EU ABOLISHES ROAMING CHARGES

[abc]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36171266

Well done EU for helping save the public millions of pounds annually.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Have you replied to any of the arguments yet in the EU thread?

Anyway this old recycled story that gets thrown up every so often, so easy to debunk.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36171266


The controls on charges are being introduced under an EU regulation - not a directive - which means they have not been specifically incorporated into UK law.

So if the UK voted to leave the EU, it could decide whether it wanted to keep them or not.

The Vote Leave campaign said the UK would be able to retain the price caps if it wanted to.

"These charges are being abolished across Europe and abroad. There is no evidence to suggest that they will go up if we vote leave," said Matthew Elliott, chief executive of Vote Leave.

In addition to this, roaming charges are now being abolished across the globe: this isn't unique to the EU or Europe.

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/roaming_charges_won_t_go_up_if_we_vote_leave


- Roaming charges are being abolished for those travelling to countries outside the EU. As the Government has argued, this is in the commercial interests of mobile phone companies.

- The mobile network Three has abolished roaming charges for customers visiting the United States of America, under its ‘feel at home’ scheme: ‘This means you can use your device there at no extra cost’ (Three, 2016, link). The scheme extends to Australia, New Zealand, Israel, Sri Lanka, Macau, Hong Kong and Indonesia (Three, 2016, link).

- Lycamobile has scrapped roaming charges for customers visiting Australia, Hong Kong, and the USA (Lycamobile, 2016, link).

- As the Minister of State for Culture and the Digital Economy, Ed Vaizey MP, has said: ‘we have individual companies in effect abolishing them for their customers and using them to give them a competitive advantage in attracting customers… If consumers feel that they can use their phone as they would domestically, they will keep their phone on, avoid their family and spend the entire time watching videos on YouTube and Twitter. There are plenty of estimates that show that over the next 10 years the abolition of roaming charges could see a net increase in revenues for telecoms companies’ (Evidence to European Union Committee, 7 September 2015, link).

Even if it was just the EU (it is not) and you had to be in the EU to abolish them (again, not) it wouldn't justify staying in and being governed from abroad. :)

[Absently]

i've been looking forward to when they're abolished completely. i used to be on EE and because i go home every so often i used to not be able to use my phone due to the charges or if i did i'd be charged quite a lot. although, 3 already provides data roaming for free across quite a lot of countries which is great for when i go home!!

[-:Undertaker:-]

i've been looking forward to when they're abolished completely. i used to be on EE and because i go home every so often i used to not be able to use my phone due to the charges or if i did i'd be charged quite a lot. although, 3 already provides data roaming for free across quite a lot of countries which is great for when i go home!!

problem is or rather natural business instinct they'll just recoup any losses on overseas by increasing domestic prices

[The Don]

Have you replied to any of the arguments yet in the EU thread?

Anyway this old recycled story that gets thrown up every so often, so easy to debunk.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36171266



In addition to this, roaming charges are now being abolished across the globe: this isn't unique to the EU or Europe.

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/roaming_charges_won_t_go_up_if_we_vote_leave



Even if it was just the EU (it is not) and you had to be in the EU to abolish them (again, not) it wouldn't justify staying in and being governed from abroad. :)

You haven't debunked anything? All you've done is parrot the rest of the leave camp and said "well we could do this without being in the EU". Just because something could be done outside of the EU doesn't mean it would. They actually did it, so how about giving credit where it's due?

[-:Undertaker:-]

You haven't debunked anything? All you've done is parrot the rest of the leave camp and said "well we could do this without being in the EU". They actually did it, so how about giving credit where it's due?

That's what the BBC said actually, not the Leave campaign.


Just because something could be done outside of the EU doesn't mean it would.

That's called democracy.

[lawrawrrr]

A while back EE dropped their charges but it just seemed so weird to be using my phone like normal there so I just kept it turned off the whole time still (apart from wifi)... it just feels wrong :')

as for the whole EU thing, the UK could decide to get rid of the caps if we were to leave the EU? It wouldn't make much business sense if we're one of the only developed countries with the cap still. Doesn't surprise me both camps will be using it as ammunition though...

[The Don]

That's called democracy.

Other than being a buzzword that has nothing to do with my previous post, what has democracy got to do with you blindly assuming the UK would remove roaming charges outside the EU?


A while back EE dropped their charges but it just seemed so weird to be using my phone like normal there so I just kept it turned off the whole time still (apart from wifi)... it just feels wrong :')

as for the whole EU thing, the UK could decide to get rid of the caps if we were to leave the EU? It wouldn't make much business sense if we're one of the only developed countries with the cap still. Doesn't surprise me both camps will be using it as ammunition though...

