British EU referendum
Author Message
Osweo
Offline
Member



England

Posts: 2.887
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 905
Post: #71
RE: British EU referendum
"Stumped" because he didn't immediately recognise a stupid acronym that all respectable people everywhere should feel embarrassed to use? On the contrary, the article reveals he has an articulate informed opinion on the matter. I suppose they rely on their idiot readership to rarely digest anything more than a headline.

"And now if a whole nation fell into that? In such a case, I answer, infallibly they will return out of it. For life is no cunningly-devised deception or self deception, it is a great truth that thou art alive, that thou hast desires, necessities: neither can these subsist and satisfy themselves on delusions, but on fact. To fact, depend on it, we shall come back: to such fact, blessed or cursed, as we have wisdom for."
Thomas Carlyle
2016 Jun 01 15:02
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 5 users Like Osweo's post:
Artturi (01-06-2016), Eldritch (07-06-2016), Raskolnikov (07-06-2016), Temnozor (02-06-2016), W. R. (01-06-2016)
Godyfa
Offline
Daughter of Yorkshire



England

Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 112
Post: #72
RE: British EU referendum
Why My American Students Used to Gasp in Horror When they Learnt About the EU

When I used to lecture American graduates in European Union Law, there were many occasions when I reduced them to gasps of disbelief. Like the time I told them they couldn’t text each other during class. Total outrage. Once, I even had the temerity to ask a boy kindly to refrain from eating a Chinese takeaway (I don’t mind surreptitious snacking but full mid-class meals with chopsticks and napkins are really pushing it).

But there was always a particular moment, midway through our first lecture on the EU, when my American students would look particularly dumbstruck. It was when they learnt that the common market, entered into in a spirit of amity to heal war-torn Europe, had by the reasoning of its appointed Judges, determined that EU laws must reign supreme over those of the EU’s member states.

Perhaps this doctrine of supremacy was always there in the text of the Treaty of Rome, which established the European Economic Community on 1 January 1958.

Article 177 provided a mechanism whereby the European Court of Justice could give rulings upon requests from national courts for guidance, to ensure a uniformity of application of Community law throughout the EU.

By Jeremy Brier | 10:29 am, June 1, 2016
Jeremy Brier is a barrister and former Adjunct Professor of EU Law at Pepperdine University

When I used to lecture American graduates in European Union Law, there were many occasions when I reduced them to gasps of disbelief. Like the time I told them they couldn’t text each other during class. Total outrage. Once, I even had the temerity to ask a boy kindly to refrain from eating a Chinese takeaway (I don’t mind surreptitious snacking but full mid-class meals with chopsticks and napkins are really pushing it).

MORE: Zombie Referendum – The Dead Could Decide if We Stay in the EU

But there was always a particular moment, midway through our first lecture on the EU, when my American students would look particularly dumbstruck. It was when they learnt that the common market, entered into in a spirit of amity to heal war-torn Europe, had by the reasoning of its appointed Judges, determined that EU laws must reign supreme over those of the EU’s member states.

Perhaps this doctrine of supremacy was always there in the text of the Treaty of Rome, which established the European Economic Community on 1 January 1958.

Article 177 provided a mechanism whereby the European Court of Justice could give rulings upon requests from national courts for guidance, to ensure a uniformity of application of Community law throughout the EU.

In 1963, in a case called van Gend en Loos, the ECJ confirmed in answer to a reference from the Dutch Courts that individuals had the power to enforce directly certain European rights in their national courts: the doctrine of “direct effect”. The question inevitably arose thereafter (this time from an Italian court) as to what happens if there is a conflict between such a “directly effective” Community right and those provisions set out in national laws?

Costa, who held shares in a private energy company that was about to be nationalized, refused to pay his (very small) energy bill. Sued before an Italian Court by the new state energy company, Costa contended that the nationalisation infringed European laws relating to the state distorting the market. The Italian Government argued that this was a national issue and Costa had no standing to bring the case. It argued that the nationalisation post-dated the Treaty of Rome and Italian principles allowed subsequent laws to modify preceding ones.

