Maria Kendrick, Visiting Lecturer and PhD Candidate at King’s College London
On 15 September 2015, when writing on Matrix Chambers’ EU Law blog site eutopia law, (available here) the EU Referendum Bill was passing through the legislative process of the House of Commons. Its legal importance extends not only to its amendments but to the apparent revelation of the sovereignty paradox: ‘both politicians and lawyers alike are citing the preservation of Parliamentary sovereignty as the reason for supporting Brexit whilst at the same time backing the use of a referendum because of a lack of legitimacy in the parliamentary system.’In essence, the use of a referendum is being advocated to circumvent the Parliamentary system in order to provide the opportunity to vote to leave the European Union and restore sovereignty to our national Parliament. Since then, events – but notably not motivations – have progressed. Continue reading
by Anne Wesemann LLM European Union Law, PhD candidate (European Union Law) – University of Sussex; Lecturer in Law – The Open University
In the coming referendum on the UK’s membership to the EU, an undecided electorate will struggle to form an opinion. Both campaigns are doing a great job at confusing opinions with facts, claiming one official can speak for a whole nation, and both are taking a more or less educated guess regarding consequences for the UK.
We have read a lot about the views of members of the government, officials or former cabinet ministers. What is missing from the debate is an assessment of the consequences for the European Union. How do the then remaining members of the Union view the prospect of the UK’s exit? Who would be the real big loser, should Brexit become reality? Can it even have an impact on the relations to the USA? Continue reading
Luca Carmosino, LLB student, King’s College London
In 2012, Cohen-Bendit MEP stated that the UK will have to decide whether it stays in the EU or whether it becomes the 51st United States’ State. This quote summarises most of the argument as it illustrates the fact that full independence is, potentially, no longer a solution for the UK. However, I will not restrict my analysis to a citation!
In 1975, the United Kingdom (UK) held a referendum on the (then) European Economic Community (EEC) membership: 67.2% voted in favour. The wind -since then- has apparently changed with the UK constantly ‘threatening’ the European Union (EU) to propose an in-out referendum. This post makes a case for the UK staying in the EU. The first argument will relate to domestic politics. Indeed, the main reason why the UK domestic political parties focus so much on ‘Brexit’ is because it attracts votes by blaming the EU for the politically sensitive issues, namely, immigration, unemployment and many more. Secondly, following the political analysis, an economic perspective is essential. Indeed, the UK largely benefits from the EU as a commercial partner. The third and final part of this post discusses and portrays the globalised context in which we live and argues that the UK is bound by the EU and that political and economic integration is essential in light of the globalisation effect.
Niall Coghlan, BPTC Student at City University London
9 May is Europe Day. This Europe Day, Senate House hosted a conference with the strikingly un-European title ‘BRITAIN ALONE’. The all-star attendee list, with representatives from most major EU law firms and universities, European institutions and governmental departments, was eclipsed only by the eminence of the four panels. These were successively chaired by the Supreme Court’s Lord Reed; Henderson Chambers’ Sir Alan Dashwood QC; former Advocate General Sir Francis Jacobs; and the conference convenor, Professor Takis Tridimas.
Fourteen speeches on topics ranging from the constitution through finance to social policy resulted. What follows is a digest of those speeches.