[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

This is a mutually agreed relationship under the TFEU treaty and written in to local laws. For example the European Communities Act 1972 and subsequent amendments in the UK where we accept the entire EU Acquis communautaire. Of course we had a referendum three years after passing this law on continued membership.

The Maastricht treaty included a mechanism where parliaments can push back on issues which should fall under national legislation rather than the EU. It's been used three times since the mechanism was introduced.

So, to answer your direct question/statement, there are situations where the EU competency trumps the local one but this is agreed between the nations and the EU under the TFEU. Where the EU tries to go over its remit and interfere with local non-EU related issues, the principle of subsidiarity comes in the mechanisms are in place to prevent this. Finally where the local parliaments disagree with an EU law that is in the EUs remit, then it would be knocked back by the local representative at COREPER or in the Council vote if MEPs don't follow their local whip.

I'm at a loss to know why you're missing my perfectly explained point.

Again - the EU Parliament is keen on federalisation because it will then trump national parliaments - notwithstanding the consultation that might take place. The EC is trying to creep the EU into federalisation.

Nothing to do with current rules - it's where the EU project is trying to go, starting with the Eurozone.