Brexit 6?

Mind you, I think Corbyn said the words 'bargain basement' about that many times at PMQ's today I almost felt sorry for him he was so useless.

Did you actually keep count?

David Davis was asked 21 times yesterday if the government would produce a white paper and he gave reasons why there would not be one 21 times.
Some u-turn.

Whatever floats yer boat...

Doesn't it just

Gives 'em all something to high-five each other about though, doesn't it roses?

I would think that 'she has given in' or agreed to the white paper because so many on either side of the House wanted it.It doesn't change anything though.

Maybe Cameron didn't understand it either. After all, it's taken a high court and supreme court to decide that May has to involve parliament in Brexit. That was on a majority vote, so three of the top judges in the land didn't agree with the others.
She's even given in on the white paper now, which was dismissed out of hand last PMQs.

Thank you for the link. It is interesting and it deserves further thought when I have more time. My eye was, though, drawn to this quote:

“the concept of ever closer union allows for different paths of integration for different countries, allowing those that want to deepen integration to move ahead, while respecting the wish of those who do not want to deepen any further”.

Ever-closer union for countries is therefore a live concept. The euro may only survive if there is further integration among its members. As the eurozone becomes more integrated, what is the future for a major country in the EU but outside the more integrated eurozone?

Those committed to the EU project like Michael Heseltine ultimately see the UK as part of a more integrated Eurozone. I see the logic of that position but it is not one I have opted for.

I might ask what was the need for the Cameron opt-out if there is no ever-closer union?

I do appreciate the link and I will ponder further but now, Sainsbury's beckons and maybe some exercise en route to a couple of Spring half marathons.

fullfact.org/europe/explaining-eu-deal-ever-closer-union/

As you like Fullfact, perhaps you'd better read this.
There could be no ever-closer union. It wasn't a political construct. People always miss out 'of the peoples.'

Cameron got us an opt out, anyway, something else which always appears to be forgotten.

I admit that Mumsnet is a great authority on constitutional matters so who am I to argue how much sovereignty has passed?

Ha, ha...

I only posted it because the original poster had done their homework; even cited references.

We know from Full Fact that it not insignificant because if it was, Full Fact would have said so.

It's so funny having Leavers who don't believe a word Full Fact says and those who do.. I think in that case I prefer to leave it out, really.

Again, I ask who will make the positive case for the UK in the ever-closer Union in the long run?

I think that was equally a part of Leavers' Project Fear.

It was good to take the matter to the Supreme Court ( nobody will argue with the rulings) and the devolved countries will have no special say in things, quite rightly, as they are part of the UK, and cannot push for extra things, unless Parliament actually wants to give it ( which it won't).

Cunco good post.
I particularly liked 'I admit that Mumsnet is a great authority on constitutional matters'
I do like a dry sense of humour.

Conservative and Labour governments passed over powers to the EU. I am not partisan in my criticism. I have little time for Major, none for Blair. I suspect most MPs (as Ken Clarke admitted) did not read the whole of the Maastrict Treaty because (I hope I am not misquoting him), nobody could.

I admit that Mumsnet is a great authority on constitutional matters so who am I to argue how much sovereignty has passed? We know from Full Fact that it not insignificant because if it was, Full Fact would have said so.

The real questions, though, lie in the future. Again, I ask who will make the positive case for the UK in the ever-closer Union in the long run? The Referendum presented a great chance for Europhiles to state their case and win us Leavers over. If they did, I didn't hear it over Project Fear which ultimately turned people off.

I disagree with Michael Hesletine about the EU but I believe he is right to say that if we stay in, we will join the euro. Ultimately, the euro only works if it is an economic union, not just a monetary union. It means significantly more transfer of sovereignty.

In the old days, people in favour of the EU used to say that the USA works so why not the USE? I used to point out that, economically, the Union works for some states but leaves others way behind. I suspect these days few will want to use the USA under President Trump as the blueprint.

Thanks, Cunco. You had me worried, mentioning a politician twice of whom I hadn't heard.