Addressing the question of whether this was a national issue or an EU one, the ECJ held as follows: “the EEC Treaty has created its own legal system which, on the entry into force of the Treaty, became an integral part of the legal systems of the member states and which their courts are bound to apply”. The Community was one of “unlimited duration … stemming from a limitation of sovereignty or transfer of powers from the State to the Community” by which Member States have “limited their sovereign rights”. This made it impossible for States to “accord precedence to a unilateral and subsequent measure over a legal system accepted by them”.

It is arguable that the European Court’s logic was sound here. Without compatible Community law across the European Union, a truly uniform market is impossible. The problem is that British voters electing to join the “Common Market” in 1975 did not comprehend this and nor did the politicians of the day. Not until the 1990s did the penny drop as the EU grew in nature and number. Then, in a case called “Factortame II” the UK’s senior court (the House of Lords) was told by the ECJ that the Merchant Shipping Act 1988, passed by Parliament, was incompatible with Community law and had to be disapplied. Westminster wasn’t top dog anymore.

One reason my students always found this shocking was because they were American. Not, you understand, because I consider Americans to be particularly shockable. But there is something particularly egregious for citizens of a country who place such a pride in their sovereignty and Constitution to contemplate it being trumped (no contemporary pun intended) from an outside body. It was, one student remarked, the equivalent of the US Supreme Court seeking guidance from NAFTA, to disapply an Act of Congress. He wasn’t wrong. Save that NAFTA remains limited in reach, whereas the EU now regulates vast aspects of European life.

In the present British debate, it is informative to recall the shock that greets an outsiders’ first understanding of how the EU grew. Its history is of an unstoppable escalation, either emanating from its own internal logic and powers or by a concerted but quiet power grab.

more http://heatst.com/uk/why-my-american-stu...ut-the-eu/
2016 Jun 02 17:05
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 4 users Like Godyfa's post:
Aptrgangr (03-06-2016), Artturi (02-06-2016), Osweo (02-06-2016), Raskolnikov (07-06-2016)
Godyfa
Offline
Daughter of Yorkshire



England

Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 112
Post: #73
RE: British EU referendum
Who would have thought it possible, these days, to find a European federalist with a sense of optimism?

But Guy Verhofstadt, a Belgian politician who leads the liberal group in the European Parliament (EP), is precisely that.

“I’m more optimistic than I was a few months ago,” he told EUobserver in an interview.
Verhofstadt is one of the few EU politicians who openly calls for the creation of a single superstate. His EP group, the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE), is the fourth most important force in the assembly.

He is optimistic because, he said, the Brexit vote will, either way lead to new talks on the EU treaty.

“The whole discussion and referendum around British membership is an opportunity,” he said.

“Why? Because if it is a No, we need to start negotiations. That’s article 50 in the [EU] treaty. If it is a Yes, we agreed with [British prime minister] Cameron to translate the special status for Britain into the treaty … and he promised not to make obstacles for the deepening of the union.”
The “special status” is Cameron’s new deal on British opt-outs from various aspects of EU integration, such as the euro or closer political union.

No matter what the result of the British referendum on 23 June, it will lead to changes in the European architecture, Verhofstadt said.

Either the British stay in the EU but let the rest of it become a real union, he explained. Or it exits the EU, letting it become a real union.

The institutions, stupid
Verhofstadt, a former prime minister of Belgium, a federal state, knows how difficult that type of structure is to manage.

Belgium, five years ago, set a world record by having no government for 19 months because Dutch and French speaking parties could not agree a coalition.

He said the EU is in a period of multiple crises - in the areas of values, the economy, migration and terrorism and security. He said it also suffered from geopolitical weakness.

"People are falling back to nationalist and populist recipes, because they see a European Union that does not function, so, automatically, then you believe those who are saying that it is better to go back to the past and to the old nation states of the last century, because that worked”, he said.

For Verhofstadt, the various crises stem from one problem - the dysfunctional nature of EU institutions.

“The drama and the tragedy of all this is that what we have today is not a union … it is a confederation of nation states that is still based on unanimity rules and that cannot function,” he said.

“Europe does not have institutions capable of dealing with today’s challenges. It’s very simple,” he said.

Associated membership
He said the Brexit debate had been foreseen by the EU’s “founding fathers”, the post-WWII politicians who launched the project.

