Smoking out the Brexout Mistruths and lack of Substance

[Gus Morris]

I am all for a rational debate on the pros and cons of continued UK memberhip of the EU. I am prepared to listen to the arguments of eurosceptic British citizens who stand by their convictions and reside within their sceptered isle. Using the benefits of EU membership to live outside the homeland while at the same time arguing against the system seems to me to be hypocritical.

Gus

[GrahamC]

If you don't wan't to get into a debate about it then why are you contributing to this thread.

Essentially as an exercise in applied anthropology: it's obvious that you are mad as hell about something. But nothing that you claim to be mad about seems remotely sufficient to justify the extreme vehemence of your statements. So what else are you mad about? Who the hell knows?

What I am as mad as hell about Martyn is the attempt by the Remainers to dismiss all contrary view as being the product of loonies. As Allan pointed out in another thread, the papers and the internet are full of cogent arguments for and against. Dismissing such opposing views as idiocy is just plain facism. (Perhaps I reacted too strongly to the OP. Having now seen the quality of his contributions to this debate I can see that getting upset was pointless).

As I pointed out in an earlier post, exactly the same tactic was employed by the pro Euro camp. Anyone who argued against them was clearly a loon. You don't hear from them anymore and you certainly can no longer find a decent economist who would argue that the Euro is a good thing.

It is not, Gus, hypocritical to love Europe and loathe the EU. For some of us the EU represents the greatest threat to Europe. Personally I would absolutely wish to Remain were it not for the fact that the EU appears to be incapable of change. More specifically it is incapable of curtailing its grasp for supranational power.

Choosing to vote Leave is not something I have done lightly. I had really hoped that Cameron's attempt at renegotiation would have caused other nations to reflect more deeply on the nature of the organisation. What became clear is that the EU is bound by its own hubris and its blind conceit.

The fact is, the EU refused to make even the smallest, most trivial concessions when threatened with the exit of the world's 5th largest economy so it is fanciful, wishful thinking to believe it will become more amenable to argument if we vote to stay.

I too have my reservations about unqualified democracy but that is no reason to surrender my right to choose the people who govern us. I would have thought there are enough lessons from history for us all to be very wary of undemocratic regimes. For all its faults democracy at least allows scope for individuality, creativity, freedom of expression and freedom to protest.

For some of us the rise of the far right and far left in Europe would have been unthinkable only 20 years ago. There are many who argue that this is the direct result of democratic deficit.

It should also be clear to all by now that the EU is not simply populated by people trying to do their best - and generally bumbling along. Recall Jean Claude Juncker's comment: 'when it becomes serious, you have to lie'.

Political union in a United States of Europe has been the more or less hidden agenda (in Britain) since day one. One might argue that it it is still being hidden by the Remainers because, even now, they choose to argue their case on narrow issues. Not one of the political leaders of the Remain camp dares to stand up and say: yes I'm voting for complete transfer of sovereignty from the UK to Brussels'. It would be political suicide and they know it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05 ... o-place-i/

I'm happy to continue this debate in the hope that I might persuade even one Remainer to change his or her mind. I sincerely hope that at least some reading these threads will understand that the issues at stake are indeed something to get worked up about.

Some on this forum think that expressing a contrary view and arguing forcefully is either trolling or boring or a man thing. Personally I think that a little temporary upset in this otherwise enjoyable forum is worth the trouble. Momentous tipping points in history, as this is, are extremely rare. We have a duty to think this through carefully.

[martyn94]

I don't think I've ever described Brexiters, as such, as loonies. But I have to say that their arguments describe a world that I just don't recognise, and it's maybe hard to express that without seeming condescending. If I'm guilty, I apologise.

It is, nevertheless, a world I don't recognise. GrahamC writes of the EU as if it were a monolithic entity "incapable of curtailing its grasp for supranational power"; a "regime", and what's worse an undemocratic one; and one which has committed the various enormities in his other posts - overthrowing elected Governments, confiscating money from Cypriots, and the rest.

Even allowing for the heat of the moment, that seems to me absurdly hyperbolic. The "EU" is just shorthand for a messy set of institutional arrangements (certainly imperfect in all sorts of ways) which were designed, and have been freely signed up to, by lots of sovereign governments. The irony is that the "democratic deficit" was designed in, and has been sustained by member states, exactly to deny the central institutions any claim to be a "state" or anything close to one.

