Just when you thought nobody could oust Rory Bremner as our greatest living satirist…

It seems one of the worst things about the ECR is their rampant Europhilia. Pro-Lisbon Czechs and Hungarians, pro-CAP Poles, and just about every single one of them a huge fan of the single market.

Splitters.

At what staggering cost though.

It’s like Juvenal is back! What have the Romans ever done for us? Satire of course. Looking at this why did they bother though.

The real satire here of course is that the original mocks the left-wing politics of the sort so popular with the denizens of this site.

A long list of things that it is perfectly possible for the UK to legislate on and err, mobile phones charges.

Sadly no-one here is commercially aware enough to know that pushing down the cost of overseas calls just increases domestic charges.

Trust the left to think you can have something for nothing.

When the EU does something about the obscene cost of data roaming charges, then we’ll talk. Okay?

I don’t think highly of the EU but I did find this amusing. As above poster said though, paid holidays and flexible working could be introduced at national level – not sure why we need the EU to do it.

And as for liberalised world trade – I believe the EU compels us to put tariffs on goods from outside. I would think more highly of the EU if it ripped down all its tariff barriers regardless of what other countries did.

I think the key word being used by the Euro-haters here is “could” our governments “could” have done that but they didn’t so thanks to Europe and the EU we have these things.

Marvellous.

“I think the key word being used by the Euro-haters here is “could” our governments “could” have done that but they didn’t so thanks to Europe and the EU we have these things.”

I think it highly likely that a Labour Government would have introduced them.

The problem with them being introduced at an EU level is that it prevents a democratically elected UK government from repealing them even if they’re in a manifesto. I thought the EU was only supposed to have a say over issues that couldn’t be dealt with on a national level?

The problem with them being introduced at an EU level is that it prevents a democratically elected UK government from repealing them even if they’re in a manifesto

…failing to see ‘problem’ here?

“I think it highly likely that a Labour Government would have introduced them.”

Yeah but they didn’t.

Heh. Excellent video.

“…failing to see ‘problem’ here”

It thwarts the will of a democratically elected government. I would also expect the Left to be outraged if the EU tried to ban empowering trade unions.

“Yeah but they didn’t.”

Because the EU did perhaps? Point of the matter is that these are measures that national governments aren’t incapable of dealing with. On an issue like climate change there’s a stronger case for pan-European co-operation.

Richard you seem to be fighting paper tigers in your desire you strut your anti-EU credentials, there is no need, you are arguing a point that has no need to be argued.

No one said national government is incapable of doing these things, but the EU beat them to the punch.

I can’t see what the problem is.

It is certainly more than likely that the more egregious things like communications surveillance would have been dreamt up by the Home Office anyway. Whether they could have been slipped through parliament rather than the much more supine EU parliament is another matter.

But for you guys, you do realise that this whole post office privitisation thing is down to the EU? You seemed to think that was an important issue on here a couple of weeks ago.

I must confess to being rather bemused by the British attitude to the EU. If the vast majority of press and comment is anything to go by (and it may not be… it’s not always the majority who shout loudest) Britain appears to be extremely suspicious of, and quite hostile towards, the European Union.

Over and over again, the EU is painted as forcing Britain to do things it doesn’t want to do. On this thread, for instance, Richard (#7) writes: The problem with them being introduced at an EU level is that it prevents a democratically elected UK government from repealing them even if they’re in a manifesto.

Except it really doesn’t. There is no gun being held to Britain’s head compelling it to remain part of the EU (except perhaps the gun labelled “self interest”) and the British people have every right to vote for a party who promises a referendum on continued EU membership; or even a party that promises an immediate withdrawal from the Union. The fact that no such mainstream party exists is a failure of British democracy and not the fault of the EU.

The EU is a community of 27 nations. Such an organisation will always require compromise as only a fool or a petulant child expects to have their own way all the time. Membership allows Britain to try and influence the general EU agenda, but also requires Britain to accept the outcome when they fail to do so.

If that’s unacceptable to Britain, then withdraw from the organisation. And if you can’t organise a withdrawal, then who’s fault is that?

In reality, the fact that such a course of action isn’t on any serious party’s agenda suggests that Britain is aware that they gain far more from the EU than they lose. In which case, they really need to accept that they are but one voice out of 27.

Jim Bliss, spot on there, great comment and very accurate.

@14. Jim Bliss.

Very well said.