Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter, a serious question about EU governance: Are there any basic law or constitutional limits on the judicial, legislative or executive powers of the EU central government? Stated another way, are there any powers, permanently reserved exclusively for the governments of the member states, in EU basic law?

I recognize that the Union has evolved significantly from its Treaty of Rome (EEC) roots, in a series of treaties (Maastricht, Lisbon& others), and through the incorporation of other distinct treaties, (Schengen Treaty, Convention on Human Rights, etc.) into EU law, applicable to all member states. The Councils ( two) and the EU Parliament have issued a host of other laws & regulations governing trade, labor regulation, the environment and other issues. It appears the Executive Power is divided among the two Councils ( Heads of national governments (EC) & national ministers CEU) - though the latter may be more of a Senate). The administrative organs in Brussels appear ( to me) to be relatively more autonomous than are those here, though ours have evolved significantly in the last 50 years).

Perhaps my question in short refers to the meaning of , and any limits on, the phrase "ever closer union".

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

First: there are no constitutional limits because there is no constitution, even not unwritten like in the UK.

Second: actually, there are seven institutions in the EU:
• Council of the European Union – executive and legislative
• European Commission – executive, legislative and quasi-judicial
• European Council – executive
• European Court of Auditors – audit
• Court of Justice of the European Union and the General Court – judicial
• European Parliament – legislative.

In my opinion, the problem with all this is that we like it compare with where we live, what we know. But the EU is neither a country nor a federation.
You're correct, george, all came and comes from the various treaties.
Compared to the administrations elsewhere (in Europe), the EU's administration has a normal seize and is less autonomous like e.g. the administration here in my state.
Third:
This "ever closer union" is indeed a problem, not only for you. (But not mine!)
The Heads of State or Government, on the basis of an awareness of a common destiny and the wish to affirm the European identity, confirm their commitment to progress towards an ever closer union among the peoples and Member States of the European Community.
(From the 'Solemn Declaration on European Union', signed by the then 10 heads of state and government [Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Germany as the original six plus Denmark, Ireland, the United Kingdom and Greece] on Sunday 19 June 1983, at the Stuttgart European Council.
This was leading to the formation of the European Single Market - and since 1993, a lot more (including the treaties etc you mentioned) happened.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Thank you. It is indeed something new and different. I'm trying to relate the EU structure, and any limits that may apply to it, to some of the currently contentious issues within the Union, for example, immigration and refugee policies.

What about the decisions on the use of land and environmental restrictions that may apply. Are these EU matters or those of National governments?

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

"Use of land" might be partly called EU-regulated via other laws (about fishery, water, air, etc ).
"The EU has a range of measures to improve the quality of the environment for European citizens and safeguard their quality of life." it says on the EU-website.

But for both, it's mainly national with EU-law at basic level. (Here, where I live, the use of land is a fight of the town with the state, environmental-wise ditto )

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

"Use of land" might be partly called EU-regulated via other laws (about fishery, water, air, etc ).
"The EU has a range of measures to improve the quality of the environment for European citizens and safeguard their quality of life." it says on the EU-website.

But for both, it's mainly national with EU-law at basic level. (Here, where I live, the use of land is a fight of the town with the state, environmental-wise ditto )

Why is there currently a shift toward nationalism, against the EU, going on politically?

What is it nationalists are disgruntled about with the EU?

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Nationalism is known in Europe since 19th century.
Germany only became 'Germany' in 1871, and even then some parts didn't fully integrate (the Kingdom of Bavaria, the Kingdom of Würtemberg and the Grand Duchy of Baden had special, 'national' rights)

Now and the, like in these days, people remember the good old days ...

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

But for both, it's mainly national with EU-law at basic level. (Here, where I live, the use of land is a fight of the town with the state, environmental-wise ditto )

Sounds familiar to me, though our system for this involves environmental regulation at both the state and national levels, which often leads to (usually needless) long-term disputes and delays.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Nationalism is known in Europe since 19th century.
Germany only became 'Germany' in 1871, and even then some parts didn't fully integrate (the Kingdom of Bavaria, the Kingdom of Würtemberg and the Grand Duchy of Baden had special, 'national' rights)

Now and the, like in these days, people remember the good old days ...

Why don't they remember the good ol' days of the Holy Roman Empire, then?

1 Reply

@livinglava,

livinglava wrote:

Why don't they remember the good ol' days of the Holy Roman Empire, then?

The Holy Roman Empire consisted of approximately 1,800 independent territories (plus some hundred family owned semi-independent ones) during the high time.

Even in 1792, there were nearly 400 kings, princes etc from independent territories at the Diet of the Holy Roman Empire in 1792.

My native town was one of the four capitals of the Duchy of Westphalia.
Since 1180, the duchy was held by the Archbishops and Electors of Cologne until its secularisation in 1803.

