samssong Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Thank you for stating that so clearly Jeffrey, a lot of people have a lot of trouble understanding this point. Three thousand six hundred new laws effecting Britain in the last three years. Thirteen million words written to describe them. A lot of people have a lot of trouble reading them:huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Three thousand six hundred new laws effecting Britain in the last three years. Thirteen million words written to describe them. A lot of people have a lot of trouble reading them:huh: Care to explain A) where you got that number from and B) how that relates to you having to understand them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woahthere Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 (edited) Just listening to Boris on radio four, he was saying that EU rules ban tea bags being recycled. Which is non-sense, because UK and all guidance on recycling is the same, do not recycle food products that come into contact with meat and dairy products. Which would theoretically ban recycling tea bags. I can't post a link but the Sun (ugh) has an article on this. 'Boris clarified today that this referred to a 2005 case when Cardiff council banned householders from throwing tea bags into compost waste which would then be recycled and sold onto the public. At the time the council said EU laws meant products which had come into contact with milk should not be made into compost to stop the spread of foot and mouth. Although it does fall within the EU Animal By-Products Regulation 2002, it seems it is up to individual councils to make a decision on it.' If you find it there's other info about the guff he's spouting about coffins, lorries, balloons etc. If he keeps saying it, people believe it. Edited March 24, 2016 by woahthere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samssong Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 (edited) Care to explain A) where you got that number from and B) how that relates to you having to understand them? Googled it . By the way it says one would need 96 days to just read the ****e that these bandwagoners in the EU have come up with regarding these laws. Edited March 24, 2016 by samssong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MobileB Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Three thousand six hundred new laws effecting Britain in the last three years. Thirteen million words written to describe them. A lot of people have a lot of trouble reading them:huh: So you are saying that in the last three years, the European Union has issued 9 new Laws every single day that effects the UK? Please provide the link, I can't wait to see this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmourDesign Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 I think that the British fear change and like things just the way they are. People who now say 'Out' will probably bottle it when it comes down to voting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samssong Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 So you are saying that in the last three years, the European Union has issued 9 new Laws every single day that effects the UK? Please provide the link, I can't wait to see this. Google it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Please provide the link, I can't wait to see this.You're better off Googling (informed-) commentary about the Business for Britain (BfB) report of 2013 in which this myth first arose This one is as good as any I've read Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeFrank Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Some of the remain arguments are stupid. EU wouldn't have trade deals with the UK. Even though they buy more from us. Why would they cause complications? Plain stupid. We're more able to fight terrorism in because we get to share information. Erm we provide more information to them. We work closely with the USA and have GCHQ. Why would they cause complications? Plain stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MobileB Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Google it. So a Business for Britain (a self proclaimed Brexit group) put together a report in 2013 of all the regulations issued by the EU between 2010 and 2013 and if the regulation involved a change to one of 18 questions pre-set by BfB then they regarded that as a change in Law. So if the same regulation actually said yes to 18 of their pre-defined questions then this was 18 changes in Law. And they got their figures by copying and pasting in Microsoft Word and doing a word count on it. Which they then claimed was too many words to read so they estimated the 3600 changes of Law. Fantastically scientific that. Using the same philosophy then, the Employment Rights Act of 1996 (a UK act) has at least 330 clauses that would answer yes to at least one of those 18 questions. Therefore, in one day in 1996, the UK Government introduced an act of Parliament equivalent of around 9% of EU legislation over a three year period from 2010 to 2013. There, you see, I can be philosophical and scientific as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts