lies and manipulation, whilst all the facts were out there.

Confirmation, confirmation, confirmation.

The British government never lost sovereignty because the Queen never lost sovereignty. The issue is a little more subtle.

Basically, Britain, through signing EU treaties in order to be part of the EU, was then bound to implement laws in Britain that did not originate in the British parliament.

Now this is actually quite a big issue because in Britain, there is a political culture that believes very strongly that democracy means the people have the right to elect their lawmakers and they also have the right to get rid of them if they don't like the laws that are being made. The people should also have the power to revoke laws they do not like by voting for a party that will repeat or amend existing law, or pass new laws that they do like.

But being in the EU means you cannot do that. If government is required to implement an EU law the people do not like, then there's little the people can do about it.

The further and more murky issue is the process of how law is made in the EU. Unlike MPs in parliament, MEPs cannot suggest new laws; they can only vote for or against them, or suggest amendments (similar to the function of the House of Lords). EU law is actually initiated by a number of officials (who are not elected by the populace) in the European Commission, though any legislation has to be passed by the council of ministers (representative of governments) and the EU parliament (where the MEPs sit).

In some cases, only the consent of the Council of Ministers applies.

So you can see how this starts to look a bit dodgy from the perspective of the British democratic tradition. Britain is required to implement laws that have not only originated elsewhere, but may not have received consent from any British MEP.

And it's this people are talking about when they are talking about "sovereignty".

Nobody asked me about this, so my likes and dislikes are not being taken into account in that poll. Your poll is incomplete and may therefore be incorrect.

It's not my poll, it's a poll by NatCen as linked to in the Guardian article -

www.natcen.ac.uk/news-media/press-releases/2017/march/i%E2%80%99ll-have-what-she%E2%80%99s-having-scots-share-pm%E2%80%99s-vision-for-brexit-deal/

As with all polls, it is based on sampling a representative sample of the population and using this to estimate statistics for the population. Polls do not claim to question the entire population or to predict the opinions of specific individuals.

Obvs we are all free to ignore polls which don't fit with our worldview or argument.

"But being in the EU means you cannot do that. If government is required to implement an EU law the people do not like, then there's little the people can do about it. "

We elect the government which makes the decisions and has the power to amend rules with the EU. We elect the MEPs who can do the same.

"EU law is actually initiated by a number of officials (who are not elected by the populace) in the European Commission, though any legislation has to be passed by the council of ministers (representative of governments) and the EU parliament (where the MEPs sit). "

Which fundamentally misunderstands the EU parliament works, because its a PR parliament and from across 27 countries, there are no parties that have large majority power to "make laws" therefore the commission draws up laws, but can't have them passed without the agreement of the council of ministers ( whom we elect), and can be ammended by parliament.

"The people should also have the power to revoke laws they do not like by voting for a party that will repeat or amend existing law, or pass new laws that they do like. "

Misunderstanding the way democracy works in the UK, we have representative democracy, not "what the people want.

Essentially when people are talking about "sovereignty" its a front, because most people don't actually understand the way the EU works, or actually our parliament, or the way trade deals work, or the WTO etc etc.

Shown by this: " If government is required to implement an EU law the people do not like, then there's little the people can do about it. "

If the government is required to implement things by the WTO, or through an FTA, or through a PTA, there is little the people can do about. it.

Its a front, something that sounds reasonable to cover up something else.

More people regret their votes:

www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/10/daily-chart-6

Brexit voters like the death penalty:

www.rt.com/uk/382851-brexit-leave-death-poll/

Danny

Quite frankly bollocks. The UK cannot alone change or veto many laws coming from the EU. A UK parliament can. End of discussion.

Your point about the "way laws are made" is also incorrect, not all law is legislature is it?

The leave vote certainly didn't like British Judges, applying British constitutional law, so that the British Parliament could exercise its sovereignty did it.

All you need do is look at the screaming all over the press, other media and website.

