Guest essay by Eric Worrall
British Green Party Leader Caroline Lucas has urged members to vote on 23rd June to remain part of the European Union. Her concern appears to be that if Britain leaves the EU, democratically elected British politicians might be emboldened to dismantle EU inspired environmental regulations.
Caroline Lucas has today called on Green voters to back remaining in the EU on June 23rd, declaring the imminent vote a “climate referendum”.
Lucas, who is a board member of Britain Stronger in Europe and Another Europe is Possible, as well as the Green Party’s only MP, warned a vote for Brexit would undermine efforts to tackle climate change and build a greener economy.
“June 23rd is a climate referendum,” she said. “Leaving the EU could wreck our chances of playing a part in the fight against this existential threat – and hand the country to people who don’t even believe climate change is happening. But by staying as a member of the EU we can build on the progress already made in Paris earlier this year and continue making strides towards a fossil-free future.”
She reiterated her view the EU is in need of sweeping reform, but insisted it remained the “best hope we have when it comes to tackling climate change and protecting our environment”.
The latest intervention came as the Green Party launched a new online video urging its supporters to back a Remain vote.
Read more: http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2461374/caroline-lucas-declares-eu-vote-a-climate-referendum
Why is Lucas so concerned that politicians elected by the British People, liberated from the shackles of the European Union, might repeal green policies? Is the leader of the British Green Party worried that the people do not want more green? Or does she think that using the undemocratic might of the EU bureaucracy to suppress voter choice, is a more certain route to a low carbon future?
At least one prominent member of the British Green Party has a different view. Baroness Jones thinks the fanatically green European Union is not anti-CO2 enough to deserve her support.
… Writing in the Guardian last week, the Green Party’s Baroness Jenny Jones, set out her reasons for backing a vote for Brexit, arguing the EU has become “a super-sized top-down dogmatic project of endless industrial development and growth” that remains resistant to any attempt to reform it. …
Read more: Same link as Above
Recent polling suggests the leave vote may have developed a commanding lead, over fears about uncontrolled immigration.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
One of the better political threads. It is good to know what actual Brits think of Brexit, rather than filtered though American reporters.
Hardly, count back to see how many supporters of the Remain side have contributed. You are only seeing one half of the argument. Remain supporters are unlikely to post here.
Why are remain supporters unlikely to post here? Are they all warmistas?
Probably.
I’ve been getting the “remain” side from the US MSM, notably the NY Times.
MarkW, on the balance of probabilities I suspect yes, probably. Or perhaps it is better to say that warmistas are more likely to vote remain. (Sure, there are other arguments, I personally haven’t made up my mind yet.)
This vote might be characterised as a vote by the UK populace for, or against, more centralised government from further away [*].
The global warmers/greens are usually in favour of bigger, more centralised government because it better allows them to tell the masses how to lead their lives (which they like to do), even though the masses were never actually given the chance to vote for it directly. I would have been surprised if the leader of the Green Party said anything else than what is reported here. So it is a kind of non-story in some respects.
[* The last time it was openly addressed in the EU, I think they called it “subsidiarity”. Nobody mentions it much these days.]
This is quite an eye opener
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/13/brexit-supporters-leave-vote-right
The Graundia is a hotbed of rabid warmists. I popped over to see what they were saying. I can’t usually stand it for long in the environment section because they are all doomsters who are convinced the world will end in 10 years and I have to come back to WUWT for a bit of sanity. There are 5500 comments from which you can get a good idea of the feeling or the left.
It does seem to me that everyone who is an anti-warmista, is also passionately anti-EU.
Whether that’s just because of a general attitude, or because they think leaving the EU will further their environmental aims I cannot say.
I think this the problem with the whole referendum. The EU has been such a scapegoat over the years for everything that goes wrong in the UK, that people from every fringe of the political spectrum think that leaving the EU will solve all their specific problems. The left and right both think that leaving will allow the country to be run the way they want.
For my own part, I want the UK to remain in the EU, I fear we will vote to leave, I Hope that if we do leave it won’t actually change much,
Leftists in general have no use for democracy.
I intend to vote in this referendum, even though I haven’t voted for almost 30 years. And yes, I’ll vote Leave.
While, rationally, I can see positives and negatives (but mostly negatives) on both sides, I regard this as an opportunity to register a vote of no confidence in the current political system.
Americans, too, might want to consider registering such a vote come November.
From here it sounds like Brexit will win, and the reason is not environmental laws at all but two major problems the EU brings to Britain: (1) the continuing costs of bailing out Greece and the other spendthrift countries that are members, and (2) the huge flood of allegedly-Syrian refugees.
Both these problems affect the other EU economies too, especially Germany and the other wealthy ones. So I expect that Britain will be only the first of a stampede as the rats leave the sinking ship.
NATO is unlikely to be affected by this, however, NATO has its own big problem — the change of regime in Turkey which has made them no longer our friend — and we desperately need to kick Turkey out, before they manage to force us into a war against Israel. But that’s a problem for next year.
Does anyone think that’s even a remote possibility?
Yes. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/may/31/israeli-attacks-gaza-flotilla-activists
I would say that Israel has done even more annoying things. In spite of that, Uncle Sam remains its steadfast supporter. NATO action without the permission of the USofA isn’t going to happen.
Greece , Portugal and Spain should never been allowed to join and the whole thing was doomed when they were. European economies are too desperate to be using the same currency. A Grexit would have been in order too.
disparate, but then again…
Poll of polls shows brexit winning.
https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/
This is great, and the comments too……
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/06/10/brexit-might-actually-win-this-referendum-heres-why/
skeptik • 3 days ago
Germany Panics Over Brexit – Largest Newspaper Begs Brits “Please Don’t Go”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/…
I guess they’ve just realized how much they’ll have to cough up if Britain leaves
There is one major problem for Brexit – we do the voting but they do the counting.
I never thought I’d write that about British politics, but details are now emerging of illegal activity at last year’s general election.
I believe it was Stalin who said that what matters is not who votes, but who counts the votes.
“I never thought I’d write that about British politics…”
Why would you think that, Roy?
When it comes to underhand activity, we British wrote the book, and we still lead the World.
In fairness, while there will undoubted be those who would try to interfere with the result, it will not be at the count.
The real objective of the “Greens” is world government with themselves behind the curtain pulling the levers and collecting the tithes.
Let us make it simple.
1. Green = Red
2. EU = Red
3. Green = EU.
Watermelons: Green on the outside, Red on the inside.
4. Green= Knows best
5. Green=By force
The just-elected Muslim mayor of London has announced he is removing all public pictures of naughty women because they are against his religion. That is, fashion models.
http://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2015/04/27/15/proteinworld.jpg
The London Mayor sounds like a little dictator.
It was not done on religious grounds but to avoid “body shaming” larger women.
Larger women didn’t mind this though
http://i2.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article5580851.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/David-Beckham.jpg
Not sure what Sid’s views are that one 🙂
What’s next??
Compulsory hijabs with a longer term move to enforcement of burqas?
Seamless exclusion of the key term “human caused” with climate change is the best guide for laymen observers on debate manipulation tactics confronting them. That point needs to be hammered home, at least to the last vestiges of thinking populations.
Thank you Eric.
The so-called “greens” – aka eco-tards – shall have their gravy train derailed very soon. It will be a pleasure to see them choke upon their own carbonated oxygen. They are loathsome and vile.
Regards,
WL
People are curious, and they will vote to leave just to see if this unelected uncountable superstate tells them to vote again, just like Ireland did, they voted No and were told to vote again. who backed Ireland up? no one! that’s who lol they voted yes the second time around because the Irish people realised it is all bull shit…
It really is amazing to me just how trivialized the debate in the UK about Brexit is becoming. The real purpose of the referendum is to decide which approach will allow Britain to fare better many, many years from now, not simply in the short term or because there might be some who will recognise and correct some of the more stupid ‘Green’ ideas that are currently being supported by an overbearing EU. A fear that Britain might be able to determine its own future in opposition to an unelected cabal of commissioners who vote their own (excessive) expense arrangements, whose accounts have not been given the all clear for 19 years running, who want to subsume Britain’s military force into an EU defence sector, all of which which costs us £10bn a year more than we receive and which even now hasn’t reconciled the concepts of Common and Napoleonic law is frankly seriously concerning.
I believe the next Greek bail-out is in around a month.
If we are still in the EU, Juncker will expect Great Britain to cough up around £2.4B.
Cameron will swear on his mother’s grave to refuse to pay, and then surreptitiously slip the cheque to Juncker in a brown envelope.
So how much is the next dues increase from Brussels? Over reach operation is expensive don’t you know, just ask Obama.
It’s all about sovereignty. Britain has had a large undercurrent of Socialism/Marxism since the beginning of the 20th century and the EU is another attempt to put them firmly in that camp. The notion that the EU has elected decision makers is laughable at best and plenty of Kool Aid has been passed around to make people believers. AGW and the EU are products of the same disinformation and both are designed to enact “wealth redistribution” which is code for making the West pay restitution for their earned prosperity. There’s no equitable redistribution planned or intended. All you have to do is look at the history of Socialist/Marxist governments to know what the eventual outcome will be. If you are one of the Yes/No voters please use your vote wisely because this may be your last chance to retain your self determination and it will affect the rest of the world.
This new, short film is pretty darned close to the truth.
https://youtu.be/eHR8Lj3wb-o
I like the Norwegian leader’s contribution to coordinated assault on Brexit. She basically tells the serfs not to look at Norway as a model. (It’s too successful as an energy state to be compared against.) Besides, someone has to pay the rent and party tab in Brussels.
If the UK leaving the EU is going to destroy Europe, why did they not give Cameron the treaty changes he needed to win this referendum? They gave him nothing.
The referendum has been promised many times and not delivered. An EU referendum has become the standard election promise from someone who expects to lose. It is not a vote winner because people want to stay in the union, quite the opposite.
There is nothing Cameron could offer me that would persuade me to vote Remain. I am one of those older voters who, it is said, “would crawl, naked over broken glass to vote Leave if they have to”.
It is actually quite difficult to find anyone who wants to stay in, apart from those who profit directly from the EU and a few misguided children who are unlikely to vote if they have anything better to do on the day.
Britons tend to do divide and conquer on themselves a lot. Like when they had an empire, which they had acquired via using divide and conquer on others. But within this empire they (most likely unconsciously) created a divide between British and non-British, thus preparing way for a permanent division along this lines, when new powerful forces (like Soviets) decided to take advantage of this opportunity.
Long lasting empires were usually doing opposite – trying to unite along a common identity. Eg. Russia convincing various Asiatic Sibiera natives that they are really Russians. Same with USA – convincing all those immigrants that they are really just American. And China – which had multiple cultures, ethnicities and languages, but managed to unify them as Chinese. Or Rome, which after some time of Roman citizenship exclusivity finally gave up and gave it to everyone within the empire.
Britons are a failure at this, even within the small borders stressing how different and separate Scotts are form English etc. Now that they have a chance for a common European Identity, and they seem to fail to embrace it. Even though that Cameron managed to negotiate it they way they like – light, with little strings attached; while still having a vote in EU; that allows them to influence what happens in countries like Germany.
In all fairness what is so special in Britishness now? Now they are weaker at industry than Korea, Switzerland, Germany and others. Worse at high-tech than US, Japan and others. In such situation shouldn’t it be buidling coalitions rather than trying to sepate itself?
The more the merrier in the Great German currency empire. They just don’t get it on the basic design flaws so might as well exploit them—VW style.
GTR,
Your ignorance is bewildering.
Do NOT try and tell us Brits what to do !
There is no such thing as a “coalition” within the EU: there never was.
