31 October, 2019

EU Commission shuns UK as an Island of Lepers. Why?

For the whole of this century European Commission chiefs have been trying to stop Europeans asking the most vital, existential question!
Brexit, says EU Commission President Juncker, is Europe’s biggest issue! But he won’t come to Britain.
The Commission tactic: No debates on EU’s fundamental faults with Britain!
In the last two decades amidst the greatest political crises of Europe, Commission Presidents have made perhaps three or four visits to Britain. Most were semi-secret and not open to the public.
Hence Commission presidents Juncker and predecessor Barroso have held no top-level debates with the British public this century!
How many trips to UK? The Commission refuses to give any figures at all. Even less will it compare it with Mr Juncker’s incessant visits to France, Germany, Italy, Greece and everywhere else around the globe.
Great Destroyer
President Juncker has toured and spoken in Germany’s provincial parliaments. From the Saarland regional parliament, he denounced one British prime minister, who questioned Mr Juncker’s legitimacy, as a ‘great destroyer of modern times‘. That’s tough company if it includes Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Osama bin Laden and al Baghdadi of the jihadi Islamic State.
Mr Junker has lectured Belgium’s Flemish and Walloon parliaments with his doom-laden message of Europe’s inevitable decline. He has spoken to the tiny German-speaking community of Belgium.
The British Mother of Parliaments he treats with disdain. Not a word uttered there or any other association, club or assembly. For the Scots he is silent. For the Welsh he is wanting. For the Northern Irish he is aloof.
Across Britain, pro-Europeans march in their myriads. From Hyde Park Corner (legendary bastion of free speech) to the Houses of Parliament, they raise their voices. They wave their European flags. Monsieur Juncker is missing and mute. Bizarre conduct for someone who announced that he was changing the Commission’s impartial status in the treaties to become the first “political Commission”.
‘The Commission is not responsible for Brexit,’ Mr Juncker said on 24 October. He was speaking at the Brussels-based think tank, the European Policy Centre in what he billed as his last speech.
He said that, if UK media tells its public for 46 years that the UK is in EU only for the market — and the rest is bullshit — the referendum result should be no surprise.
Is this true?

“Brexit is a shame and is the most difficult problem we have ever had to face. I do not think that Brexit is in the interest of the Britain, nor in the interest of the European Union. All of us – we will pay the price,” Mr Juncker said.
Why then do Commission presidents refuse to step on UK soil? Wouldn’t coming and offering more money help morale? Money and markets seem available by the bucketload for other Member States via the €440 Billion Juncker Plan.
Real Problem
Something more serious is the core problem, not economics. The Presidents of the European Commission have been avoiding any real dialogue with the United Kingdom. They treat the UK as an Island of Lepers!
They refuse to cross the Channel. Why? Is UK contaminated? No, but it has a contagion. It is called:
D E M O C R A C Y.
Do European Commission presidents fear Hyde Park Corner? Or is it the House of Commons and British Common Law? British Common Law has upheld the nation’s democratic heritage together together for 3000 years — long before Romans ever thought of coming.
This diagnosis should come as no surprise to Brussels. The British have been complaining about the Democratic Deficit since 1977.
The complaints came from pro-Europe activists, not the sceptics.
Prof David Marquand used the term Democratic Deficit in his 1979 book on the European Parliament. The Political clique, the new Politburo, refused to heed.
Thus began the long, long road that led to Brexit. See YouTube Brexit: Cause & Solution

Democracy is essentially about HONEST GOVERNANCE. That applies to all institutions and how they conduct themselves.
Honesty has been singularly lacking for decades. Without honesty and openness democracy’s fuel tank is filled with sand. The motor blocks. That is what has happened today.