Because the EU actually removed them? Any guesses as to what the UK would have done outside the EU is a... guess?

[lawrawrrr]

Other than being a buzzword that has nothing to do with my previous post, what has democracy got to do with you blindly assuming the UK would remove roaming charges outside the EU?



Because the EU actually removed them? Any guesses as to what the UK would have done outside the EU is a... guess?

Huh? All I'm saying is that if we were to leave the EU it wouldn't make much business sense to reverse the decision to implement the caps but I may be misunderstanding your post?

[-:Undertaker:-]

Other than being a buzzword that has nothing to do with my previous post, what has democracy got to do with you blindly assuming the UK would remove roaming charges outside the EU?

Because my friend as I point out time and time again whenever a policy is enacted - for good or bad depending on who you ask - that decision should be made by our elected representatives in our accountable parliament. Then, at election time, we can either throw them out if we do not like it or reward them if we do like that said policy. The constitutional principle that no government can bind its successor is at the heart of democracy and one which EU membership destroys.

If Britons want to abolish roaming charges (we have not actually been asked) then fine. That's a decision for Parliament, not one to be imposed on us.


Because the EU actually removed them? Any guesses as to what the UK would have done outside the EU is a... guess?

@lawrawrrr (https://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=61966);

He's just trying to do that "ooOoOoo scary if we weren't inside the EU cos lyke unknown" thing when everything you said made economic and political sense.

Indeed if he'd have read the press release and the article it is clear HM Government is fully behind this price cap so you could even argue we'd have been able to do it possibly faster than the EU has given how slow and sluggish the bureacratic machinery in Brussels functions. Either way, it's certain it'd be enacted.

[Red]

02 is only 1.99 per day which is grand.

[The Don]

Huh? All I'm saying is that if we were to leave the EU it wouldn't make much business sense to reverse the decision to implement the caps but I may be misunderstanding your post?

Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you were being an idiot like Dan and arguing about what the UK would have done in an alternate universe where we were never part of the EU. Yeah, the UK could keep the caps if we left the EU! Although that doesn't take away from the fact that this is something the EU has done which has benefited us -:Undertaker:-; ;) .

[-:Undertaker:-]

Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you were being an idiot like Dan and arguing about what the UK would have done in an alternate universe where we were never part of the EU.

well i hate to break it to you but that alternative universe already exists for some 150+ other countries and they seem to cope pretty fine.

america, australia, canada, norway, switzerland, new zealand, iceland........ there's your super scary alternative universe right there.


Yeah, the UK could keep the caps if we left the EU! Although that doesn't take away from the fact that this is something the EU has done which has benefited us @-:Undertaker:- (https://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=24233); ;) .

that's if you believe the companies won't simply recoup lost charges through domestic increases as i said earlier.

[The Don]

well i hate to break it to you but that alternative universe already exists for some 150+ other countries and they seem to cope pretty fine.

america, australia, canada, norway, switzerland, new zealand, iceland........ there's your super scary alternative universe right there.



that's if you believe the companies won't simply recoup lost charges through domestic increases as i said earlier.

The death penalty is also a punishment for being gay in Uganda. Uganda isn't in the EU. Does that mean that if we were never in the EU we would have had the same law? No, it doesn't. That's how stupid your comment is.

[-:Undertaker:-]

The death penalty is also legal for being gay in Uganda. Does that mean that if we weren't in the EU we would have the same law? No, it doesn't. That's how stupid your comment is.

whattt now he's comparing anti-gay hellholes with developed countries like britain, canada & australia implementing mobile roaming caps. talk about project fear...

ok i'll just let that stand cos says it all really.

[The Don]

whatttttt now he's comparing anti-gay hellholes with developed countries like britain, canada and australia implementing mobile roaming caps. talk about project fear...

rightttttttt ok i'll just let that stand cos says it all really.

Nope, i'm comparing your flawed logic. It really isn't this hard to follow a conversation.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Nope, i'm comparing your flawed logic. It really isn't this hard to follow a conversation.

as laura pointed out it'd hardly make sense for an advanced economy like Britain to be the only one not implementing roaming charge caps.

that's not flawed logic that's c o m m o n s e n s e

[The Don]

as laura pointed out it'd hardly make sense for an advanced economy like Britain to be the only one not implementing roaming charge caps.

that's not flawed logic that's c o m m o n s e n s e

There are many other advanced countries which still have excessive roaming charges which is exactly why your argument is so stupid.

[The Don]

In fact, the UK government could have put a cap on roaming charges at any point despite being in the EU and they didn't. Your argument is provably wrong.