This time we won’t be alone and we shall set to fire the English Channel.
I strongly suggest you learn before you type.
“Now that they have a chance for a common European Identity, and they seem to fail to embrace it.”
But of the few things most of us agree on, we don’t want a common EU identity. Even the Remain side don’t want to be part of the United States of Europe. The argument is whether we believe that our MPs can keep us in the EU but out of the union. Those who go on past experience want out altogether. Cameron managed to negotiate FA.
Your post is nearly as funny as the Downfall movie clip.
Top marks for the Satire sir!
Oh hang on, you didn’t actually mean it?
Bless!
It’s healthy to hear a “Remainian” voice here. Well done.
Now…, from your examples of people “convinced” to accept a “common identity” the USA clearly fought hard for their independence. That leaves (Revolutionary) China, (Soviet) Russia or the ancient Roman Empire. In which of these would you say the everyday person was better off as a result?
If you are to build coalitions (not the most popular concept in recent memory in the UK) would you not do so with like minded individuals that look like succeeding?
The EU is a burning building and the fire exit will only stay open a few days longer.
@Phil’s Dad – I explicitly wrote about immigrants as people who accept American identity, not those who fought independane war. Meaning even new people do this. And I didn’t mean Soviet Union, but Russia. Rusia (before World War I) had a federalistic identity, that is tried to make people identify as Russians, even if they were from some minority. Soviet Union and China just after revolution had a different identity, based on ideology – they wanted people to identify themselves as communists, and it was an international identity. Similar to what Islam does today.
Europe had unions for it’s history eg. Austro-Hungary, Poland-Lithuania, Coalitons were even more frequent, Eg. today there is Visegrád Group. There was a previous, much wider and more ambitious, but unfortunately unsuccessfull attempt called Hexagonale. Benelux in the West.
UK seems to be kind of deficient in such abilities, with a tendency to isolate itself, thus becoming smaller, and less meaningful.
GTR You obviously have no idea about the EU and Britain’s membership of same. There is no ‘common European identity’ and never will be. Cameron negotiated nothing at all, and then claimed a great victory (just as many of us Brits had predicted). Now he leads a massive campaign of fear, trying his best to frighten the people into voting his way. He has not tried to promote the benefits of EU membership because there are none. All he has done is threaten us all, threaten old people that their pensions will be cut, threaten everyone that all taxes will rise steeply. It isn’t working though. The more he threatens the more the polls move towards a vote to leave. I hope very much that we will vote for independence on 23rd June.
100% 24 carat unmitigated nonsense from start to finish, GTR.
And insufferably patronising to boot.
You haven’t the remotest clue what you’re wittering about.
They are reporting on the news tonight that that United States are preparing to announce that they are devolving power from the electorate to an unelected bureaucracy based in Ottawa to whom citizens of the U.S. will pay a fee to manage governance of their country on their behalf. Needless to say, we Brits stand firmly behind President Obama’s far-sighted plan to align his nation with other Western ‘states’ in this manner.
I hope they know that the sidewalks of Ottawa are rolled at 5pm sharp Mon-Fri. Closed weekends.
Newsflash
Mexico and Central America doing the same. It is likely that USA will be downvoted in all future decisions. Queso and tequila will get huge subsidies and preferred status for exports. All car production will be moved to Belize and Guatemala. Lake Erie will be set aside for the milk lakes and Gildersleeve mountain will be repurposed for the much banana mountain.
much needed banana mountain. doh!
El Salvador given $3 billion to enhance its fishing fleet and sole rights to lobster and crab along the east coast of USA and Canada.
The best, most responsive government is the one that is closest to the People.
+1 TA
I found this point of view compelling, and hard to dispute.
Indeed. Or the longer..
dbstealey commented: “…I found this point of view compelling, and hard to dispute….”
+1
I add my humble support for the country that is the Mother of Parliaments, …shake off the burden of unelected bureaucrats in Brussels and become free again. Just one lonely Canuck wishing you all well and hoping you can make us proud again.
Thanks, we need all the support we can get.
Well, I am most definitely NOT in favour of leaving the EU. And here is why:
Years ago – 2001 – I did a documentary about the EU. It was called Politics Isn’t Working – The E-Word. And it was all about the failings against successes of the EU. It gave me an insight into how it works. The EU is mad, mad organization…even crazier than proponents of the Leave campaign might imagine. Because it is constructed out a hotch-potch of compromise and selfish national interest, it’s MEPs have to work incredibly long hours and travel incessantly. But what struck the documentary and myself makers is how hard those guys actually worked and despite being unheralded, and how much they believed in the principles of democracy and accountability. They work their bottoms off for us.
The other thing that struck me is how little people care or know about the EU and how it works. And reading this thread it’s pretty obvious know one really grasps it here either. The thrust of the documentary was that because no one was particularly interested in the EU, even enthusiastic supporters of it, no one takes the time to work out what their elected representatives are doing and why, and thus aren’t being represented in the traditional sense of democracy. Voter turn outs for MEPs are really low, and I doubt anyone could tell you who their MEP was in any country in the EU let alone the UK.
Attempts to address the lack of transparency in the EU was made via the Lisbon treaty, but voters wanting to object to the way EU did things, ironically voted against the very things that would have addressed their concerns. It speaks to the lack of trust, lack of interest etc.
Yet, the EU does do what it sets out to do. It has presided over the greatest rise in wealth and security in Europe’s history (it’s why the UK wanted to join after the fact in the first place). Member states come together to agree on regulations of common interest. For example, the fisheries policy, environmental policy (and I am not talking about climate change, I am talking pollution, common health care, river and waterfront management – stuff that crosses borders), mobile phone charges, insisting that airlines meet a certain standard for safety and be held responsible for missing luggage and flights that don’t come etc…
What people seem to forget is that the UK is a large, influential and important member of the EU. Far from being DICTATED to by Brussels, the UK IS Brussels – as much “Brussels” as any other major nation. But the EU also gives us recourse against our own government….something that is really important to me right now as a large section of our borough are being royally shafted by our local council…..and actually for other reasons related to my profession.
