EU Citizenship, Verhofstadt and actual EU law - or does this no longer matter?

I was startled to learn of the somewhat left-field proposal by Guy Verhofstadt (widely quoted in the media, but I include this BBC link here). Guy Verhofstadt, in case you have just crawled from out of some subterranean cavern, is actually an MEP from Belgium and is leader of one of the [minor] groupings in the European Parliament called "Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe", see his page here.

Mr Verhofstadt seems to be implying that a modification of "EU Law" can somehow be "fast-tracked" to allow "EU Citizenship" to be retained on an individual basis by UK citizens, when the UK leaves the EU, as seems to be likely a few years from now.

Now I do not doubt that that this may be a theoretical possibillity, but I think the likelihood of this or any other 'ad hoc' modification of EU Law being "fast tracked" is, ahem, illusory - it might happen after MANY years of tedious negotiation, but the idea such a change could be fast-tracked is just so much hot air, in my view.

To bring this whole nonsense proposal back down to some semblance of reality, here is what the official EU website says about the status of EU citizenship here:

What is EU citizenship? - Any person who holds the nationality of an EU country is automatically also an EU citizen. EU citizenship is additional to and does not replace national citizenship. It is for each EU country to lay down the conditions for the acquisition and loss of nationality of that country. - Citizenship of the Union is conferred directly on every EU citizen by the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU.

This seems to imply that the status of 'EU citizen' is entirely dependent on being a citizen of an EU member state. Whether it follows that if one is a citizen of a member state of the EU which ceases to be a member state of the EU that such a citizen might retain the status of EU citizen, is not at all clear, whatever Mr Verhofstadt may care to assert.

Frankly, though, I'd never heard of the "Treaty on the Functioning of the EU" before - as this is stated in the official website of the EU one must suppose it is a real thing and not just wishful thinking; have you heard of this before? By the way, if you want to 'blow your mind', you could always read this document and try to understand it - here. This is just a minor example of the "Alice in Wonderland" fantasy-land that the decision of the UK to leave the EU seeks to consign to unlamented history! My best reading of this fantasy is that it is a part, or apparently subsidiary to, the 'Lisbon Treaty'

I think what this whole [probably minor and best forgotten little nugget of an] episode reveals is just how much of a wake-up call the UK has delivered to the schlerotic EU and just how desperate it is to try and defuse this 'crisis' - that is to say, the decision of the UK electorate to leave this cosy (suffocating?) little club.

Natrually it is no surprise to learn that the UK political party, or the remnants of its following after recent elections, in both the UK and the EU, which participates in this frankly minor and inconsequential grouping, is the "Liberal Democrats" - as a true 'Liberal' and a true 'Democrat' I do not wish of course to try and and silence these people, rather do I celebrate the welcome diversity of views which they represent.

However, I would love to know the legal basis under which the so-called "associate citizenship" of Mr Verhosfstadt's fantasy-thinking might be conferred. It is either a naive declaration with little consensual acclaim (from the rest of the EU, or at least its two or three most influential members), or it is a sign of the increasing desperation of the EU hierarchy to try and respond, perforce feebly, to the existential crisis that the imminent departure of the UK from the EU represents. If EU citizenship does not depend on being a citizen of an EU member-state, on what does it depend? Is it proposed that any existing 'EU citizen' holds that status independently of a similar citizenship status of a member state of the EU? If this new status is to be conferred upon UK citizens, presumably it must apply also to citizens of all EU member states. If accepted as a valid EU treaty amendment (fast- or slow-tracked) it seems to imply that EU citizenship may be granted completely independently of any partuclar citizenship status of an EU member state. Is the EU, in Mr Verfofstadt's thinking, to abrogate to itself the power of granting citizenship of the EU to anyone, independently of whatever status they may or may not hold in any member (or former member) atate if the EU?