It's pretty much a cliché for people who have actually been involved in the daily work of the EU to stress how far it is, in their experience, from the sort of unaccountable power that Brexiters describe. But like most clichés, this is largely true, and certainly true in my experience. Negotiating things in the EU takes more patience than I normally command, and a strong bladder, but can produce genuinely useful results, sometimes even in less than a decade.

GrahamC adds his own stone to the pile on another thread: he was apparently paid a lot of money by the EU to write a useless report. That is obviously undesirable (though he seems to have been content to take the money), but it hardly adds to the picture of a power-mad superstate: rather the contrary.

I know that this not going to convince GrahamC: not because he's a loony, but because he sees the world, at a visceral level, in a quite different way from me, which no amount of "debate" here seems likely to change.

[GrahamC]

I don't think I've ever described Brexiters, as such, as loonies. It is, nevertheless, a world I don't recognise. GrahamC writes of the EU as if it were a monolithic entity "incapable of curtailing its grasp for supranational power"; a "regime", and what's worse an undemocratic one; and one which has committed the various enormities in his other posts - overthrowing elected Governments, confiscating money from Cypriots, and the rest.

Even allowing for the heat of the moment, that seems to me absurdly hyperbolic. The "EU" is just shorthand for a messy set of institutional.

Were I alone in my views, or if the confiscation of money from private accounts had not in fact ocurred, or if the claim that democratically elected governments were replaced by the Troika was untrue then I would have to concede that my world view was unrealistic and indeed 'absurdly hyperbolic'.

But, unfortunately these facts are true, as are the charges of corruption. And I am not alone in my views because very senior current and retired politicians have independently reached the same view. Indeed following the putsch that ousted the Greek government the question was even asked in Cabinet "are we comfortable with this".

The EU used to be a set of messy institutions but it is inexorably and very deliberately evolving into a federal architecture exactly as was intended right from the very beginning with the European Coal and Steel organisation (the precursor to the EEC).

International Socialism is not something I would normally read, but their article on the direction the EU is taking reveals some interesting historical facts.

http://isj.org.uk/the-internationalist- ... ean-union/

As for my own involvement with the EU, I had been in charge of a TACIS team for some months (believing that I was actually employed to do some good) before I was asked to write the concluding report. Only then did I understand that the whole thing was a crock of sh1t. A small taste of the pig trough which daily feeds thousands upon thousands of 'consultants' from vast sums of hard-earned taxpayers money.

[martyn94]

I don't think I've ever described Brexiters, as such, as loonies. It is, nevertheless, a world I don't recognise. GrahamC writes of the EU as if it were a monolithic entity "incapable of curtailing its grasp for supranational power"; a "regime", and what's worse an undemocratic one; and one which has committed the various enormities in his other posts - overthrowing elected Governments, confiscating money from Cypriots, and the rest.

Even allowing for the heat of the moment, that seems to me absurdly hyperbolic. The "EU" is just shorthand for a messy set of institutional.

Were I alone in my views, or if the confiscation of money from private accounts had not in fact ocurred, or if the claim that democratically elected governments were replaced by the Troika was untrue then I would have to concede that my world view was unrealistic and indeed 'absurdly hyperbolic'.

But, unfortunately these facts are true, as are the charges of corruption. And I am not alone in my views because very senior current and retired politicians have independently reached the same view. Indeed following the putsch that ousted the Greek government the question was even asked in Cabinet "are we comfortable with this".

The EU used to be a set of messy institutions but it is inexorably and very deliberately evolving into a federal architecture exactly as was intended right from the very beginning with the European Coal and Steel organisation (the precursor to the EEC).

International Socialism is not something I would normally read, but their article on the direction the EU is taking reveals some interesting historical facts.

http://isj.org.uk/the-internationalist- ... ean-union/

As for my own involvement with the EU, I had been in charge of a TACIS team for some months (believing that I was actually employed to do some good) before I was asked to write the concluding report. Only then did I understand that the whole thing was a crock of sh1t. A small taste of the pig trough which daily feeds thousands upon thousands of 'consultants' from vast sums of hard-earned taxpayers money.

I think it is bit misleading to skate over the fact that the Cypriot banks were staggeringly insolvent. Unsecured creditors can normally expect to take a bath in such circumstances: in fact they just took a "haircut", and deposits under €100,000 were protected. The EU did not force Cypriot bankers to go mad, nor did it force depositors to put their money in unsound banks (very largely to evade tax, and quite often - notably for the Russian depositors - using money they had stolen). The EU could, with hindsight, be accused of not taking more interest in all this before it went to pot. But you would regard that as supranational over-reach.

Similarly, mutatis mutandis, for the governments which were "replaced" when they ran out of the capacity to borrow any more. Calvin Coolidge is credited with one of the great modern quotes when asked about writing off the UK's WW1 debts to the US: "they hired the money, didn't they?". Much of what you say seems to me to reduce itself to that.

[Tim and Anna]

I love a good argument but that is one thing that has been sadly lacking in the UK. I admire Gove, IDS and Grayling even though I completely disagree with them, but Boris has shot his opportunist bolt, hopefully for good. I look forward to joining in energetically but my wife says I must try to be restrained and polite until I have "earned my stripes" in the P-O community. Fair comment, but please see our signature block and our plea for lodging.
Looking forward to setting up in P-O asap, regards to all, Tim

[Kate]

Hello Tim and Anna
I will share this with the Facebook group as well in the hopes that somebody might be able to help you from there. Very best of luck, hope you find someone soon. You have chosen a beautiful place to live.

And yes, your wife is absolutely right. Men do tend to get carried away on the forum and come over as grumpy b----s. You should all take a leaf out of us ladies' books - Calm, thoughtful, teetotal, never shout, scream or exaggerate......loooooooooooooooool

[GrahamC]

Similarly, mutatis mutandis, for the governments which were "replaced" when they ran out of the capacity to borrow any more. Calvin Coolidge is credited with one of the great modern quotes when asked about writing off the UK's WW1 debts to the US: "they hired the money, didn't they?". Much of what you say seems to me to reduce itself to that.

Call me old fashioned Martyn but I prefer a system in which, when governments screw up, they are replaced by the electorate not a cabal of unelected corrupt, old, white men.

Oh, and a 'messy set of institutions' as you like to call the EU doesn't have the power to replace governments - a federal architecture does that.

Perhaps you have also forgotten the Austrian elections in which Jorg Heider appeared to be in the ascendant. The EU attempted to intervene in the democratic process by threatening suspension/exclusion from the EU.

I'm surprised that you and others are so sanguine about the deep structural changes to our democracies that are already taking place. Let alone the looming prospect of a Soviet Europe in which regional governments are the puppets of an unelected centre.

[martyn94]

Similarly, mutatis mutandis, for the governments which were "replaced" when they ran out of the capacity to borrow any more. Calvin Coolidge is credited with one of the great modern quotes when asked about writing off the UK's WW1 debts to the US: "they hired the money, didn't they?". Much of what you say seems to me to reduce itself to that.

Call me old fashioned Martyn but I prefer a system in which, when governments screw up, they are replaced by the electorate not a cabal of unelected corrupt, old, white men.

The problem arises when member states' electorates don't throw out govts which have screwed up, but re-elect them, or simply swap them for another govt which is equally corrupt, clientelist, incompetent or simply deluded (perm any three from four) which then screw up in their turn. And then rinse and repeat. The electorates' response may be intelligible in the short run (they are after all the clienteles that their pols are trying to please). And the "short run" can carry on for quite a while so long as your govt can still borrow. But the financial markets are not sentimental about democracy. When you have no expedient left but to ask your friends for an enormous bailout on non-market terms, the results may be painful, but they are not a coup d'état, just self-inflicted wounds.

You can argue, I suppose, that both the EU and the euro have made it easier, for a while, for badly-governed countries to get away with it. But they did not have a gun to their back. And it is not, in any event, the UK's case.

Haider's case is rather different. It's a matter of judgment what counts as interference in a member state's internal politics. Saying that his intended policies (apart from being abhorrent) were incompatible with continued EU membership seems to me no more than factual, and not even unwelcome to his hardcore supporters.

[montgolfiere]

The Brexouters know nothing as 'Fact'. They can only Second Guess what will happen. I cannot risk this uncertainty and anyway support the idea of a 'common' Europe....... Listening to their ? ideas? this morning seemed to suggest that they imagine we could leave the Eu and still have all the benefits of Membership. They live in Cloud Cukoo land...... I can just see how the French, at least, would be rubbing their hands as to how they could remove all the advantages us Expats currently enjoy just as soon as possible!!!