“They said we might have full membership and associated membership. It was foreseen in their constitution: A [draft] treaty [for a political community] in 1953. So they had already the solution for [these] problems”, Verhofstadt said.

“Nation states don’t want to give up their power. It’s a transfer of power we are talking about essentially and they don’t want to do it”.

He said that if the UK had a “special status” or “associated membership” then pro-EU capitals could continue “deepening the union”.

"That is the reason that I am more optimistic now."

He noted that it usually takes the EU “10 years of problems” before it finds solution, giving the so-called banking union as an example.

“In the beginning [German chancellor] Merkel said: ‘No’. But then, in 2011, suddenly there was fear that Spanish banks could fall. So, they [the Germans] said: ‘OK, now we need a banking union. As fast as possible.’ And in two to three years we made a banking union that had been impossible for 10 to 15 years before”, he said.

He predicted that refugee relocation quotas would be the next example.

“It will come. The question is how much damage we need before finally saying: ‘Yes, Yes. There’s no other way’.”

Germany must do more
With the Brexit vote marking a crossroads in European history, Vefhofstadt said German leadership is needed more than ever.

“I think it is important that Germany involves itself more in European affairs. It is fundamental now,” said the liberal leader.

“Let’s be honest, the union does not exist … and we have to make a fundamental shift to a federal union”, he said.

“That is now on the table. We are talking about a separate budget and treasury for the eurozone, a real defence community. We need to make this shift and we need Germany for that”.

https://euobserver.com/institutional/133674
2016 Jun 03 12:03
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 3 users Like Godyfa's post:
Aptrgangr (03-06-2016), Artturi (17-06-2016), Osweo (03-06-2016)
Alfaro
Offline
Member



España

Posts: 177
Joined: Oct 2015
Reputation: 43
Post: #74
RE: British EU referendum



working on this...
2016 Jun 05 05:36
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 2 users Like Alfaro's post:
Aptrgangr (05-06-2016), Artturi (17-06-2016)
Aptrgangr
Online
Nulla crux, nulla corona
Supervision



Deutschland

Posts: 2.918
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 893
Post: #75
RE: British EU referendum
Every pro-EU argument boils down to not being able to trust the ‘plebs’

We all know that the Remain camp has peddled the politics of fear. But what is the object of their fear? What’s the thing that makes them so scared, so convinced that a litany of social and political horrors will befall Blighty if we pull out of Brussels?

It’s you, and me; all ordinary people. It’s the public. It’s our unpredictable passions. When the pro-EU lobby frets about a post-EU Britain having Boris as a PM, becoming a right-wing cesspool, getting rid of workers’ rights, becoming less eco-friendly, and / or becoming vulnerable to neo-fascistic forces, what they’re saying is: ‘You can’t trust the public. You can’t leave politics to ordinary people alone. Some politics must be done in the cooler forum of the EU.’ For them, the EU is a bulwark against the blob, tamer of the throng, mercifully keeping in check our extremism. (...)

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/06/eve...the-plebs/

"The secret to happiness is freedom... And the secret to freedom is courage."
Thucydides

“My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.” Carl Schurz

"Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms."
Aristotle

"Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." Thucydides
2016 Jun 05 21:37
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 2 users Like Aptrgangr's post:
Artturi (17-06-2016), Osweo (07-06-2016)
Aptrgangr
Online
Nulla crux, nulla corona
Supervision



Deutschland

Posts: 2.918
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 893
Post: #76
RE: British EU referendum



"The secret to happiness is freedom... And the secret to freedom is courage."
Thucydides

“My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.” Carl Schurz

"Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms."
Aristotle

"Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." Thucydides
2016 Jun 06 22:13
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 2 users Like Aptrgangr's post:
Alfaro (10-06-2016), Artturi (17-06-2016)
Godyfa
Offline
Daughter of Yorkshire



England

Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 112
Post: #77
RE: British EU referendum


2016 Jun 07 14:27
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 1 user Likes Godyfa's post:
Artturi (17-06-2016)
Flavius
Offline
Vae Victis



Helvetia

Posts: 359
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 27
Post: #78
RE: British EU referendum
Brexit is 'not deliverable', says David Cameron's father-in-law

A Brexit is "not deliverable" because parliament could conspire to block Britain leaving the European Union, David Cameron's father-in-law has claimed.

