The wonderful EU and Migration thread!

[Worthy4England]

Growth...your words

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Growth...your words

But, but... both camps, in and out, are for economic growth. The exit camp, unlike me, don't foreswear growth. And yet you say you know that I prefer exit. Does not compute.

[Worthy4England]

Errr right...you said you wouldn't be convinced to stay based on an economic argument around growth. I just said I hadn't mentioned the word...

[Prufrock]

If Spotty is undecided then so am I!!

[Hoboh]

This article is about the abandoned 2004 proposal. For the constitutional basis of the EU, see Treaties of the European Union.

The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (TCE), (commonly referred to as the European Constitution or as the Constitutional Treaty), was an unratified international treaty intended to create a consolidated constitution for the European Union (EU). It would have replaced the existing European Union treaties with a single text, given legal force to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and expanded Qualified Majority Voting into policy areas which had previously been decided by unanimity among member states.

The Treaty was signed on 29 October 2004 by representatives of the then 25 member states of the European Union. It was later ratified by 18 member states, which included referendums endorsing it in Spain and Luxembourg. However the rejection of the document by French and Dutch voters in May and June 2005 brought the ratification process to an end.

Following a period of reflection, the Treaty of Lisbon was created to replace the Constitutional Treaty. This contained many of the changes that were originally placed in the Constitutional Treaty but was formulated as amendments to the existing treaties. Signed on 13 December 2007, the Lisbon Treaty entered into force on 1 December 2009

Typical action of the Europhiles, lose a vote and fudge up virtually the same thing under a different name and change the way it's voted upon.
Don't forget we had the biggest douche bag of a Europhile as PM then who would have signed his soul to the devil for more migrants and a cheap labour force!

[Worthy4England]

A victory for common decency as we voted for the original through our elected representatives.

[Hoboh]

A victory for common decency as we voted for the original through our elected representatives.

No, we were duped, referendums were good enough for others yet ours was 'postponed'.
Lisbon would never have got past a referendum it was a Europhile stitch up!

[Worthy4England]

A victory for common decency as we voted for the original through our elected representatives.

No, we were duped, referendums were good enough for others yet ours was 'postponed'.
Lisbon would never have got past a referendum it was a Europhile stitch up!

Another untruth. It was quite clearly in Labour's 2005 manifesto. Are you suggesting our electorate are too stupid to understand what they're voting for? I mean, that would surely call into question giving people referenda...

[Hoboh]

A victory for common decency as we voted for the original through our elected representatives.

No, we were duped, referendums were good enough for others yet ours was 'postponed'.
Lisbon would never have got past a referendum it was a Europhile stitch up!

Another untruth. It was quite clearly in Labour's 2005 manifesto. Are you suggesting our electorate are too stupid to understand what they're voting for? I mean, that would surely call into question giving people referenda...

I think in general elections peoples priority tends to be more immediate things than something hidden in the small print, anyway who the feck ever reads a full manifesto?

[Hoboh]

Judge lets Romanian rapist back into Britain because it would break EU law to deport him back to his home country
Judge ruled fast-tracked deportation broke law and breached human rights
Mircea Gheorghiu sentenced to six years in jail in Romania for rape in 1990
Served two years and eight months in jail before moving to the UK illegally
He was deported under Theresa May's 'deport first, appeal later' scheme
It was decided his crime wasn't serious enough to justify being sent away

[bobo the clown]

^^ to be fair so was a guarantee that should there be treaty change then there would be a referendum.

There was treaty change & they spent a lot of energy wriggling on the end of a stick to explain that it wasn't real, actual, y'know ... proper ... treaty change. More a tweak which required small changes in the treaty.

[Worthy4England]

This was buried nowhere. It was widely debated at the time. Look, have some of my straws, see if you can grab them, eh?

[Hoboh]

The EU now has 25 members and will continue to expand. The new Constitutional Treaty ensures the new Europe can work effectively, and that Britain keeps control of key national interests like foreign policy, taxation, social security and defence. The Treaty sets out what the EU can do and what it cannot. It strengthens the voice of national parliaments and governments in EU affairs. It is a good treaty for Britain and for the new Europe. We will put it to the British people in a referendum and campaign whole-heartedly for a ‘Yes’ vote to keep Britain a leading nation in Europe.

You mean this little bit on pages 83-84 of the manifesto?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/p ... ifesto.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Hoboh]

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/to ... ocid=edgsp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And this may be the reason we never got a referendum on the treaty?

