Supporters of the EU have always been able to use the argument that it is "not really happening". This argument arises because the EU is based on Treaties between 28 countries that were once sovereign.
The argument that the EU is not really happening is entirely disingenuous and "grandstanding" for a real or imagined crowd. Obviously if you are in favour of the EU then you, yourself, believe fully that it is happening.
The members of the EU have all signed Treaties that pool sovereignty, allowing the EU to control certain areas of government. The structure is clear, in agreed areas of government "competencies" in EU jargon, the EU is in control and the member states must comply or face action in the European Court of Justice, which polices the Treaties. So how can the pro-EU activist claim that this is "not really happening"?
The method is simple. Take for instance the very basis of the EU, the Customs Union. The Treaties are clear:
Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union says:
"1. When the Treaties confer on the Union exclusive competence in a specific area, only the Union may legislate and adopt legally binding acts, the Member States being able to do so themselves only if so empowered by the Union or for the implementation of acts of the Union."
The Customs Union (ie: the Tariffs and procedures for dealing with international trade) comes under this area of "exclusive competence" - see Note 1 - so how could anyone argue that this is "not really happening"? Simple: just point to the fact that all of the customs officers are run by the member states (ignore EU staff in Frontex) and have different uniforms and point out that EU Directives and Regulations are almost all replicated in National Laws (ignore "for the implementation of acts of the Union") and use the fact that every member state has an historical seat on the WTO, UN etc. It then becomes possible to make the entirely fatuous argument that the Customs Union is under the control of the individual countries.
The other point that is used to reinforce the "not really happening" argument is the flat assertion that every member state must agree for any action to be taken by the EU, that each state has a veto. This point is actually a falsehood because almost all vetoes were abolished on 1st November 2014 as a result of the 2009 Lisbon Treaty. However, the entire "not really happening" argument is an obvious falsehood to anyone who knows the Treaties and the history.
Why might the "not really happening" argument work as a political tool? Many people in the UK think they are in the EEC. The UK media have neglected to inform them about the scope of the Maastricht and Lisbon Treaties that created the EU so when the EU is discussed the "not really happening" argument is closer to the beliefs of the ill informed. The "not really happening" argument shows its users to be people of no principle, demagoguery is one thing but outright lying is despicable.
The "not really happening" argument is mostly used when discussing further political union but it is also used when discussing defence and foreign affairs. You may have noticed that Foreign Policy was almost absent from the 2015 election. In fact the UK has scarcely raised a foreign affairs matter in any international forum since 2014 owing to Article 24 of the Treaty on European Union:
"1. The Union’s competence in matters of common foreign and security policy shall cover all areas of foreign policy and all questions relating to the Union’s security, including the progressive framing of a common defence policy that might lead to a common defence"
However, almost all supporters of the EU will simply declare that this is "not really happening" and would use any UK support for EU policy as evidence of UK sovereignty.
The final "not really happening" argument rests upon the fact that the UK pays for and has immediate control over, its own defence forces. In practice the UK can just say "No!" if it really disagrees with the EU. This is actually a reason why the case for British exit is urgent. If the UK votes to remain in the EU it will provide a tremendous impetus towards the growing, joint EU defence force. In a decade or two the UK will no longer be able to say "No". The UK will be unable to stop any decision of the EU from really happening, even if the EU were to swing violently to the Right and, for instance, Direct that all migrants should be deported.
Note 1:
Article 3 Treaty on European Union
1. The Union shall have exclusive competence in the following areas:
(a) customs union;
(b) the establishing of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the
internal market;
(c) monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the euro;
(d) the conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries
policy;
(e) common commercial policy.
7/2/16
The argument that the EU is not really happening is entirely disingenuous and "grandstanding" for a real or imagined crowd. Obviously if you are in favour of the EU then you, yourself, believe fully that it is happening.
The members of the EU have all signed Treaties that pool sovereignty, allowing the EU to control certain areas of government. The structure is clear, in agreed areas of government "competencies" in EU jargon, the EU is in control and the member states must comply or face action in the European Court of Justice, which polices the Treaties. So how can the pro-EU activist claim that this is "not really happening"?
The method is simple. Take for instance the very basis of the EU, the Customs Union. The Treaties are clear:
Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union says:
"1. When the Treaties confer on the Union exclusive competence in a specific area, only the Union may legislate and adopt legally binding acts, the Member States being able to do so themselves only if so empowered by the Union or for the implementation of acts of the Union."
The Customs Union (ie: the Tariffs and procedures for dealing with international trade) comes under this area of "exclusive competence" - see Note 1 - so how could anyone argue that this is "not really happening"? Simple: just point to the fact that all of the customs officers are run by the member states (ignore EU staff in Frontex) and have different uniforms and point out that EU Directives and Regulations are almost all replicated in National Laws (ignore "for the implementation of acts of the Union") and use the fact that every member state has an historical seat on the WTO, UN etc. It then becomes possible to make the entirely fatuous argument that the Customs Union is under the control of the individual countries.
The other point that is used to reinforce the "not really happening" argument is the flat assertion that every member state must agree for any action to be taken by the EU, that each state has a veto. This point is actually a falsehood because almost all vetoes were abolished on 1st November 2014 as a result of the 2009 Lisbon Treaty. However, the entire "not really happening" argument is an obvious falsehood to anyone who knows the Treaties and the history.
Why might the "not really happening" argument work as a political tool? Many people in the UK think they are in the EEC. The UK media have neglected to inform them about the scope of the Maastricht and Lisbon Treaties that created the EU so when the EU is discussed the "not really happening" argument is closer to the beliefs of the ill informed. The "not really happening" argument shows its users to be people of no principle, demagoguery is one thing but outright lying is despicable.
The "not really happening" argument is mostly used when discussing further political union but it is also used when discussing defence and foreign affairs. You may have noticed that Foreign Policy was almost absent from the 2015 election. In fact the UK has scarcely raised a foreign affairs matter in any international forum since 2014 owing to Article 24 of the Treaty on European Union:
"1. The Union’s competence in matters of common foreign and security policy shall cover all areas of foreign policy and all questions relating to the Union’s security, including the progressive framing of a common defence policy that might lead to a common defence"
However, almost all supporters of the EU will simply declare that this is "not really happening" and would use any UK support for EU policy as evidence of UK sovereignty.
The final "not really happening" argument rests upon the fact that the UK pays for and has immediate control over, its own defence forces. In practice the UK can just say "No!" if it really disagrees with the EU. This is actually a reason why the case for British exit is urgent. If the UK votes to remain in the EU it will provide a tremendous impetus towards the growing, joint EU defence force. In a decade or two the UK will no longer be able to say "No". The UK will be unable to stop any decision of the EU from really happening, even if the EU were to swing violently to the Right and, for instance, Direct that all migrants should be deported.
Note 1:
Article 3 Treaty on European Union
1. The Union shall have exclusive competence in the following areas:
(a) customs union;
(b) the establishing of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the
internal market;
(c) monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the euro;
(d) the conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries
policy;
(e) common commercial policy.
7/2/16
Comments