If you were elected PM today, what would you do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

So Spain is needy?, and if we put in money to help needy countrys why do we pay much more than other countrys? LETS SORT OUT OUR OWN COUNTRY FIRST, eh?

The EU does create laws, like it will have power over our justice system if Brown signs the new treaty and will not allow us to have Life sentences because they are 'too harsh'

I think your a very confused Liberal who thinks we should throw away Taxpayers money away without them agreeing.

Who gives the government permission to give Billions away without us agreeing even though it's OUR money, you say my views have no place in modern Britain - well no bleeding wonder it's going to the dogs.

---

No, Spain isnt needy, but Bulgaria and Poland are. WE DO GET MONEY BACK! All EU countries get money back! Its just in proportion to how wealthy we are as a nation. Do you know we are one of the worlds richest?!?!? We have enough money to sort ourselves out in the first place, the only problem I see is that it is not being used properly. Oh, and I believe we agreed when we voted as a nation to go into the EU mate.

Again, ECJ does not create laws that directly effect us. The only thing they do, for example, in a case a women wants to use frozen sperm from her dead husband, and the ECJ says No, that means the WHOLE OF EU wont be able to use the frozen sperm of dead husbands [This is called ratio decidendi, people who study Law will know this]. ECJ doesnt decide on, things like tax cuts, or how long terrorists should be held for. Infact, ECJ really only deals with Cival Courts rather then Criminal Courts.

You think Im a confussed Liberal. Well I take that with a pinch of salt from the person who don't know the difference between left wing and right wing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frodo13.

We can have our own legal system. The ECJ is used when there isnt a specific law set. For example, a women wanted to use the stored eggs that had been fertilised by her ex. She wanted to use them, but he didnt. Because there wasn't any specific law, it had to go all the way up to the ECJ so it could be sorted out. I think its a good thing as it represents lots of other cultures, not just Britain.

---

Nope, there are actual ECJ/ECHR laws, and ANY of these can currently override ANY British law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frodo13.

I think many people in this thread want Britain to cut many of its ties and we should fend for ourselves. This wouldnt work. What you have to remember is Britain is a little remote island. We need the rest of the world, including EU and USA.

---

Trade is not impossible without EU membership. It would be more expensive in itself, but that would come mostly from private money from businesses not government taxpayer money, and would therefore leave the government more freedom to spend our money as needed for us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frodo13.

And tbh Taker, I dont think you understand politics full stop. We put money into the EU to help much needier countries, and Im guessing the Goverment sleeps much easier at night because of this. The billions we pay go to good causes. Even if we wernt part of EU, we would be paying billions non the less to USA who is probably the worlds biggest loan shark!

---

Just because another country has greater needs, doesn't mean we don't have any needs at all. These countries are problematic for their own reasons, and it's not up to us to sort them out when they're not stable - hell, when we're not stable. If we sort out our own country first then what people don't seem to understand is that we'd then be far more qualified and equipped to help others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frodo13.

Also, Im not saying we cant trade with other countries, but if your part of the EU, the trading between EU countries is cheaper and more efficent. This is common knowlage! Again, I think your political knowlage is lacking in this area.

---

As you said, it's common knowledge. Anyone with an interest in politics knows this, and Dan comes under that category. See above for my response to this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frodo13.

Oh, and if your suggesting the ECJ CREATES laws, then LOL at you. Judges only make laws when there is no previous legislation, and/or the law needs to be interpritated. It is the British Government who make BRITISH LAWS.

---

Ouch, wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frodo13.

I think most of your views dont have place in modern Britain.

---

I don't agree with everything Dan says, but that's a bit of a bold statement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frodo13.

No, Spain isnt needy, but Bulgaria and Poland are. WE DO GET MONEY BACK! All EU countries get money back! Its just in proportion to how wealthy we are as a nation. Do you know we are one of the worlds richest?!?!? We have enough money to sort ourselves out in the first place, the only problem I see is that it is not being used properly. Oh, and I believe we agreed when we voted as a nation to go into the EU mate.

---

We get a tiny amount of money back from what we put in.. and we really don't have enough to sort ourselves, as easily seen by looking at the current state of the country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frodo13.

Again, ECJ does not create laws that directly effect us. The only thing they do, for example, in a case a women wants to use frozen sperm from her dead husband, and the ECJ says No, that means the WHOLE OF EU wont be able to use the frozen sperm of dead husbands [This is called ratio decidendi, people who study Law will know this]. ECJ doesnt decide on, things like tax cuts, or how long terrorists should be held for. Infact, ECJ really only deals with Cival Courts rather then Criminal Courts.

---

Oh dear, still wrong. Tax cuts they may not decide upon, but technically they could impose minimum tax rates or something like that to prevent cuts. They have a lot more power than you seem to think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frodo13.

You think Im a confussed Liberal. Well I take that with a pinch of salt from the person who don't know the difference between left wing and right wing.

---

Ok then take it from me instead; you're a confused Liberal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif
I would.

Cut taxes.

That depends, if you cut taxes then what expenses would be gone?
None would be gone, we'd leave EU and we'd save billions.

---

Well I somewhat doubt that really. Maybe if you left EU you would be by yourself? Nobody would want to trade you for example for things and you would have to look elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif
Bring back capital punishment.

Disagreed. This would be a mess.
Why would it?, Our justice system right now is a mess with murders getting so called 'life' and serving only 2 years of it.

---

Well that's too bad. You can't go around killing people. A government killing their own people isn't that good of an idea. Who gives you the right to kill? Nobody has the right to kill in any situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif
Bring back corporal punishment.

No, this is certainly not how to solve problems.
Yes it is, look at behaviour now compared to years ago, it's PROVEN that it's a deterrant against bad behaviour.

---

Well it's been PROVEN that that system was removed. If it was removed it was removed for a reason. Probably because it was violent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif

Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason.

Robert Mugabe. No R. And if you did that you would probably help people, but your reputation would take a hit.
Actually I think an invasion of Zimbarbwe would be supported by a fair number of people, I would also consider colonising it again, or run a joint coliation with the opposition there so peace and western civilised ways can spread.

---

Colonizing it is a ridiculous idea. England shouldn't have any colonies. They are not responsible with them from what history says. They treat the citizens in them awful. I'm not sure if they do that now but it is a chance nobody else wants to take really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif
Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament.

I'm from Canada so I don't know what Scotland's done?
Scotland take billions pounds from Englands taxes every year, they get extra services and their MP's get to vote on our policies but we don't get a vote on theirs.

---

Why is that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

I think you'll find if we went to Canada to bring it back as a colony then you wouldn't be able to say no :P well, if we went about it the same way as before anyway.

---

Commonwealth to us means absolutely nothing.

We don't even know the Queens name most us. And if you did come over we would laugh at you. What would you do? Fight us? You could win but the money lost wont be worth it. So people would think England is fighting just to own land. Again. I don't think last time you did that it worked out :P.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

Nope, there are actual ECJ/ECHR laws, and ANY of these can currently override ANY British law.



Trade is not impossible without EU membership. It would be more expensive in itself, but that would come mostly from private money from businesses not government taxpayer money, and would therefore leave the government more freedom to spend our money as needed for us.



Just because another country has greater needs, doesn't mean we don't have any needs at all. These countries are problematic for their own reasons, and it's not up to us to sort them out when they're not stable - hell, when we're not stable. If we sort out our own country first then what people don't seem to understand is that we'd then be far more qualified and equipped to help others.



As you said, it's common knowledge. Anyone with an interest in politics knows this, and Dan comes under that category. See above for my response to this.



Ouch, wrong.



I don't agree with everything Dan says, but that's a bit of a bold statement.



We get a tiny amount of money back from what we put in.. and we really don't have enough to sort ourselves, as easily seen by looking at the current state of the country.



Oh dear, still wrong. Tax cuts they may not decide upon, but technically they could impose minimum tax rates or something like that to prevent cuts. They have a lot more power than you seem to think.



Ok then take it from me instead; you're a confused Liberal.

---

So your telling me what they are teaching me at school is wrong? Judges cant just create laws, for example, they cant just say 'Lets kill all right handed people' They only make laws when there is a gap in the legal system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frodo13.

No, Spain isnt needy, but Bulgaria and Poland are. WE DO GET MONEY BACK! All EU countries get money back! Its just in proportion to how wealthy we are as a nation. Do you know we are one of the worlds richest?!?!? We have enough money to sort ourselves out in the first place, the only problem I see is that it is not being used properly. Oh, and I believe we agreed when we voted as a nation to go into the EU mate.

Again, ECJ does not create laws that directly effect us. The only thing they do, for example, in a case a women wants to use frozen sperm from her dead husband, and the ECJ says No, that means the WHOLE OF EU wont be able to use the frozen sperm of dead husbands [This is called ratio decidendi, people who study Law will know this]. ECJ doesnt decide on, things like tax cuts, or how long terrorists should be held for. Infact, ECJ really only deals with Cival Courts rather then Criminal Courts.

You think Im a confussed Liberal. Well I take that with a pinch of salt from the person who don't know the difference between left wing and right wing.