Democracy Postponed
The Deficit is not just about lack of ‘one elector, one vote‘ of MEPs. That elementary requirement for parliament democracy has NEVER been implemented in 70 years! Don’t hold your breath. There should be one set of election rules for Europe, not 28.
Schuman and Europe’s Founding Fathers said that the Consultative Committees should have a role comparable to the Council of Ministers. They must elect their own representatives of organised civil society. They would act as a sort of Europe-wide Think Tank. Thus representatives would be able to give in-depth understanding of the needs and potential of Europe’s
  • workers,
  • industries,
  • consumers and
  • regions.
Never happened. Elitist politicians decide on who can be members of these ‘democratic‘ bodies! On a temporary basis, of course.
The Founding Fathers said that Ministers should hold open Council meetings. What was said would be reported on TV and in the press. Today’s politicians refuse.
They now drive Europe further into secret government.
They created a super-secret European Council! The EU and its misbegotten currency the euro is run by the EuroGroup, an “institution” that appears nowhere in the treaties!
Deficit Origins
The Community system, announced by Robert Schuman on 9 May 1950, provided the most democratic proposal ever.
It worked.
He was inspired by his study of the British and American constitutions, themselves based, as he wrote, on biblical principles of justice. Instead of incessant wars that had plagued Europe for more than 2000 years, Europe had for the first time lasting peace and prosperity.
Many Britons wanted to join. Others suspected the Continentals were untrustworthy.
Europe’s Customs Union and Single Market flourished. Hit by labour unrest, UK had declined into a parlous economic state. UK was known as the ‘Sick Man of Europe‘. Britons learned the lesson that a democratic Customs Union was the way to prosper.
But British governments had left it two decades late to join. Since 1945 de Gaulle fomented a revolution to overturn the French Constitution. He seized power in France in 1958. France remained under the autocratic control of the Gaullists. They were intent on wrecking and destroying the Community’s democratic base while making sure France by political pressure had the lion’s share of the Community budget.
The UK arrived when the Community system was palpably in a major crisis of trust. The thirty glorious years of the postwar economic miracle were faltering because autocracy always damages the economy as well.
The Democratic Deficit can more properly be traced from 1973, the year UK joined the European Communities. To outsiders the damage was obvious. The British Labour Party was so disgusted at the way the Europe’s Parliament was treated under de Gaulle, and was still being treated, that they BOYCOTTED it!
How did it happen? How did a whole parliament, proposed by Schuman’s government in 1948, become a shipwreck?
The French autocrat, Charles de Gaulle, president from 1958-69, forced an agreement on the then politically weaker Germany, led by Konrad Adenauer. All the instruments of democracy were suspended. De Gaulle forbade European elections to the Parliamentary Assembly. All democratic institutions were frozen or “chloroformed” according to his scheme.
De Gaulle’s minions decided European policies behind the closed doors of the Council of Ministers. Power politics reigned. The Council and even the Commission consigned parliamentary Amendments on legislation to the dustbin without being read. The Consultative Committees were never elected. Gaullist graft ensured French farmers benefitted from his corrupt and bloated Common Agricultural Policy that cost two-thirds of the Community budget.
So, post-de Gaulle, did European politicians reverse the democratic deficit and stop having secret meetings? Did they have proper elections? Did they have budget accountability?
Not at all. Worse was to come. They grafted Gaullist graft into their system. They turned it into a secretive party political oligarchy.
The Acid Litmus Test
Today Europe is faced with a Europe divided between the neo-Gaullists who have absorbed anti-British attitudes and those who understand that open, democratic, Community principles brought Europe’s peace, prosperity and the freed the nations behind the Iron Curtain. Others are just confused about European governance.
Unhappily the confused seem to be in the majority when Europe’s future was discussed in 2001. Elitist authors of a new treaty failed to convince the public. It rejected Constitutional Treaty and its later identical twin, the Lisbon Treaty. Instead of insisting on Human Rights politicians tried to subvert them. The public smelt the fish.
Elitist projects are built on constitutional errors, lack of honesty and humility. Robert Schuman warned such schemes would lead to unrealisable utopias.
Human Rights Violations
Contrast that with Europe’s birth. The early Community treaties had to be examined by the Council of Europe, guardian of the Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Elitist politicians knew they could not succeed under this scrutiny.
How can we Litmus test the anti-democratic acidity of the present politicians?
They abandoned any Human Rights checks on treaties.
They refused to recognise the public’s right to a referendum. If the public got the ‘wrong’ answer, the Commission told the Council the States must vote again.
  • Maastricht 1992 Denmark.
  • Nice 2001 Ireland.
  • Euro 2000 Denmark.
  • 2003 Sweden.
  • Constitutional Treaty 2005 France & The Netherlands
  • Lisbon treaty 2008 Ireland.
  • Greek Bailout 2015.
  • Ukraine Association 2016 NL
The UK was refused any referendum on any treaty since 1975. UK has not confirmed by Referendum the Lisbon Treaty (and its Article 50). The Brexit Referendum of 2016 based on Article 50 is illegal UNLESS Britons first agree by Referendum to this treaty!
The people are not subject to the Lisbon Treaty because it was imposed by Parliament contrary to Government promises that a Referendum would be held on the Treaty itself before Article 50 could be used. The Lisbon Treaty (then called the Constitutional Treaty) was rejected by France and the Netherlands and others. Parliament is subject to the voice of the people in legitimate referendums.
Now track the Commission. See what they are up to. See if and how they engage in democratic reform and debate with the public. For example, Britain.
The presidents of the Commission zip around Europe. They fly around the world. They collect fancy medals and honours. They collect scores of honorary doctorates.
But not in Britain. Why?
President Jean-Claude Juncker is nearing the end of his five-year mandate. What’s the record? At times he has seemed to spend part of every week in Berlin, if not in Paris. Then he’s off to the Mediterranean and Italy, Spain and Portugal or the Black Sea reaches of Bulgaria and Romania.
To England? Naaaaah! A fast Eurostar train from central Brussels to central London is just too far.
How many times has he visited London or any other part of the UK?
He made one trip for an evening dinner in London. Did he speak to a mass meeting of concerned British democrats. Did he speak to Parliament? No. On 27 April 2017 he had a private meeting with PM Theresa May to describe the length and breadth of any agreement on Brexit. With his team of Martin Selmayr and Michel Barnier, he visited 10 Downing Street under tight security to tell Prime Minister May that Brexit was no walk in the park. He came loaded with the Canada agreement to show how big a document a trade agreement normally was and how negotiations are conducted.
Mr Juncker told a Polish journalist that he has actually visited London on another occasion. When? No one can remember. That makes two trips in 5 years.
Why did he not come more frequently given the gravity of the Brexit crisis — which at the time threatened the disintegration of the EU. When asked by a Polish journalist how many times he has travelled to Mrs May at Downing Street, his less-than-chivalrous reply was:
“Why fly somewhere, if you can discuss it here?” He added: “She used to sit at the place where you are now, at seven in the morning, at eleven o’clock at night.”

