Time to leave the EU?

startledcod

I genuinely cannot think of any benefit that being a member of the EU offers us beyond being members of an, imperfect, free trade area.

I would be very grateful if someone could elighten me.

Nickle

Ask the question, would you want to be in an economic zone and out of the political zone, and the numbers are even more extreme.

So the simple question, why aren't they giving us the referenda they promised in order to get elected.

Political as well as financial frauds - the lot of them.

FvH

There could well be a tipping point coming soon on EU

The growing Eurozone crisis creates a mood where it becomes practical, sensible, even safe to get out

This will help persuade huge numbers of voters in the middle ground who are not exactly fans of EU but who are fearful of leaving

The number of ideologically Pro-EU voters is small (15-20% of electorate)

I also noticed 50 Labour MP's were supporting withdrawl

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/272313/Labour-rebels-unite-with-Tories-to-force-vote-on-quitting-EU

General Zod

Only three Member States in which there is a majority with a positive view of the EU.

Yam Yam

Forget Munich, Suez or Iraq, the decision to join the EU in 1973 was the most disastrous foreign policy decision that Britain made in the twentieth century.

This monstruous superstate has managed to fleece us, humiliate us and enslave us more efficiently than any of the great dictators we have had cause to face down.

Raffles

I guess the majority of the Libdem vote is probably still pro EU but when that constitutes about 10% of the population its also about as relevant as this non-entity of a politician.

Russell

Is this the same Denis MacShane who wouldn't say no whilst troughing at the taxpayers expense and is awaiting the decision of the cps on whether to involve prosecution?
It seems all who crave even more EU are heavily involved in getting taxpayers to pay their income and pensions whilst UK MP's and then want to move on to the EU gravy train as well.
Publicly funded leeches all their lives at our expense.

The sooner we can rid ourselves of these spongers (either UK or EU) the better.

Just look at Mandelson for a prime example of taxpayer funded greed (ex disgraced MP, then EU gravy train, currently HoL trough). How many pensions is he in receipt of from us?

Scrobs...

One of the main reasons why the majority of UK citizens want to leave the EU, is the general view of countless tiers of often totally inept politicians, piling on costs to the nation, taking huge salaries and pensions, and of course, squandering expenses, all at a time when newsworthy fishermen are told to chuck their day's work back in the sea to die, 'human rights' legislation is reducing the British way of life, and further inexplicable laws are thrown at the UK public with a foregone conclusion that they will obey.

When the ads on trees round here said "Yes to Europe, No to Communism". it was a totally different story, but there also was a different sort of Heath in charge then...

toco

Huhne has serious personal matters on his mind just at present and clearly has failed in spectacular fashion to do his homework before pontificating on this subject.His teacher may order extra out of school work to improve his knowledge on the subject of the EU and our continued participation.

denis cooper

Of course it's time to leave the EU; as the ads once had it, "Any time is Celebrations time", and there'll certainly be widespread celebrations when we finally shake ourselves free from the suffocating embrace of the EU.

We might even celebrate again on each anniversary, if we could be bothered to dignify the event with commemorations rather just preferring to forget about the whole unhappy episode in our history; and maybe it would be a good idea to institute a formal annual commemoration, in the hope that future generations of Britons would learn and wouldn't allow their unpatriotic and untrustworthy politicians to make the same kind of mistake again.

However ... I come back to the more immediate issue of the major EU treaty change quietly agreed on March 25th:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:091:0001:0002:EN:PDF

which MPs should refuse to approve when presented with the Bill next spring.

Ed P

Huhne is unaware of many things. To name but a few: speed limits, the idiocy of bird slicers, the outrage at the artificially-inflated energy bills we all receive to pay for these vanity "green" projects, the general hatred for the EU and its unelected & undemocratic apparachiks, the insult of being lectured by him, a millionaire, about energy savings and the majority desire for less taxes (like the Taxed-Enough-Already party).

Submariner

Huhne doesn't give a monkeys what the UK electorate wants of believes: he is a true Lib Dem. Which means he prefers perpetual opposition with a smug glow of being able to tell everyone else that everything is their fault. All he cares about is clocking up brownie points with the LD conference crowd as he thinks that he can be leader after stabbing Clegg in the back.

johnfaganwilliams

God, they are a sorry lot aren't they? Yesterday we had Mad, Bad Vince, enemy of capitalism and now we've got Huhney-tunes who believes there is no question about global warming despite massive evidence to the contrary, wants us all to be the most energy uncompetitive country in the world and has the nerve to tell us we should shop around to mitigate the effects of his policies. And he's pro-Euro and probably dismisses the current crisis as a little blip. Cameron needs to call these wimps bluff. Promise a Euro referendum, announce the dissolution of Parliament and he'll get in with a thumping majority and the weirdy-beardies can all go back to where they are comfortable. A place where they can say what they want but never have to take responsibility for anything as they have no peer. And we'll all live happily ever after outside the EU.

Simon Stephenson.

Time to leave the EU?

Not before there's been a proper programme of discussion of the pros and cons of EU membership, and of the reality of what we should expect outside it. Democracy's not even remotely good when the vast bulk of the voters don't really have a clue what they're voting about, and where their randomness is corrupted by the pressures of tribal cohesion.

NewBritannia

What startles me is that nobody in the UK press seems to seriously question the left wing notion that the Tea Party are "loons" or "fundamentalists".

I fail to see why pushing hard for small government and fighting tax rises is the preserve of idiots.

Perhaps if we could capture the same sort of groundswell that our American friends have mobilised then we could finally force a debate about the EU and other issues that concern voters.

I have set up a forum platform aimed at using the web to facilitate such a movement. It is slowly taking off. I would be delighted if you would join in. All considered views welcome.

http://newbritannia.org/default.aspx

Nicholas

Huhne is a typical social-democrat who believes he knows what is good for everyone else. Any disagreement with this knobhead has to be characterised by him as a "Tea Party tendency" to devalue and delegitimise it. A nasty and increasingly deployed leftist trick.

He was out of touch on energy bills and he is out of touch on this. I hope a tipping point is reached to "rub the left's nose in dissent" and make them aware of what the MAJORITY of people actually want.

strapworld

I would love nothing more than to leave the EUSSR.

However just consider what will happen, should a referendum be called:-

The EU will plough many millions into the Pro EU Campaign. They will have all the main players in politics/business/education/church (both CofE and RC)/the BBC/ The usual suspects on the EU payroll and local organisations that are beneficiaries of EU handouts/ The Guardian/ Independent.

For the OUT campaign we will have no major political figure. Just a bunch of Nigel Farage's.Plus The Sun, Daily Mail/Express and The Times.Funding will be down to individual donations. They will probably refuse to allow public money to be used!

I am sorry, the first vote may well be NO but we will face vote after vote until we vote YES. (The Irish experience)

Yes, the majority may well be against it in opinion polls, at the moment. But the weight of arguments

mongoose

Huhne would, wouldn't he? He was an MEP till 2005 and can look forward to a pension denominated in s.

Are you going to record the debate to post up here for the hoi polloi who live in the sticks?

steve

The one thing I don't understand is how many laws we would still have to take as a part of the EEA compared to the EU, is this limited to trade laws or does this still extend into social areas?

Rick

Is there any chance of the Spectator debates being streamed online? Its a great shame for those of us who live far removed from London to miss them.

disenfranchised

having spent time distastefully witnessing EU excess in luxembourg, all i can say is that ex-MEPS like huhne are the last people you should listen to when the topic of EU membership is raised.
something quite frightening happens to them (nigel farage excepted, of course) when they enter the rarified atmosphere of brussels, strasbourg and luxembourg.
they're very soon proselytised into believing that there IS such a thing as a free lunch, and that it will always be served up, piping hot, seven days a week, thanks to silly old contributor countries like germany, britain and france (and in that order).....

Vulture

I think the EU will implode before the UK public is allowed to vote on it, so sold are all three Westminster parties on the gravy train.

But the disaster unfolding across Europe must be converting many thousands more each day - in Europe as well as the UK - to the utter folly, the criminal folly, of the Europpean Union.

Before it goes the way of Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union and all other dictatorial, multi-lingual towers of Babel it will have done huge harm to our nation.

Huhne and his ilk are responsible and if he escapes his speeding ticket I hope he won't escape his treason charge

Publius

"Huhne seems genuinely unaware of the depth of feeling out there"

Then he's one of many, Mr Nelson, eh? Shame you're so selective about the 'depth of feeling out there' when it suits you, though.

Joe

If Mr Huhne truly believes this then why did consecutive EU treaties have to be pushed through the back door without a democratic vote? Why was we not allowed to vote on the Eu / Lisbon treaty after all three parties promised one? His opinion is about as misjudged as his driving points fiasco.

merlindragon

I'd love to be at the debate tonight, but can't make it. However, I'd gladly pay for a recording. Please would you make one available?

Rob C

"The EC also asks whether its respondents 'tend to trust' the EU or not: just 24 per cent of Brits say they do. We are by far the most eurosceptic nation on this measure; next up is Greece on 32 per cent: "
Even more significant for me is the next two up on the list - less than 40% of French and Germans 'tend to trust' the EU. That in itself speaks volumes! If the 'leaders' can't take their own people with them then what hope is there for the rest?

Publius

@Simon Stephenson
"Democracy's not even remotely good when the vast bulk of the voters don't really have a clue what they're voting about, and where their randomness is corrupted by the pressures of tribal cohesion."

Are you advocating the abolition of democracy then? Or of human nature?

Cogito Ergosum

Fraser writes: "I cannot think of any other issue where the Westminster consensus is so far removed from public opinion".

Think hanging.