To the issue of democracy, people don’t realise that if you want a law changed or created in the EU, ANY EU citizen can devise a petition and they HAVE to implement or seriously consider it. You can’t do that in the UK, at least at the moment. We have democratic accountability in that we vote for MEPs, and the members of the executive who currently are able sit behind closed doors (from which the accusation rightfully can be made about lack of transparency). So if anything is implemented we don’t like we can hold our own politicians accountable. And we do….
For me, it makes no sense to leave the EU. The reason most people want to leave is because of immigration, but if we left we would still have to accept free movement of trade in order to be part of the common market. We would still have to accept EU regulations in order to trade with them (for example we couldn’t make…I dunno…DVD players that blow up when you turn them on) but we would have no seat at the table deciding on what those regulations would be. We would be figuratively cutting our nose off to spite our face.
We don’t gain anything by leaving. “Sovereignty”? You’ve got to be joking. That’s really a hard argument to take seriously. You mean you would rather be shafted by your own politicians than your own politicians plus someone else’s? Either way your shafted. What on earth makes people think that our own politicians are so wonderful or our system of democracy is so accountable that we would be any better off? How better off? Plus, we still have the right of veto in the EU, control of our own borders, all the trappings of sovereignty – we just have to accept regulations that all member states – including us – agree to.
Finally, most of the criticisms of the EU are generally right, though not always for the right reasons. But it is NOT imposed on us, we are PART of it and if we don’t like it we can CHANGE it. If you aren’t happy with something, you can write or go and see your MEP. You can formulate a petition and force the EU to consider it. The EU is net good for the UK, for all its faults.
It doesn’t make sense to pick up our toys and go home, it makes better sense to change it for the better.
If you understand the EU then you know full well that they will sweeten the deal on the table and call referenda until they get the answer they want. Whatever we get, everyone else will want, but that is not our problem. Cameron uncorked the bottle with the EU Genie trapped inside, I will vote Leave on the 23rd. Whatever the result some people will lose a lot of money, some will gain, most of us will muddle through as usual.
“Plus, we still have the right of veto in the EU, control of our own borders, all the trappings of sovereignty …”
No, we really don’t. Qualified Majority Voting long ago put paid to any kind of right of veto and the so-called free movement rules prevent us from adequately policing our borders. With regard to border controls, however, I accept that we do not help ourselves by having brain-dead judges deciding that any feeble “human rights” excuse trumps common sense every time but, since that is primarily a result of the ECHR and not the EU, it is less germane.
Reposted (because I accidentally used a wrong email address)
“Plus, we still have the right of veto in the EU, control of our own borders, all the trappings of sovereignty …”
No, we really don’t. Qualified Majority Voting long ago put paid to any kind of right of veto and the so-called free movement rules prevent us from adequately policing our borders. With regard to border controls, however, I accept that we do not help ourselves by having brain-dead judges deciding that any feeble “human rights” excuse trumps common sense every time but, since that is primarily a result of the ECHR and not the EU, it is less germane.
You say they want it to be democratic, but fundamentally, when elected MEPs do not have *any* power over the legislation that originates from unelected bureaucrats, how can it be?
You also say we can change it. There are 2 parts to this, (1) whether Cameron WANTS to change it, and (2) whether he is genuinely ABLE to. To (1) it’s clear his pathetic attempt at ‘renegotiation’ was a poorly veiled demonstration that he DOESN’T want to, and to (2) we have a heavily weighted system against us to achieve anything, and have been consistently outvoted. It is also clear that the core bureaucrats have no intention of deviating from their ultimate goal; that of eliminating nation states and creating the single ‘Country’ called Europe. Their answer to every failure is ‘MORE EUROPE’!
…further. The reason it’s desirable to be “shafted” by ONLY our own politicians, is that we can get rid of them. Has that failed to sink in. We CANNOT vote out the EU bureaucrats and presidents (how many do they need!). That’s being shafted, not our sovereign democracy. If our own politicians try that on us, they can be both DESELECTED, and they and whole governments VOTED OUT, and often are.
agnostic2015,
None of your arguments addresses the fact that once the UK hands over its sovereignty to the EU, it’s a done deal — forever. From that point on, the UK will just be another small part of the Borg.
Greece, along with every other basket case country in the EU, is already making plans to vote the UK’s wealth into their pockets. The UK has only one vote against theirs, so get ready to hand over your taxpayers’ assets based on wishful thinking that joining the EU will be in your best interests.
The EU has been politically unable to make Greece live within its means, and Greek profligacy continues unabated. The EU desperately needs the UK’s substantial wealth to pay for more Greek bailouts, and other countries will be in line with their hands out. British taxpayers are in the EU’s sights. Even the most casual observer can see that if the UK joins the EU, it will be looted to keep the EU kleptocrats in power.
If the UK hands over its sovereignty to the EU, unelected foreign bureaucrats will make decisions directly affecting the UK, and they will carry the force of law — and your MP’s will be impotent to do anything about it except complain.
You don’t seem to understand that the EU does whatever it wants, regardless of any rules. Who is going to challenge them? Every country in the EU is subservient to Brussels. The rules stated that Ireland would vote Yes or No on joining the EU, but when the vote didn’t go the way the EU wanted, the rules were simply discarded.
EU bureaucrats are appointed by the EU President, who is an unelected puppet of the other unelected EU potentates who lord it over individual countries. They get away with it because each of those countries has stupidly handed over its sovereignty to the unelected EU. And now you want your own country to throw out everything it’s gained since the Magna Carta? For WHAT??
And whatever you believe the UK would get out of joining the EU now is nothing compared with what the EU would offer you if the UK voted “NO”. The EU desperately needs your country’s wealth to spread around. Without it, self-serving poseurs like the EU’s unelected president Herman Van Rompuy are fearful of keeping the EU together. If you had even minimal business sense, you would at least hold out for a lot more. If you had real common sense you would vote “NO” and that would be the end of it. Instead, you’re ready to simply hand your collective heads on a platter for nothing to a corrupt gang that’s afraid to stand for election.
Do you really believe that the EU follows its own rules? Do you really believe that if an individual country disagrees, it has any recourse? Those beliefs are contradicted by the EU’s repeated actions and statements. You clearly haven’t watched this video. You really should.
dbstealey,
None of what you right is correct, or where you are correct it makes no difference. Again you fall into the trap of thinking of theEU is somehow a separate entity. It ISN’T. You can say the same thing for every other member state, most of whom are not as powerful or influential as the UK. But they don’t view it that way.
I think one of the reasons for this kind of thinking is an english-speaking habit of viewing the government as “them”. In Switzerland at least, and to an extent other european countries I have visited, they think of government as being a “we”. What “we” are going to do, how “we” are going to live. The idea of sovereignty is in my view delusional. It’s thinking that somehow we are masters of our destiny. We aren’t whether we are in the EU or not. We buffeted by the forces of global economics and politics and we have to react to that, and THAT determines our destiny. Those things don’t change whether we are in or out of the EU, except that the EU itself creates a moderating influence. Like the difference between a large ship or a small ship in rough seas.
“Even the most casual observer can see that if the UK joins the EU, it will be looted to keep the EU kleptocrats in power.”
The UK is ALREADY joined to the EU. It gets its way on policy more than 80% of the time. It is absolutely a critical and influential member, not some whipping boy consigned to be kicked in the teeth for some high minded ideal.
“You don’t seem to understand that the EU does whatever it wants, regardless of any rules. ”
Well….rubbish. The EU is not some distant and distinct entity that exists outside of human experience that imposes its conscious will on the meek subservient mindless masses like a despotic god. The EU is….wait for it…US!! It’s made up of people, flawed, brilliant, overworked, corrupt, uncorruptible, cheating, honourable, lazy and hardworking people.
“EU bureaucrats are appointed by the EU President, who is an unelected puppet of the other unelected EU potentates who lord it over individual countries.”
No, this isn’t correct, or at least it is misleading. The EU president is rotating position held by member states. It is modelled on the swiss system in order to ensure a casting vote. Any appointment has to be ratified by the member states, but important matters of policy can and are discussed behind closed doors by the executive level. One simple suggestion to deal with this lack of transparency is to film those sessions. But those members meeting behind closed doors are elected representatives of the member states, so the accountability is there, it’s just not good enough.
“stupidly handed over its sovereignty to the unelected EU. ”
This just isn’t true, or at least again is misleading….in that the whole concept of sovereignty and self-determination is laughably flawed. The British government, and in fact our local council trample over its own laws and regulations with depressing regularity. The degree to which that is possible in the EU is less, because there is no balance of power.
“And now you want your own country to throw out everything it’s gained since the Magna Carta? For WHAT??”
My friend, the UK is already part of the EU and it hasn’t thrown out the Magna Carta or anything else. All the idea behind agreeing to REMAIN in it is that the EU can continue to formulate regulations that govern the interests of ALL member states where they intersect. And there are TONS of examples. One of the most famous is the fisheries policy. The North Atlantic fishing stocks were nearly decimated a few decades ago, and the EU devised a system that really made EVERYONE unhappy, as such compromises do. But without it stocks would have collapsed entirely and despite the hardship it caused the fishing industries of many member states, at least they still have one today.
Europe is situated over a very small area. Western Europe could fit within the state of Western Australia with room to spare. As a result its geography requires some form of collaboration or confrontation. What happens if environmental laws in say Slovakia are laxer than in Austria and they want to dump their toxic waste into the Danube? The Slovakian Toxic Waste manufacturers pressure their government to let them do it because it “saves jobs” and they have retained all that marvellous “sovereignty”. Yeah, but the farmers in Austria who depend on that water for their farming are upset because now their crops are ruined. Austria says “their killing our crops” and Slovakia says “their taking our jobs”. Meanwhile Croatia are saying “hang on, you shouldn’t use that water for your farms, we need it too!!”
It doesn’t take Einstein to recognize you NEED something to arbitrate all that. Where everyone signs up and says “it’s in our common interest to not stuff things up for everyone else”. Think of it like living in a block of flats – 11b can’t be blasting out hard rock at 2:30 in the morning because 12b has an early start. But would you say that 11b should be allowed to blast out whatever and whenever and agreeing not to is giving up “sovereignty”?
The EU is far…far…from perfect, in ways most people, even those dead against, even realise. BUT it does do, for the most part, what it is supposed to in managing the interests of its members collectively.
The craziness is this notion that the UK is separate from and dictated to by the EU, or that withdrawing from the club will protect it from the decisions it makes. At the moment the UK is influential so if something happens it doesn’t like, it can stop it. BUT there HAS to be compromise, that’s the way of the world.
My final thoughts:
– Would you therefore support Scotland leaving the UK? Why would their reasons to leave be any different from the UK’s leaving the EU?
– If the UK was large enough to leave the EU without it mattering, then surely it is large enough to be getting what it wants if it was still in?
“Again you fall into the trap of thinking of theEU is somehow a separate entity. It ISN’T.”
Bollocks, like most of your disingenuous pro-EU puff pieces.
@dbstealy – Why this talk only about Greek lack of financial discipline, eg, “The EU has been politically unable to make Greece live within its means”? According to Wikipedia: “As of Q1 2015 UK government debt amounted to £1.56 trillion, or 81.58% of total GDP”. Does such debt indicate “living within one’s means”? Is it because UK financial discipline looks well only when compared to Greece?
agnostic2016 begins:
None of what you right is correct…
But what I wrote is correct. Right?
And GTR rights:
Why this talk only about Greek lack of financial discipline…
Greece was just one example of the problem. It is certainly not the only country that wants to make use of the UK’s wealth. That’s much easier than self-imposing financial discipline, AKA: living within their means.
How is the UK is better off being part of the EU? The UK is perfectly capable of negotiating separate agreements with any country, or with the EU itself. The EU needs the UK, not vice-versa.
Giving up sovereignty for imaginary benefits is wishful thinking. Get out while you can.
dbstealey and others:
Here is a professor of EU and UK constitutional law talk about how the EU works and how leaving it will impact the UK. It’s pretty much as I have outlined but in greater detail and far more authoritative:
Key points:
– The UK is a sovereign country. The EU is NOT a sovereign entity let alone a sovereign country. This is not an opinion, that’s a fact of UK and EU and international law.
– The UK parliament allows the EU to draw up legislation on it’s behalf, but it retains ultimate power over any law in the UK.
– Allowing the EU to legislate means there are trade offs. We gain from it although we also have to adhere to it.
– It is democratic in that all legislation has to be agreed by all member states. This involves enormous amount of negotiation, but all parties act for their national interest.
– The key reason as to why the EU is a successful economic bloc is that it standardizes regulation. Prof Dougan uses the example of if the UK manufactured computers. In order to trade with any other country it has to adhere to the individual laws regarding safety and responsibility to the consumer, and every country can and does have its own regulations. The point of the EU is that it standardises those regulations so that if you adhere to them you can trade anywhere within the EU without the regulatory barrier. This is the single greatest economic benefit of the EU.
If the UK were to leave it would STILL have to adhere to those regulations in order to trade with the EU, but without the right to help decide what those regulations should be. It would also STILL have to agree to free movement of people if it wanted to stay in the common market. Since that is major reason why the UK wants to leave, it would mean negotiating trade agreements with the EU member countries separately. That’s a huge amount of work.
– The amount of time it would take to disentangle EU and UK law which is deeply entwined is likely to take at least a decade, keeping people like him in business a long time. It’s considered the most serious difficulty of leaving the EU.
agnostic2015 says:
Allowing the EU to legislate means there are trade offs. We gain from it although we also have to adhere to it.
The United States tried the same thing, with the very best of intentions. Our Constitution says that the States are essentially sovereign. Except for a very few, very limited powers reserved for the federal government, all other governmental power is reserved to the States and their citizens.
But now in the U.S., legislative power is held by the federal government. If there is a conflict between state and federal laws, the feds win. It will be no different with the EU, except it will take much less time for the EU to become the de facto ruler. It’s already happening, right under the noses of countries like the UK, where its jobs and wealth are being transferred to more ‘needy’ countries.
There is always a government pecking order; a top dog. A headman. That’s simple human nature, and the good intentions of everyone concerned cannot stop it from happening in the EU. Bit by bit, law by law, regulation by regulation, the EU will become just like the U.S. federal government: it will become the supreme ruler of its subsidiary nations. Hoping that won’t happen is just wishful thinking, which ignores human nature and thousands of years of history.
And:
…the EU is a successful economic bloc…
…at the expense of its wealthier subsidiary countries. See Warren Latham’s selected examples.
The EU covets the UK’s wealth. That is the primary reason they want to keep the UK under EU jurisdiction. That allows the EU to transfer the UK’s wealth to poorer countries countries, which is exactly what’s happening now.
In the EU the wealth always goes from the makers to the takers. If the UK remains, that process will ratchet up inexorably. Your wealth will be confiscated by the EU and handed out as political favors.
But a vote to remain will accelerate the EU’s confiscation of your wealth. UK taxpayers didn’t cause Greece’s problems, but they will be expected to pay the cost of bailing out the countries whose own bad governments and policies caused their problems.
It’s been demonstrated over and over that the EU is not willing to force austerity on profligate countries like Greece. Why should it, when the UK and other wealthy countries have the money to bail out the deadbeats? The EU doesn’t have the money — but the UK does.
The citizens of the UK have a once in a lifetime opportunity to become independent of their EU master. Or, they can remain on the road to serfdom within the EU. For their sake, I sincerely hope they get out while they can.
“The EU covets the UK’s wealth. That is the primary reason they want to keep the UK under EU jurisdiction. That allows the EU to transfer the UK’s wealth to poorer countries countries, which is exactly what’s happening now.”
dbstealey you are FUNDEMENTALLY misunderstanding how the EU works. The EU …IS….the UK. The UK is a hugely influential stakeholder in the EU. It would be truer to say that the UK covets the wealth that the EU generates. The EU is simply a club run by its members. The UK is one of the “big 3” and it sets the agenda, so you can’t characterise the EU as something that happens to us, or covets or desires anything from the UK, because any agenda is driven largely by the UK itself.
This is the craziness of the whole debate. You have to grasp that nettle. The EU isn’t an entity separate to the UK. I strongly recommend you watch the video I posted. In the climate debate do we not insist on EVIDENCE? Not just arm waving and alarming sensationalism?
The EU is far more democratic than you give it credit for, it has its problems yes, but it’s will is the will of its democratically elected representatives from their respective sovereign countries.
“…at the expense of its wealthier subsidiary countries. See Warren Latham’s selected examples.”
I have and he is utterly wrong. Proveably and demonstrably wrong.
You could check this yourself you know. You can fact check and closely examine what the EU really is and how it works. Once you do, provided you are objective, is conclude that their really is no reason for all the hysteria.
““…at the expense of its wealthier subsidiary countries. See Warren Latham’s selected examples.”
I have and he is utterly wrong. Proveably and demonstrably wrong.”
Actually just to clarify, I mistook those comments for something else that was posted earlier. His comments aren’t wrong, just misleading. It cut’s BOTH ways.
agnostic2015,
We see the role of the EU differently. I respect your views on that more than my own, since you will be affected much more than folks in the U.S. We’re just in the peanut gallery, watching the show.
However, there is still history and human nature to consider. The EU began as an attempt to copy the U.S., which began with its many states united by an extremely weak federal government. In fact, your EU/UK arguments would apply to our federal and state governments just as well. I’m in California, one of the biggest, richest states in the U.S. But this state is subservient to the federal government. What the feds say goes, whether we like it or not.
It wasn’t intended that way. The rules were written to specifically forbid what’s happened. Our Bill of Rights does not allow it. But it’s happened to us anyway — good and hard.
The same evolution will take place in the EU. Eventually it will be the superior government, no matter what the rules say, and no matter what promises are made now. Therefore, my advice is to get out while you can.
If the UK does withdraw it can always re-join, and on much more favorable terms. The EU wants and needs the UK. If Brexit passes the EU will say a lot of things publicly to salve their wounded pride. But as always, money will have the final say. Behind the scenes there will be offers and counter-offfers made. At the very worst, you can re-join later if you want to, but under much more favorable circumstances the second time around.
I would still advise retaining your sovereignty. In the EU that will erode until it’s just an impotent, meaningless, old-timey word. But that’s your decision, not ours. We might see things a little more objectively, viewing the situation from across the Atlantic ocean.
Time will tell. Neither you nor I can make a difference in the voting at this point. The die is cast; voters will decide, and which way it goes will determine the next move in the game. All I can say at this point is, ‘Good luck!’ You will need it in either case.
Agnostic,
Dunno if DB has replied to your question about Scotland, but as a former resident of the UK of both Scottish and English ancestry, I’ll presume to do so.
You ask, “Would you therefore support Scotland leaving the UK? Why would their reasons to leave be any different from the UK’s leaving the EU?”
My answer is indubitably Yes! If Wales wanted to leave the UK, I’d also say, please feel free. For that matter, if the North of England wanted to be free of London, more power to them.
Any political entity with more than ten million people is too big. Five million is better, about the size of the USA in 1800.
Why would England want to be united with a bunch of National Socialist soccer hooligans and heroin addicts, anyway? Once the oil is gone, Scotland will be Venezuela with whisky. Sad what has happened to the land of Adam Smith and David Hume, of James Watt and James C. Maxwell.
Glaswegian In voter:
“agnostic2015 June 15, 2016 at 1:22 am
it’s why the UK wanted to join…”
The UK did NOT want to join the common market, as it was called, in 1973. Heath had no mandate to do so but did anyway. There was a referendum in 1974 and people voted to stay, but the damage was done.
“The reason most people want to leave is because of immigration” + “You mean you would rather be shafted by your own politicians than your own politicians plus someone else’s?” – has EU ever ordered UK to take in Pakistani immigrants? Who let them in?
Some people complain about “unelected” officials – the last time I checked the official head of state of UK is a hereditary monarch…
16th. June 2016
This is how good the EU has been for UK jobs……
Cadbury moved factory to Poland 2011 with EU grant.
Ford Transit moved to Turkey 2013 with EU grant.
Jaguar Land Rover has recently agreed to build a new plant in Slovakia with EU grant, owned by Tata, the same company who have trashed our steel works and emptied the workers pension funds.
Peugeot closed its Ryton (was Rootes Group) plant and moved production to Slovakia with EU grant.
British Army’s new Ajax fighting vehicles to be built in SPAIN using SWEDISH steel at the request of the EU to support jobs in Spain with EU grant, rather than Wales.
Dyson gone to Malaysia, with an EU loan.
Crown Closures, Bournemouth (Was METAL BOX), gone to Poland with EU grant, once employed 1,200.
M&S manufacturing gone to far east with EU loan.
Hornby models gone. In fact all toys and models now gone from UK along with the patents all with EU grants.
Gillette gone to eastern Europe with EU grant.
Texas Instruments Greenock gone to Germany with EU grant.
Indesit (washers and dryers) at Bodelwyddan Wales gone with EU grant.
Sekisui Alveo said production at its Merthyr Tydfil Industrial Park foam plant will relocate production to Roermond in the Netherlands, with EU funding.
Hoover Merthyr factory moved out of UK to Czech Republic and the Far East by Italian company Candy with EU backing.
ICI integration into Holland’s AkzoNobel with EU bank loan and within days of the merger, several factories in the UK, were closed, eliminating 3,500 jobs
Boot’s sold to the Italians – Stefano Pessina, who have based their HQ in Switzerland to avoid tax to the tune of £80 million a year, using an EU loan for the purchase.
JDS Uniphase (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JDSU) run by two Dutch men, bought up companies in the UK with £20 million in EU ‘regeneration’ grants, created a pollution nightmare and just closed it all down leaving 1,200 out of work and an environmental clean-up paid for by the UK tax-payer. They also raided the pension fund and drained it dry. (and don’t forget, these grants are all made with OUR money )
UK airports are owned by a Spanish company.
Scottish Power is owned by a Spanish company.
UK strategic oil pipelines (military airfields) are owned by a Spanish company.
Most London buses are run by Spanish and German companies.
The Hinkley Point C nuclear power station to be built by French company EDF, part owned by the French government, using cheap Chinese steel that has catastrophically failed in other nuclear installations. Now EDF say the costs will be double or more and it will be very late even if it does come online.
Swindon was once our producer of rail locomotives and rolling stock. Not any more, it’s Bombardier in Derby and due to their losses in the aviation market, that could see the end of the British railways manufacturing altogether even though Bombardier had EU grants to keep Derby going which they diverted to their loss-making aviation side in Canada.
39% of British invention patents have been passed to foreign companies, many of them in the EU
The Mini cars that Cameron stood in front of as an example of British engineering, are built by BMW mostly in Holland and Austria. His campaign bus was made in Germany even though we have Plaxton, Optare, Bluebird, Dennis etc., in the UK. The bicycle for the Greens was made in the far east, not by Raleigh UK but then they are probably going to move to the Netherlands too, as they have said recently.
