withdraw

The backbench debate on an EU referendum has caused much excitement in Westminster, the  motion was ‘negatived on division. (Ayes: 111, Noes: 483)’, the significance of the debate is not as much as the hype being discussed, it will not do what it says on the tin, it was defeated and in any case was not binding on the government. It has though, brought attention to the credibility of Cameron’s leadership and his  preferment for rhetoric over action.

The number of ‘rebels’ was increased by the wording of the motion; including the third option of ‘renegotiation’ allowed the majority who supported the motion a get out clause and a chance to kick Cameron for whatever grievances they may have. Renegotiation is simply not an option, it  needs to be made clear to those suggesting that renegotiation is an option and those that have been naive enough to believe them.

For Britain or any other member state in the European Union decide it would like to withdraw from any policy area signed up to through the various treaties, directives and legislation. Britain or that member state would have to seek agreement from the other 26 member states, and an amendment to the existing treaties would need to take place.

The likelihood of  the 26 member states  agreeing on Britain opting out of policy areas that it does not find favourable, while they themselves remain signed up to it is nil, it is as though those advocating ‘renegotiation’, they seem to think that  EU treaties are  a box of chocolates where you pick out the nice pieces and leaves the rest for the next idiot.

Cameron and co still claim to be eurosceptic, even after all the broken promises and ‘cast iron’ guarantees, some will keep the pretence going – it serves both their interests, others are naive enough to actually believe it. Cameron calls himself a ‘euro-realist’ :read federalist,  he has consistently used the issue of europe as bait to the party using it whenever he needs their support, ignorant when it does not suit his needs.

It has to be asked why those in the party who do not agree with the position of the leadership continue to support the leadership, in the FT today Tristan-Garel-Jones (former minister for europe under Thatcher and Major) another europlast, says those that are “stuck in the 19th century model of the nation-state and who advocate withdrawal from the EU” should withdraw from the party.  it is the obvious suggestion to make while the quisling leadership is so at odds with their views.

Advertisements

One Response to withdraw

  1. I have now adopted you as my official pj’s! Nice post and have retweeted!

leave a comment

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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

%d bloggers like this: