Your reading to much of the Daily Mail and worst of all you believe it.

Yes it is actually. Most laws enacted every year stem from the EU. The vast majority may be small, unnoticed and ultimately unenforced but plenty of them aren't and that's the point.

Much, possibly most, recent law has originated in the EU but that's still a drop in the ocean compared to UK law in general - although motoring law has seen more EU changes than general law.

The paper states that 186 of the 1,302 Acts passed by Parliament between 1980 and 2009 (14.3 per cent) were influenced in some way by EU obligations.

Classic piece of Governmental misdirection and unsurprisingly this report was produced by the previous Labour Gov so is probably 100% inaccurate. They don't tell you EU regs are converted into UK law without the HoC voting on them. For instance the Working Time Directive is not in your 14.3%. The HoC library in 2010 found the UK adopts 3,000 EU regs a year. Most of them don't affect anybody - such as ones governing classification of padded jackets - which just merely proves we're spending £50million a day for cronies to sit in a big building in Belgium and make law which doesn't matter. Don't forget this lot in Belgium haven't had their accounts signed off by auditors for 18 years in a row now. But they keep spending our money anyway.

The Bruges Group study of 2008 showed British business spends £30bn a year just to comply with EU regulations - that's all the stuff which isn't in your 14.3% - and we lost £3bn worth of fish in 2008 because the EU orders us to throw it back in the sea. For years Mr Blair told us the 'benefits of membership were self evident' and we didn't even need a study into the figures. The truth is calculating what percentage of law comes from the EU is pointless, what we need to know is how much of it affects us and how it affects us. Agriculture is the industry most hampered by the EU, the likes of Defra see 50% of their obligations coming out of Brussells. Everybody has their own figures for how much law comes from the EU, my view is whether it's 14.3% or 84% it's too much.

LArge swathes of stuff on ending the employment relationship, changing the criteria for access to Tribunals and the way the ET itself operate have come straight from Westminster.

The previous Labour Government made laws at a record pace. Some of them were silly things about doing improper things with eggs but many actually do matter and I've never said a British Government free of the EU won't do stupid things. They obviously do.

And is there a source for the story about Child Benefit - I suppose it might engage directives on Equality. But I'm not hearing cries from Brussels while IDS dismembers our system.

I believe the EU have problems with equality directives in regard to the idea of a cap at two children. The fact is it's our money, not theirs and if the Chancellor of the UK wants to cut child benefit he should be free to do so. Just as we should be free to either vote in approval of that in 2015 or vote to kick him out in 2015.

Unfortunately that big ugly building in Belgium now essentially means our votes mean nothing anyway. Doesn't matter who wins in 2015. I don't even care if Labour get back in because it's merely a badge on a suit. We're governed by people we don't vote for in Belgium.

The report is talking about acts passed by Parliament, as in Acts tabled and then voted on by our elected people. I'm talking about all the rules and regulations which are imposed on us which never get anywhere near our House of Commons. For instance those rules governing the classification of padded jackets - which British business has to comply with - have nothing to do with Westminster.

"Everybody has their own figures for how much law comes from the EU, my view is whether it's 14.3% or 84% it's too much."

That's more like it. And I agree.

The previous Govt told us it was 9%, that report says 14%, a German President said it was 80%, Dan Hannan says 84%, UKIP say 75% as does a former German Chancellor, David Cameron says it's 50%. They can't all be right but I don't really care, they're all too high. I think it depends on what you classify as law when you're studying it - commonlaw, secondary law etc - and what you deem legislation - are working hour directives deemed legislation for instance?

For the record I have no problem with the European Community - which my distant ancestors voted for - getting together and agreeing basic minimum standards for vehicle safety, electronic legislation and that sort of thing. What I object to is £11billion of our money going to a bunch of faceless suits intent on wrecking the lives of millions purely to preserve their socialist dream of a centrally controlled Europe. Mr Boroso and his mate Van Rumple want a centrally controlled European Police Force, flag, anthem, foreign policy and the former is already using words like 'Federal Europe.'

They're not even pretending anymore, they don't hide their intentions now. Let's get the hell out of this thing.

Not true at all. Many employment regulations prevent people getting work in the first place. If each employee comes with a mountain of red tape and possible legal action, I'm less inclined to hire people generally aren't I? Just like higher taxes mean more money going to the Government and less left over to employ people with. Employers NI needs abolishing right away.

Many of the laws may protect people lucky enough to have a job but in the case of womens rights you could argue it actually harms their prospects. We've layered the law with all sorts of womens rights stuff yet it's not changed the fact they earn less. In some cases the law makes a woman 21-35 a financial risk to a business in ways a man isn't.