Then there is a division of views on politics across the Channel. Many Continental politicians, regardless of what laws and treaties say, feel they can do what they like. No one will take them to Court.
Some of UK’s nearby neighbours don’t blink an eye at presidential slush funds. A mistress of 30 years is housed at the State’s expense or another lover is made prime minister. Would taxpayers in UK agree?
Ministers and prime ministers across the Continent get away with financial and political corruption.
In UK ministers are forced to resign if they mislead the police on a motoring offence. They may end up in prison.
The Question
What is the question that European Commission Presidents don’t want to hear? There are many words which point to the same direction: accountability to tax-payers, honesty to electors, open government … or simply real democracy.
What is the major chasm of credibility for Europe? Fraud. Political fraud.
What Commission presidents Juncker and Barroso fear is that the whole fraudulent Lisbon Treaty structure will come crashing down on their heads. It should.
Why is the Lisbon Treaty fraud big-time? It is not just that this changes the constitution of 28 Member States without the approval of the citizens.
It is not just that it puts European government in the hands of politicians who prefer secrecy and political plots above transparency.
It is that the whole treaty was rejected by Europeans in massive referendums. Further referendums on the renamed treaty were refused by the political clique. Elitists think they know better than everyone else.
The articles are the same as those misshapen monstrosities that appeared in the rejected Constitutional treaty, committee-written under the supervision of former French president ValĂ©ry Giscard d’Estaing. This camel of a treaty was roundly rejected by the French and the Dutch in 2005. Six other nations, including UK, were expecting to have referendums. But the political clique refused to let them. The outcome was clear to all. No. No. NO!
Mr Barroso said the camel looked partly like a horse. Spaniards (who were pretty fresh to democracy) voted for it. That’s no endorsement.
But politicians and bureaucrats thought they could get away with it. Two years later the rejected articles were forcefully re-instated as the Lisbon Treaty. How? Articles were retained and inserted as amendments to an old treaty, the much-amended European Economic Community treaty of Rome, 1957.
Why were no further referendums allowed? Bureaucrats said so.
Giscard himself explained in an article published in a number of newspapers. The British must be denied a democratic voice. Human rights must be suppressed.