Think Neathergate.

bojimbo

Not forgetting the UK pouring money into the EU Swiss bank accounts .

Sean O'Hare

@Simon September 20th, 2011 2:06pm

It is not simply a matter of economics is it? At least it shouldn't be. It is entirely possible by quoting dodgy statistics the Europhile Lib/Lab/Con will convince a majority that there would be dire economic consequences and that we have to stay in. The real question of cost in not a monetary one, but one of sovereignty. Many have died defending this country from foreign tyranny. Are you prepared to say they died in vain because we might lose some trade with the EU, because I sure am not!

oldtimer

Looking at those charts, and considering the mess that Ireland is in, the Irish seem more gullible than I supposed.

As others have pointed out, Huhne is an interested party as a well rewarded traveller on the EU gravy train. One question: who will pay his MEP pension if/when the EU goes bust? That must concentrate the mind.

Sean O'Hare

Incredible to see that Ireland tops the list on the question "Has your country benefited from EU Membership?"! I wonder if they had asked in the present tense: "Is your country benefiting from EU membership?" whether they would have got quite such a positive response.

David Parker

Simon Stephenson,

Of course we should have had a proper independent cost benefit analysis of our EU membership long ago. The problem, however, is who can be trusted to carry out such an audit fairly and impartially?

Certainly no department run by any of our civil servants, many of whom owe their jobs and pensions to the bureaucracy of EU institutions.

One of the major drawbacks in any referendum campaign will be the sheer volume of lies and misinformation spread by the opposing factions, not to mention the MSM, since few of even the more respected jouralists have any deep understanding of the internal workings and ramifications of the EU.

A further drawback will be that the pro EU lobby, heavily funded by the EU Commission's large propaganda budget and also, probably, by all three main political parties, not to mention the BBC, will be able to outspend the Better Off Out faction by a ratio of three or more to one.

denis cooper

Steve -

It's getting a bit dated now, but this is Daniel Hannan writing in 2005 about the position of Norway:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3620612/What-we-can-learn-from-Norwegians.html

"Norwegians must meet EU standards when they sell to the EU - as exporters the world over must do. But they are spared the expense of having to apply most of these regulations to their domestic commerce. You will sometimes hear that Norway has to assimilate thousands of EU laws, but these laws are generally of a technical and trivial nature. The 3,000 EU legal acts adopted in Norway since 1992 have required only 50 statutes in the Storting. And the people who make such a fuss of these 3,000 regulations neglect to mention the 24,000 that Britain has had to incorporate over the same period."

3,000 divided by 24,000 is one in eight, about 12%.

From elsewhere, according to statistics from the Norwegian Foreign Ministry, in the years 1997 - 2003 the EU introduced a total of 11,511 different pieces of legislation, of which 2,129 were adopted by Norway - 18.5%.

I wouldn't expect to ever get a precise answer to your question:

"how many laws we would still have to take as a part of the EEA compared to the EU",
because it would depends how they were counted; but one reliable answer would be that "Norway has to apply fewer than one in five EU laws", and it could be as low as one in eight.

Writeangle

When politicians speak about the views of the public they mean the public in the narrowest sense (i.e themselves). The problem with the EU is it is totally a political organization so matters like finance and economics don't get a look in. Hence the EU decision to form the eurozone with widely disparate economies utterly ignored the warnings from economists who predicted great problems a decade or so down the line. Similarly the EU has no financial expertise i.e. witness failure to ever pass the annual audit. Unfortunately the UK has £100 billion + exports to the EU, about £30 billion to the US and negligible exports to massive countries like China. When the EU sinks the UK will be dragged under. It will take well over a decade at phenomenal growth rates to replace EU exports. The EU has no interest in (economics or growth as these are not politics) and with the huge EU debt growth is guaranteed to be low for decades. Out of necessity the UK will gradually grow exports to the rest of the world where there is real growth possible as there is little other way to move forward economically. Unlike China the EU has no science backed department to invest in a technological future creating GDP growth. Economically the EU is going to increasingly sink under its aging demographics so is a dead horse and not worth flogging.

starfish

Fraser writes: "I cannot think of any other issue where the Westminster consensus is so far removed from public opinion".

Hmmm

Banker's remuneration
Taxation
Criminal justice system
Foreign Aid
Politicians' expenses
The BBC poll tax
Global Warming 'consensus'
Planning Policy
Health and Safety legislation and implementation
Human Rights Act
Freedom of Speech
Islamic Extremism
Welfare dependency

I came up with that list in less than 2 minutes - you don't think very deeply do you?

London Calling

Q. Time to leave the EU?...

A. Yes…Lets take on the Coreper’s
And free Democracy from her chains…

EU legislation still lies with the unelected are negotiated in COREPER (the Committee of Permanent Representatives),or bureaucrats from the member states, and agreed in the
Council of Ministers, mostly by majority voting. The UK Government has some 8 per cent of that vote, and must accept whatever is decided. It still has a veto in some areas of our national life, but does not want to appear "anti-Communautaire" and so does not dare to use it. The whole process takes place in secret, and now imposes a large majority of our national law.The Commission then becomes the sole enforcer of all EU law,supported when necessary by
the Luxembourg Court, against which there is no appeal.
The point is, of course, that this system is not accountable to anyone except itself. The British people elect and dismiss their Members of Parliament every five years or so, but our Parliament has no influence on the process of EU law making, or on what Brussels does with our money.Westminster is powerless even to query the fraud and waste,
let alone to stop it.

"The Great Deception" by Christopher Booker and Richard North. Continuum
Books.

There are two ways of leaving the EU:

1. The Lisbon Treaty contains a laborious process which lasts 2 years, and would be expensive.

2. We repeal the 1972 Act which took us in. From then on we are no longer subject to the Luxembourg Court, and become free of all financial and other commitments under the Treaties (including the Common Agricultural & Fisheries Policies). However, EU law is sown into our national law, and would remain binding until repealed by Parliament. .

http://www.globalbritain.org/BBC/BBC_2011/Letter_and_Enclosures_to_Mark_Thompson_03.02.11.pdf

echo34

There's a typo in the title Fraser, someone has put a question mark at the end of it.

michael

I love Europe, when your there, the allure to be part of it all is overwhelming.
Its head over heart time... it has never stacked up for us and after 2 generations of cow-towing its time to call time.
With the geopolitical alliances that have evolved we can never be more than a second division expedient cash cow.

Slim Jim

Fraser, you are far too kind to Huhne. Of course he is aware of public opinion of the EU. He may be a very objectionable man, but he is not stupid. No, he is a professional politician, and he has the ability to look you straight in the eye and lie to you. He doesn't care that we know that he knows that we know he is a lying so-and-so. It's the people who voted for him that need to look hard at themselves.

Hexhamgeezer

That 35%. Would they be polish plumbers 'self employed' Romanian 'Big Issue' sellers, amnestied illegals, criminal HRA beneficiaries etc etc?

Hexhamgeezer

...and another thing. Your picture caption shows a married couple. When did we say 'I DO' to Lisbon, Maastricht or Nice?

An unintentional(?) bit of pro EU deception trying to suggest the relationship is akin to a marriage and as easy to extricate oneself from?

dorothy wilson

strapworld is absolutely right. That said, an in/out choice is not the only possibility for a referendum. We could add a further option of a trading arrangement like that of Switzerland.

However, we do need to give some serious consideration to how we would manage the changeover to that. Given the current mess within the EU some Conservative MPs should be asking sharp questions about whether that is being done.

Tiberius

I like your style, starfish, but I would like to add that bringing Speccy debates to the provinces ought to be on the list.

Fraser; have a word with Mark Pritchard. You need some pretext, after all. He'll tell you how suitable Oakengates theatre is for such an event. If it's good enough to show an evening with Michael Portillo, it's good enough for Andrew Neil to consider alighting from his first class carriage in between London and the land of New Labour.

David Parker

London Calling,

Accepting that we are both in favour of withdrawal your final paragraphs sum up ther purely practical difficulties of acieving this very well.

As I understand the situation, the full terms, apart from a two year notice period, of the clause relating to withdrawal from the EU in the Lisbon Treaty had not been finalised before that treaty was finally ratified.

Denis Cooper may be able to enlighten us about the current contents of that clause but, in common with most other EU legislation, I anticipate that in its final form it will be both complex and expensive. It may even include punitive severance clauses, designed to dissuade discontented member states from contemplating withdrawal. However, it remains an option and one which (if its terms are as unattractive as I predict) our political class may well try to claim is our only option.

If we were to repeal the 1972 Act, I think that, under international law, we would also need to abrogate the Treaty of Rome and with it all subsequent EEC or EU treaties. Whilst this is not impossible would then still be left with the problem which, as you so rightly point out, is that many EU laws or directives have been compulsorily incorporated into our own domestic laws and the task of disentangling these will be a lengthy and daunting, but not insuperable one.

Those well intentioned, but naive eurosceptics, who say that leaving the EU will simply be a matter of tearing up the treaties and cancelling our subscriptions do far more damage than good to our chances of winning a referendum, nor do many of them, given this argument, have much chance of converting any of the, perhaps crucial, number of people who are still undecided.

The whole Better Off Out movement therefore now urgently needs to devote its campaign not to whether we should leave the EU, but to how we can best achieve this.

Boudicca

Yam Yam is absolutely right. The UK's membership of the EU was far and away the worst foreign policy decision of the 20th century.

It will take a Prime Minister with a lot of guts to admit that and take us out - and the current weakling in No.10 won't do it.

So - we have to get rid of him and ensure that the CONservatives learn they will never again get a majority if they don't commit to an EU-sceptic position which consists of negotiating to leave the EU and switch to a Free Trade Treaty.

UKIP is doing its best. The lastest YouGov poll has us at 10% in the 60+ age group (those most likely to vote). 8% in the C2DE (working classes) and 65 in the south and the midlands, where all those nice swing seats are found.

If we can manage to overtake the LibDims in the polls - not beyond the bounds of possibility - then it really will be 'game on' over the EU.

denis cooper

David Parker -

It's Article 50 TEU and it reads as follows:

"1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49."

So the two year period is the maximum time allowed between the notification being given and the withdrawing state being freed from its EU treaty obligations, unless all parties agree to an extension.

One obvious concern about this Article is that it involves the EU Parliament, which might resist giving its consent to any withdrawal agreement.

Another more abstruse concern is that the process of withdrawal is not excluded from the jurisdiction of the ECJ, and so in theory it could also interfere to delay or prevent withdrawal - for example, by claiming that the decision to withdraw had not been taken properly in accordance with the state's "constitutional requirements".

Simon Stephenson.

Publius : 3.19pm

"Are you advocating the abolition of democracy then? Or of human nature?"

Neither. We must start from democracy, but we need to recognise that a democracy of the ignorant and the easily led will get us nowhere. This is why it should be an essential part of citizenship education to impress upon people that enfranchisement comes with an obligation to make an effort to understand the issues about which one is being asked to form an opinion, and that deciding that this is too much bother, and choosing instead to follow a herd leader wherever he goes is social irresponsibility.

Sean O'Hare : 3.25pm

"It is entirely possible by quoting dodgy statistics the Europhile Lib/Lab/Con will convince a majority that there would be dire economic consequences and that we have to stay in."

Yes, but it's also possible that the non-dodgy statistics also predict dire economic consequences of leaving, isn't it? All I'm suggesting is that there needs to be some attempt to inform the public of the most likely possible outcomes for both staying in and coming out. Being asked to make a decision while being prevented from examining its likely consequences seems to me like a pretty absurd way of doing things.

"The real question of cost in not a monetary one, but one of sovereignty. Many have died defending this country from foreign tyranny. Are you prepared to say they died in vain because we might lose some trade with the EU, because I sure am not!"

I'm sympathetic about the sovereignty issue, but the EU doesn't necessarily have to be a tyranny. I expect I am in agreement with you in thinking that the current political class is acting much too autocratically, both at EU level and at national level, but I'm not entirely convinced that under a better-constituted authority we'd be better off out than in. But I'd go along with reducing the scope for autocracy.

David Parker : 3.49pm

By your argument there's no point in having courts of law, because it's impossible to select protagonists who would seek the truth because they're all consumed by the need to promote their particular dogma. I don't believe this. I think it's probably true that most inquiries/Royal Commissions etc. are set up with an overriding agenda not to reach a public conclusion that will destabilise the establishment, but this doesn't mean that they can't reach restricted-access conclusions that the establishment is powerless to ignore. But why do we think that this sort of exhaustive policy inquiry isn't going on all the time, as a matter of course? After all, the civil service resources are immense, and it's surely unreasonable to think that instead of using these resources to pre-plan and to forecast and investigate, they'll just ignore them and make policy on the hoof. What I'm asking is that a much fuller examination of the pluses and minuses of EU membership are put in the public domain.

My personal gut feeling is that we'd probably be better off out than in, but gut feeling's no good. Before I feel entitled to register a vote, I need to have far more
details about the issue than have been made available so far.

David Lindsay

Peter Bone and his audience of Lib Dem delegates both thoroughly enjoyed his winding up act on Newsnight.

But while they all applauded when he accused their party of having significantly watered down the (still horrendous) proposals for the NHS, there was complete silence when, in the previous breath, he accused their party of having blocked the repatriation of powers from the EU. Everyone knows that David Cameron no more wanted that than Nick Clegg did, and that he would never have attempted it even if he had had a majority of two hundred.

Might Lib Dem activists be following the remnant Liberal Party and the remnant SDP in waking up to the reality of a legislative body which meets in secret and publishes no Official Report, of the Common Agricultural and Fisheries Policies, and of subjugation to the legislative will of of Stalinists and Trotskyists, neo-Fascists and neo-Nazis, members of Eastern Europe's kleptomaniac nomenklatura, neoconservatives such as now run France and Germany, Dutch ultra-Calvinists who refuse to have women as candidates, and people who believe the Provisional Army Council to be the sovereign body throughout Ireland?

Such concerns, along with a Keynesian opposition to what have always been the EU's economic agenda, have always been articulated at every level of the Labour Party, where they are very much re-emerging to the fore at the moment. Not for nothing did three times as many Labour as Conservative MPs vote against Maastricht, including, in Bryan Gould, the only resignation from either front bench in order to do so, while John Prescott and David Blunkett had abstained rather than support it at a meeting of Labour's National Executive Committee.