It strikes me that whilst the UK occasionally arrives at a pragmatic interpretation when responding to contemporary events, it would be highly unusual for an entity so hidebound by its own self-image as the EU to do likewise. Please wake me up when the dysfunctional EU actually bucks it historic reputation and shows it is capable of genuine change, not the kind of desperate gesture politics that Mr. Verhofstadt seems to be peddling.

Why it became necessary for the UK to vote to leave the EU

An article in this week's Spectator magazine has crystalised many of my reasons for voting as I did in our referendum on EU membership held on 23rd June last.

Dan Hannan (still an MEP), for a former committed "Europhile" such as me, brilliantly nails the lies and deceptions at the heart of the so-called "EU project". I voted Leave on 23rd June and have become more certain since then that it was the correct choice. For me this has got NOTHING to do with 'immigration', despite those who voted Remain presumptuously telling everyone who voted Leave that this was the reason we voted the way we did. Frankly I think this illustrates perfectly the sad beggar-thy-neighbour mindset of many (if I hope not most) Remain voters.

Sovereignty is not some esoteric concept, it is the basic choice as to how we make our laws and who is competent to adjudicate on them.

What really changed my mind about the "virtues" of the EU (which are many) is the callous way it has treated Greece, in the name of "EU solidarity"; Greece is not entirely innocent of course, it is not as straightforward as that, but what its treatment does illustrate is that a supranational body, the EU, is prepared to ride roughshod over the democratically elected government of a small and relatively "unimportant" member state, not for any noble reason, but simply to protect the financial institutions of its most powerful member state, Germany. To be frank, it is a moral outrage. I am equally disgusted by the petty arguments of some of my former "friends" who think the GBP exchange rate is sufficient reason to sell the soul of our country, the UK. I loathe almost everything Gordon Brown ever did as Chancellor and Prime Minister, but the one good thing he ever did was to make it impossible for the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, to take the UK into the cesspit of the poorly-designed Euro, a continuing shambles, which tries to align the economies of vastly different countries, without the real and necessary mechanisms which make a 'currency union' successful, for example those which allow the US to have a common currency across 50 diverse economies, or the UK to have a similar common currency across its four component parts (and the separate regions of those four component parts).

Those mechanisms involve not just "benefits", but "obligations", which means sticking to certain basic rules - which means that countries within the Eurozone which flout the laid-down budgetary deficit rules regularly, rather than exceptionally, need to understand they cannot continue along this path if the currency union is to have any meaning and achieve longevity. This is however merely a symptom of the malaise at the heart of the EU. It seems that certain larger member states think they can flout fiscal and other rules, simply because they are large and economically significant, or powerful politically, whereas smaller states must be punished severely if they step out of line. This is not "democracy". The UK is undoubtedly a "more significant" country economically and politically, along with 3-5 other EU member states, but above all we are a democracy, and have been for quite a long time, and we think we believe in that old-fashioned concept called "fair play", not just "might is right". If I believed that true "reform" of the EU was possible I would have been amongst the first to have argued that the UK should remain a member, but empirical evidence over many years has demonstrated that this is not possible. We can and must leave the EU, and that is what we voted for on 23rd June, to ensure our democratic future as a free and successful economy, not as a vassal member state of the increasingly undemocratic entity that the EU has developed into. Other EU member states, including some if not all of the more powerful ones, have stated repeatedly that they wanted the UK to remain a member of the EU, but have consistently shown that they are unwilling to, or incapable of, making the "reforms" necessary for a true democracy such as the UK to remain. 23rd June 2016 was "crunch time" and the bluffs with which the EU has endeavoured to fob us off for many years have lost their power that day. Personally I very much regret that this decision has been made necessary. I believe that a brighter future for the UK is possible outside what has become the straightjacket of the EU. I wish the EU a bright and successful future too, of course, but am much less sanguine about that.