This deception operation, was foisted on the public by the Council. It is an affront to any citizen with a micron of morality. It was whipped through parliaments because their ministers told their parties to avoid referendums at all cost.
In a democracy who tells parliaments to obey?
Not even the ministers. In the Brussels Bog it was the bullyboy bureaucrats at the Council who insisted that the Lisbon Treaty would not die by democratic decision. It must be re-instituted regardless of the cost to honesty and integrity.
Did Mr Barroso come and explain his strange decision to the great British public? He came to UK perhaps once to Chatham House for a one hour meeting at the end of his ten-year mandate (24 October 2014). Then, amid public outrage, he was off to join Goldman Sachs.
The Lisbon Treaty is illegitimate. So is its equally fraudulent Article 50. This is why the UK Referendum of 2016 is causing a political impasse.
The official name of the Lisbon Treaty is Treaty on European Union (TEU) plus the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The EU Treaty, for short. But leaving the EU is not the same as leaving the European Communities. Hence, logically, a referendum that affirms the desire to ‘Leave the European Union‘ does not mean leaving the Customs Union and Single Market of the European Communities.
Rather the Brexit vote affirms that British electors want an end to the Lisbon Treaty fraud.
Before any progress in Europe can be made, legitimacy needs to be restored. Europeans require that THEIR VOICE is sovereign — not bureaucrats. Legitimate Referendums must be respected. Politicians should no longer hide themselves behind closed doors. The public must have an open dialogue about their plans and investigate their plots.
No more political Leper Colonies!

22 September, 2019

EU von der Leyen Commission: its secret dictators revealed!

