EU forces elected British government to renege on Queen's Speech promise

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://order-order.com/2015/06/04/eu-forces-elected-government-to-renege-on-queens-speech-promise/#_@/Y9MYifViPsHeRQ

EU forces elected British government to renege on Queen's Speech promise


https://orderorder.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/queen-eu.jpg?w=900



The government will be forced to back track on their Queen’s Speech promise not to raise VAT following a European decree. The decision (http://order-order.com/2015/06/04/european-court-bans-energy-friendly-vat-cut) by the Court of Justice of the European Union to ban the UK’s 5% rate of VAT on the supply and installation of energy-saving materials will force the government to raise VAT to the standard 20% rate. Unelected pen-pushers over-ruling a democratically elected government just weeks after an election.

The CJEU has form with these types of judgements, last year forcing Poland to apply the full rate of VAT to fire protection equipment. One for Dave to bring up with his new German friends.


The Court of Justice of the European Union has banned (http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2015-06/cp150065en.pdf) the UK from reducing the rate of VAT on the supply and installation of energy-saving materials. EU directives allow governments to reduce tax on the supply of energy-saving goods and services “as part of a social policy“.

The UK government believed that a tax break initiative intended to produce positive “social effects” would satisfy European regulations, but the CJEU ruled that pretty much the only way insulation can provide for “reasons of principally social interest” is if is installed in “social housing“.

The CJEU therefore today found in favour of the European Commission, who had brought infringement proceedings against the UK. So we have to tax an industry if it intends to prevent an old lady from freezing to death, but it’s fine to waive the tax if the service is provided as a handout. When will this madness end?

Our government can't control the borders to the EU which contains 400m+ people.
Our government can't cut VAT from 20% to 5%.
Our government has no control over agricultural & fisheries policy.
Our government has only limited control over energy policy.

Can somebody tell me why we put up with this when other countries outside of the EU do not?

Can a supporter of the EU on here please give an argument as to why our elected government shouldn't be able to implement basic policy changes?

Thoughts?

[GommeInc]

I'm not sure what to think of this. 20% on renewables seems counter-productive, or have I read that wrong?

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'm not sure what to think of this. 20% on renewables seems counter-productive, or have I read that wrong?

What's there to be unsure about?

Either you believe our laws should be made by unaccountable foreign courts/politicians or they shouldn't. Whether you agree with the British government on the policy or not is neither here or there, the fact that our parliament is being blocked from making the most basic of tax changes is just wrong.

[GommeInc]

What's there to be unsure about?

Either you believe our laws should be made by unaccountable foreign courts/politicians or they shouldn't.
My post was obviously directed at the issue rather than the politics. Isn't increasing VAT to 20% on renewables (solar) essentially sticking fingers up at the environment, something the EU ought to look at seeing as they live in a glorious white blanket of smog? The British Government wanting it at 5% seems like a selfless act of defiance to actually sort out our own energy problems while not filling the public coffers. Unless these installers and manufacturers are over-charging and profiteering from the low VAT.

[FlyingJesus]

Can a supporter of the EU on here please give an argument as to why our elected government shouldn't be able to implement basic policy changes?

I'm not really a supporter of the EU but it's because they're a higher authority, same as how a local councillor can't act in a way that defies what's set by the national government and so forth. Pretty obvious

[-:Undertaker:-]

@GommeInc (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=2339);

Indeed, EU policy on wider energy policy makes no sense at all, nor do its policies on agriculture or fisheries.

That kind of bad law making is what you get when you have an unaccountable supranational organisation.


I'm not really a supporter of the EU but it's because they're a higher authority, same as how a local councillor can't act in a way that defies what's set by the national government and so forth. Pretty obvious

That's a legal argument, I am arguing politically and morally.

I would like to see the death penalty brought back tomorrow for example, yet if the EU were to implement it against the wishes of our parliament then I would regard that as illegit. We elect a government as our supreme law making body, or at least we did: and that's what is wrong with it all.

And that's the only debate to be had. Either one is for unaccountable judges and politicians making our laws for us, or they are not.

[FlyingJesus]

What you regard as illegitimate and what is actually illegitimate are two very different things. For those living in the real world, it's clear that we elect representatives in the European Parliament just like we do with the national one and our local councils - we therefore still do elect a supreme lawmaking body as you said

[GommeInc]

In theory and practice the European Council (elected heads of state from each member) and the EU Council (elected government officials of each member state from particular departments depending on area of discussion) are what drive EU policy and legislation. The Parliament then do the main body of work to see what to do with the direction put forward. So it's not entirely unelected. The only problem really is if it isn't going your way you just have to deal with it.

[-:Undertaker:-]

What you regard as illegitimate and what is actually illegitimate are two very different things. For those living in the real world, it's clear that we elect representatives in the European Parliament just like we do with the national one and our local councils - we therefore still do elect a supreme lawmaking body as you said

You can't have a democracy and thus legitimacy without a demos.

Europe does not have a demos.

[Chippiewill]

Not sure what the issue is here, any kind of free trade agreement would prevent this sort of stuff.

[FlyingJesus]

You can't have a democracy and thus legitimacy without a demos.

Europe does not have a demos.

You say that a lot in spite of it not being true

[-:Undertaker:-]

You say that a lot in spite of it not being true

There's a European demos? Where can I find them?

It is true what I keep repeating by any measurement, even founders of the EU such as Jean Monnet admitted this and knew this hence why they never suggested political union straight after World War II and decided to achieve it via the backdoor (economic union). The founders of the project knew, and admitted if you want the direct quotes, that the peoples of Europe would not accept political union if it were expressly put to them hence why they will still not go for what they really want. Business for Britain has put together a series of essays by historians on this topic: http://forbritain.org/demosessays.pdf


It is clear that one of the most pervasive and dangerous claims is that there is a single ‘European demos’. The view, held by some within the EU’s institutions, is that Europeans either share a common political and social identity or that there is a need to reforge an identity that hasn’t existed since the end of the Roman Empire (it was no coincidence that the EU’s founding document was the Treaty of Rome). Thankfully in his Bloomberg Speech, the Prime Minister, David Cameron noted that: “There is not, in my view, a single European demos.” It was a promising step forward, but more needs to be done.

The EU’s official motto is “United in diversity” – a laudable philosophy. Unfortunately, many of the EU’s policies seem intent on crushing that diversity, striving to replace Europe’s many historic identities with a single, artificial ‘European’ culture. As these historians convincingly show, there has always been a European component to our identity but it has never evolved into a ‘demos’. Britain, like the other member states, has its own political, social and economic outlook. Our history has been – and our future almost certainly will be – entangled with that of Europe’s, but we have always retained our own distinct identity.

If you still disagree with me, then again please show me present or historical evidence that there exists a European demos aka a people. It is impossible to argue for the existance of a European demos on the continent, let alone Britain included which is even more different in culture/outlook to those on the continent.

[FlyingJesus]

There's a European demos? Where can I find them?

Europe.

And if a "common political and social identity" is what you need for a demos then there isn't a British one either, so it's really a rather self-defeating argument

[-:Undertaker:-]

Europe.

Saying a word doesn't make it so.

If I say "Eurasia" does that mean there's a Eurasian people?


And if a "common political and social identity" is
what you need for a demos then there isn't a British one either, so it's really a rather self-defeating argument

Yes there is.

I know you like to think of everyone as a pretty little snowflake cos EvErYoN1 iS UnIqUe but the world doesn't work like that. In politics, the nation state is the biggest political unit a group of similar people can form and which we have formed: in the shape of the United Kingdom. Or France. Or Poland.

I bet when you answer a census/form (written in ENGLISH) you put 'Other' meaning individual. Ohh you are so unique aren't you. The very fact that you dispute there's no British people (aka a demos) but then go on to say 'Europe' is a demos makes you look really really silly. Now be sensible and debate the history.