[Worthy4England]

^^ to be fair so was a guarantee that should there be treaty change then there would be a referendum.

There was treaty change & they spent a lot of energy wriggling on the end of a stick to explain that it wasn't real, actual, y'know ... proper ... treaty change. More a tweak which required small changes in the treaty.

There was not a guarantee that should there be treaty change there would be a referendum, nowhere in the Labour manifesto does it say that. The Constitutional Treaty - a specific Treaty, which as Hoboh pointed out was rejected by the EU funnily enough, was what the referendum was to be on - Capital "C", capital "T". Not any Treaty, nor any treaty.

It was tested in a UK High Court by Stuart Wheeler as to whether "the Government’s promise in 2005 to hold a referendum on the EU Constitution “involved an implied representation that a referendum would be held in relation to any treaty having equivalent effect, giving rise to a legitimate expectation that such a referendum would be held”." He lost.

These are the people we want to give more "rights" to - isn't that a bitch.

As it happens, parliament aren't bound by the results of a referendum anyhow - they could vote to ignore it - although I'm not convinced that'd be a wise course of action, ain't that interesting to know.

[Worthy4England]

The EU now has 25 members and will continue to expand. The new Constitutional Treaty ensures the new Europe can work effectively, and that Britain keeps control of key national interests like foreign policy, taxation, social security and defence. The Treaty sets out what the EU can do and what it cannot. It strengthens the voice of national parliaments and governments in EU affairs. It is a good treaty for Britain and for the new Europe. We will put it to the British people in a referendum and campaign whole-heartedly for a ‘Yes’ vote to keep Britain a leading nation in Europe.

You mean this little bit on pages 83-84 of the manifesto?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/p ... ifesto.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sorry, were you in some sort of cryogenics chamber when it was being discussed in the national press for about 4 years? Did you miss that bit?

[Hoboh]

The EU now has 25 members and will continue to expand. The new Constitutional Treaty ensures the new Europe can work effectively, and that Britain keeps control of key national interests like foreign policy, taxation, social security and defence. The Treaty sets out what the EU can do and what it cannot. It strengthens the voice of national parliaments and governments in EU affairs. It is a good treaty for Britain and for the new Europe. We will put it to the British people in a referendum and campaign whole-heartedly for a ‘Yes’ vote to keep Britain a leading nation in Europe.

You mean this little bit on pages 83-84 of the manifesto?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/p ... ifesto.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sorry, were you in some sort of cryogenics chamber when it was being discussed in the national press for about 4 years? Did you miss that bit?

And your starting point was?

Another untruth. It was quite clearly in Labour's 2005 manifesto. Are you suggesting our electorate are too stupid to understand what they're voting for? I mean, that would surely call into question giving people referenda...

Cleary, the Europhile stance is 'outers' spin myths and scare monger, my point is the in camp is full of a bunch of anti democratic (unless it suits them) deceitful fudgers!

[Worthy4England]

I'm pleased for you. Great point. It will surely win the day.

[thebish]

A victory for common decency as we voted for the original through our elected representatives.

No, we were duped, referendums were good enough for others yet ours was 'postponed'.
Lisbon would never have got past a referendum it was a Europhile stitch up!

Another untruth. It was quite clearly in Labour's 2005 manifesto. Are you suggesting our electorate are too stupid to understand what they're voting for? I mean, that would surely call into question giving people referenda...

I think in general elections peoples priority tends to be more immediate things than something hidden in the small print, anyway who the feck ever reads a full manifesto?

aye - the detail matters not - just the daily mail headlines... errrrr.... now it all makes sense!

[Hoboh]

A victory for common decency as we voted for the original through our elected representatives.

No, we were duped, referendums were good enough for others yet ours was 'postponed'.
Lisbon would never have got past a referendum it was a Europhile stitch up!

Another untruth. It was quite clearly in Labour's 2005 manifesto. Are you suggesting our electorate are too stupid to understand what they're voting for? I mean, that would surely call into question giving people referenda...

I think in general elections peoples priority tends to be more immediate things than something hidden in the small print, anyway who the feck ever reads a full manifesto?

aye - the detail matters not - just the daily mail headlines... errrrr.... now it all makes sense!

I mainly read the Guardian, followed by the Telegraph, the Mail, sometimes the Indie, and RT, so your point is?