Unfortunately the so called wonderfully Democratic Government in the UK has already stripped me of my right to vote. Not a very good advertisment for the Future in their Utopia....

Roll on the 24th when we can celebrate the end of this Brexout Folly...

The Brexouters are th made up of the dregs and failed Politicos of the UK Establishment. Gove, Farage, Boris, Duncan Smythe (failed ex leader of the Tories) just to name a few....

The Stay Camapign seem to have 99% of the rational Politicians supporting their Cause.....All the Hype of the Brexouters is fermented by the 90% of Media, espercially Muddock, who are campaigning for Exit. Shame on them...again not very Democratic.

VOTE STAY, dont be a Turkey........

[martyn94]

Unfortunately the so called wonderfully Democratic Government in the UK has already stripped me of my right to vote. Not a very good advertisment for the Future in their Utopia....
.

I am firmly in the In camp for what it's worth. But this is hardly accurate. Historically, non-UK-residents had no right to vote. Mrs Thatcher's govt extended voting rights to non-UK-residents, and then extended them again, for wholly cynical reasons (they tended to vote for her). All the present govt has done is not extend them further again.

As has been said by others, I don't think that anyone on either side can claim that their judgments are FACTS.

[GrahamC]

As has been said by others, I don't think that anyone on either side can claim that their judgments are FACTS.

Thank you Martyn, I'm glad to see you admit that the Remain side of this debate (on this forum at least) has provided only opinions and no facts.

But to attempt to apply that to the Leavers is patently untrue. I have given you a string of facts, some of which you have chosen to ignore completely - presumably because they are too difficult to counter. Others you attempt to explain away in increasingly disingenuous terms.

Your benign opinion that the EU is a 'messy set of institutions' completely ignores the facts. Ignores for example, the endemic corruption, the existence of an EU diplomatic corps, the repeated attempts to establish an EU army and a self-serving European Court of Justice that systematically reinterprets the treaties so as to assign more power to the EU centre and itself.

Moreover, whilst admitting to the fact of democratic deficit you dismiss its significance despite the fact of widespread European disenchantment with federalism.

Indeed you are starting to contradict yourself. On the one hand you claim that the EU has no pretentions to a Federal Europe (just a 'messy set of institutions' as you put it) but then on the other, you attempt to justify the overthrow of democratically elected governments and the interference with sovereign democratic processes as either nesesaary or in some way deserved. You can, of course, make that arguemt, but not at the same time as holding that the EU is not a proto-federal structure.

By all means counter my facts with facts of your own but don't attempt to explain away the awkwardness of your position by dismissing factual argument as opinion.

I for one would be absolutely delighted if you would lay out the facts which have convinced you to Remain. Then we might have a properly illuminating discussion.

Meanwhile, more facts for you, this time from a former ambassador and private secretary to the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... lomats.pdf

[GrahamC]

This one is just for you Montgolfiere.

It seems that there are a lot of us 'dregs' of society around Europe;)

Almost half (45%) of Europeans in the researched countries think their own country should hold a referendum on its EU membership. Again support for a referendum varies, though is never lower than four in ten, from 38% in Hungary to majorities in Italy and France (58% and 55%).
When asked how they would vote if a referendum on their country’s EU membership was held now, a third of Europeans in the selected countries say they would vote for their country to leave the EU. However, this figure differs markedly among the researched EU countries – almost half (48%) of Italians and roughly four in ten Frenchmen and Swedes (41% and 39% respectively) say they would vote “out” in a referendum on the EU in their country; in comparison, just one in five (22%) Poles would vote for their country to leave the EU if a referendum was organised now

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpubl ... he-EU.aspx

[GrahamC]

Nice quote from Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in the Telegraph today:

"As I reported at the time, Spain's foreign minister José Manuel Garcia-Margallo told us that Brexit would lead to "terrible devastation" of our industries, leaving nothing left but "a few petty bankers" in xenophobic isolation.

"David Cameron must understand he cannot slow the speed of the EU cruiser," came the finger-waving admonition from Madrid"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/201 ... sh-rage-o/

So, what the Spanish Foreign Minister is saying is that the 5th largest economy in the world has no say on the speed and direction of the EU.

This seems explain in part why we achieve a mere 7% success rate in getting British candidates into the EU diplomatic corps.

[martyn94]

As has been said by others, I don't think that anyone on either side can claim that their judgments are FACTS.

Thank you Martyn, I'm glad to see you admit that the Remain side of this debate (on this forum at least) has provided only opinions and no facts.

But to attempt to apply that to the Leavers is patently untrue. I have given you a string of facts, some of which you have chosen to ignore completely - presumably because they are too difficult to counter. Others you attempt to explain away in increasingly disingenuous terms.

Your benign opinion that the EU is a 'messy set of institutions' completely ignores the facts. Ignores for example, the endemic corruption, the existence of an EU diplomatic corps, the repeated attempts to establish an EU army and a self-serving European Court of Justice that systematically reinterprets the treaties so as to assign more power to the EU centre and itself.

Moreover, whilst admitting to the fact of democratic deficit you dismiss its significance despite the fact of widespread European disenchantment with federalism.

Indeed you are starting to contradict yourself. On the one hand you claim that the EU has no pretentions to a Federal Europe (just a 'messy set of institutions' as you put it) but then on the other, you attempt to justify the overthrow of democratically elected governments and the interference with sovereign democratic processes as either nesesaary or in some way deserved. You can, of course, make that arguemt, but not at the same time as holding that the EU is not a proto-federal structure.

By all means counter my facts with facts of your own but don't attempt to explain away the awkwardness of your position by dismissing factual argument as opinion.

I for one would be absolutely delighted if you would lay out the facts which have convinced you to Remain. Then we might have a properly illuminating discussion.

Meanwhile, more facts for you, this time from a former ambassador and private secretary to the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... lomats.pdf

This is silly. The Greek electorate voted themselves the right to carry on borrowing other peoples' money without any serious prospect of ever paying it back. I am sure they found that satisfying. But "democratic processes" are not binding on foreign lenders. When they declined to play ball, the result cannot sanely be regarded as an "overthrow" of a democratically elected Government, nor as "interference" with sovereign democratic processes. As for the process, the "EU's" attitude was entirely driven by the views of member states, notably Germany but also others, and the Commission was left struggling to smooth things over: as far from proto-federal as you could imagine.

But everything is proto-federal if you choose to see things through that lens.

[Gus Morris]

As I have travelled across Europe I'v seen place names and sights which, to me at least, are a powerful argument for creating a United Europe. Azincourt, Waterloo, the Somme, Normandy. Reminders of the millons of Englishmen and their allies who died in pointless conflicts. As a youth I remember seeing Cologne before it was rebuilt, Or the chilling sight, while driving towards Munich, of signposts to Dachau.

Two World Wars were spawned in Europe. The 1938-45 conflict was truly a contagion that rampaged across the face of the earth, ending at Nagasaki. I've seen what an atomic bomb can do with my own eyes. Destruction on an almost unimaginable scale.

The EU and it's precursors were created so that a group of bankrupt and devastated countries could pool their resources and create a better and brighter future. Which they did! It was designed to bind nations together so that conflict would be impossible. It worked too. We have enjoyed seventy years of peace in Western Europe.

By co-operating we make better use of our resources and reduce waste and duplication. The result is things like Airbus. Leading edge technology on a pan-European scale . Creating employment, lot's of employment.

Sure the politics of the EU are a bit of a mess and things need to be sorted. It took the USA more than a century ( and a bloody civil war) to get organised and co-ordinated.

Why run away when the going gets rocky? Why not stay and help get things better. Why not show a bit of leadership for a change. Let's leave our children a brighter and a safer place where they can live in peace and harmony. Let that be our legacy

Gus

[montgolfiere]

well said Gus. the Brexouters are led by a load of Failed or Loopy , has been, small minded wannabees, who choose to ignore the past 100+ years of European History.... VOTE STAY.

[martyn94]

well said Gus. the Brexouters are led by a load of Failed or Loopy , has been, small minded wannabees, who choose to ignore the past 100+ years of European History.... VOTE STAY.

I was going to give Gus a quiet thumbs up, but found that you had got in first and screwed things up. You do the "in" cause no favours with this sort of random abuse. I struggle to understand exactly what itches the Brexiters are trying to scratch, but I do still keep struggling. The itches are evidently real, even if I think they have been mis-diagnosed. Saying that they are all just bonkers, and failures with it, is no way to persuade them. And no more attractive to those of us who are still in two minds.