When the Conservative Whip was withdrawn from a mere eight MPs, joined by another who resigned it in sympathy, for abstaining on the European Finance Bill, 44 Labour MPs voted against it. Then as on Maastricht, the Labour three-line whip was to abstain. Then as on Masstricht, not a single Labour MP rebelled by voting in favour. One of Labour's anti-Maastricht contingent, Peter Hain, went on to be Minister for Europe even under Tony Blair, and is now writing Ed Miliband's plan for party reorganisation.

Peter Hain, late of the Young Liberals. Nick Harvey, now a Lib Dem Defence Minister, also voted against Maastricht. Simon Hughes, now Lib Dem Deputy Leader, abstained. Even on the essentially meaningless proposal for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, the Lib Dem rebels in favour included David Heath, now Deputy Leader of the House, Alastair Carmichael, now Chief Whip, and Tim Farron, now Party President.

Whereas all the concentration is on the brayers about "wegulation fwom Bwussells", the worshippers of the Prime Minister who signed the Single European Act, the people whom Fleet Street and the BBC remember as the least intelligent members of their own public school forms. We are now being told that there are around 120 of them. Where? Who? There is a world elsewhere, you know.

David Parker

Denis,
Thanks,once again for your erudite help.

The provision that
"the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union." Would seem to leave far too much wriggle room, possibly resulting in an inablity even to reach such an agreement, nor, as you say, would there be any certainty that this would ultimately be approved by the European Parliament.

It is certainly possible that an EU inclined British government, faced with the results of a referendum in favour of withdrawal, could use this clause to defer or obstruct our withdrawal beyond the life of that Parliament.

Archibald

I think my favourite stat here must be that it appears 50% of Greeks don't think they have benefited from EU membership. I wonder what the German press makes of that. Does anyone have access to the figures of net subsidies to Greece since it joined, less its own contributions? I'm guessing the phrase 'they don't know they are born' may be needed if anyone does. I think this is a more interesting angle than focusing on us if you are against the EU.

JohnBUK

Simon Stephenson, I would be quite happy for there to be a period of "electioneering" prior to the "in/out" vote. But, in my view there has to be a vote. It is nothing short of a scandal that given the importance of the EU issues we in the UK have not had a say since Ted Heath kindly wheedled us in to the club under false pretences.
As for the voters having the nous to understand and vote on the issues, well that is down to the two sides involved to make the issues understandable and coherent. Democracy isn't perfect but the current situation of, no say, is worse.

Herbert Thornton

I think the fact that Britain and Greece are next to each other at the top of the scale
of disenchantment with Europe is hilarious.

Britain's problem of course includes knowing that they are required to put far too much into Europe, while Greece's problem is that they believe they are getting far too little out of it.

London Calling

David Parker
September 20th, 2011 5:24pm

It would appear that there is much confusion regarding the EU’s formation, its purpose and a way forward for Britain to leave, an example of this below. I have since learnt from my earlier post that a Bill to repeal the European Communities Act 1972 is already in process in the House of Commons, be it a lengthy one. Also an e-petition has been put forward for the repeal also, as well as many other variations for a referendum on the EU. This has added to the confusion as to where we are and the need to gather as much information into one place and one format to make a stronger case to present so that the public and those like myself who do not understand law can do so without reading ‘Understanding the EU for dummies’…:)…although it wouldn’t be a bad idea in layman terms…:)

European Communities Act 1972 (Repeal) Bill 2010-11

Latest news on the Bill

1st reading: House of Commons 5 July, 2010
This Bill is expected to have its second reading debate on 20 January 2012.

House of Commons (the process)

First reading
Second reading * - 20th January 2012
Committee Stage
Report Stage
Third Reading

House of Lords

First reading
Second reading
Committee Stage
Report Stage
Third Reading

Consideration of Amendments

Roayal Assent

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-11/europeancommunitiesact1972repeal.html

e-petition

Repeal of the European Communities Act 1972
Responsible department: Foreign and Commonwealth Office
The government should repeal the European Communities Act 1972 to enable the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. Thus saving approximately £7billion pa in direct transfers from the UK tax payer to the EU. Other benefits would be ower food prices, rebuilding fish stocks and enable the rebirth of fishing communities,effectively policing our own borders and lessening illegal migration, reducing the attendant social costs, abolishing 'climate change' obligations we would save industry uneccessary costs and lower fuel prices, restoring judicial sovereignty, this country would no longer be guided by the decisions of judges of foreign powers. Most of this country's trade is once again with countries outside the EU. The countries of the EU will want to continue trading with us due to our deficits with them, they will not wish to incur sanctions from the WTO by imposing illegal tariffs. We have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Number of signatures:
236
Created by:
Ian Clay
Closing:

05/08/2012
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/815

London Calling

I would like to have joined the audience at the debate at South Kensington tonight, however this is not possible. I look forward to the transcript of what transpired on the Coffee House tomorrow hopefully…:)

Hard Heartless Perry

Don’t delay –
Sweep Cameron away!