[FlyingJesus]

Saying a word doesn't make it so.

If I say "Eurasia" does that mean there's a Eurasian people?
Yes. It's not a political group but yes there is a definition of a Eurasian person


Yes there is.

I know you like to think of everyone as a pretty little snowflake cos EvErYoN1 iS UnIqUe but the world doesn't work like that. In politics, the nation state is the biggest political unit a group of similar people can form and which we have formed: in the shape of the United Kingdom. Or France. Or Poland.

Or the European Union


I bet when you answer a census/form (written in ENGLISH) you put 'Other' meaning individual. Ohh you are so unique aren't you.

How about just for once in your life you attempt to actually tackle arguments properly instead of making up things that you'd like to be true? No, I do not do that, and I have no intention of ever doing so, so stop being a little brat and learn to read definitions that actually exist


The very fact that you dispute there's no British people (aka a demos) but then go on to say 'Europe' is a demos makes you look really really silly. Now be sensible and debate the history.

I didn't say that though, so once again learn to read. What I said is that if one doesn't exist, the other doesn't either, just by definition. You know, the thing that notes what words mean

[-:Undertaker:-]

Yes. It's not a political group but yes there is a definition of a Eurasian person

Yes, like Europe.

Europe is a continent, not a people.


Or the European Union

Not so hence why the EU isn't a country and cannot become a country which is my point.


How about just for once in your life you attempt to actually tackle arguments properly instead of making up things that you'd like to be true? No, I do not do that, and I have no intention of ever doing so, so stop being a little brat and learn to read definitions that actually exist

Irony.


I didn't say that though, so once again learn to read. What I said is that if one doesn't exist, the other doesn't either, just by definition. You know, the thing that notes what words mean

Where is the European demos in history? Where is it today? Can you please actually answer the question for once? You have thus far pointed to nothing that makes up a European demos. Where is the political culture of European conservatism to be found? Where is the European-wide concept of law and what is it exactly? Where is the European ethos of trade and business? Where is the European language? What humour to they share? What clothes do they wear? What architecture do they have? What wars have they fought? What food do they eat? Throughout history and now, I can attribute each of these criteria to the likes of France, Germany, Spain, the Byzantines, the Romans, Great Britain but not so to a thing called 'Europe'.

Now reply properly, not "I eat Italian pasta and can speak some Spanish cos i'm a unique snowflake" sort of argument. Actually try to engage me, along with the historians in the paper I linked to, to show me where there are a European people rather than peoples which is my argument.

[FlyingJesus]

Yes, like Europe.

Europe is a continent, not a people.

That's like saying England/UK is a country, not a people. Oh wait... that's correct. Cheers


Not so hence why the EU isn't a country and cannot become a country which is my point.

I don't see the word country included in your weird little redefinition of demos. Could that be because it's irrelevant and a demos doesn't only refer to a country full of people?


Where is the European demos in history? Where is it today? Can you please actually answer the question for once? You have thus far pointed to nothing that makes up a European demos.

People, that is what a demos is. The word literally means people. It does not mean "hivemind"


Where is the European-wide concept of law and what is it exactly? Where is the European ethos of trade and business?

The EU lol


Where is the European language?

Oops Switzerland just ceased to exist


What humour to they share? What clothes do they wear? What architecture do they have? What wars have they fought? What food do they eat? Throughout history and now, I can attribute each of these criteria to the likes of France, Germany, Spain, the Byzantines, the Romans, Great Britain but not so to a thing called 'Europe'.

History is not a very good indicator of the present. If it were, Byzantium (to use your own example) would continue to be an empire, and you're still pretending that everyone in a country is the same person. They're quite clearly not, and it's nothing to do with trying to be ultra unique or anything like that, just plain fact. Did we all vote the same person? Did you wake up at the same time as me today? What are we all having for dinner tonight?