EU Referendum results - the UK votes to leave the EU

Somewhat surprisingly, the EU Referendum in the UK yesterday, 23rd June 2016, has resulted in a narrow but decisive vote to 'Leave'. Although this is the result I favoured, so am pleased, it has still somewhat surprised me. In due course, quite possibly after a change in leadership of the Conservative Party, as the Prime Minister David Cameron announced this morning that he plans to step down as Leader and therefore as Prime Minister in the expectation that a new Conservative Party leader will be in place for the Autumn Conservative Party conference, to be held this year between 2-5 October in Birmingham, the country's departure from the EU will formally be triggered under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which generally provides for a 2-year period for negotiations by a country wishing to leave, although this period may be extended by mutual agreement.

Full details of the results are available via the BBC EU Referendum microsite here - as mentioned above, the overall result was quite narrow (Leave - 51.9%; Remain - 48.1%) on a turnout of 72.2%.

Within the UK as a whole, the following regional results were declared:

England and Wales both voted to 'Leave':
- England (Leave - 53.4%; Remain - 46.6%; Turnout - 73%)
- Wales (Leave - 52.5%; Remain - 47.5%; Turnout - 71.7%)

Scotland and Northern Ireland both voted to 'Remain':
- Scotland (Leave - 38%; Remain - 62%; Turnout - 67.2%)
- Northern Ireland (Leave - 44.2%; Remain - 55.8%; Turnout - 62.9%)

The only other matter of particular interest is that within England, much of London voted to 'Remain', along with Scotland and Northern Ireland this was insufficient to outweigh the 'Leave' majorities in much of the rest of England and in Wales. In some parts of London, the results were fairly close, but in other boroughs 'Remain' had considerably more votes than 'Leave'

You can find more detailed infrmation about specific areas in the BBC microsite linked above.

It will take a little while to see how this development is going to play out in various ways over the next couple of years. I am cautiously optimistic, overall.

The EU Referendum in the context of Scotland's place in the UK

In my most recent article on the EU Referendum, just over a week ago ("Thoughts on the Pound and the Stockmarkets ahead of the EU Referendum" - link here), I mentioned at the end that I would write about it in the context of Scotland within the UK "hopefully in the next day or so". This is that article.

The reason this article has been delayed for longer than I had originally planned is largely because of personal circumstances (my own travel arrangements and having my partner here for several days after a month apart whilst I was in Spain at my home there), but an additional couple of days were added to the delay because of the shocking incident in which an MP was murdered on the street close by her constituency office. I am not going to comment on what may have motivated the perpetrator - there has been enough of that, much of it hysterical and intemperate, in the media and so-called "social media". The only comment I would make is that the rush to judgement by some has, curiously, overlooked the bile directed at this lady prior to her killing by supposed supporters of the Labour Party, or at least the part of it that is now in charge of its destiny - here is a link to a Tweet in which is embedded some of this bile: https://twitter.com/EnemyWithinn/status/743818860663549952. There are unpleasant people in all political parties of course, and some with no connection to any political party, but a bit of calmness and, above all, objectivity is badly needed.

Anyway, onto the main subject of this article. As I indicated in my last article, referenced above, it was my intention to vote 'Leave', but that article was written whilst I was still in Spain. Since then I have returned back to the UK and waiting for me was my postal vote ballot paper and associated documents (explanatory notes, return envelope, etc) and I mailed off my ballot paper last Monday, having put my 'X' in the 'Leave' box as I earlier suggested I would. I'm not going to rehash all the points I made in my earlier article - I have formed a view, for good or ill, with which some will agree and some will disagree. I believe in a democratic system and will be happy (more or less) to accept the result in due course, whatever it is. Obviously I shall be happier if 'Leave' prevails, preferably by a comfortable margin, but will accept with good grace the decision if it goes the other way to 'Remain', hopefully also with a comfortable margin.

