EU ABOLISHES ROAMING CHARGES

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

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BBC News

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/..._we_vote_leave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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. :)

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!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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!!

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -: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



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/..._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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Don

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Don

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

---

That's called democracy.

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...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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...

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Don

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Don

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Don

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

---

@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.

02 is only 1.99 per day which is grand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lawrawrrr

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:-; ;) .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Don

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Don

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:-; ;) .

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Don

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Don

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

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.

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.

Another wise decision by the good old European Union.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Don

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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; @scottish;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr Richard North

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scottish

Another wise decision by the good old European Union.

---

Got to love the good old European Union!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scottish

Another wise decision by the good old European Union.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xxMATTGxx

Got to love the good old European Union!

---

something about merkel

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...d_3461767b.jpg

Priase Merkels decisions.

ps dno why its angelika but w/e

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

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.

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; 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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abc

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abc

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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 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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

including @xxMATTGxx; who has ... +repped abc

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Have you not read one word of what I have posted

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Did you not read how

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scottish

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abc

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abc

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lawrawrrr

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AgnesIO

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?