Now reply properly, not "I eat Italian pasta and can speak some Spanish cos i'm a unique snowflake" sort of argument. Actually try to engage me, along with the historians in the paper I linked to, to show me where there are a European people rather than peoples which is my argument.

Again can you please stop with the absolute nonsense strawmanning and libel? It really doesn't make you look like anything but an aggressive child with an internet education in conspiracy. I have consistently answered your questions while all you do is repeat the same falsities and warped definitions that don't match up to the real world. I'm not even pro-Europe, I just think you're an idiot who needs to learn how to debate properly

[Chippiewill]

Yes, like Europe.

Europe is a continent, not a people.

Well it is, I'm european, therefore there's a european people (I'm also eurasian all though that's less relevant).

[-:Undertaker:-]

History is not a very good indicator of the present.

In the words of the late Kenneth Williams, "Oh what's the bloody point?".


Well it is, I'm european, therefore there's a european people (I'm also eurasian all though that's less relevant).

It doesn't mean there's a European people or a demos though, Europe is merely a geographical concept. It's like if I, you and some intellectuals came up with an idea (ring any bells?) called pan-Atlanticism and stated that Britain, Norway, America, Spain and Canada were inhabited by a similar people called the Atlantics (a made up people): that wouldn't mean it existed or that you could create a viable democracy or nation state out of it as anybody knows, despite what we may claim about our new great idea, that there's no such thing as an Atlantic culture or people. There's peoples and cultures in the Atantic region, but not a people: just like Europe, Eurasia, Asia, Arabia, Africa or North America. The peoples who inhabit Europe are French, Dutch, Italian and British: not some vague notion of European.

For historical examples (if you believe on history, unlike Tom) see the Sovietism, pan-Slavic (Yugoslavia), Iberianism, the Kalmar Union.

[GommeInc]

Arguably Britain is a geographical concept which means people in Wales, Scotland and England - we say British to usually mean these people and not including Northern Ireland.

I would say Europe has a demos, albeit hard to determine. With Schengen people can easily move around the EU and identify as European with no regard to their home nation.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Arguably Britain is a geographical concept which means people in Wales, Scotland and England - we say British to usually mean these people and not including Northern Ireland.

Indeed, there is a British demos certainly I think... although obviously that has been worn down immensely over the past few decades. England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and even the Irish Republic for that matter are all so similar yet look at the fact that a Union that has survived 300 years and was forged in war, blood and industry has 45% of the population in one part of it that don't wish to be a part of it and southern Ireland had left in 1922.

A political union on the continent, which is vastly diverse, would end up in bloodshed. The historical examples are there for all to see.


I would say Europe has a demos, albeit hard to determine. With Schengen people can easily move around the EU and identify as European with no regard to their home nation.

I identify as European, although on a geographical and maybe wider civiliasational context. But there's no such person as a European in the same way there's French, German, Polish, British: we're all so different. Even on holiday anybody can see the slight, yet huge differences between us all. An Indian person may identify sometimes as Asian to outsiders mainly for the ethnic factor, yet look at the cultural gulf between India and Japan. Or Cambodia and Mongolia.

My country is Britain, I am British and the continent which I live on is Europe. I would say that is what the large proportion of people agree with.

[FlyingJesus]

Even on holiday anybody can see the slight, yet huge differences between us all

I see a slight yet huge difference between you and I does that mean you're a new country

You're also still using a totally false definition of "demos" which is pretty much the entire problem with your attempt at reasoning

[-:Undertaker:-]

I see a slight yet huge difference between you and I does that mean you're a new country

You're also still using a totally false definition of "demos" which is pretty much the entire problem with your attempt at reasoning

To be a democracy or a functional state, you need a demos aka a people with something in common for it to work.

Otherwise Yugoslavia, Soviet Union, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Czechslovakia, The Sudan and on and on and on and on and on.


demos

ˈdiːmɒs/
noun
noun: Demos; plural noun: Demoi; noun: demos; plural noun: demoses

the common people of an ancient Greek state.



I'm not going to keep going over this with you if you can't understand it.

[FlyingJesus]

lol that use of common means "not the nobility", not a bunch of people who are supposedly clones. Also we're not an ancient Greek state, so let's use the definition that IS applicable to the present world:
The populace of a democracy as a political unit
Nothing about having to think or look or act like each other, just have to be within a democratic unit

[-:Undertaker:-]

lol that use of common means "not the nobility", not a bunch of people who are supposedly clones.

Those are your words, not mine.

The people of this country share many common instincts and beliefs which make them a nation, as is the case with every other nation.


Also we're not an ancient Greek state, so let's use the definition that IS applicable to the present world:
The populace of a democracy as a political unit
Nothing about having to think or look or act like each other, just have to be within a democratic unit

Like Yugoslavia and Iraq?

Yes, throwing different peoples under the same legal and political system has worked so well in the past hasn't it. :rolleyes:

[FlyingJesus]

I'm not talking about what works, I'm talking what is true and what is made up by you to suit your own purposes

[-:Undertaker:-]

@FlyingJesus (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=24753);

Oh Tom stop being a John Lennon and pretending all different peoples could live under the same political and legal system. It's such rot and any historian or political theorist would laugh you out of the room. Even the EU/pan-Euro groups know it would need this hence why they pour millions into Euro 'culture' programmes. In any case, by admitting false nations such as the examples I have provided don't work you've invalidated your own argument. :clap:

[FlyingJesus]

Oh Tom stop being a John Lennon and pretending all different peoples could live under the same political and legal system.

I've never said that and I certainly don't believe it. I even said in my opening post that I'm not pro-EU, I'm just also not pro-bull


It's such rot and any historian or political theorist would laugh you out of the room. Even the EU/pan-Euro groups know it would need this hence why they pour millions into Euro 'culture' programmes.

That's great but nothing at all to do with what I've said. You're really not very good at this


In any case, by admitting false nations such as the examples I have provided don't work you've invalidated your own argument. :clap:

No I haven't because my argument is literally just about the definition of words. What else is it that you think I'm trying to argue here?

[-:Undertaker:-]

FlyingJesus;

Still all over the place, what a joke.

Once I pin him on why certain nations won't work as they're created from separate cultural groups and lack a common people aka a demos, he falls apart and just witters on about us not being in ancient Greece despite not understanding that the word democracy comes from the word demos as it is generally accepted that for a democracy to function you need a common people who share broadly similar beliefs. Otherwise you end up with Yugoslavia and Iraq style scenarios.

But no, John Lennon Tom knows better.

[FlyingJesus]

Or you know, I never said any of that and you're shooting down straw men. I can't believe I have to say this in every thread but do try at least once reading what my actual argument is instead of making up what you want me to have said and running with it. Mudslinging and ignorance aren't going to help you here, you're just looking stupid as usual by posting a string of lies

[-:Undertaker:-]

@FlyingJesus (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=24753);

You've basically said that there's no such thing as a British people or demos whilst there's a European one.


And if a "common political and social identity" is what you need for a demos then there isn't a British one either, so it's really a rather self-defeating argument

There's only so much you can do to try and reason with somebody who is arguing that water flows uphill. If you dispute the very existence of historic nations like Britain and France, as well as the literal definition of a demos which is how a democracy functions, then it's impossible to hold a discussion with you on this.

Imagine all the people... free from utopia-builders like Tom who create unworkable states/democracies that end in violence and disaster.

[FlyingJesus]

An if/then statement is not the same as saying it's what I believe... how the hell are you debates manager? And it's you trying to argue against the literal definition(s) of demos lol, you're trying to pretend that the phrase "common people" means everyone (which I guess is kinda fair for someone from Liverpool) and flat-out ignoring the definition that actually fits the modern world.

