(also, in the rather unlikely event that passing some watered-down-but-vaguely-sensible laws started a violent revolution in the US, I’d rather be on the side of the government, the money and the army than the side of the nutters, so I’m with the North. See also: what happened last time…)

Jim – have you every thought of reading the comments rather that spluttering some Spectator talking point you’ve half understood? I said ‘if you want to keep asking the question [on staying in the EU or not] they go ahead, I’m all for it’ which is the exact opposite of not trusting the people.

If you can deal with the U.S. immigration requirements, Texas or The Carolinas, Alabama, or Mississipi, or Oklahoma would be a breath of freedom, along with a dose of heat and humidity.

Of course, if Obama and his Socialists keep shoving legislation through, you might find yourself in the middle of an armed revolution. Better to be in Texas, though, than in Cali or NY for that.

no, the key was always the price that would be extracted for trying to leave the EU, not whether you would be forced to remain within the Union. Your examples are not exact either because the US was a single nation state in itself. No matter what the more emotional Eurosceptics say, the EU is not a nation state. It is a Union of 27 nations that have agreed to pool their sovereignty in certain areas of policy. That is all. We are not looking at the creation of a single nation state called Europe. Anyone saying otherwise is not being serious.

My point was that we joined the EEC/EU the moment Ted Heath signed the Treaty of Rome, not when the ECA was passed. All that did was ensure that EEC/EU law would be passed into British law, and its area of competences, it would be superior to British law. Repealing the ECA would, I guess, mean that future EU legislation would no longer be passed into British law. All existing legislation would still be on the statute books. It would achieve very little, therefore, and certainly would not mean we had withdrawn from the EU.

Although I think your use of the phrase casus belli is way overblown, your essential question is right. Is it worth staying in the EU? It is slightly amusing that the more emotional sceptics were scathing of Lisbon when I feel they should have been supportive because it provides the UK with a legal path out of the EU, if that is what we choose to do. Again, I don’t know what exactly is involved and what costs would be extracted from us. And I’m sure that there will be some fall out with our neighbours in terms of trade, reputation etc but that will always be overcome in the end. But even to suggest that there would be a risk of war in our leaving the EU is utter guff. I know talking about the EU is dry and tedious stuff but there really is no need to attempt to make it more interesting with that kind of fantastical nonsense.

Treaty obligations can always be repudiated, with a corresponding loss of reputation, trade relations, risk of war, etc of course, but if you can show sufficient casus belli for the action then the damage can be minimised.

Well, I lol’d. +1

Wasn’t sure who the hell to vote for next year, but am definitely going for UKIP with the aim of a hung parliament. As, I suspect, are a significant portion of the electorate.

Time to end the Punch & Judy Lab-Con political pendulum in Britain once and for all.

Vote for me and I’ll order it!

I’m not even sure what repealing the ECA would achieve. Would EU law still be the highest source of law in its relevant competences? Could our courts ignore EU law and not be liable to the costs of such actions, as laid in in the various treaties we have signed up to? It would be a bit of a mess. Best to follow the procedures as laid out in Lisbon.

Great simpleton, if even you can’t be trusted in referendums then I’m not too sure they are a great idea. But if you want to keep asking the question then go ahead, I’m all for it.

Curious what you mean by “can’t be trusted”? If those on the left think that democracy can’t he trusted because it occasionally returns answers you don’t like then would mind campaigning on that basis: an end to democracy so the great unwashed and unenlightened are disenfranchised?

Tim,

A great and comforting post- would anyone care to restart this petition? Probably get a slightly different answer to it now.

Of course, were assuming Cambo isn’t planning on a new constitutional settlement but that woul be…oh…

good post

Similarly, let’s have regular referenda on every aspect of our constitution and legal system. Nobody’s ever consulted me on whether we should have an FPTP voting system, whether ultimate sovereignty should be held by the Crown in Parliament, etc.

I’m 38 and I have never had the chance to vote whether we should be in or out of the EU. If the EU is such a good thing why should we not have regular referenda on whether we should be in or out? After all if the benefits are so obvious everyone will vote Yes won’t they?

Or are you afraid of the will of the people like the rest of the Europhiles?

I’ll put a note in the calendar for the children’s children etc to celebrate our 1,000th year of joining then in 2973.

—–

Great simpleton, if even you can’t be trusted in referendums then I’m not too sure they are a great idea. But if you want to keep asking the question then go ahead, I’m all for it.

We’ve only had one referendum on staying in and that was in 1975.

Why shouldn’t we have another one now? It will at least give some of us he chance to atone for our stupidity and ignorance.

In any case isn’t it a Treaty obligation, which of course states can simply tear up, but I’d rather they didn’t.

All we have to do is vote Ukip.

Lets do it!