[scottish]

Another wise decision by the good old European Union.

[lawrawrrr]

He's just trying to do that "ooOoOoo scary if we weren't inside the EU cos lyke unknown" thing when everything you said made economic and political sense.

Indeed if he'd have read the press release and the article it is clear HM Government is fully behind this price cap so you could even argue we'd have been able to do it possibly faster than the EU has given how slow and sluggish the bureacratic machinery in Brussels functions. Either way, it's certain it'd be enacted.

Well, he has a point, we don't know for SURE what would happen if we did leave the EU although it doesn't seem to make a lot of business sense to go against it. The only way to actually guarantee roaming charges stay low (if that's anyone's main concern about the EU debate.......) is to stay in the EU so I see that point, but it is scaremongering of the most pathetic and petty level.


Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you were being an idiot like Dan and arguing about what the UK would have done in an alternative universe where we were never part of the EU. Yeah, the UK could keep the caps if we left the EU! Although that doesn't take away from the fact that this is something the EU has done which has benefited us.

Thanks for apologising. As I've said to Dan above, it is all speculation what would happen if we left - or what would have happened if we'd not been in the EU at all. The scaremongering and speculation filtereing down to even this level is just amazing though when in all honesty it wouldn't make sense to put them back up after so I doubt it's really enough to make a big impact to anyone's vote either way surely... and some people are taking it EXTREMELY seriously and using it as some kind of massive platform for the debate as a whole. I don't understand it. Yes, it could have happened without the EU but taking it to the levels of the alternate universe you mentioned is, I agree, ridiculous. It's all well and good to speculate what may or may not happen without the EU but we can't really turn back time and deny it all and to even try to do so is a waste of time.

I do completely agree with the bit I've bolded though and it's great for individuals - which is what this is more about than politics IMO.

[-:Undertaker:-]

In fact, the UK government could have put a cap on roaming charges at any point despite being in the EU and they didn't. Your argument is provably wrong.

my god your going to drive me to drink someday. you've already read it's happening regardless of the EU.

no matter what I post - you'll completely blank it. i'll bother posting the history/process tho for the benefit of others reading. @lawrawrrr (https://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=61966); @scottish (https://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=53890);


The EU can claim very little which is to the direct advantage of ordinary people. So, when it thinks there is something it can use to its advantage, it grabs it with both hands and pushes it for all it's worth.

It comes as no surprise, therefore, to find the Government in its propaganda leaflet bigging up the decision to abolish mobile phone roaming charges across the EU, thereby saving UK customers up to 38p per minute on calls.

Claiming credit for such things, though, is what the EU does – even when it is not the prime mover. As Pete pointed out a little while back, reducing roaming charges is a global initiative in which one of the major players is not the EU but the OECD.

However, if there is any single group that can take the credit for forcing changes, it is an obscure organisation that calls itself the International Telephone Users Group (INTUG). Founded in 1974, a year after the UK joined the then EEC, it is an international association of business users of telecommunications with members and contacts in all five continents and thus claims a global presence.

In 2010, the OECD published its policy recommendations, which put the move to reduce roaming charges on a truly international footing, also pulling in the WTO as part of a globally co-ordinated initiative.

In 2013, effectively it was all over, with the OECD invoking WTO (of which the UK does not have a seat due to EU membership) provisions, stating that "international mobile roaming services are believed to fall under the scope of these provisions" and "more clearly so under section 5 a) of the Annex on Telecommunications".

EU or not, the writing was on the wall. We saw in 2013, India committing to removing roaming charges. African countries followed, alongside Latin America. ASEAN members are set to do likewise. In the United States and the Caribbean, things are also moving in the right direction.

As for the EU, it has been slow to the point of hesitant, its actions marked down as unambitious. Its claim to be looking after consumer interests is hollow, representing nothing more than them taking credit for an unstoppable movement that was going to happen anyway.

Full article (sourced) and progress on roaming charges can be read here: http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86008

[xxMATTGxx]

Another wise decision by the good old European Union.

Got to love the good old European Union!

[David]

Another wise decision by the good old European Union.


Got to love the good old European Union!

something about merkel

[scottish]

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03461/merkel-cardboard_3461767b.jpg

Priase Merkels decisions.

ps dno why its angelika but w/e

[abc]

Have you replied to any of the arguments yet in the EU thread?

Even if it was just the EU (it is not) and you had to be in the EU to abolish them (again, not) it wouldn't justify staying in and being governed from abroad. :)

I stopped reading most of your posts as I became bored of the same repetition. You do not debate, you repeat yourself constantly and refuse to admit you have been defeated on any point. For example, here the EU have done something good and you are looking for excuses to trash them? I enjoy good debates, not someone just repeating the same points with IFS, BUTS, COULDS, WOULDS. And more importantly you attack those from the STAY campaign who use the same IFS BUTS WOULD etc. It's pathetic.

Like Akeam said, the UK never abolished the roaming even though it could have, the EU did. So despite how much you hate the EU, give them credit instead of trying to run around looking for excuses and making yourself look like a bigger fool.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Well this is exactly what I am talking about. I post well researched rebuttals with all sources provided and they just ignore it all including @xxMATTGxx (https://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=1020); who has also ignored everything factual I have said and has +repped abc as though he's rebutted anything with some facts. Nothing, nilch. It's all about personalities here now.


So despite how much you hate the EU, give them credit instead of trying to run around looking for excuses and making yourself look like a bigger fool.

Are you like really that dense? Have you not read one word of what I have posted regarding the process of abolishing data roaming charges?

Did you not read how it has been a general global initiative taken by the OECD and at the WTO?


Like Akeam said, the UK never abolished the roaming even though it could have, the EU did

Do you not understand why the UK might have stalled legislation and waited for EU legislation?

Because had the British government legislated in say 2013 to abolish these roaming charges and introduced the legislation it would then have implemented these changes and then only a couple of years later had to tear them up because EU law is currently supreme to any British law therefore making a legislative mess of it all. Why would one introduce and go about introducing regulations of their own when they know the supranational body is drawing up those laws anyway? It'd be like introducing a carbon targets scheme when you know there's one being drawn up by the EU which will (in law) override your own. Utterly pointless.

[xxMATTGxx]

I haven't actually +repped abc so get your facts right. Or maybe we should we go back to the post where you threatened or you said "PROMISED" to post much less when you didn't get your way and get your post count restored but have posted like 200 times already since then. Once again, Dan talking out of his ******* ass.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I haven't actually +repped abc so get your facts right. Or maybe we should we go back to the post where you threatened or you said "PROMISED" to post much less when you didn't get your way and got your post count restored but have posted like 200 times already since then. Once again, Dan talking out of his **** arse.

My apologies then I thought you had +repped him as your name appeared at the bottom. I take that back completely.

And btw I have been posting much less, especially in threads.

[David]

including @xxMATTGxx (https://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=1020); who has ... +repped abc

that was me actually, cause he called u out on ur shit and i found it funny




Have you not read one word of what I have posted


Did you not read how

he literally said he didn't read your post and stated why ya nugget

[-:Undertaker:-]

that was me actually, cause he called u out on ur shit and i found it funny

he literally said he didn't read your post and stated why ya nugget

How can he call me out on anything when the rebuttal and reasons I posted all had sources and he didn't knock back a single one?

How is posting something, then being completely proved wrong and then ignoring you've been proved wrong and claiming victory calling me out on shit?

[scottish]

that was me actually, cause he called u out on ur shit and i found it funny

he literally said he didn't read your post and stated why ya nugget

Dan doesn't read posts before replying, can't be proved wrong if you don't read it right?

[-:Undertaker:-]

Dan doesn't read posts before replying, can't be proved wrong if you don't read it right?

Did you read how this decision was taken globally at an OECD and WTO level?

yes/no

[abc]

Are you like really that dense? Have you not read one word of what I have posted regarding the process of abolishing data roaming charges?

Did you not read how it has been a general global initiative taken by the OECD and at the WTO?



Do you not understand why the UK might have stalled legislation and waited for EU legislation?

Because had the British government legislated in say 2013 to abolish these roaming charges and introduced the legislation it would then have implemented these changes and then only a couple of years later had to tear them up because EU law is currently supreme to any British law therefore making a legislative mess of it all. Why would one introduce and go about introducing regulations of their own when they know the supranational body is drawing up those laws anyway? It'd be like introducing a carbon targets scheme when you know there's one being drawn up by the EU which will (in law) override your own. Utterly pointless.

So it is a general global initiative but the UK didn't bother to implement it? The UK didn't care they could have introduced a legislation which could have saved the British public £350m a year? Well thank God the EU stepped in then isn't it?

And in reply to you saying the UK didn't bother making it law because the EU was going to - well thank you EU for saving our government time and money. The EU sat down, discussed and wrote a new legislation which saved the UK government time and money and now the EU legislation will save the British public money. Win win all thanks to the EU :)

Yes Three and LycaMobile have scrapped it. I use Three and like the fact that in many countries I can now use my UK allowance at no extra cost. However most other UK networks have not done this. BTW - those two networks have done it to gain a competitive advantage and also because they are based in those countries also allowing them to make roaming free.

I hope I have answered all your questions and comments on this simple topic.

[dbgtz]

So it is a general global initiative but the UK didn't bother to implement it? The UK didn't care they could have introduced a legislation which could have saved the British public £350m a year? Well thank God the EU stepped in then isn't it?

And in reply to you saying the UK didn't bother making it law because the EU was going to - well thank you EU for saving our government time and money. The EU sat down, discussed and wrote a new legislation which saved the UK government time and money and now the EU legislation will save the British public money. Win win all thanks to the EU :)


Well, assuming what parts of Undertaker has said is true, the UK "didn't bother" because it couldn't as it is represented by the EU in this regard. The EU didn't "step in" like some generous aunt, it's basically fulfilling it's purpose. Having said that, how much I trust a Conservative government to work on such a policy isn't very high. But yeah, the EU totally saved our government time and money, after being paid billions in membership fees...

I'm not particularly pro or anti-EU, but those were awful points to make.

Also at the point of the two networks scrapping roaming fees, that probably won't sound like a bad thing for him as he's very much pro-free market as competition will bring the best deals and government intervention, to him, is a bad thing.

[abc]

Well, assuming what parts of Undertaker has said is true, the UK "didn't bother" because it couldn't as it is represented by the EU in this regard. The EU didn't "step in" like some generous aunt, it's basically fulfilling it's purpose. Having said that, how much I trust a Conservative government to work on such a policy isn't very high. But yeah, the EU totally saved our government time and money, after being paid billions in membership fees...

I'm not particularly pro or anti-EU, but those were awful points to make.

Also at the point of the two networks scrapping roaming fees, that probably won't sound like a bad thing for him as he's very much pro-free market as competition will bring the best deals and government intervention, to him, is a bad thing.

The UK could have made it law on its own if it wanted to. It did not have to wait for the EU.

And regarding our membership fees, for ever £1 we put in, we get almost £10 back through increased trade, investment, jobs, lower prices etc etc etc

[dbgtz]

The UK could have made it law on its own if it wanted to. It did not have to wait for the EU.

And regarding our membership fees, for ever £1 we put in, we get almost £10 back through increased trade, investment, jobs, lower prices etc etc etc

Could it, or could there be difficulties which is why it needed global cooperation on the issue? I don't know, and neither do you really.

Yeah sure I see those kinds of figures all the time but never an actual source to them. So tell me, when you say £1 we put in, is this before the rebate? Before any money is put back directly in the UK via EU grants? What is the criteria exactly as I'm genuinely curious.

[abc]

Could it, or could there be difficulties which is why it needed global cooperation on the issue? I don't know, and neither do you really.

Yeah sure I see those kinds of figures all the time but never an actual source to them. So tell me, when you say £1 we put in, is this before the rebate? Before any money is put back directly in the UK via EU grants? What is the criteria exactly as I'm genuinely curious.

The figure is based on the jobs created due to our membership in the EU and the low costs we have access to, the trade the hundreds of thousands of UK businesses do with the EU etc. Source? Confederation of British Industry and the Treasury.

[AgnesIO]

Well, he has a point, we don't know for SURE what would happen if we did leave the EU although it doesn't seem to make a lot of business sense to go against it. The only way to actually guarantee roaming charges stay low (if that's anyone's main concern about the EU debate.......) is to stay in the EU so I see that point, but it is scaremongering of the most pathetic and petty level.

How exactly does it not make business sense to go against it? No business is going to leave the UK based on a few roaming charges, and no mobile phone company is going to lose money as a result of having roaming charges.. seems like flawed logic, to me.

[lawrawrrr]

How exactly does it not make business sense to go against it? No business is going to leave the UK based on a few roaming charges, and no mobile phone company is going to lose money as a result of having roaming charges.. seems like flawed logic, to me.
well because if we're the only developed country in the world to have a large cap on roaming charges it would put people off visiting and damage the tourism industry, no?

[AgnesIO]

well because if we're the only developed country in the world to have a large cap on roaming charges it would put people off visiting and damage the tourism industry, no?

Not at all, you've misunderstood roaming charges. You are affected by roaming charges when you go to another country based on your own providers decisions, not based on the country you are visiting. So if our government said we are banning roaming charges, then our companies would not be allowed their own customers for huge sums for going abroad. They would still be perfectly entitled to charge foreign visitors astronomical fees (of course, this is dependent on the network that the foreign visitor actually belongs to).

[lawrawrrr]

Not at all, you've misunderstood roaming charges. You are affected by roaming charges when you go to another country based on your own providers decisions, not based on the country you are visiting. So if our government said we are banning roaming charges, then our companies would not be allowed their own customers for huge sums for going abroad. They would still be perfectly entitled to charge foreign visitors astronomical fees (of course, this is dependent on the network that the foreign visitor actually belongs to).
I see. Yes, I thought that it was the countries that decided what roaming charges they charge visitors and the networks eat up or charge their customers for some reason.

[AgnesIO]

I see. Yes, I thought that it was the countries that decided what roaming charges they charge visitors and the networks eat up or charge their customers for some reason.

It is down to the network operator that you are visiting, technically speaking. As in, Airtel in Kenya tells EE that for their customers to use the network, they must pay X amount. A logical solution is to build partnerships with network providers overseas - like Three are doing with 'feel at home'. Having said that, Three's move to do that was largely because of the EU's roaming cap, as it gave them a distinct competitive advantage, before all providers had to scrap roaming charges anyway.

Basically, the ability to get all firms to agree on such caps across so many nations would be virtually impossible to do without something like the EU to legally enforce it. It would ultimately come down to whether we have more foreign visitors from x country using one of our networks than we have British nationals going to their country.

[-:Undertaker:-]

So it is a general global initiative but the UK didn't bother to implement it? The UK didn't care they could have introduced a legislation which could have saved the British public £350m a year? Well thank God the EU stepped in then isn't it?

Again why would Britain introduce it when it knew it was coming via EU legislation? A total waste of legislative time.


And in reply to you saying the UK didn't bother making it law because the EU was going to - well thank you EU for saving our government time and money. The EU sat down, discussed and wrote a new legislation which saved the UK government time and money and now the EU legislation will save the British public money. Win win all thanks to the EU :)

It hasn't saved us time and money because we could have introduced it earlier like others have done so.

In any case let us pretend for the sake of example that the British government was dead set against this legislation, yeah? Now can you tell me how it would be democratically just and correct that the unelected EU would then have the power to overrule our elected government and impose this legislation on us?

If I want a piece of legislation introduced or repealed, I elect an MP and he/she argues for it in parliament & it votes on it: that's called democracy.


Yes Three and LycaMobile have scrapped it. I use Three and like the fact that in many countries I can now use my UK allowance at no extra cost. However most other UK networks have not done this. BTW - those two networks have done it to gain a competitive advantage and also because they are based in those countries also allowing them to make roaming free.

I hope I have answered all your questions and comments on this simple topic.

No you haven't actually answered my questions on this. Here's one.

Are you claiming that by leaving the EU or being outside of the EU Britain would not be able to cap mobile roaming charges? yes/no

[abc]

In any case let us pretend for the sake of example that the British government was dead set against this legislation, yeah? Now can you tell me how it would be democratically just and correct that the unelected EU would then have the power to overrule our elected government and impose this legislation on us?

If I want a piece of legislation introduced or repealed, I elect an MP and he/she argues for it in parliament & it votes on it: that's called democracy.



No you haven't actually answered my questions on this. Here's one.

Are you claiming that by leaving the EU or being outside of the EU Britain would not be able to cap mobile roaming charges? yes/no

I am not claiming that and neither have I ever claimed that or stated anything to suggest I believe that. I am, however, stating that Britain failed to do this on its own.

You are correct, we elect MP's. However we also elect MEP's who represent us in the European Parliament, and who have been in the majority over 2000 times. They have only been in the minority a mere 50-70 times (the exact amount is debated). The times we have been in the minority, many British public had actually wanted us to vote in favour of the legislation.

Despite how grim, evil, nasty you portray the EU to be, it has put in law many beneficial laws such as the climate change initiative, roaming tariffs, helped young people benefit from EU funds etc.

You are fixated on this idea that by being in the EU we are not independent, we are not free, we are ruled by someone else. No we are not. The world is changing at an extremely fast pace. What the EU allows is total and complete freedom. The type of freedom people in non-EU countries would die for. So many of my friends no longer reside or work in the UK, they work in other European countries and that is all thanks to the EU and the free movement of labour. It is allowing our citizens to find new challenges in different places/countries. It is expanding the freedom of our citizens to work where they want without restriction. It is allowing students to study for a degree abroad without having to pay international fees which are ridiculously high. It is allowing our businesses the freedom to look at a larger labour pool rather than restricting them to one country.

The world is changing, and we need to change with it.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I am not claiming that and neither have I ever claimed that or stated anything to suggest I believe that. I am, however, stating that Britain failed to do this on its own.

Thank you, at last!


