Is Britain about to leave the EU?

[Arwon]

I have not used the term "EU tyranny". Indeed I regard it as very inaccurate as there is no "tyrant" running the EU.
I tend to regard them as very much well intentioned technocratic bureaucratics albeit with a few political types.

I am well aware of the differences which were greater in countries in their pre-democratics times.

Which does not wish to be ruled as an offshore possession of a largely Franco-German compromise.

Yeah look

 

[EnglishEdward]

Yeah look

The word "tyranny" is derived from the word "tyrant".

Or are you denying that the EEC/EC/EU in part started off as Franco-German compromise whereby the
French sought to contain the Germans and the Germans hoped to obtain respectability after WW2 ?

 

[Arakhor]

We can chop logic about the original meanings of words if you like, but it's poor show to do that without saying so first.

 

[Cheetah]

http://www.politico.eu/article/theresa-may-will-trigger-brexit-on-march-9/

Theresa May will trigger Brexit on March 9
UK government wants to invoke the clause at European summit.

The U.K. government intends to pass legislation allowing it to trigger Article 50 by March 9, the Times reported Tuesday.

Prime Minister Theresa May had said she would formally invoke the two-year mechanism for Britain’s exit from the European Union by the end of March but had declined to reveal an exact date.

May’s government told the House of Lords on Monday it wants its Brexit bill — unveiled last week — approved by March 7, according to the Times. The timing will give May the option of invoking the clause at a March 9 European Council.

Brexit Secretary David Davis will open debate on the bill in the House of Commons Tuesday. The bill, he is expected to say, is not “about whether or not the U.K. should leave the EU, or how it should do so. It is simply about implementing a decision already made.”

MPs will vote on the bill Wednesday, after which it will proceed to committee stage, where it can be amended by opposition parties.

The government is hoping to avoid invoking Article 50 in the last week of March, as doing so would coincide with the 60th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome, the founding charter of what later became the EU.

Looks like we have ourselves a date.

 

[Cheetah]

Oh, and someone pointed out this Guardian article from 25. April 1962, regarding British doubts about the European political union:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/25/eu-european-union-political-union-in-out-eec

Comment: Doubts about European political union - archive
25 April 1962: British fears about the loss of sovereignty slow down its EEC entry

The setback which the Six suffered last week in their attempt to build a European Political Union could, in the long run, be all to the good. But it is unfortunate that it arose over the question of Britain’s participation in the discussions of the Six about the form their political union should take.

That this was so was not entirely Britain’s fault. But it may well appear to have been so in Paris, where the negative attitude of successive British Governments to questions of European unity has created a deep-rooted and almost automatic suspicion of British statements and actions in respect to such questions.

[...]

 

[Gen.Mannerheim]

The word "tyranny" is derived from the word "tyrant".

Or are you denying that the EEC/EC/EU in part started off as Franco-German compromise whereby the
French sought to contain the Germans and the Germans hoped to obtain respectability after WW2 ?

Somebody is quoting Yes Minister

The evolution of the EEC into the EU has a lot to do with the French fears of Germany (economically & politically speaking). France, and particularly President Mitterrand, feared losing financial and political status in Europe with the Reunification of Germany. West Germany was already a financial titan, with the Buba being a role-model for central banks. Mitterrand was able to guarantee German support for the reformation of the EEC by threatening not to support German Reunification and other strange things, all with the hope and intention of using German power and resources to ensure French "dominance" of Western Europe. Instead, they opened the door for German domination of Europe through the political and "internationalists" back door.

As Sir Humphrey sayd, "[the EEC/EU] is a game played for national interests and always was."

 

[Takhisis]

The resurrection of Cornish is perhaps my favorite modern linguistic events.

The Irish flag will never be the same for me again.

I was thinking of the Indian flag when I saw that, actually. XD

http://www.politico.eu/article/theresa-may-will-trigger-brexit-on-march-9/

(…) Brexit Secretary David Davis will open debate on the bill in the House of Commons Tuesday. The bill, he is expected to say, is not “about whether or not the U.K. should leave the EU, or how it should do so. It is simply about implementing a decision already made.”(…)

Looks like we have ourselves a date.

But never discuss the how.

Snipping made by me.

 

[FriendlyFire]

As Sir Humphrey sayd, "[the EEC/EU] is a game played for national interests and always was."

For a moment I read that as National socialism.

 

[really]

Brexit Bill passed by the house of commons.
498 to 114.
Ken Clarke (Tory) voted no.
47 Labour voted no.
Most of the rest were SNP and Lib Dem.

When will this go to the Lords?

White paper to be published today.

George Osborne had a good point that the UK is putting politics ahead of the economy and that leavers shouldn't be surprised if the EU puts politics ahead of the economy.

 

[Kyriakos]

Brexit Bill passed by the house of commons.
498 to 114.
Ken Clarke (Tory) voted no.
47 Labour voted no.
Most of the rest were SNP and Lib Dem.

When will this go to the Lords?

White paper to be published today.

George Osborne had a good point that the UK is putting politics ahead of the economy and that leavers shouldn't be surprised if the EU puts politics ahead of the economy.

Maybe there should be a referendum to vote on whether the parliament's vote must be upheld.

 

[Arwon]

That's a whole lot of MPs voting for something they personally don't think is in their country's interests.

 

[Arakhor]

The BBC is offering a dropdown list to see if your MP voted for the bill. Of all the things that the BBC has done so far, that's the least helpful, as those of us living under a Tory MP don't need to bother checking.

I would hazard a guess that there were a lot of MPs very concerned with their future careers, which of course takes precedence over national or consitutency concerns.

 

[Flying Pig]

It's a conflict between two ideas of representative democracy. One school says that the representatives are supposed to vote for what their constituents would vote for, if they were all in the voting booth instead of their MP. The other (Edmund Burke's) says that people elect representatives because they're better at making decisions than they are, and so representatives are supposed to vote for what they think is best, even when their voters disagree with it. Most people and most MPs sit somewhere in the middle, but voting against something that a majority of your constituents had explicitly asked to happen (remember, this isn't a vote on the terms of Brexit, and doesn't preclude amendments to the bill) doesn't fit with most people's ideas of democracy, at least not these days.

 

[Arwon]

I'd also suggest there's quite a few MPs voting against what both their constituents views AND what they think is best.

 

[Arakhor]

Neither of which explains why the Tories voted to literally all but a single man to support the bill, presumably without any threat of whipping. I do not believe that there are no Remain-supporting Tory MPs from majority-Remain constituencies, but the devil is in the details, so now we see what sort of amendments are raised.

Even if you’re an ardent supporter of leaving the EU, given how much of a fiasco the Government has made of the process so far, I can’t see why on earth you’d want to sit back and let them continue to mismanage the whole affair with absolutely no checks or oversights.

 

[JohannaK]

Yes, I was gonna say that the English and Welsh peoples voted for Leave, but not necessarily at any cost and to let the government handle the process as sloppily as it can unchecked by Parliament.

 

[really]

Neither of which explains why the Tories voted to literally all but a single man to support the bill, presumably without any threat of whipping. I do not believe that there are no Remain-supporting Tory MPs from majority-Remain constituencies, but the devil is in the details, so now we see what sort of amendments are raised.

Even if you’re an ardent supporter of leaving the EU, given how much of a fiasco the Government has made of the process so far, I can’t see why on earth you’d want to sit back and let them continue to mismanage the whole affair with absolutely no checks or oversights.

The Tories have their tails up.

 

[Samson]

Now the torys have produced their plan. I have not read all of it, unsurprisingly Labour said the document "says nothing" and had been produced too late for "meaningful" scrutiny. The main point I think:

On 17 January 2017 the Prime Minister set out the 12 principles which will guide the Government in fulfilling the democratic will of the people of the UK. These are:
1. Providing certainty and clarity;
2. Taking control of our own laws;
3. Strengthening the Union;
4. Protecting our strong historic ties with Ireland and maintaining the Common Travel Area;
5. Controlling immigration;
6. Securing rights for EU nationals in the UK and UK nationals in the EU;
7. Protecting workers’ rights;
8. Ensuring free trade with European markets;
9. Securing new trade agreements with other countries;
10. Ensuring the United Kingdom remains the best place for science and innovation;
11. Cooperating in the fight against crime and terrorism; and
12. Delivering a smooth, orderly exit from the EU.

 

[Arakhor]

Strengthening the Union by disregarding Scotland's concerns on the entire process? Seems legit.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Strengthening the Union by disregarding Scotland's concerns on the entire process? Seems legit.

Suggest a workable alternative.