National Non-Sectarianism
Referendums are not written in law, or are they set in stone or designated to time. For those who 're basing their vote on sovereignty: straightaway, I will clarify that already the United Kingdom is a sovereign state under international law. I will clarify also... that the Parliament in Westminster is the only lawmaking authority in this country. The 'EU ' is not a sovereign state and cannot rule over one.
The 'EU ' only has the powers that it 's gifted under the 'EU ' treaties. If you find judicial systems operating under a 'EU ' priority this is done so under our elected parliament 's instruction. A sovereign state has control. We have that control!
- - -
Here we have it... the final hours to an
…show more content…
then a cash-till worth of 'ol pennies dropped, 'Brexiters ' can only speak in sound bites, when it comes to something they know nothing about; out comes the faux pas idiom. "Independence was worth something in old pence." Ah, let 's go back to 1974, when our annual inflation rate was set at 17.2%... an era of inglorious fiscal depravity; be careful what you wish for. Why on this occasion, I opt to agree with the experts, not for the sound advice, but due to the premise their observations aren 't based on predictions; instead they 're based on uniformed logic there is a behemoth difference, uniformed logic informs us all that if to remove yourselves from influence you become 'increasingly ' isolated and less influential - this is not a positive outcome for a democratic state - see, no prediction required, or scaremongering.
Now, for argument sake why not call me an expert because the general view seems that I 'm going to be ignored anyhow; if a 'Leave ' vote wins I 'm in the clear; ' what-more, I 'm assuming I 'm entitled to an opinion after the excrement hits the fan after 24th June 2016 too; which happens to be the 16th anniversary of the death of my beloved nan; I can assure you 'll it 'll be worth a read. I 've already had threats having been on the 'Remain ' campaign trail in my local area and I live in a quintessential British town;
In the recent referendum that took place 14th September 2014. The people of Scotland were asked, “Should Scotland become an independent country?” They had the choice of ‘yes’ or ‘no’. The outcome was 2,001,926 (55.30%) no and 1,617,989 (44.70%) yes, which meant
In the past, referendums have been used to make some of the biggest constitutional changes in modern times. By definition, a referendum ‘is a general vote by the electorate on a single political question which has been referred to them for a direct decision’. The very name and use of 'referendums' is thought to have originated in the Swiss canton of Graubünden as early as the 16th century where, to this day, still use a form direct democracy to settle many issues. Traditionally, Referendums were rarely used in the UK but, in recent times, they have been gaining popularity by the public and have also been used more often to decide constitutional changes such as the 2016 EU Referendum and the 2014 Scottish Independence referendum. Since the end
In recent years, it has been increasingly apparent that European Parliament election turnout is on the decline, with just 35.6% of British citizens casting their vote in 2014. This is remarkably low, especially when viewed alongside other national decisions such as the referendum for Britain to leave the European Union, which received a staggering 72.2% turnout. However, this decline was not
The EU government comes before the government of your home country and the rules pertaining to it. So if the EU votes on a rule that will negatively impact your country or the economy there of, you will be forced to carry that rule out as a member of the EU. This takes away countries independence to make their own decisions and choices. This can be proven in the quote, “The Visegrad countries’ opposition to Brussels is different from Britain’s. They don't want to leave the union, they just refuse to abide by some of its rules…(Doc E).” Because of the large size of the EU, creating rules that are fair and pertain to all the counties is hard. The rules made are unfair to some parts of Europe and that can be represented by the following quote, “To Western Europeans, it is unsettling to see a new East-West divide emerging, threatening to fracture the the European Union itself (Doc E).” This quote is saying that because of the differences across the EU in many areas, it's becoming more likely that other countries will follow brexit and leave the
Moreover, even when looking at the people who did vote and the outcome which was achieved, referendums can never truly represent everyone and meet society’s needs as a whole. This is because although a majority of people voted a certain way, there is usually a very slim margin between this and the
With diminishing control of what happens in Britain, the British people decided it was best to vacate the union. The British were dealing with the laws given by the European members who were not living and experiencing the country themselves. To provide an example of a ghastly law given to the British people, they, as part of the European Union, were only allowed to catch 20% of the fish swimming in British territorial waters. What this meant was that tens of thousands of jobs were lost and they were not able to use one of the most significant resources given to them, as Britain is surrounded by ocean. Nigel Farage, Leader of the UK Independence Party, says that his fellow Englishmen, “effectively gave away the ability to look after one of our greatest resources to a bureaucracy based in Brussels.” Because of the way the government was set up, “Not only could the voters not change anything, but the institutes themselves are incapable of reform.” With an already maimed government, the European Union was creating more problems than it was solving. The British people had enough of giving up their rights as British citizens so the European Commission could tell them how to live. Therefore, with problems like those arising from the Union and with no hope to resolve them, Britain filed for secession and pulled out of the union
Throughout the history of European integration, the major UK parties have debated on all different aspects of Europe and the impacts of membership on Britain itself. From both these debates and party policies, it is clear to see that whilst there is generally a consensus over Europe, some issues have been a cause of disagreement among the major parties. In this essay I will analyse the policies and actions of the major UK parties that concern the EU and be able to conclude to what extent they agree over Europe.
