UKIP with adverbs

The “Open Europe” boys apparently think that giving the EU a legal personality would be a huge transfer of powers from the UK to “Brussels”. Legal personality, essentially, means that the EU would be allowed to sign cheques – or rather that it could sign for the member states.

Well, that sounds like a big transfer of powers, no? The EU could sign away the spoons and we’d know nothing of it! Sadly, as always with Eurosceptics, there is a lot of discourse abuse here. The EU is a law-governed entity. That is to say, whether it could sign something is governed by its own decision-making procedures. Having legal personality would not give the Commission, or whatever, more power to make decisions, as it is subject to its own procedures. The only situation where “Britain” would lose powers here would be if we were to assent to something (if it was this important, it would presumably be subject to unanimity) and then decide to refuse our signature, after ratifying it!

Why, in this wild scenario, would we care? Wouldn’t we be leaving anyway? Enough of “Open Europe”, anyway. How does this stuff differ in quality from, say, David Noakes?

2 thoughts on “UKIP with adverbs

  1. C’mon Alex, that is particularly weak.
    You know as well as I do this isn’t a matter of signing checks or giving away spoons, and you belittle the institutions you seem to support by suggesting so.
    By giving the EU a legal entity, this measure will allow the EU to operate as an individual body in all sorts of areas, including the 56 new areas of QMV, without recourse to unanimity.

    Oh yes and the adverbs, since when did supporters of the project ever have a monopoly on the use of the English language? Your title makes you look like an arrogant buffon. Not something that is unusual amongst those who support the post-democratic concept of elite governance but suprising in you.

  2. I have nothing against QMV. The fact remains that whatever the legal personality, the EU’s decisions are governed by its internal decision-making procedure. How often have member states agreed to something at every level, ratified, but refused to sign individually? Head on block: never.

Comments are closed.