Getting back to Gus, I used to drive through the Somme battlefield en route between my place in Normandy and EU meetings in Brussels. There are a couple of horribly poignant sign posts on that road marking the line of the front a few weeks apart in 1916: a few hundred metres apart, and a few hundred thousand dead. It always made the tedious euro-nonsense I was trying to negotiate seem a bit more worthwhile (and in the end it turned out to be worthwhile on any basis).

[montgolfiere]

nothing random and not abuse and all fairly minor 'banter'.
i have no way of being kinder to the brexouters. in general the self apponted leaders are failed or wanabees, ids and farage to name 2, and boris and gove are certainly not 'run of the mill' and they trade on being loopy........it is only my observation but, please feel free to disagree...it is nothing like the abuse they seem to give out... they act like spoiled brats and bullies as they really have nothing to say..they just abuse.... and like all bullies dont like it when they are 'pulled up'... vote stay, dont be a turkey...

[montgolfiere]

the latest 'wisdom' (EU = Hitler) from Boris, is starting to make him seem as Loony and off the wall as Trump.....

[martyn94]

the latest 'wisdom' (EU = Hitler) from Boris, is starting to make him seem as Loony and off the wall as Trump.....

But so what? Boris has one vote, like the rest of us who haven't been too long away from the UK. He's evidently a careerist buffoon, which was obvious long before he opted for the out camp. I don't suppose that GrahamC takes his opinions from Boris: I no longer hope to persuade GrahamC, but I wouldn't insult him by suggesting that he is a Boris fanboy.

The comparison with Trump does, though, seem quite relevant. There are lots of people in the UK, and France, who feel that the "terms of trade" have turned against them in all sorts of ways over the last decades. And it is hard to say that they are wrong. The EU seems an obvious target for their genuine grievance. I think they are wrong, but I don't think it is helpful to slag them off: some of them are my good friends.

[Nigel and Karen]

Great post Gus, have copied and pasted it to my Facebook page, hope you dont mind.

[GrahamC]

Great post Gus, have copied and pasted it to my Facebook page, hope you dont mind.

First of all let's put and end to the nonsense claim that the EU is responsible for post war peace in Europe. It isn't. NATO is, helped in large measure by nuclear weapons. Sorry Gus, I don't blame you personally for this fallacy. It is an untruthful dogma that has been peddled by Brussels for many years.

Secondly Gus, I'm glad you mentioned the American civil war. One of the bloodiest civil wars of all time. I have been loath to point this out in case I was seen as being hysterical. The cause of this war was the increasing sense of injustice at the interference in the affairs of 33% of the states by the remainder. (The trigger was the issue of slavery but it wasnt the cause). It's shocking to hear you imply that Europe might have to go through the same process.

Thirdly Gus, your comparison of the EU as being analagous to the US is deeply flawed. The US is a democratic Federal system with a number of checks and balances built into the Constitution. The judiciary and the executive are kept separate and democratic scrutiny is guaranteed by the separate institutions of the Senate and Congress. If you continue to read on you'll see that the EU lacks all these essential features.

Now onto some plain hard facts.

If you vote to stay in this is what you're voting for:

Article 1 of the Treaty on European Union which reasserts the principle of 'ever closer union' without stating what that means in practice.

The European Council. comprises the Heads of State or Government of the Member States, together with its President and the President of the Commission. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shall take part in its work. Decisions are taken by 'consensus' or by qualified majority voting.

The Council of Europe. The Council consists of a representative of each Member State at ministerial level, who may commit the government of the Member State in question and cast its vote. Most decisions are taken by qualified majority voting. 28 in all so our share of the vote is 3.6%. Some decision by the Council, require no scrutiny Or ratification by the European parliament.

The EU Commission. This unelected body has the monopoly on proposing all EU legislation (the 'right of initiative') which it does in secret ('private') meetings. It can also issue 'Regulations' which are automatically binding in all Member States. The Commission comprises 28 members, one from each country. Decisions are taken by qualified majority voting.

The process of choosing UK candidates for the EU Commission is done in secret. Past choices include Kinnock (twice rejected at the polls) and Ashton (a career social worker and career committee sitter).

COREPER. The committee of Permanent Representatives. Comprises unelected bureaucrats which represent the Member States. This is where all the horse-trading takes place of forthcoming regulations. Again all conducted in secret.

The European Parliament. Comprises 750 MEPs elected every 5 years. The Parliament cannot propose legislation. It can in theory delay or block legislation. In practice this rarely happens.

The Court of Auditors. Court members are 'appointed' by the Council. Is supposed to guarantee the proper use of taxpayers funds. It is unable to do this job because the EU fails to account for all its expenditure. There is no external auditing process.

The (unelected) Commission is the sole enforcer of all EU legislation. It is supported by:

The European Court of Justice. This is not an independent court of law. It is financed directly by the EU and has the final say on all EU matters. There is no right of appeal. The Court has ruled that EU regulations and EU legislation has primacy over national legislation. The ECJ has also ruled that it has primacy over United Nations Security Council resolutions.

72% of the UK regulations are imposed by the EU at a cost of approximately £10 billion per annum.

It is illegal under the Treaties to repatriate even the smallest powers to the UK without the consent of all Member States.

Westminster is not permitted to question possible instance of fraud in the EU.

Our principal means of accountable monitoring of the laws and regulations streaming out of Brussels are the Commons and Lords European Scrutiny Committees.

The government promised that no new EU legislation would be imposed while the Committees were in the process of scrutinising it. As of 2009 this promise had been broken 435 times.

TRADE

UK exports to the EU have fallen from 54.8% in 1999 to 44.6% in 2014. We run a trade deficit with the EU

Our level of exports to the rest of the world continues to increase. We run a trade surplus with the rest of the world.

The EU's share of global GDP has fallen from 30% in 1993 to 24% in 2014.

[montgolfiere]

Not treally bothered by all the above, we live in a Global economy and i believe we will fare better in a 'big Block' than being just a poxy little island somewhere on the Continental shelf of europe who noone cares about. ...

probably selfishly i am more interested in the effects on Myself in my own situation. leaving the EU would be a disaster for me. Vote Stay.

[GrahamC]

A good analysis from Roger Bootle in the Telegraph today. He concludes as follows:

First, if the benefits of the single market are so enormous, then why is it that over recent years countries all around the world have increased their exports into the single market at a faster rate than most single market members?

Second, if the single market is of such overwhelming importance, why are so many of its members in a terrible state? Why is the Greek economy not carried forward on a wave of prosperity unleashed by the absence of form-filling and checking at borders?

Third, if trade deals are so important, why does the UK do such a huge amount of trade with countries that it doesn’t currently have a trade deal with – including America?

[GrahamC]

Not treally bothered by all the above.........probably selfishly i am more interested in the effects on Myself in my own situation. leaving the EU would be a disaster for me. Vote Stay.

Good grief.

[montgolfiere]

The Brexouters are a Joke as typyfied by barmy Boris and the Loch ness Monster debate.. Doesn't he realsie that he is actually trying to screw the lives of up to 2 Million Expats around Europe and that is apart from his Big picture of a Little Islander mentality and destroying the UK economy.. Shame on them all. Vote Stay.

[Florence]

There is much speculation about the effects of a Brexit on Britain and it's ex-pats. But I wonder whether any of our adoptive countries have made any contingency plans if we are no longer Europeans.

[martyn94]

Great post Gus, have copied and pasted it to my Facebook page, hope you dont mind.

First of all let's put and end to the nonsense claim that the EU is responsible for post war peace in Europe. It isn't. NATO is, helped in large measure by nuclear weapons. Sorry Gus, I don't blame you personally for this fallacy. It is an untruthful dogma that has been peddled by Brussels for many years.

Secondly Gus, I'm glad you mentioned the American civil war. One of the bloodiest civil wars of all time. I have been loath to point this out in case I was seen as being hysterical. The cause of this war was the increasing sense of injustice at the interference in the affairs of 33% of the states by the remainder. (The trigger was the issue of slavery but it wasnt the cause). It's shocking to hear you imply that Europe might have to go through the same process.

Thirdly Gus, your comparison of the EU as being analagous to the US is deeply flawed. The US is a democratic Federal system with a number of checks and balances built into the Constitution. The judiciary and the executive are kept separate and democratic scrutiny is guaranteed by the separate institutions of the Senate and Congress. If you continue to read on you'll see that the EU lacks all these essential features.

Now onto some plain hard facts.

If you vote to stay in this is what you're voting for:

Article 1 of the Treaty on European Union which reasserts the principle of 'ever closer union' without stating what that means in practice.