There are many problems that could arise from the risk, like job loss, rise in prices, and major projects being frozen. Also, Better Together (a campaign that encourages “no votes”), argues that for obvious reasons, like sharing an island, staying a part of the United Kingdom would be better off for Scotland’s security, defense, and military. And not only that, but Scotland has been apart of the United Kingdom since 1707, and more people than not feel “equally Scottish and British.” Lastly, people feel the economic risk is very large; Better Together insists that despite a claimed “common-sense” deal, there will be no currency union with
There is no doubt that Brexit has caused a divide amongst the UK population, with 52 to 48 percent in favor of leaving. “Take back control” has been at the forefront of the Brexiter’s campaign. It is argued the UK Parliament has lost its power since joining the European Union (EU) in 1973.
Treaty of Lisbon has provided that Union should uphold the representative democracy and thus, the legislative power is divided between the European Commission (‘the Commission’) which represents the interest of the European Union as a whole, the Council of Ministers (‘the Council’) which represents the Member States’ interests or their citizens and the European Parliament which represents its citizens’ interests. However, only 34% turned out to vote at the last EU election which implied a growing dissent in Europe. The EU is described as “undemocratic from the start”. The gist of the question is whether the EU law-making process is sufficiently democratic. EU’s democratic performance should be judged on the basis of subsidiarity, representativeness, accountability and engagement.
Billions of pounds each year is spent on membership fees to the EU that can be spent on British public services and Infrastructure. Many strict rules and regulations need to be upheld by being in the EU and it “restricts” the UK from reaching their full potential. Furthermore, immigrants are allowed to freely move into England and are taking over the citizens’ work, thus decreasing job opportunities and wages for the British people.
From a macro scope it is evident the EU is strong promoter democracy and has deeply embedded democratic features, however, as Peterson and Shackleton point out that “understanding politics always begins with understanding institutions not at least the EU”. Taking this advice the essay will seek to examine the two main legislative bodies within the EU,
This paper will assess the claim that supremacy of EU law is still an evolving and debatable concept. To do this, I have divided this paper into four sections. The first section will discuss the establishment of supremacy in EU law through ECJ case law. The second section will explore the vibrant debate surrounding constitutional pluralism that has arisen since the early 1990s. The third section will examine the debate and impact of the codification of primacy in the early 2000s. The fourth section will examine the extent to which the principle of sovereignty has been accepted in three EU Member States, namely, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Poland.
However again this higher status can be seen as limited as is only assumed from a written obligation. Therefore to asses if supremacy is not the challenge to member state sovereignty that is appears to be, a close analysis of how the CJEU has dealt with the issue of supremacy of EU law in case law is needed, firstly looking at Van Gend en Loos which stated that the ‘EU was a new legal order permanently limiting the sovereign rights of the Member State’. This customs case helped establish the ‘relationships between the European Union and international law…to grantee that the rules of one system are complied with in another legal order ’ showing in practise that if on a national level EU law is breached CJEU will take supremacy and comply with ‘the integrity of the EU legal order’ . Further evaluation of the limits of the supremacy can be seen in the case of Costa V ENEL where ‘Italy had claimed that the EU treaties…had been transposed into the Italian legal order by national legislation, which could therefore be derogated by subsequent national legislation. The court rejected this presumption of the supremacy of national law by insisting on the supremacy of EU law’ . This case holds significance as it ‘is well-known since Costa V ENEL the court has affirmed the supremacy of Community law over national law’ strongly suggesting the continued existence of EU supremacy is not frequently
Britain withdrawing the European Union has always been an ongoing discussion, one of the many goals pursued by some British political parties, along with groups of people and individuals. Leaving the European Union is a right that every country that is part of the Treaty on the European Union has (Article 50 of the treaty), and this is what the Conservative political parties that proposed the referendum are triggering to impulse a faster withdraw from the EU; specially the new prime minister Theresa May. There had been another referendum in 1975, but it resulted in