In the context of Scotland, it is the announced intention of the Scottish Government, currently led by the Scottish National Party (SNP), to press for another 'Independence Referendum', should Scotland vote to 'Remain' next week, but the rest of the UK vote to 'Leave'. The last referendum was held in September 2014 and the result was that a comfortable majority of Scots wished to remain within the UK, a decision that pleased me greatly. I wish Scotland to remain in the UK - I am quite comfortable describing myself as British and Scottish, or Scottish and British if you prefer it that way. Many of my friends from other parts of the UK are happy to consider themselves British too, but in addition English, Welsh or Northern Irish as is appropriate - this all seems very normal to me. I have never felt anything other than 'at home' when living in or visiting all parts of the UK and the banter about 'Jocks' and kilts has almost always been completely good-natured. Most from other parts of the UK who live in or visit Scotland feel the same way, in my experience, although it is undeniable that there have been lapses from this good-neigbourliness by a few of my fellow Scots on occasion, generally supporters of the aims of the SNP sadly. Although I would in general have been in favour of voting 'Leave' in the upcoming EU Referendum in any case (but I am not a fanatic about it - I was until a few years ago a strong supporter of UK membership of the EEC/EU, but have gradually changed my views to some extent), it is certainly in my view wise to do my little bit to try and ensure that the margin between how the rest of the UK decides to vote next week and how people here in Scotland decide to vote is not significant, as the opinion polls might lead one to believe may be the case. Opinion polls have seemed to show that there is stronger support for 'Remain' here in Scotland than in the rest of the UK. We won't know how accurate these polls were and are until the 'morning after the night before' (so to say) of the vote on 23rd June.

In the two urban settlements here that I have most recently visited (Nairn, where I live, and Inverness, which is only about 15 miles distant) I have no clear feel for current local sentiment, although those I have spoken to seem to favour 'Leave' and it is the case, which to be honest I find quite bizarre and perplexing, that the only posters I have seen on public display (on lamp-posts and the like) are those favouring 'Vote Leave'; I have not observed any at all which advocate 'Remain' or 'In', in either Inverness or Nairn. As this part of Scotland is now largely represented at both Westminster and Holyrood by SNP MPs and MSPs, who presumably favour 'Remain' in accordance with that Party's policy position, there seems to be a disconnect of some kind. Either the opinion polls are badly wrong or SNP supporters have developed a reticence in displaying their views that certainly never existed in the run-up to the Scottish Referendum in September 2014. Who knows what the truth is, but we will all know overnight next Thursday/Friday how the country (the UK) has voted overall and how the various component parts of it have voted too. It promises to be an interesting week, but I hope it will be reasonably calm and that there will be no more violence of the appalling kind that happened in Birstall, West Yorkshire a few days ago.

Thoughts on the Pound and the Stockmarkets ahead of the EU Referendum

Firstly, the Pound FEX rates simply aren't "collapsing" either against the USD or the EUR in the way ‪the "Remain" side‬ said they would & according them "are"; the stockmarket is reasonably OK too with normal ups/downs. There are lots of economic problems in the world, of course, but my view is that the UK is performing tolerably well and certainly pretty favorably compared to our friends in the Eurozone. Check for yourself. Discount the "propaganda" which purports to tell you a Leave vote will result in disaster, being spewed out incessantly by "Remain".

The markets do not lie - the markets are ultimately interested in only one thing, ensuring that the "bets" made by market players result in net positive results for them (i.e. "profits").

The USD is being bolstered by the recent positive effects of fracking in the US for that country's domestic energy availability, the EUR is being maintained at a reasonably stable level only by the "magic"/skill of the current President of the ECB, Mario Draghi; it certainly isn't happening because of the underlying strength of most of the Eurozone economies, as even some of its major economies (Italy, Spain and France for example) are perilously close to disaster, even if a couple are perhaps headed more or less in the right direction.

However you plan to vote in the EU referendum being held in the UK on 23rd June, don't be scared into a choice to Remain based on this highly prejudiced (aka 'false') economic data. If Remain is your choice, fine, but don't pretend that whether we remain or ‪Leave‬ will result in "economic disaster" either way. As someone who broadly favours ‪Leave‬, I make no claims of "disaster" flowing from a decision to remain, if that's what happens. My view is that after a relatively brief negative "glitch" should we ‪decide to Leave‬, that in the longer term the UK, and the rest of the EU if it learns the correct lessons, will benefit.