---

Spain is classed as 'poor' by the EU, so you are wrong on that one, We don't get our money back so you are wrong on that one and you are also wrong in believeing that the EU can't override British Laws, so your wrong again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HotelUser

Well I somewhat doubt that really. Maybe if you left EU you would be by yourself? Nobody would want to trade you for example for things and you would have to look elsewhere.

Well that's too bad. You can't go around killing people. A government killing their own people isn't that good of an idea. Who gives you the right to kill? Nobody has the right to kill in any situation.

Well it's been PROVEN that that system was removed. If it was removed it was removed for a reason. Probably because it was violent.

Colonizing it is a ridiculous idea. England shouldn't have any colonies. They are not responsible with them from what history says. They treat the citizens in them awful. I'm not sure if they do that now but it is a chance nobody else wants to take really.

Why is that?



Commonwealth to us means absolutely nothing.

We don't even know the Queens name most us. And if you did come over we would laugh at you. What would you do? Fight us? You could win but the money lost wont be worth it. So people would think England is fighting just to own land. Again. I don't think last time you did that it worked out :P.

---

So according to you, no one wants to trade with China, India, South Africa and so on, just because they aren't in the EU?

Murders should die if they kill someone else, who gives the state the right to kill? - The murders do, you murder someone, you know the price you will have to pay.

It was removed because the liberal morons got their way, just look at how soft everything is getting.

Colozing is a good thing, it brought wealth and cilization to them countrys, look at Zimbarbwe, when we owned it, it was called 'The bread basket of Africa' it was the richest African nation, now it is one of the poorest, THEY CANNOT RULE THEMSELVES people need to understand this.

I have explained the Scotland issue, read over again then reply.

Quote:

---

So your telling me what they are teaching me at school is wrong? Judges cant just create laws, for example, they cant just say 'Lets kill all right handed people' They only make laws when there is a gap in the legal system.

---

So you can't think for yourself?

Have a nuclear war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HotelUser

Commonwealth to us means absolutely nothing.

We don't even know the Queens name most us. And if you did come over we would laugh at you. What would you do? Fight us? You could win but the money lost wont be worth it. So people would think England is fighting just to own land. Again. I don't think last time you did that it worked out :P.

---

lol I was satirising myself, sorry it's sort of.. British humour. Bit bleak ^_^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frodo13.

So your telling me what they are teaching me at school is wrong? Judges cant just create laws, for example, they cant just say 'Lets kill all right handed people' They only make laws when there is a gap in the legal system.

---

Judges don't create laws, you're quite right, but the ECJ and ECHR are controlled by the EU committee/body/representatives or whatever you want to call them - and they do make laws. And yes, I believe my college "government&politics" course is likely to be more detailed and more informed than a school.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

lol I was satirising myself, sorry it's sort of.. British humour. Bit bleak ^_^



Judges don't create laws, you're quite right, but the ECJ and ECHR are controlled by the EU committee/body/representatives or whatever you want to call them - and they do make laws. And yes, I believe my college "government&politics" course is likely to be more detailed and more informed than a school.

---

And I would think my A Level Law course would be quite informed too. European COURT of Justice. ECJ is basiclly an appeal court, and there decision for one case will effect the decisions of all similar cases in EU. I dont know if you do law, but this is called the ratio decideni.

And the ECHR. Im presumming you mean the European Convention of Human Rights? Yeah, they made the law for European Human Rights. But without that, we wouldnt have things such as freedom of speech etc. And it is because of the ECHR Britain passed a Human Rights Act in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frodo13.

And I would think my A Level Law course would be quite informed too. European COURT of Justice. ECJ is basiclly an appeal court, and there decision for one case will effect the decisions of all similar cases in EU. I dont know if you do law, but this is called the ratio decideni.

And the ECHR. Im presumming you mean the European Convention of Human Rights? Yeah, they made the law for European Human Rights. But without that, we wouldnt have things such as freedom of speech etc. And it is because of the ECHR Britain passed a Human Rights Act in the first place.

---

We'd have rights without this stupid charter, America and other countrys have democratic systems without the EU human rights bill, I find it funny how you think the EU is so good for our country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

We'd have rights without this stupid charter, America and other countrys have democratic systems without the EU human rights bill, I find it funny how you think the EU is so good for our country.

---

In [i think] 1950, Britain was the first country to sign the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and since 1966, the British people have been able to pursue complaints in the European Court of Human Rights.

Because of the large amount of breaching of the ECHR in UK, goverment wanted the ECHR to be incoporated into the British Legal System. So, in 1998, the Labour Party drafted a bill incorporating the ECHR and passed it through parliament. Because of this bill, Britain now deals with most breaches of the ECHR.

So in responce to you, Yes, we do have our own rights bill. But we only have this because the ECHR was causing massive problems for our goverment, as cases can only be put againt public authority in the European Courts of Human Rights.