Lord Astor, who is Samantha Cameron's step-father, has said that a Brexit would have "not legal standing" even if the public vote to leave the 28 member bloc in June.

The Conservative peer also cast doubt over whether his son-in-law would be able to stay on as Prime Minister after the referendum.

Writing in the The Spectator, he said: "If the Brexiteers win, an exit from the EU is actually not deliverable. The EU referendum is merely advisory; it has no legal standing to force an exit.

"Parliament is still sovereign. We will need an Act of Parliament to revoke the European Communities Act 1972, by which Britain joined the EEC or Common Market, or perhaps a paving bill enabling the Government to start the Leave negotiations. But whatever, a vote will be required.

"The Government, whether still led by David Cameron or not, would probably not win the vote in the House of Commons.

"Labour could claim the referendum was too close and did not include a majority to leave in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

"Therefore the Labour Party, the SNP and the few Lib Dems would claim to have the mandate to vote against the bill."

Membership of the House of Commons is overwhelmingly pro-EU, with just over 70 per cent of its present members campaigning for Remain at the referendum on June 23.

Unnamed ministers have told the BBC that in the event of a vote to leave, pro-EU MPs could engage in what one called a “reverse Maastricht” process - a reference to the long parliamentary campaign fought by Tory Eurosceptic MPs in the 1990s against legislation deepening EU integration.

This could see pro-EU MPs using the Conservative government's small working majority to push for the UK to stay in the single market.

The justification would be because the Leave campaign has refused to spell out what trading relationship it wants the UK to have with the EU in the future.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/...sf28156967
2016 Jun 07 21:05
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 2 users Like Flavius's post:
Aptrgangr (09-06-2016), Artturi (17-06-2016)
Aptrgangr
Online
Nulla crux, nulla corona
Supervision



Deutschland

Posts: 2.918
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 893
Post: #79
RE: British EU referendum
France’s plan for a bloody Brexit

Paris wants to cut cord quickly if Britain votes to leave the EU.

PARIS — France is not ready to let Britain get away from the European Union scot-free.

If the U.K. votes to leave on June 23, Paris will push to ensure that consequences are felt swiftly and severely to avoid emboldening anti-EU forces elsewhere in the bloc, senior EU diplomatic sources said.
France’s tough stance foreshadows major difficulties for London in the event of Brexit, as a core EU member tries to assert its influence in a reconfigured bloc and sway other countries against adopting an easygoing attitude toward Britain. Some of those countries, such as Germany, are more inclined to favor a softer approach. (...)

http://www.politico.eu/article/france-pl...d-cameron/

"The secret to happiness is freedom... And the secret to freedom is courage."
Thucydides

“My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.” Carl Schurz

"Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms."
Aristotle

"Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." Thucydides
2016 Jun 09 22:05
Like PostLIKE REPLY
The following 3 users Like Aptrgangr's post:
Artturi (17-06-2016), Flavius (09-06-2016), Osweo (10-06-2016)
Flavius
Offline
Vae Victis



Helvetia

Posts: 359
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 27
Post: #80
RE: British EU referendum
(2016 Jun 09 22:05)Aptrgangr Wrote:  France’s plan for a bloody Brexit

Paris wants to cut cord quickly if Britain votes to leave the EU.

PARIS — France is not ready to let Britain get away from the European Union scot-free.

If the U.K. votes to leave on June 23, Paris will push to ensure that consequences are felt swiftly and severely to avoid emboldening anti-EU forces elsewhere in the bloc, senior EU diplomatic sources said.
France’s tough stance foreshadows major difficulties for London in the event of Brexit, as a core EU member tries to assert its influence in a reconfigured bloc and sway other countries against adopting an easygoing attitude toward Britain. Some of those countries, such as Germany, are more inclined to favor a softer approach. (...)

http://www.politico.eu/article/france-pl...d-cameron/

An exit tax, maybe? Big Grin
2016 Jun 09 23:16
Like PostLIKE REPLY


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)