Tommy wrote:Which laws have the EU forced upon the UK that you don't like? Which EU laws have been forced upon *you* and how do they affect your life?
Finningley Boy wrote:Tommy, I've just recorded some examples of EU imposition in my response to IAT then RIAT. In order the prove the EUs ability to over rule all, do you need a case point for every country or something.
No. You haven't. You also did not answer the question - dare I say because you can't.
You've used examples of Article 7 being used and twisted them to say it was imposing EU law - which was the stance taken by the tabloids - namely those that twisted everything that the EU did to "they're taking away our bendy bananas".etc.etc. Gutter press. When in fact Article 7 was imposed to defend the existing freedoms of that nations citizens.
But as the EU grows itself and gains more authority by making laws in Brussels which override the national laws where there is inconsistency, in which case EU law prevails, that's the law! The EU have already flexed their muscles toward countries which have upset them, Poland for example, when they openly renewed demands war reparations from Germany. The Government in Poland is unpopular with the EU commission, because it's like ours, it isn't sufficiently supine. The new government wanted to remove lingering old communist Judges, which hadn't been elected, the EU disagreed and threatened to withhold voting rights and stop funding. What the hell has Poland's internal national administrations got to do with a bloody trading block?
Article 7 (to date) was not implemented against Poland. The European Commission triggered it however for it to be implemented requires a two thirds majority vote of the European Parliament - that has not
happened. In essence, the European Commissions actions are purely a warning at this stage that things are reaching a point where the vote can occur.
This is due to the Polish Government changing the law to put their judges under the direct influence of the ruling Political Party via retirement and punishment policies. They were no longer independent, it was part of a package of 13 laws passed by Poland designed to put a political bias on their judiciary system. The threat was made to protect the people of Poland from a potentially dangerous situation.
This all happened at the time the Polish Government was demanding reparations, so the tabloids linked the two as (I'm going to say it), fake news.
Article 7 was only invoked after 2 years of attempts by the EU to ask them to review the situation. A last resort.
It had nothing with forcing new EU laws through on them as you claim, it was about the protection of freedom.
want Boris Johnson telling the Judge in your
court case what ruling or sentence to pass on you? Or would you rather the system was independent and fair based on the evidence at hand?
Hungary, didn't want to take in an un restricted flow of migrants, for many rational and practical reasons, again, the EU invoked article 7 of its constitution, depriving Hungary of some of its membership rights, only some, they didn't want to chuck them out. If you know what I mean.
The EU voted to implement Article 7 against the EU during September 2018 - however as Hungary is challenging this vote things are moving slowly.
Hungary is challenging the validity of the vote in the ECJ (two thirds of those that voted voted to implement but 7% - 48 - MEPs obstained; they argue the law says that Article 7 must be two thirds of all MEPs not just those that voted - if right the vote is less than two thirds in favour). Until the ECJ reach a decision, the EU is reluctant to implement the Article 7 procedure - this is the first time it has ever gone this far and therefore they are rightly treading lightly in order to establish the correct precedents.
Whilst Migrants are involved in why Article 7 has been implemented - the reason has again been twisted by yourself (and the press) - it was about how they were treating the migrants within the country themselves. The Migrant issue is only a small part of why Article 7 was invoked however.
Again, the main reason for it being invoked was in response to a number of changes bought in by the ruling party in Hungary that eroded the freedoms of its people for their own benefit. Indeed, one of the triggers was the independent thinktanks (US based) annual barometer of democratically free nations changing the status of Hungary to "partially free" - the only EU nation to be set at this level. With the laws and rules being invoked in Hungary, the nation risked falling back into a non-democratic and/or dictatorial situation.
Whether you like it or not, member states of the EU sign a treaty upon joining the bloc to uphold democratic freedoms (in addition to Human Rights) - if a nation is seen to breech them then the other EU members can enforce on you to comply via Article 7 - they do also however have to say why you are not complying, confirm those accusations post vote (on going at the moment) and provide suggestions on how to rectify the matter. The nation is not left to its own devices.
Sources: 1 2 3 4 5 6