My focus in the EU referendum has got little or nothing to do with "immigration", what it does have to do with is the democratic deficit which increasingly exists as a result of our EU membership, where few if any know the names of any of their local regional MEPs, who in any case have little real power - that resides in the European Commission, who aren't elected by anyone. People will refute that by saying it is the European Council (heads of government and ministers in different functions from all the EU member states - all "elected") which ultimately decides, which is partially true, but the reality is that it is the European Commission which sets the agenda for future changes, And anyone who understands anything about organisational dymanics knows it is those who control the agenda that controls the organisation, just as it is those who write the minutes of meetings in any organisation, if not properly monitored and corrected when they make a "mistake", who control what goes into the agenda for future meetings - that is the European Commission in the case of the EU. The European Parliament, where MEPs sit, is not able to introduce any new legislation, only debate what is put forward to it by the European Commission. Don't believe me? Well, in that case I suggest you find out how the protectionist cartel that is the EU really operates. It talks about being a free trade area, which it is internally, but it erects barriers against the outside world to protect inefficient EU domestc producers against more efficient external producers - this affects not only food prices paid by EU consumers, but most other aspects of the EU economy. It is unfortunately no accident that the EU is the poorest performing part of the world in economic terms (I really don't count Antarctica - it survives only as a result of massive state subsidies from those countries which maintain research bases there). For these and some other reasons I shall be voting Leave on 23rd June.

One of these additional reasons has to do with how the result could potentially affect the position of Scotland within the UK, to which I am very strongly committed. As a subsequent article will show, hopefully in the next day or so, this is yet another reason why I shall be voting Leave.

For Europe, Against the EU

The first and most important thing to bear in mind is that Europe is not the EU and the EU is not Europe - Europe is a lot wider than the restrictive 'corset'/'straitjacket' of the EU.

For Europe, Against the EU. It’s not a contradiction in terms. The EU is a deadweight around the neck of this exciting continent, limiting the power of its peoples and submitting its parliaments to petty bureaucracy and diktat. Just ask Italy and Greece! The video embedded below argues that the referendum is an opportunity for the British public to strike out against the risk-averse, technocratic elites of Brussels and Whitehall, and an opportunity to inspire publics across Europe to do the same.

Watch, share and vote Leave on 23 June. Unless you prefer to remain in the gilded cage that is the EU, of course - gilded it may be (for some, at least), but it is still a cage.

Brexit the Movie - essential viewing before you vote in the Referendum on 23rd June

Watch this in full and then decide if you want the ‪#‎UK‬ to remain in the ‪#‎EU‬ - or not:


If you decide, after watching this film (1 hour 11 minutes in length), then at least you won't be walking into the decision completely blind - and will have no excuse for complaint afterwards if we do vote to 'remain' in the EU and things go belly-up, as I fear greatly they will. It'll be too late then to whine "but I didn't realise".

PS/ Just to be clear, I am a supporter of neither UKIP nor its leader Nigel Farage, although he appears in this film, but then so do many others of great reputation and stature.

UK and EU; should we stay or should we go (*)

(* - with a hat-tip to 'The Clash')

Tomorrow 5th May we will be having elections of one kind or another in every part of the UK - regional parliamentary or assembly elections in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and local elections in England, plus of course the mayoral election in London, not forgetting also a bumper crop of elections to select 41 Police & Crime Commissioners across England and Wales - and by Friday we will know what the immediate fallout is. The BBC has a dedicated 'homepage' for all of these elections here. I've written several blog articles recently about the Scottish parliamentary elections in my immediate area; please scroll down if you wish to refresh your memory.

However, not much more than a month from now, the UK will hold a referendum which is arguably at least as important if not more; whether to remain a member of the European Union, or not. There are two 'official' campaign groups, supporting the 'remain' and 'leave' sides respectively and you can visit their website here (for 'remain') and here (for 'leave').

Over coming weeks in the run-up to the referendum, I shall undoubtedly be writing more on this topic in this blog, but meantime I have started the ball rolling by writing brief news updates in my own personal website here in the 'homepage', with a slightly more detailed (but also completely neutral) brief section in its dedicated EU page here (nb/ this page has existed in my personal website more or less since I began the website in its current form in 2002). In that latter page I have included a couple of relevant links which I repeat here, because they will undoubtedly be mentioned regularly in passing in media reporting as the referendum date of 23rd June 2016 draws closer:
- Lisbon Treaty Article 50;
- HM Government official EU Referendum website.

The referendum question will be:
"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"

The only other remark I wish to make at this stage is that whilst HM Government's official position is to recommend that the UK remains a member of the EU and its website linked to above reflects this, the level of 'objectivity' of the arguments advanced for this position is hotly disputed by some and I myself tend to share some of that scepticism, although I have not yet made up my mind finally how I will vote.

24-hour countdown begins for my departure for Spain

I have just updated the header message at the top of my blog in anticipation of my departure tomorrow, almost exactly 24 hours from now, for about three months in Spain, to escape the tail end of the British winter and enjoy the early Spring-like weather in Murcia over coming weeks.

I'll be blogging here as usual during my time in Spain of course, at least after the next few days when I get myself settled in to the house there (stock the refrigerator, put out garden furniture, etc).

Then it'll be back to the splendid long daylight hours in the north of Scotland in mid-May for the summer.

¡Hasta Luego!

Police State Britain - 'stun gun' use described as 'wicked' by a judge in court

The use of a device of a similar kind to that used by the police has been described as wicked by a High Court judge in Edinburgh. Habitual criminal Steven Burns was told by Lord Clarke that he had committed:

"... a wicked, unprovoked and vicious attack on an innocent member of the public. "The fact you initiated this attack by the use of a stun gun made it all the more sinister. It was also cowardly. "Your criminal record is appalling and conveys to my eyes a man who has absolutely no respect for the law and simply refuses to learn his lawless conduct must stop."

I suppose context is everything, but the fact that Burns's victim, Craig Samuel, has been severely injured and permanently disfigured whilst using a device 'of a much lower strength than used by law enforcement authorities' will have little effect on plans to deploy these vicious devices amongst those, in theory, employed to protect the public (and not simply used by the State as a means of controlling and coercing citizens to its will, as seems increasingly to be the case).

Barroso's grasp of elementary psychology is pretty mediocre

José Manuel Barroso is urging the UK not to hold a referendum on any treaty signed at the imminent EU summit:

"Britain is the country that exported Parliamentary democracy to the world. Do the British people consider Parliament the backdoor? "Do the British people who killed their king to protect the rights of Parliament consider it the back door? "Is that the respect some people show their Parliament , maybe the greatest Parliament in the world? I don't consider Parliament the back door."

All of this is true, but it has been shown on subsequent occasions that the British, when roused, will do some pretty amazing things, against all the odds, when they perceive themselves threatened; we can be amazingly stubborn when pushed too hard. Barroso's attempt at the smarmiest form of flattery is wasted on me and I hope very sincerely on both Blair and Brown. Even for someone as pro-EU as me, albeit opposed to our ratification of the EU Constitutional Treaty as originally agreed (as the development of my views is illustrated by a few of the posts I have written, here and here and here) and who would have voted against it if a referendum had been held (just as a majority of French and Dutch voters chose to do in their referenda), I feel pretty irritated that some jumped-up appointed EU official (unelected by anyone) should presume to tell the UK how it should deal with its own democratic institutions and its own future. I remain basically pro-EU, but Barroso needs to butt out of our internal affairs and not get 'ideas above his station'! We'll deal with our own government in due course if they make the wrong decision (and agree to Merkel/Sarkozy's attempted stitch-up) and choose not to allow the British people a referendum to ratify what they do if they allow themselves to be rail-roaded this weekend.