London Calling

PS

I registered with the Spectator three days ago so that there wasn’t a delay with my comments appearing and it would appear that the Magic Wand does not work and that comments are still filtered…Why? Is it technical or the firm but unfair moderator?...:(

Dimoto

Rob C - that's what jumped out at me too.
All of the big, old-stager members (Germany, France, Spain, Italy), DON'T trust the EU, but Belgium (wonder why ?) and the naive new entrants are very trusting.

Three outliers: Finland & Slovakia (two hardliners on Greek debt) apparently trust the EU, and Latvia don't. Why is Latvia so disenchanted so soon ?

Baron

Events, my blogging friends, more to the point, economic events, may do it for the EU, if the Euro falls apart, as seems very likely, the rest of the forced undemocratic arrangement may follow, it will either each on its own, or some serious re-drafting of the whole idea of united Europe.

Simon Stephenson.

JohnBUK : 8.11pm

Yes, I agree - this is what I suggested in my original post at 2.06 this afternoon.

What I find dangerous, however, is that so many people seem to be tranfixed by the idea that public opinion, however uninformed, however hysterical, and however determined it is by copycat or herd behaviour, still carries an element of magic that allows the assumption to be made that it is preferable to any other policy on offer.

Archie

I submit one overwhelming reason to leave the EU: "Baroness" Ashton! As for Huhne, after his performance during the last few days I am astounded that anyone could take him seriously!

Publius

Simon Stephenson writes to Publius:
"This is why it should be an essential part of citizenship education to impress upon people that enfranchisement comes with an obligation to make an effort to understand the issues about which one is being asked to form an opinion" etc

And when the "citizenship education" or whatever other exhortation you suggest fails to transform itself into universal wisdom?

When "making an effort", no matter how much effort one makes, fails to turn into all-pervading knowledge and understanding, then what?

So my question still stands.

Or are you one of those who believe that everyone can be an Einstein if only there were a bit more schooling?

To put this another way, what is the relationship, in your view, between opinion and knowledge?

John

Lets have another European war. The last one was great fun for most people. (Except for those killed and injured) And UK lost, although it was on the winning side, and had to be rescued by the USA.

Martin C

Tell it to the BBC. Please. Try and get them to understand, if only a little.

TGF Euros

If there's always been such a groundswell of popular desire to leave the EU, why did William Hague lose so badly in 2001? Michael Foot stood on a platform of leaving the EU in 1983 and a similar fate to William Hague befell him.

Simon Stephenson.

Publius : 9.19am

I'm neither saying that everyone can be Einstein nor that opinion is worthless without universal wisdom. I'm merely saying that I believe the chance of getting a good democratic decision is directly related to the electorate's level of knowledge, and that it is therefore better to have a more knowledgeable populus than one that is less knowledgeable. This is not only because the more knowledgeable will have more chance of rejecting the obviously inferior, but also because more knowledge in an amateur may awaken him to how much he doesn't know, how reckless and self-important of him it would be to press his opinion at all, and how it may be better to leave technically difficult decisions on subjects about which he knows little to those people who know more.

I'm quite prepared to accept that I may be wrong here - that more knowledge doesn't lead to better decisions - but I really think it's a Nirvana Fallacy to argue that consideration of the link between public knowledge and decision quality is pointless because it's impossible for public knowledge to achieve perfection.

Simon Stephenson.

Sorry about the underlining, which should be only of the word "better".

MH

Given what membership of the EU has done to Ireland I can only believe that their alleged responses to the questions were given with deep sarcasm. If not, dear god help them.

raymond jones

losses in Europe-lost self determination,Christianity,purity of education,strength of family unit,right to cencership of filth,many industries,many jobs,right to say what goes in our own land,right to have law bring traitors to justice,falsely accused of racism,brainwashing people to believe lies.Increase in deceptions,40 yrs of political class cowardice,If they get their way Total surrender and loss of our Nation.Why are we there if not to furnish political class with perks.

Ray Burke

The Economist/Ipsos MORI Issues Index for September is out. Respondents are given a list of 34 issues and asked two questions:

What would you say is the most important issue facing Britain today?
Common Market/EU/Europe/EURO: Less than one per cent.

What do you see as other important issues facing Britain today?
Common Market/EU/Europe/EURO: 3pc.

The latest You Gov opinion poll for the Sun offers respondents a similiar choice of issues:

To the question: Which of the following do you think are the most important issues facing the country at this time, please tick three, Europe comes eighth on a list of 12 issues with 15pc support.

But to the question: Which of the following do you think are the most important issues facing you and your family, please tick three, Europe comes 11th on the list of 12 issues with 7pc support.

Asked in isolation from other issues whether they wish to depart the EU, voters may reply in the affirmative. But the notion that the British people are up in arms over membership of the EU and desperate to leave is demonstrably fallacious.

Simon Stephenson.

Ray Burke : 1.38pm

False logic, but a good try.