The European Council. comprises the Heads of State or Government of the Member States, together with its President and the President of the Commission. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shall take part in its work. Decisions are taken by 'consensus' or by qualified majority voting.

The Council of Europe. The Council consists of a representative of each Member State at ministerial level, who may commit the government of the Member State in question and cast its vote. Most decisions are taken by qualified majority voting. 28 in all so our share of the vote is 3.6%. Some decision by the Council, require no scrutiny Or ratification by the European parliament.

The EU Commission. This unelected body has the monopoly on proposing all EU legislation (the 'right of initiative') which it does in secret ('private') meetings. It can also issue 'Regulations' which are automatically binding in all Member States. The Commission comprises 28 members, one from each country. Decisions are taken by qualified majority voting.

The process of choosing UK candidates for the EU Commission is done in secret. Past choices include Kinnock (twice rejected at the polls) and Ashton (a career social worker and career committee sitter).

COREPER. The committee of Permanent Representatives. Comprises unelected bureaucrats which represent the Member States. This is where all the horse-trading takes place of forthcoming regulations. Again all conducted in secret.

The European Parliament. Comprises 750 MEPs elected every 5 years. The Parliament cannot propose legislation. It can in theory delay or block legislation. In practice this rarely happens.

The Court of Auditors. Court members are 'appointed' by the Council. Is supposed to guarantee the proper use of taxpayers funds. It is unable to do this job because the EU fails to account for all its expenditure. There is no external auditing process.

The (unelected) Commission is the sole enforcer of all EU legislation. It is supported by:

The European Court of Justice. This is not an independent court of law. It is financed directly by the EU and has the final say on all EU matters. There is no right of appeal. The Court has ruled that EU regulations and EU legislation has primacy over national legislation. The ECJ has also ruled that it has primacy over United Nations Security Council resolutions.

72% of the UK regulations are imposed by the EU at a cost of approximately £10 billion per annum.

It is illegal under the Treaties to repatriate even the smallest powers to the UK without the consent of all Member States.

Westminster is not permitted to question possible instance of fraud in the EU.

Our principal means of accountable monitoring of the laws and regulations streaming out of Brussels are the Commons and Lords European Scrutiny Committees.

The government promised that no new EU legislation would be imposed while the Committees were in the process of scrutinising it. As of 2009 this promise had been broken 435 times.

TRADE

UK exports to the EU have fallen from 54.8% in 1999 to 44.6% in 2014. We run a trade deficit with the EU

Our level of exports to the rest of the world continues to increase. We run a trade surplus with the rest of the world.

The EU's share of global GDP has fallen from 30% in 1993 to 24% in 2014.

Thanks for the civics lesson. But I have been living under these institutional arrangements, give or take the odd tweak, for my whole adult life and I am no longer a spring chicken. They have not created a European superstate, or even tried to, nor even given us straight bananas, which might have been a more realistic project.

Your numbers seem to me to be entirely unsurprising. Developing economies have gained a larger share of world GDP recently, and a larger share of the EU's trade (both ways), from a low base, than the mature economies of the EU. It would be very odd, and very bad news, if that were not so. But that does not begin to show that we are better off out than in.

I don't know who has claimed that the EU is solely, or even mainly, responsible for keeping the peace in Europe (as if you could judge that like a figure-skating contest). I do think that it has made us more friendly and comfortable with each other, and I would vote for that even if all the rest seemed like a toss up, which I don't think is so, despite such authorities as the Daily Telegraph and Roger Bootle.

[Gus Morris]

I had no idea my few comments would generate such a reaction.

I put forward a few simple precepts. The response from Graham C was an absolute deluge! Must have taken hours to put it together.

If the EU is undemocratic how about Westminster? The Upper House has eight hundred members none of whom are elected. Ninety two of them are hereditary peers whose only qualification is the accident of birth. They all have tenure for life. It's almost impossible to get rid of them.

There are twenty six C of E clergy too. So much for the separation of church and state which is the cornerstone of most functioning democracies!

After the Napoleonic wars the British establishment was concerned that the ordinary man in the street might imbibe revolutionary ideas. The Chartist movement in mid-century saw these fears realised and the leaders were transported to the Australian penal colonies. Yet five of the six central demands were eventually enacted into law! Some sections of British society have a history of resisting change on the basis that what was good yesterday will be fine for tomorrow. History shows that this is not always the case.


Gus