Where is the Democracy, Ursula? Is it behind you?
The truth is: Democracy is Dictated behind closed doors.
    • No public debate.
    • Secretive Politburo-like manoeuvres in the European Council.
    • Reducing the most important European institution of democracy to a Secretariat.
What lay hidden when Frau Ursula von der Leyen introduced her team of 26 Commissioners at a press conference on 10 September? That’s 27 from each Member State with herself from Germany.
1. A triumph of Nationalism! A logical dissonance. The very thing politicians warn is Europe’s danger.
It is contrary to the founding principles of Community system and its independence. A European system embraces all citizens and organisations (mostly non-party political). Impartiality is vital to oppose aggressive out-of control governments, lobbyists, cartels and secret influence groups.
The Commission must not be a multi-national system of national politicians.
2. Political bias. Half the eligible voters thought the present politicians so bad that they refused to vote for any of them in the European Parliament elections.
Political parties have no legal right even to be represented inside the Commission. They are banned by the Treaties. The number of Commissioners should be small. They should be independent.
You don’t ask an honest broker or a Jury to be composed of agents of the contentious parties pleading before it. Frau von der Leyen said that she had told her Commissioners that they should act like Europeans not nationals. But why on earth then did she decide to have one Commissioner for each State? Why boast about their political allegiance?
3. Violating their own law. How do we know the top politicians have fiddled the system against the people? The Lisbon treaty says that there should be a maximum of 18 Commissioners.
Who decided there should be 27? And why? Fancy titles now abound! The biggest problem, Commission First Vice President Frans Timmermans told me is to find work for them all! Byzantine bloating reduces democracy. It stymies transparency and accountability.
If you do not know how this happened, then the ‘Dictators of Democracy‘ have already won. This decision is a major betrayal of Democracy. It shows that Frau von der Leyen is herself complicit in an anti-democratic wave that is engulfing control of the most powerful economic unit in the World.
Why has there been no public debate on the most important aspect of managing Europe? Why the bloated bureaucracy filled with partisan politicians? Packing pals into high paying jobs in a supposedly independent body is political nepotism.
We are not dealing with politicking at a tennis club or a parish council. What is involved is political fraud on a massive scale. It is deceit at a global, geopolitical level.
The European Commission is the only institution of its kind. It brought Europe its unprecedented peace. Then in the 1960s Europeans fought a battle with the French nationalist leader Charles de Gaulle. He refused to have elections. He wanted to turn the Commission into his political secretariat. An intergovernmental body was easier for him to dominate.
The Commission has to have some sessions in private like judges and juries do. But Europeans couldn’t trust de Gaulle in private. They knew any Gaullist politician would pressure the smaller States to gain his way, to subvert the budget to make sure the French policy prevailed. Gaullists by definition did not act impartially. Gaullists even tried to boycott the institutions to blackmail the other States.
Good Europeans, like Poher, Spaak, Luns, Monnet, insisted that the Commission must be impartial.
Europeans won the battle of the Fouchet Plan.
Today? Not any more. The Commission has lost its independence. It is controlled in secret.
Now the anti-democrats in the European Council believe they can control the Honest Broker. That would obviously make the Commission dishonest and subservient to a closed door cartel.
The future is dark, unless this is quickly remedied. Europe, composed of ancient democracies, is itself controlled by an anti-democratic autocracy.
How was Robert Schuman‘s democracy supposed to work? He explained the functions of the five institutions before the Council of Europe, the body responsible for Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
Over the last decade the consensus opinion reinforced the original idea that the Commission must be composed of a small number of Commissioners. Why? Because the function of the Commission is to act as an honest broker, an impartial judge of European affairs, for all the people of Europe. It should not consist of lobbyists, whether national representatives, political parties or industrial or labour interests. They should be rejected as much as a Nazi official. No one can expect lobbyists to give impartial decisions. Sometimes government representatives work against the interests of organisations or individuals. Politicians usually oppose each other.
Many people objected to this Democratic Deficit. So then the reduction of Commissioners was enforced by law. It was written down in treaty law. The Constitutional Treaty specified that the Commission should be no more than 15 members by 2009.
Never happened. The Constitutional Treaty itself was rejected in referendums in France and the Netherlands. Other referendums in six States were abandoned as it was clear they would reject it too. That utter rejection should have sounded like a siren before a bombing raid.
Politicians were up to dirty tricks. The politicians should have abandoned a failed project. They didn’t. Quite the reverse. They insisted on the treaty text for other reasons, concealed control. That is the obvious conclusion for insisting on democratically flawed duplicity.
Further sirens sounded when the politicians insisted on NO MORE REFERENDUMS. The rejected articles were re-instated without any democratic referendum at all except in Ireland where it was rejected.
The Lisbon Treaty, the nationalist politicians’ treaty, says that the number of Commissioners should be reduced in number to two-thirds of the number of Member States.
That would make it 18 Commissioners.
Mrs von der Leyen announced 27. Is she and the politicians so bad at mathematics or even simple counting? or is it total disrespect for any democratic law?
4. Secrecy. The European Council (that the people never agreed to as an institution) decided the matter in secret. Later it deigned to publish one sentence in the obscure website that few people know about or can find.

Former French President Valery Giscard D’Estaing condemned the Council’s lack of respect for the Constitutional or Lisbon treaties he helped formulate. ‘There needs to be a more scrupulous respect of the treaties.‘ More than a decade ago it was agreed by all to limit the size of the European Commission. It was to be reduced to around a DOZEN people, max.
        • It was recommended for years by former members of the Commission.
        • It was demanded by members of organized civil society.
        • It was agreed by all in Convention on the draft Constitutional treaty.
        • Former European Commission President Jacques Delors said that European Commission must be not exceed about a dozen members plus the president and foreign affairs representative.
        • It was not only demanded a decade ago. It had been demanded for decades previously from the first expansion of the European Communities in 1973.
A small independent Commission with four other independent OPEN institutions are the basis of the supranational system that brought peace to Europe.
The Commission’s size and composition is the BIGGEST democratic issue facing the European public. It is the key institution in the Community method. The Commission is not the politicians’ plaything. Democracy belongs to all the people, all the time.
It is also why Europe is in a crisis of Democratic Deficit and Denial of which Brexit is only one symptom.