And where are you getting utopia-builder from? I'm genuinely confused as to how you can even attempt to paint me as some sort of idealist when I'm speaking only in literal terms and you're the one inventing your own definitions in order to create some sort of cosmic balance of pure traditions

[-:Undertaker:-]

An if/then statement is not the same as saying it's what I believe... how the hell are you debates manager? And it's you trying to argue against the literal definition(s) of demos lol, you're trying to pretend that the phrase "common people" means everyone (which I guess is kinda fair for someone from Liverpool) and flat-out ignoring the definition that actually fits the modern world.

Nation states are as old as civilisation, they are not an idea that has suddenly expired. Indeed you could argue that if anything the notion of a nation state and a demos has become stronger in the last century, given the end of Empires and the rapid explosion in newly independent states for people with a common culture.

And yes common in that sense does mean everyone, you do understand that interpretation of the word don't you? *cough* Common Market... *cough*


And where are you getting utopia-builder from? I'm genuinely confused as to how you can even attempt to paint me as some sort of idealist when I'm speaking only in literal terms and you're the one inventing your own definitions in order to create some sort of cosmic balance of pure traditions

Nation states and needing a demos for democracy are realpolitik, not some idea from the past.

Ask the Kurds - a common people with shared traditions, ideals, values - who are on the brink of finally establishing their own independent state after hundreds of years of being caught in the borders of other states. And an independent Kurdistan has a chance of working as both a nation state and possibly even a democracy given it has that required demos and conforms to the established definitions despite what you may pretend otherwise.

But nope, there's Tom on the other hand denying the existence of a Kurdish people or demos. He knows better than thousands of years of history.

[FlyingJesus]

Nation states are as old as civilisation, they are not an idea that has suddenly expired. Indeed you could argue that if anything the notion of a nation state and a demos has become stronger in the last century, given the end of Empires and the rapid explosion in newly independent states for people with a common culture.

Yeah you could argue that... so? It doesn't make a specific reference less specific and isn't anything to do with what I just said


And yes common in that sense does mean everyone, you do understand that interpretation of the word don't you? *cough* Common Market... *cough*

No it doesn't because it's in reference to ancient Greece, where democracy certainly did not extend to everyone. Also you're still ignoring the existence of the NON-SPECIFIC definition: The populace of a democracy as a political unit.
That's all that it means. This is not difficult, you're just making it look that way by ignoring everything that you wish didn't exist and making up new bits to fill in the gaps


Nation states and needing a demos for democracy are realpolitik, not some idea from the past.

Where the hell did that come from are you just throwing out catchphrases from a .txt file or something now because that is not relevant to anything that's been said


Ask the Kurds - a common people with shared traditions, ideals, values - who are on the brink of finally establishing their own independent state after hundreds of years of being caught in the borders of other states. And an independent Kurdistan has a chance of working as both a nation state and possibly even a democracy given it has that required demos and conforms to the established definitions despite what you may pretend otherwise.

But nope, there's Tom on the other hand denying the existence of a Kurdish people or demos. He knows better than thousands of years of history.

I don't deny the existence of Kurds, you're lying again. I would state that there is no current Kurdish demos BECAUSE OF WHAT DEMOS MEANS but that will change if Kurdistan becomes a nation/state with democratic governance. Regardless of whether that happens or not, there are clearly people who are culturally Kurdish, but because of the current political state of the region that is a people and not a demos - they aren't the same thing.

[The Don]

FlyingJesus;

Still all over the place, what a joke.

Once I pin him on why certain nations won't work as they're created from separate cultural groups and lack a common people aka a demos, he falls apart and just witters on about us not being in ancient Greece despite not understanding that the word democracy comes from the word demos as it is generally accepted that for a democracy to function you need a common people who share broadly similar beliefs. Otherwise you end up with Yugoslavia and Iraq style scenarios.

But no, John Lennon Tom knows better.

If you think you're 'winning' here or in anyway making anyone else other than yourself appear to be a fool then you're clearly more deluded than I thought you were.