4 ms·

> Perhaps, but if anything the UK's own government and press were major offenders in this regard. It's quite possible that this behaviour by the UK political c

by bograt 8y ago

> Perhaps, but if anything the UK's own government and press were major offenders in this regard. It's quite possible that this behaviour by the UK political classes is what hastened to movement towards Brexit. I personally think that many people in the UK were aware of the behaviour, by both major parties, of using the EU to impose laws for which they lacked democratic support technocratically. Since there was no electable party that stood in contrast to this, the electorate took its opportunity by evicting the EU instead. Seen in this light, Brexit is as much a reflection of a failure of national politics, as it is of continental politics. The mantra 'taking back control' of many Brexit supporters is perhaps better seen as citizens wanting to stop their government from acting in ways they don't vote for, than as the government taking back control from the EU. The dissembling (as I see it) of politicians from across the EU on this law (and others before it) indicates that this is not a problem that is restricted to the UK.

simonh 8y ago
Brexit was about immigration. Nothing else comes close. I think you're right that this was in the mix, but so were a hundred other factors that might have got raised here or there, but they're all dwarfed by immigration. Britain more than any other member has managed to get exclusion clauses from any EU regulations or rules we didn't want, so the argument that we couldn't do anything about rules imposed by Brussels is obviously untrue. We opted out of stuff all the time, it was routine. The irony is that if we end up in a soft Brexit situation with an open trade deal with the EU, we won't be able to negotiate any opt-outs anymore because we won't have any representation in Brussels. We'll have to take everything Brussels serves up, or crash out hard.
- ben_w 8y ago
  Not to deny that immigration was a major part, but the belief is more important than reality for both that and sovereignty. Yes, the UK had a great deal with loads of opt-outs, but that didn’t stop the papers blaming the EU for everything — including immigration, which was mostly non-EU.

by bograt 8y ago

simonh 8y ago

Brexit was about immigration. Nothing else comes close. I think you're right that this was in the mix, but so were a hundred other factors that might have got raised here or there, but they're all dwarfed by immigration. Britain more than any other member has managed to get exclusion clauses from any EU regulations or rules we didn't want, so the argument that we couldn't do anything about rules imposed by Brussels is obviously untrue. We opted out of stuff all the time, it was routine. The irony is that if we end up in a soft Brexit situation with an open trade deal with the EU, we won't be able to negotiate any opt-outs anymore because we won't have any representation in Brussels. We'll have to take everything Brussels serves up, or crash out hard.

ben_w 8y ago
Not to deny that immigration was a major part, but the belief is more important than reality for both that and sovereignty. Yes, the UK had a great deal with loads of opt-outs, but that didn’t stop the papers blaming the EU for everything — including immigration, which was mostly non-EU.