Democracy and sovereignty my arse.

"The UK cannot alone change or veto many laws coming from the EU. A UK parliament can. End of discussion."

Quite frankly drivel, the UK can veto many things, including the proposed tariffs on Chinese Steel. The UK is PART of the process of making laws, and has its own representatives as part of the commission drawing them , with repeated discussions so that the laws coming in the EU suit all parties.

Cause you know the commission civil servants aren't permanent right? When drawing up proposals they are seconded from government departments to draw up the laws in national interests.

I DARE you to name one that is so detrimental, and no "VAT" doesn't count, cause you know that we were part of the driving force behind that right?

"The UK cannot alone change or veto many laws coming from the EU. A UK parliament can. End of discussion"

It can't change the deal we strike with the WTO, which can effect taxes, government aid to industries etc etc.

It can't change the regulations agreed. It can't change the independent court rulings that will adjudicate on disputes.

It certainly won't be able to have any influence over EU rules and regs set after we leave, which in order to trade with our biggest partner, our businesses will need to follow.

The democracy and sovereignty claims are merely attempts to legitimise a leave vote for another reason, because when you get down to it, we gain very little actualy sovereignty from leaving, and will give yet more up in more ways in our new "deals".

I think most leavers are getting a bit bored of being called racists

Then don't give counterfactual justifications for the reasons for your vote, then. The lady doth protest too much

Eh. What has the reason I, as one leave voter, give for my vote got to do with whether 17 plus million are bored with being called racists or whether it's reasonable for you to call them racists?

I thought leave voters were all about how incorrect polls were, especially when it shows how many people might change it, or regret it, but when its convineint, ah yes out you trot them

No, just more of your insults.

A lot of your posts suggest you have a real problem with the fact that just because one leave voter posts, says, believes something, that doesn't mean the other 17 plus million agree. It's a difficult concept, I know, but do try to get your head round it.

Being opaque about what you actually mean seems to be a bit of an art. In fact you raised the freedom of movement, but seem to be unable to justify the reasons WHY people don't like it.

Oops, faulty logic again. Someone not discussing something does not equal them being unable to. I haven't shared my dahlia propagation techniques with you, but I could if you asked nicely.

Misinformation, lies and manipulation, whilst all the facts were out there

Indeed.

Confirmation, confirmation, confirmation

Yes, that's what happens when you are unable to absorb any information or ideas which don't fit your narrative.

The leave vote certainly didn't like British Judges, applying British constitutional law, so that the British Parliament could exercise its sovereignty did it

Tut tut. You are doing it again. Some of the leave vote, some remember (We're not the Borg)

"Yes, that's what happens when you are unable to absorb any information or ideas which don't fit your narrative."

How ironic, the leave vote encapsulated.

And yes, when you get down to it and ask for the reasons for leaving and the reasons given are so poor and incorrect, it is safe to assume its actually an attempt to legitimise something else.

The leave campaign made hugely inaccurate claims regarding immigration, people stood infront of posters of refugees in fact, others made claims about the impacts of immigration, and it did so with the support of massively racist and xenephobic media stories.

It made hugely inaccurate claims regarding the cost of the EU, it make VERY inaccurate claims about democracy.

All of which were very easy to show that were incorrect, with the worlds biggest educational tool at most people's finger tips, yet somehow it didn't happen.

My post about your use of polls is fine, leave voters have repeatedly decried the polls, yet when it suits you, you trot them out.

"Someone not discussing something does not equal them being unable to."

In a forum which is directly debating the issue it does, not engaging with it means you're ignoring it, and we know the reason why.

Not all leave voters are racists, not all are xenephobic, I admit.

But those sentiments were massively exploited to get the vote.

Ah "some of the leave vote"

Yet all remainers are the borg...see the double standards rock both ways.

with repeated discussions so that the laws coming in the EU suit all parties

or, given that agreement between 28 parties is harder to reach than between one, which don't suit all parties.