Sunday, 27 December 2015

'We're here to help' EU Referendum threat

"Herr Juncker, now that the polls in the UK are swinging toward an 'out' vote, how can we stand by our pledge not to send out and fund campaign literature supporting the 'ins'?"

"Calm, Heinrich. We can't break our pledge to create a playing field as level as ... an alpine meadow for the vote. So here's what we do.

Eight weeks before the referendum we send to every voter in Britain an EU Information pack and Directory, listing every service they receive or can access and credit the EU with providing, managing or regulating them. And we include all the numbers of their national government departments and helplines. And we include a CD with all the best EU marching songs, and a small EU flag, and a voucher for a bottle of wine from the EU surplus lake. Quite neutral, you see. No mention of the referendum at all."

"Herr Juncker, that's brilliant!"

"And also we change the contract condition for all UK schemes in receipt of EU grants to include the obligation to display a full 96 sheet billboard poster on which at least 45% is filled with the EU logo and symbols crediting the scheme to the EU. We will of course give them extra grant to compensate for this minor change."

"Herr Juncker, you excel yourself!"

"Thank you, Heinrich. Let it never be said that we don't go the extra kilometre to achieve real European fairness. We're here to help".


G. Tingey said...

Camoron is going for a sell-out & claiming victory
All the pathetic fuss about a few supposed "spongers On the welfare system & a few refugees...
NOTHING AT ALL about Brussels over-regulation & corruption & control of our Parliament, which is what it SHOULD be about.
I'm not getting good feelings over this one ....

mikebravo said...

USA, EU and our treasonous politicians all want us in the EU.

Will enough free thinking people stand against the coming wave of propaganda. It will be a miracle.

Even if they do will the elite invoke article 50 and complete negotiations on behalf of the leave voters. Fat chance!

Dr Evil said...

If only Junker would do this, it would bolster the out vote. I will be voting leave/out on the day. I will not be in the Fourth Reich.

Flyinthesky said...

The missing element in the information pack will be "all this is done with our own money."

James Higham said...

One despairs.

Cascadian said...

You will keep voting until the "correct" result is obtained. Did you learn nothing from Ireland?

There will be NO LEAVING the EU.

You will "absorb" as many muslim "refugees" as the EU decrees, you will pay for their welfare and you will absorb multiples of their number as their relatives are allowed in too.

With camoron in charge you will be paying higher dues forever, but at least you kept UKIP out they were after all the real threat.

At least Raedwald has had the good sense to jump off the TitanUK.

Budgie said...

Mikebravo, The last thing we want to do is invoke Article 50 to leave. The right way is to positively not use Art 50, but to announce as a sovereign nation our intention to abrogate the EU treaties after negotiation, negotiate for a free trade agreement (ie: not belong to the EEA either), patriate the EU laws from Brussels (to keep institutions going until we replace those laws in the future), then repeal the ECA so finally leaving the EU. Six months to freedom.

mikebravo said...

That is one opinion. Not one I share but you are welcome to it.

Budgie said...

Mikebravo, Article 50 specifically excludes the applicant (the UK) from the process of deciding the conditions under which the UK is allowed to leave the EU. That is the definition of a stitch-up, not a negotiation.

mikebravo said...


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.

I read it slightly differently.

Budgie said...


"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." (Treaty of Lisbon).

So paragraph 4 specifically modifies the tone of para 2 that you quote, restricting the UK's ability to negotiate openly in a normal bilateral manner. The (rest of the) EU intends "setting out the arrangements" (para 2) for the UK's withdrawal. This is the take-it-or-leave-it attitude I characterised shortly as a stitch-up. There is nothing to stop the EU "setting out" onerous conditions if it suits their purposes.

Moreover there is no need for the (remaining) EU to be "setting out the arrangements for [the UK's] withdrawal" in any case - their "arrangements" after we leave are non of our business, and our "arrangements" (eg: how we deal with legacy EU rules) are non of their business. All we need to agree with the EU is a cut-off date for the financial and legal transfer and a free trade agreement which can be done bilaterally (UK/EU) without Art 50.

In the end why take the risk?

mikebravo said...


I read that as, the withdrawing state can not be on the council representing the EU. It can not be on both sides of the negotiations. Hardly surprising.

"Why take the risk?" It will not be your or my decision. The method of withdrawal is not a part of the referendum.

The government will use the existing treaty law as previously agreed to withdraw from it's treaties. That is the way it works unless this country elects a government that just walks away from it's predecessors treaty. Hardly likely.

Anyway, I am off skiing for a week now.


formertory said...

I was in Lubeck for a few days after Christmas and in wandering round the city came across an example of German "vandalism".......

Someone in Germany gets this "government" thing!

Budgie said...

Mikebravo, Since it is not physically possible to be "on both sides of the negotiations" why would it even need stating? Para 4 is a modifier of Para 2 & 3, it says so. It is therefore not simply a stand alone statement of the obvious about us not being on both sides.

You then go on to state that we must use the existing treaty's exit clause (Art 50). This is a completely different point from your previous contention that Art 50 is the better method.

The termination of a treaty or the withdrawal of a party may take place:
(a) In conformity with the provisions of the treaty; or
(b) At any time by consent of all the parties after consultation with the other contracting States." (my italics)
So there is an option not to use Art 50 recognised in international law.

Invoking Article 50 puts the "arrangements for [the UK's] withdrawal" in the hands of the EU giving them the discretion to impose onerous exit provisions. By comparison a bi-lateral agreement between the UK and the rest of the EU prevents that risk. There is no sensible reason that I can see to trust that the EU will look after our interests, rather than theirs. That is why we should not use Art 50.