(Wikipedia)

Today, we have here a lot of communal (and state administrative) activities still within these old borders, in "Südwestfalen"

But we do live in Europe, are German and EU-citizens.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

livinglava wrote:
Why don't they remember the good ol' days of the Holy Roman Empire, then?
The Holy Roman Empire consisted of approximately 1,800 independent territories (plus some hundred family owned semi-independent ones) during the high time.

Even in 1792, there were nearly 400 kings, princes etc from independent territories at the Diet of the Holy Roman Empire in 1792.

My native town was one of the four capitals of the Duchy of Westphalia.
Since 1180, the duchy was held by the Archbishops and Electors of Cologne until its secularisation in 1803.

(Wikipedia)

Today, we have here a lot of communal (and state administrative) activities still within these old borders, in "Südwestfalen"

But we do live in Europe, are German and EU-citizens.

You said people romanticize the golden age of nationalism, so I asked why they don't romanticize the Holy Roman Empire, a little further back? I.e. why nationalism and not medieval imperialism?

Could it be because nationalism occurred as part of a larger imperial expansion of Europe to the Americas? Or maybe because national independence movements gave the public hope that they could take over the wealth and power of the elites for their own gain?

1 Reply

@livinglava,

livinglava wrote:

Could it be because nationalism occurred as part of a larger imperial expansion of Europe to the Americas? Or maybe because national independence movements gave the public hope that they could take over the wealth and power of the elites for their own gain?

Well, a lot happened during the end of the 18th century, the French Revolution for instance, and that was the starting signal here in Europe: the ideas of liberty, equality and fraternity generated the spirit of nationalism. And Napoleon, how bad he was and though he established a monarchy in France, carried forward the revolutionary ideals of equality and nationalism.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

livinglava wrote:
Could it be because nationalism occurred as part of a larger imperial expansion of Europe to the Americas? Or maybe because national independence movements gave the public hope that they could take over the wealth and power of the elites for their own gain?
Well, a lot happened during the end of the 18th century, the French Revolution for instance, and that was the starting signal here in Europe: the ideas of liberty, equality and fraternity generated the spirit of nationalism. And Napoleon, how bad he was and though he established a monarchy in France, carried forward the revolutionary ideals of equality and nationalism.

But is nationalism really popular because of these ideas of liberty, equality, and fraternity; or has it become a way for people to rally around an exclusive collective identity, symbolized by flag, language, and superficial cultural commonalities so that people can be part of a birth-right club that excludes people not deemed 'rightful heirs of the nation?'

It seems like the EU ostensibly pursued the ideal of expanding liberty, equality, and fraternity to an ever-broadening society of people, which would put equality and fraternity over national territory and exclusion.

But I have the sense that even if people really cared enough about liberty, equality, and fraternity to want to extend these inclusive values beyond their language-collective, there would be migrants who would join them not in the interest of liberty, etc. but in the interest of exploiting wealthy societies from within for the benefit of other societies elsewhere.

This is the general problem with free trade and migration, i.e. that people exploit it for gain within some exclusive society elsewhere. In short, it's "if you open your borders and trade with me, I'll exploit you for the benefit of my people over there, and I'll block you and your people from joining my welfare state where we enjoy the spoils of trading with you."

Where exactly is the liberty, equality, and fraternity in such trade exploitation and welfare-state exclusion?

0 Replies

No-deal Brexit warnings multiply as Trump praises PM candidate Boris Johnson. The UK's finance minister on Thursday warned those in his party vying for PM May's job that a no-deal Brexit would endanger the economy, as frontrunner Boris Johnson earned praise from U.S. President Donald Trump.

Ahead of UK visit, Trump praises Brexit-supporting 'friends' Johnson and Farage

Quote:

WASHINGTON/LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump lauded Britain’s most high-profile Brexit supporters - Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage - as his friends on Thursday, weighing into Britain’s political crisis just days before his state visit to London.

Trump told reporters he had great respect for Johnson and Farage and considered them friends, but declined to say whether he supported Johnson to succeed Theresa May, who is stepping down as prime minister after failing to steer the country out of the European Union.

“Nigel Farage is a friend of mine. Boris is a friend of mine,” Trump told reporters as he left the White House to deliver a speech in Colorado.

“I like them ... but I haven’t thought about supporting them. Maybe it’s not my business to support people, but I have a lot of respect for both of those men.”

Johnson is a former foreign minister seen as the favorite to replace May after she steps down as Conservative Party leader on June 7. He has said Britain should be prepared to leave the bloc without a deal, arguing that stance would force the EU to offer it better terms.

Farage, who led the unofficial campaign to leave the EU in the 2016 Brexit referendum, wants to leave the bloc without any agreement.

When asked about Brexit, Trump’s national security adviser John Bolton said the United States remained Britain’s most steadfast ally and dismissed questions about the security implications of leaving the bloc.

“You know, America declared its independence once – we made out okay,” Bolton quipped to reporters in London.

‘NO-DEAL BREXIT’?