You are correct, we elect MP's. However we also elect MEP's who represent us in the European Parliament, and who have been in the majority over 2000 times. They have only been in the minority a mere 50-70 times (the exact amount is debated). The times we have been in the minority, many British public had actually wanted us to vote in favour of the legislation.

Firstly you're confusing votes in the EP with votes in the Council of Ministers.

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts-behind-claims-uk-influence/

Our MEPs account for less than 8% (and falling with the admission of new members) and in addition the European Parliament is not a democratic parliament firstly because of the lack of a demos of which you cannot have a functioning democracy and secondly in that it is merely a rubber stamp chamber because it is the unelected European Commission which writes up the laws, not the EP. This is unlike any democratic parliament like say the House of Commons where the government is taken and formed from the floor of the chamber and the opposition/any member can propose legislation.

It is the core difference which led Baroness Thatcher to refuse to call it a Parliament and instead referred to the body as an Assembly.


Despite how grim, evil, nasty you portray the EU to be, it has put in law many beneficial laws such as the climate change initiative, roaming tariffs, helped young people benefit from EU funds etc.

Climate change initiatives should be taken at an intergovernmental level just as Canada, Australia and everyone else manages.

Roaming tariff caps again are not an invention of the EU nor are they unique to the EU.

Young people benefiting from EU funding is a meaningless catchphrase but where does EU funding come from I wonder?


You are fixated on this idea that by being in the EU we are not independent, we are not free, we are ruled by someone else. No we are not. The world is changing at an extremely fast pace. What the EU allows is total and complete freedom. The type of freedom people in non-EU countries would die for. So many of my friends no longer reside or work in the UK, they work in other European countries and that is all thanks to the EU and the free movement of labour. It is allowing our citizens to find new challenges in different places/countries. It is expanding the freedom of our citizens to work where they want without restriction. It is allowing students to study for a degree abroad without having to pay international fees which are ridiculously high. It is allowing our businesses the freedom to look at a larger labour pool rather than restricting them to one country.

We are ruled from abroad and it is only going to get worse.

Those of you on Remain who continue to pretend this is just an economic bloc are telling outright lies. It's time you admitted the end goal.



"The creation of a single European state bound by one European constitution is 'the decisive task of our time'" - Joschka Fischer, former German Foreign Minister, 1998.


"There is no danger of a single currency." - Ted Heath, former British Prime Minister, 1975.


"Europe's nations should be guided towards the super-state without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation." - Jean Monnet, Founder of the European Movement, 1952.


"I have never understood why public opinion about European ideas should be taken into account." - Raymond Barre, former French Prime Minister.


Sissons: "...the single currency, the United States of Europe: was that on your mind when you took Britain in?"
Heath: "Of course, Yes." - Ted Heath, former British Prime Minister, 1991.


"With its own army, Europe could react more credibly to the threat to peace in a member state or in a neighbouring state”. - Jean Claude Juncker, current President of the European Commission


"The creeping unification of Europe ... since the time of Jacques Delors [has been] managed by the bureaucrats from Brussels behind the back of the continent's population, behind the back of the citizens of individual member states" - Valclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic, 2003.


"If the British cannot support the trend towards more integration in Europe, we can nevertheless remain friends, but on a different basis.
I could imagine a form such as a European economic area or a free-trade agreement."- Former European Commission President Jacques Delors, Handelsblatt, 28 December 2012


"There are 27 of us. Clearly,down the line, we will have to include the Balkans. There will be 32, 33 or 34 of us. No one thinks that federalism, total integration, will be possible with 33, 34 or 35 States. Clearly there will be a two-speed Europe: one speed that moves towards a Federation for the eurozone and one speed for a Confederation within the European Union." - French President Sarkozy, 8 November 2011


"We want more Europe and stronger powers to intervene. Treaty changes for that should not be taboo" - Chancellor Angela Merkel - Irish Times Monday 24 October 2011


"We have a shared currency but no real economic or political union. This must change. If we were to achieve this, therein lies the opportunity of the crisis. We have to view the crisis as a motive, to make up for failures - failures that were not remedied by the Lisbon Treaty...And beyond the economic, after the shared currency, we will perhaps dare to take futher steps, for example for a European army." - German Chancellor Angela Merkel

How much more do they need to spell it out for you to understand where this is going?

It means the end of Britain as a sovereign, independent and self-governing state.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVt_1ByddUQ


The world is changing, and we need to change with it.

The world is changing you are correct.

How does that then lead you to declare that we need to tie ourselves to a declining 1950s trade bloc?

[abc]

Thank you, at last!



Firstly you're confusing votes in the EP with votes in the Council of Ministers.

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts-behind-claims-uk-influence/

Our MEPs account for less than 8% (and falling with the admission of new members) and in addition the European Parliament is not a democratic parliament firstly because of the lack of a demos of which you cannot have a functioning democracy and secondly in that it is merely a rubber stamp chamber because it is the unelected European Commission which writes up the laws, not the EP. This is unlike any democratic parliament like say the House of Commons where the government is taken and formed from the floor of the chamber and the opposition/any member can propose legislation.

It is the core difference which led Baroness Thatcher to refuse to call it a Parliament and instead referred to the body as an Assembly.



Climate change initiatives should be taken at an intergovernmental level just as Canada, Australia and everyone else manages.

Roaming tariff caps again are not an invention of the EU nor are they unique to the EU.

Young people benefiting from EU funding is a meaningless catchphrase but where does EU funding come from I wonder?



We are ruled from abroad and it is only going to get worse.

Those of you on Remain who continue to pretend this is just an economic bloc are telling outright lies. It's time you admitted the end goal.



How much more do they need to spell it out for you to understand where this is going?

It means the end of Britain as a sovereign, independent and self-governing state.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVt_1ByddUQ



The world is changing you are correct.

How does that then lead you to declare that we need to tie ourselves to a declining 1950s trade bloc?

Are you seriously quoting things from 40+ years ago again and trying to pretend they are applicable today? In which case lets pretend slavery, racism, sexism are all OK today too because someone said it was OK 40+ years ago.

[-:Undertaker:-]

@abc (https://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=125189); Please please please reply to all the many quotes I took the time to write up and post from senior EU figures and European leaders over the years who've stated exactly where this is all going. I can provide countless more if you really want them directly from the Commission and others, or simply read the wording of the treaties themselves which make it quite plain what the final objective is. Or alternatively you can read the Five Presidents Report (https://ec.europa.eu/priorities/publications/five-presidents-report-completing-europes-economic-and-monetary-union_en) the EU recently published which outlines the plan to move to full economic union which the second stage results in inevitable political union by 2025.

I repeat. It means the end of Britain as a sovereign, independent and self-governing nation. The EU has always been a political idea, not economic.

[abc]

@abc (https://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=125189); Please please please reply to all the many quotes I took the time to write up and post from senior EU figures and European leaders over the years who've stated exactly where this is all going. I can provide countless more if you really want them directly from the Commission and others, or simply read the wording of the treaties themselves which make it quite plain what the final objective is. Or alternatively you can read the Five Presidents Report (https://ec.europa.eu/priorities/publications/five-presidents-report-completing-europes-economic-and-monetary-union_en) the EU recently published which outlines the plan to move to full economic union which the second stage results in inevitable political union by 2025.

I repeat. It means the end of Britain as a sovereign, independent and self-governing nation. The EU has always been a political idea, not economic.

I am not going to read quotes from 40+ years and pretend they are applicable today. The world has changed. The economic outlook has changed. You are insane for even quoting 40+ year old speeches.

The laws EU is making I have no problems with. The key laws are still made by our government and will continue to be done by our government. The UK government has already said we will not move to the Euro as our currency, and if they ever try the public backlash will mean it will be a political suicide.

I am going to go back to doing what I have done for the last few months and that is to ignore all your posts again.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I am not going to read quotes from 40+ years and pretend they are applicable today. The world has changed. The economic outlook has changed. You are insane for even quoting 40+ year old speeches.

The laws EU is making I have no problems with. The key laws are still made by our government and will continue to be done by our government. The UK government has already said we will not move to the Euro as our currency, and if they ever try the public backlash will mean it will be a political suicide.

He's not got one reply to even recent quotes or official EU reports detailing where the EU is heading and yet he accuses me of being unable to debate.

I repeat. Reply to the countless quotations from 2010+ on this from EU leaders as well as an official report or shut up and quit wasting my time.

Read. The. Damned. Report ffs.https://ec.europa.eu/priorities/publications/five-presidents-report-completing-europes-economic-and-monetary-union_en

[abc]

He's not got one reply to even recent quotes or official EU reports detailing where the EU is heading and yet he accuses me of being unable to debate.

I repeat. Reply to the countless quotations from 2010+ on this from EU leaders as well as an official report or shut up and quit wasting my time.

Read. The. Damned. Report ffs.https://ec.europa.eu/priorities/publications/five-presidents-report-completing-europes-economic-and-monetary-union_en

Because I am not going to waste my time replying to 40+ year old quotes? Reply with quotes from last 2 years and I will happily respond. You need to be logical in your debates and arguments, not ridiculous.