Shamelessly copied and pasted from a mumsnet thread:

On the continuous retention of vast sovereignty by the UK by the way, this is not my opinion. It is fact verified by constitutional lawyers who write books on this subject ( yes dreaded experts) and also the government sources below.The now disunited kingdom's decision to delegate some minor amounts of shared sovereign power to the European Union over matters such as Agriculture and trade was a calculated decision.Membership has strengthened the UK’s economic position making us (formerly) the world's fifth largest economy and helped maintain peace between member states.

Numerous Eurosceptics ..... repeatedly assert the myth that to exit means regaining sovereignty, but it is a myth.If you want to justify the result of the referendum by all means try, but not on the basis of control or sovereignty because that is just not correct.

*Objective fact*The UK’s net contribution to the EU budget in 2014/15 was 1.2% of Britain’s total spending of £735 billion that year. British parliament still had sovereign control of over 98% of public spending.(HM Treasury and institute for fiscal studies- summarised in chart here medium.com/*@ChathamHouse*/five-things-to-know-about-sovereignty-in-the-uk-s-eu-referendum-debate-2ed7ab82bd41#.27zhptk52)*

Determined* exclusively by UK -*Health policy. Education. Fiscal policy. Public expenditure. Monetary policy. Income tax. Corporation tax.Capital gains tax.Inheritance tax. Border control and security. Non-EU immigration.Pensions.Welfare. Foreign policy decisions. Defence. Military Intelligence. Development cooperation and humanitarian aid.All local government.National policing.Crime. *Media and press regulation.Family law. Property law and succession of estates.

*( Objective facts Sources -* 1. HM Government Balance of Competences review. 2. Chatham house- Niblett.Link in previous post, and general knowledge.)

*Determined by joint UK and other European Union member states*
Trade.* Energy.Climate policy.Environment.Agriculture. Some Employment. Consumer.Transport. Some crime. Asylum.VAT. F*oreign policy (EU). Single Market.Competition.Fisheries.EU migration.( Sources 1. HM Government Balance of Competences review. 2. Chatham house- Niblett.)

*Objective fact* The key benefit of membership has been peace, prosperity and unfettered access to 16.6 Trillion a year in a Single Market of 500m people.
*(http://www.cbi.org.uk/insight-and-analysis/our-global-future/factsheets/factsheet-2-benefits-of-eu-membership-outweigh-costs/)

The overwhelming evidence is that the small amount of delegation of some shared sovereignty, mainly tedious but necessary standardisation and safety in trade and food is a price worth paying for the immense benefits.

I have no comment

cunco where have you been for the past 40 years. You need to tell that to Major and Thatcher. Look at the grief they got from the Tories.

Apologies, Jen, I meant Tim Farron. I don't know where Haddon came from.

This is getting silly but those voting OUT in 1975 did not moan. We accepted the decision and carried on. The campaign was led mainly by Tony Benn so one would have expected little else. My views on most things differed from Tony Benn but not about accepting the view of the people.

As to the future, I suspect Referendums will be scarce and better constructed. I hope that Parliament will not give away further sovereignty which is, in my view, unconstitutional, but who knows? If we stay in the EU, we will probably have to join the euro and a further chunk of sovereignty will go out the window en route to the United States of Europe.

If there is a real debate on the terms of Brexit, I hope someone will address the future of Britain in the EU. We have heard a lot of stories about how dreadful it will be if we leave but who will make a positive case for the ever-closer Union to convinvince us knuckle-draggers to change our tune?

I find it odd that people who believe so profoundly in the supremacy of Parliament seem to care little about Parliament passing over its powers to outside bodies, not answerable to Parliament or to us.

With regard to the Euro, countries that are not in the Eurozone often get mentioned, but there are also countries that use the Euro that are not members of the EU.
They do it for reasons given in Maizie's article, the idea of social cohesion. 70% of those in the Eurozone like using it.

Shame IDS can't understand.

twitter.com/sunny_hundal/status/823850944228159489/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Pleased to know my crowdfunding money wasn't wasted.
Not that it would have been whateverthe outcome. However, as Starmer said, it could have been sorted without all this extra taxpayers money if only May had done the decent thing and accepted the first court's decision.

Sorry, Cunco, but who is Haddon?

Hmm...Remainers aren't used to not getting their own way, so they have taken extra umbrage!

But Brexiters have become expert moaners - they've had 40 years to hone their skills!

So do some Remainers - some people are never satisfied!