Anyone who thinks the EU is good for British industry or any other business simply hasn’t paid attention to what has been systematically asset-stripped from the UK. Name me one major technology company still running in the UK, I used to contract out to many, then the work just dried up as they were sold off to companies from France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, etc., and now we don’t even teach electronic technology for technicians any more, due to EU regulations.
I haven’t detailed our non-existent fishing industry, that the EU has paid to destroy (using our money of course), nor the farmers being paid NOT to produce food they could sell for more than they get paid to do nothing, don’t even go there.
Appalling. Nothing more than wealth redistribution from the UK to elsewhere.
Why do you think it’s EU that is “guilty” of industries avoiding the UK? How about UK simply not being competitive? The world is different now than in 19th centaury, or during Cold War. China is on the market with with like everything better than the UK: larger, cheaper, more disciplined, perhaps even more talented (IQ, technical education) population, lower prices for land or sub-components, and importantly – less molestation of businesses by lawyers and courts. That’s the main competitor, not EU countries, it’s them who capture most of the business.
Central Europe on the other hand is more competitive with the UK with better location – at the center, close to most of the customers, exactly at the crucial roads (east-west: Asia – Russia – Belarussia – Poland – Germany – France; or north-south: Italy – Germany – UK, or Balkans – Poland – Hungary – Slovakia – Scandinavia). Is reasonable to locate stuff at the center, rather than at the periphery. The workforce is cheaper, prices of land or real estate also. There’s a long tradition of industry, culture and law support it. And no aversion to the energy from coal (UK self injured itself here), including even in Germany.
Granted, there are some countries that do well alone, but they all have some kind of a master game plan. Like Korea or China. Brexiters seem just to believe that everyting is going to work out by itself.
GTR commented: “…Why do you think it’s EU that is “guilty” of industries avoiding the UK? How about UK simply not being competitive?…”
If that were true the EU wouldn’t have to take money from the UK to finance businesses moving to another country.
@markl – why won’t you allow the possibility that the businesses would move of UK to the cheaper locations anyway, independant of it being in EU or not, and got EU grants anyway (perhaps smaller), even if the UK was not in the EU? It looks more like the UK was trying blindly to imitate US model of deindustrialization (they sent their industry to Asia), and transfer into “services economy”, but without having the ability to print the world currency out of thin air.
GTR commented: “…. why won’t you allow the possibility that the businesses would move of UK to the cheaper locations anyway, independant of it being in EU or not, and got EU grants anyway (perhaps smaller), even if the UK was not in the EU?…”
Right. The EU gave away money because it didn’t have anything else to do with it. And the UK being in the EU is relevant because they helped pay for it! Something they’ve been planning all along in parallel with the EU? Kick businesses out and pay them to leave? You’re ignoring the obvious.
markl says:
If that were true the EU wouldn’t have to take money from the UK to finance businesses moving to another country.
Exactly. Warren Latham shows just a small part of the damage being done to the UK by the EU. That will increase over time, as long as the UK remains a subsidiary of the larger government. It’s certain that the EU’s taxing authority and grasp will ratchet up inexorably. They want the UK in the EU for one reason: the UK’s wealth. The EU has plans for it.
In all the arguments for remaining in the EU I haven’t seen anything more than talking points; pablum for the masses. And “What if…” speculation. Instead, the affected voters should be asking themselves: ‘Why is the EU so determined to keep us under their control?’ Because that’s what this is about.
Eventually the typical UK citizen’s standard of living will decline every year; the difference is in having to pay for another large and unnecessary layer of government. After all, someone has to pay. Progressive taxation will make certain that UK taxpayers will pay the most.
But what’s in it for the UK, that the UK couldn’t do as well or better on its own?
The UK is a wealthy country. The EU desperately covets their money. That fully explains the EU’s motivation.
And as time goes by, the superior governing body will naturally assert more and more authority over their subordinate entities. That’s what always happens. The U.S. began as the ‘united states’, with the federal government having very limited authority or power, per the Tenth Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
The specific intent of the “States Rights” 10th Amendment was to prevent the federal government from amassing too much power. But that’s exactly what happened. When immense money and power are involved, there are always those who connive to bend the rules to their advantage; Gresham’s Law in politics and human nature.
The EU will eventually call all the shots, no matter what they promise now. And if the UK remains subservient to the EU, the superior government will not forget this. The UK will become more and more entangled by new EU regulations, laws, agreements, and other hobbles that before very long, it will become practically impossible to disengage. The EU will begin taking the necessary steps to prevent the UK from ever leaving. This may well be the UK’s last chance to escape the trap of forever being a subservient entity in a larger government.
All the talk about competition, businesses, land or labor costs, etc., are a diversion from the central and primary reason the EU wants to keep the UK within the fold: money. The UK has lots of it, and the EU is going to get a larger and larger portion of the UK’s wealth as time goes by.
As a subservient entity, the UK will have no choice but to pay up. Because that’s what happens when you give up your sovereignty. It’s hardly different from selling yourself into slavery. The Master will smile at you right now, and promise you anything. Anything — except the right to stop paying into the EU’s protection racket, and obeying the EU if push comes to shove.
That’s what all this is about: the UK’s money. Who gets it? And it’s adding a higher layer of government; an authority that must be obeyed.
So this is it. Get out while you can — or give up the right to complain about how things didn’t turn out like you expected.
I was born in cork Ireland, I live in the UK (Northern Ireland) I understand how superstates cut off limbs to save themselves,,, I never vote in the tribal politics here, but I know as soon as the UK votes to leave a political union of Europe there will be nothing but a relief for the British. and I would like to see that happen. it’s a big Universe and I dislike seeing people unhappy.
Whoops!
I apologise for my multiple postings. When the originals failed to appear, I realised that my email address was wrong and was not valid. I therefore assumed that the posts had vaporised and reposted. The system works better than I anticipated however so my deathless prose is repeated.