Britain’s finance minister warned those in his party vying for May’s job that a no-deal Brexit would endanger the economy.

The Brexit crisis that has engulfed British politics for months has deepened with the impending departure of May, who was unable to get parliamentary approval for the withdrawal deal she had negotiated with Brussels.

A new Conservative Party leader, who should be in place and take over the premiership by the end of July, is likely to want a more decisive split, raising the chances of a confrontation with the EU and potentially a snap parliamentary election.

“We need to get the spectre of a no-deal exit off the table,” finance minister Philip Hammond told the BBC. “Leaving with no deal would be a very bad outcome for the economy.”

Hammond, underlining his view on a no deal, indicated he could be prepared to vote to collapse his party’s government if he felt it was heading in the wrong direction.

The United Kingdom was supposed to have left the EU on March 29 but its politicians are still arguing over how, when or even whether the country will leave the club it joined in 1973.

That political failure caused car production to plunge last month as factories shut down in expectation of a Brexit that never came, according to data published on Thursday.

An exit - currently due to happen on Oct. 31 - without a deal would mean no transition period. Bank of England Governor Mark Carney said the disruption could be akin to the 1970s oil shock.

May’s government has repeatedly warned of the disruption a no-deal Brexit would cause for everything from travel with pets to the import of crucial medicines and supply chains that criss-cross Europe and beyond.

Opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said the danger of a no deal had risen with May’s departure announcement, and pledged to do everything he could to stop it.

Brexit supporters admit there may be some short-term effects but say that in the long term the United Kingdom would thrive outside what they cast as an undemocratic and excessively bureaucratic system dominated by Germany.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

It is indeed something new and different. I'm trying to relate the EU structure, and any limits that may apply to it, to some of the currently contentious issues within the Union, for example, immigration and refugee policies.

In the European Elections far-right nationalist political parties won the largest share of the votes in the UK, Italy and France. These extreme right-wing parties all share a dislike for the European Union and immigration. They all wish to stop the freedom of movement for workers in Europe. Which raises the question of whether internal immigration in Europe is a huge problem in these countries.

>How Europe Moves< is an interactive map visualising the number of European citizens of working age living in another European country.
Germany and the UK are the countries with the largest numbers of European internal migrants. However in terms of the percentage of the working age population Luxembourg (45%), Switzerland (19%), Ireland (12%) and Cyprus (11%) have the most internal European migrants. Eastern European countries and Portugal are among the countries with the biggest percentage of the working age population emigrating to other European countries.

The flow lines on the How Europe Moves map reflect the numbers of people moving between different countries. If you click on a country the map will switch to just show the migration flow for that country. This makes it easier to determine where migrants are coming from and going between individual countries. For example, the UK is the most popular destination for Polish emigrants. Italy is the most popular destination for Romanians. France is the most popular destination for the Portuguese. Germany is the most popular destination for Italians.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

In Europe citizens within both the EU and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) are free to live, study, work and retire in any other EU or EFTA country. Swissinfo has undertaken a more detailed look at internal migration in Europe and created a map which shows which individual regions of Europe have a net gain or loss of workers.

>Where are people leaving? Where are they moving to?<

That map shows the difference between the number of immigrants and emigrants in each region based on movement within the free movement area. Areas with a positive net migration rate (where more people are moving to) are coloured blue on the map and areas & regions with a negative net migration rate (where people are leaving) are coloured brown on the map.

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

The Liberal Democrats have become the most popular party in the country, a poll suggests.

The pro-Remain party has seen its support surge to 24 per cent, closely followed by Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party at 22 per cent.

A YouGov poll for The Times found the Conservatives and Labour had slipped to joint third place, both with 19 per cent.
... ... ...

The Independent

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Amazing. This thing is revolutionarising UK politics.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Thanks Walter: fascinating stuff. I was surprised to note the emigration from, Latvia and Slovenia ( both places I have visited and found to be relatively prosperous and happy), and the relatively low overall net immigration rate in France (but high in the South & in Corsica). The exodus from Western Ireland, the central Spain, the Algarve, Lithuania, Poland and Eastern Anatolia I more or less expected.

I believe the election results in the UK involving the rise of Leave/Remain parties and the descent of the previously dominant Conservative & Labor Parties reflects, (beyond the Brexit issue itself) a widespread increasing polarization of the political spectra across Western Europe and in the United States as well. An interesting phenomenon, perhaps suggestive of Rome in the 2nd century BC.

I'll dust off my Irish passport and make another trip to Europe ( recently returned from a tour in Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia and found them fascinating: interesting national characters, good food and hospitality. To my surprise I found the Armenians and Georgians quite hostile to each other. I came to understand the role of the high mountain passes in preserving peace in a small region.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Don't talk with an Armenian about Azerbaijan!

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

I hadn't thought much about that aspect of things, but it's true that the Armenians are (in my view) a bit like the Greeks - they don't like anyone, even themselves.

1 Reply

Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know