This blog presents arguments for why the exSplinteringisting EU is ill-designed and bound to fail. We began it in the months leading up to the UK’s Referendum on continuing its membership of the EU, taking a broadly Eurosceptic view. We are continuing it as a review of EU and Brexit news and comment. For a full list of articles click All Posts or visit the monthly archive. 
On this Home page we review some recent posts and also some we regard as vital background to the debate. We invite (moderated) reader comments – please keep the debate polite.


To EU-besotted Remainers, Leavers are inward-looking nationalists. Remainers see the EU project as a giant step towards an open-arms approach to the world; a commitment to peace after the global wars our continent has triggered; an engine of enhanced prosperity; a well-spring of social, scientific and environmental advancement. These are the promises, which Remainers believe, choosing not to look carefully at the limited delivery.

The EU is protectionist, the CAP in particular is designed to exclude outsiders. Wars between nations in the EU would no longer be world-wide conflicts but regional, civil wars, made more likely by disastrous overreach (the euro and Schengen). For half its existence, since recovery from WW2, average EU growth has lagged other major trading groups. The welfare of citizens is of little concern in difficult times, at least for the more peripheral countries. The EU’s anti-science bias is repeatedly demonstrated in regulations against drug trials and efficient food production. Its environmental policies are often unrealistic and turned by corporate lobbying into anti-competitive weapons.

More and more citizens are noticing that the EU’s objectives do not serve their interests. They want change but see it won’t happen under the present structures, which are designed to minimise their involvement.

Accepting the PR uncritically defines a faith, or even a cult. Leaving a cult is a betrayal, a blasphemy; escaping without harm cannot be allowed. Remainers’ hopes have been betrayed.

Latest Updates (reviewed 17 July 2017)

The Brexit negotiations have started, with the UK team under David Davis conceding that Phase 1 must show “satisfactory progress” before discussions on future relations with the EU will begin. Much ink and hot air are being spilt on possible outcomes and we review some of the issues in Betting on Brexit? (on economists and their forecasts) and The Withdrawal Method (on the EU’s mandate for the negotiations).

In a digression we look at some similarities and differences among the relations between the UK and the EU and those between Hong Kong and China (Comparative Studies).

Shorties-10 covers, in brief, the blame game, free trade, bullying, citizens’ rights and planning.

Most recently we look at two issues that go to the heart of the EU’s limitations. Standard Confusion revisits ever-closer-union and attempts to impose uniformity across the EU, while To See, or Not to See? exposes the EU’s failure to curb the excesses of lobbying.

9 thoughts on “

    1. Thank you for your comment. I’m not sure what sort of answer you expect to your question though. I have never belonged to a political party. I have taken to social media to protest against the EU for two reasons mainly (and many lesser ones): it is aiming for a supra-national government that cannot be dismissed by its citizens, however it performs, and it continues to obstruct a more community-oriented collaboration among European nations, which might make a better shot at bring economic and other benefits to more people.


  1. It is not every day one encounters a new Eurosceptic blog site so was wondering what your political history was?

    You can read up my profile on The Harrogate Agenda website.

    Are you yet familiar with The Harrogate Agenda and if you are what are your thoughts on it?

    Finally have you read Flexcit and do you in principle support it?


    1. I’ve heard of the Harrogate Agenda but not studied it in detail. I like the idea but am concerned at the practicalities of bring it about.
      I’ve dipped into Flexcit and support what I have read.


      1. Niall, This blog has two authors so I thought I might add my response to my brother’s. As a youngster I was very left wing but, like many others, became aware that we must address the world as it is and not as we wish it were. “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong,” according to H L Mencken (roughly). Grand designs seldom, if ever, work and are certain to fail if they don’t adapt to evidence and changes in the real world. The EU is further proof of this.
        I agree with you that decisions should be devolved as close to those affected by them as is practical and that competing administrations should lead to innovative solutions providing fair, efficient and effective government. We must be careful that higher-level decisions don’t get hog-tied and then adopt QMV across incompatible interests, as the EU does.
        Further comment on your proposals are more appropriate on your own site. I can’t seem to do this from my smart phone, which is all I have with me this week.


      2. We aim to draw people’s attentions to the fundamental flaws in the EU’s design, how it excludes influence from its citizens and, because of the entrenched ideology, will not be reformed. It performs badly and is sustained only by myths and propaganda. Worst of all it prevents the formation of a useful European community.


      3. Well as you well know we won the referendum and so the BIG issue now is what happens next and to ensure the Brexit offered is doable in the time available,workable and causes us as little grief as possible. This is of course the aim of the blog EU Referendum where I first came across you and your blog.
        As to the long term future for the continent of Europe (because it is so important to differentiate between the EU and Single Market of 28, the EEA of 32 and Europe of 51 countries) this is covered in Flexcit and ultimately sees an European Economic Space controlled by UNECE in Geneva.
        The more blogs working together to support the above the better.


      4. Thanks for your comment. I agree that we need as much support as possible during the Brexit negotiations to ensure that there will be no back-sliding towards Remain as things get difficult. They will get difficult because the EU feels it has to defend itself against the risk of contagion and so has to make it seem that the UK is being punished. They have little confidence that their project can hold up on its merits, perhaps because it has so few.
        And, as you say, there are now more important international agencies which could oversee a more democratic and successful European project.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s