If you slip a few changes of process into a list of changes of outcome, then of course all the changes of process are going to come out at the bottom of the list of public priorities. What a significant number of people want strongly is not to pay for the mistakes of other countries, not to have laws imposed on them by people they have had no chance to vote for or against, and to be able to say "no entry" to people they don't want to come and live here. It's difficult to see how these can be achieved within the EU, but they are genuine desires, and you can't invalidate them by saying "well you can't want them that badly because you didn't also say that you wanted to go through the process that would make them possible"

Rob

Last night's debate was an eye opener. Politicians are unwilling to have a referendum as they actually believe they know better than the electorate. The sooner we get rid of the current batch (on both sides) the better.

John.

I would say opposition to all immigration is top of the list of subjects on which the Westminster consensus is by far the most removed from British public opinion.
"Euroscepticism" should really be re-phrased as "eurohatred2. Why be mealy-mouthed about it? We are fed up with judicial decisions being reversed, parliamentary legislation being overturned, British fishing grounds being vacuumed clean of all life by the French and the Spanish, small slaughter houses being put out of business, fish being prohibited from being sold by the fishermen as they return from the sea, massive annual contributions to the EU, the court of human rights, being stopped from deporting violent criminals, being obliged to allow illegal immigrants to stay here etc., etc. China has all the trading advantages of being a member of the EU without paying any dues and so does Switzerland, which also has the advantage of giving the citizenship of non-Swiss parents, or of the non-Swiss parent in a Swiss-non-Swiss marriage, to the children of such marriages and also having a participatory democracy - probably the only one in the world. What stops us copying Switzerland or China? All we have to lose are our chains. We already do aver half of our trading outside the EU.

Julia Gasper

It's great to see a mag like the Spectator at last printing an honest and well-researched article on this subject. Hooray! I hope the result of the debate is Yes because it's really long PAST the time we should have left the EU. We should never have gone in, it has drained our economy and bled us dry. As for naive readers who mention the old "free trade" business - the World Trade Organisation is there to prevent any unfair trading practices. There are already more than 30 countries that have a free-trade agreement with the EU (Switzerland being the obvious one) and they need us more than we need them as we have got a trade deficit with them.
Time to go? YES IT IS TIME TO FLEE.
Get out and stay out! and before I end this I am just going to mention Hugh's Fish Fight. What's that but a battle against mad EU regulations that are wrecking the environment?

pewkatchoo

What are you on about. There is not one member state that has an overall positive view of the EU. Not one.

Ian

Is it true that Energy Secretary Chris Huhne, mentioned in this article, will lose his MEP pension if he stops pushing EU policy (integration, wind farms, etc.)?

John.

The Augean stables need to be sluiced clean of all EU directives and laws and our own law re-established as the only law we obey. We should have established a Dominion-wide free trade area long ago or rather never have allowed it to disappear. We were deeply treacherous and ungrateful to the Australians, New Zealanders, South Africans and Canadians by abandoning them all when it seemed to suit our book. If they were ever prepared to forgive that pretty unforgiveable behaviour to allies who had died in their hundreds of thousands to defend this country in two world wars, then perhaps we could start again. Europe is ridden with corruption and greed and we have no place in it.

John

We cannot get out of this corrupt wasteful club fast enough but we never will because the politicians need somewhere to go after we've vote them out.

John.

John: Unfortunately no one will vote for UKIP simply because no one votes for UKIP and people don't want to waste their vote. However, if enough petitions, mass demonstrations and marches are organised the length and breadth of the country the electable parties will be obliged to do something. Doubtless they will do everything possible to avoid representing the wishes of those who have given them their votes, but with enough demonstrable anger and enough people in evidence marching on the roads of the country, they will scarcely be able to continue to relax in ineptitude and inaction.

simple citoyen

The most telling figures are those of the countries whose people are less trusting of the EU (to say the least, since more than half the countries and half the EU population are distrusting the EU altogether): from the last one finds the UK then Greece, France, Germany and Spain with Italy close behind...
In other words: the people of the EU's founding nations do not recognize it. Rather damning evidence to stop everything and start anew, whaterver arguments are thrown our way to tell us it would be suicidal, impossible and backwards.
In that respect, I am sure quite a few people would be surprised in the UK to discover so many French attentive and thankfull for the debates taking place within your society.
From a Frenchman in Bordeaux.

Gary

Britain should leave the EU and scrap the Euro because if we stay in the EU, we will end up losing the Pound and we will be over rulled continually by Brussles.
It is time for Britain to rule our own Country and remain Independant and stop bailing other European Countries out because they will not do it for us.
If we go back to being an Independant Country, we will creat more British employment and the UK may mangage to get out of Recession and again Britain is better off out of the EU.

Peter Treadwell

Gary

Leaving Aside your apparently Random use Of capitals, could you explain how "Britain should scrap the euro"?

In2minds

Chris who?