In this blog we argue that the EU is ill-designed for its declared purpose, because it is well-designed for a different, and deliberately obscured, purpose. The true design, which is being steadily and deceitfully achieved, is to draw governance in Europe away from the nation states and their citizens and into a supranational entity called the European Union, with its Commission as the seat of power.
We began our blog in the months leading up to the UK’s Referendum on continuing its membership of the EU. We have continued it as a detailed review of EU, a summary of Brexit news and comment on both.
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 useful background to the debate. We invite (moderated) reader comments – please keep the debate polite.
Remainers and Leavers see the world, the EU, the UK and each other quite differently. In the 15 months (to September 2017) since the referendum, the binary question – to leave or to remain? – has both congealed and fragmented. Most people in the UK now accept that Britain will leave the EU. However, the means of leaving, and the possible consequences, continue to generate as much hot air as the original question.
At one extreme the cry is, “To hell with them, let’s just get out”. At the other the whimper is, “Oh! But it will hurt so much, let’s hang on to what we can for as long as we can.” At least those roughly represent the views that come down to us from politicians and commentators.
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.
For most of us it seems that we can’t trust the politicians to tell us the truth, we can’t trust the media to understand what is happening and report it clearly and fairly, and we can’t trust the negotiators to represent anything other than the interests of their own groups. The difficulties of Brexit are many and complex.
We understand that while there is comfort in the suggestion to “always keep a-hold of Nurse, for fear of finding something worse”, the decision to leave has been made and now needs to be implemented fairly, competently and in the interests of the country’s citizens, and future citizens.
Latest Updates (revised 24 September 2017)
The negotiations for Brexit are grinding slow but not fine. The EU has adopted a fixed position, a mandate, and is not giving an inch, or even a millimetre. The UK side is responding with bluff over-optimism from David Davis and some cool and interesting papers from the Civil Service.
In March Jean-Claude Juncker, Commission President put forward some options for the future integration of the 27 remaining member states, and possible future members, which we reviewed in Our Commentary on the White Paper and More on the White Paper. We also review his State of the Union 2017 address.
In July we looked at some of the issues surrounding the Brussels negotiations in The Withdrawal Method. We then looked at some of the arguments that have been used to persuade us that the UK should remain in, or closely allied to, the Single Market and reviewed these in For Richer or Poorer? and more recently in The £350 Million Question.
In a series of five posts, beginning with Overtime Lords, we challenged some of the themes we read in EU documents, quoting extensively in support of our arguments.