06 September, 2019

Brexit Crisis will last Decades

Not serious! The European Commission have announced extra measures and emergency subsidies in the case of a No Deal Brexit scheduled for 31 October 2019.
But neither the EU, the Irish or the British government are taking seriously the date of 31 October as the definitive date of Leave. What do they know that they are not telling the public?
The evidence
Neither the EU or the Irish have a plan to put up border posts along he Irish / Northern Ireland border. This would be required if they took the ‘Irish Backstop‘ danger seriously. It is a complex border requiring much preparatory work. It is also politically sensitive with memories of the the IRA conflict. But this can’t be the whole story for doing absolutely nothing. What’s happening?
Some British may think that all will be over at 11 pm on 31 October. But in Brussels, the bureaucrats have read the treaty carefully. That is why we could be in for decades of Brexit crisis.
How many years will the Brexit crisis last? That is not clear. But don’t expect an exit on 1 November. The way Article 50 is written it could last several decades.
The key word ‘Constitutional’
The key word in Article 50, the Exit clause of the Lisbon Treaty on European Union is ‘constitutional‘.
“Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.” Article 50 paragraph 1.
But what is the constitutional position for Brexit in the United Kingdom? It does not have a written constitution. Even if it did, there might be a dispute about the government’s interpretation of a clause compared with an opposition party, a commercial organisation, a trade union or an individual who challenged this. That would take the matter to the Courts.
Constitutional disputes about Europe have taken a long time to resolve in Member States. Courts raised questions on the legitimacy of the Lisbon Treaty and whether Europe is democratic.
The German Constitutional Court judged that “It is first and foremost the national peoples of the Member States who, through their national parliaments, have to provide democratic legitimacy
For the UK with no separate Constitutional Court and no written Constitution, the chances for a dispute are much wider. For the present UK, with unprecedented disputes in Parliament and in the country about Prime Minister’s conduct and allegations of lying to the public and Parliament, the question is even more open.
It is complicated further by the fragility of the government. At present Mr Johnson does not have a majority in Parliament. Normally he should resign on the basis of a vote of no confidence. But that is not the situation in UK now that the country under the Fixed Term Parliament Act.
Second problem. UK has a government that cannot resign. It needs a two-thirds majority vote against it to call a General Election. But the Opposition does not trust Mr Johnson and has refused this until it is sure that he will follow an Act that they are passing to rule out a No Deal Brexit.
The only other means to have an election is a vote of NO Confidence. But that requires the Government party to vote that they have not confidence in themselves!
Furthermore Mr Johnson has sacked a score of some of the most loyal Conservative MPs simply because they voted against his wishes on the government timetable. A severe penalty from a government itself composed of many MPs who voted against the previous Conservative government. Mr Johnson himself has voted against the previous government of Theresa May on the Withdrawal Treaty but hypocrisy does not seem to bother him. However, sacking 21 supporters when the government had only a majority of one vote, seems reckless beyond measure. It shatters the majority and embitters the party supporters around the country.
How will the Johnson Government get anything else through Parliament?
But that is not all.
Thirdly, the Courts. At present there are three Court cases dealing with the legality of Brexit. They attack the advice the government gave to Queen to prorogue Parliament, allegedly to cut back on democratic debate on a No Deal Brexit. These cases are likely to go to Appeal and even the Supreme Court.
Nor is that the end. If cases are open by the Scottish and Welsh governments against the central government on misuse of advice to the Queen to prorogue parliament, then there is likely to be further challenges on more substantial issues of the Constitution.
Fourthly Economic Cases. Any of these arriving at the Supreme Court would take far longer to deal with and require extensive research and therefore delays.
Billions of pounds and billions of euros are involved in the decision and repercussions of Brexit both in UK and on the Continent. The Government has already paid out millions in compensation for its ill-judged handling of the Dover-Calais fiasco. So challenges in UK Courts may continue.
Fifthly, the core issues are unsolved, and much more. There are two further levels of legal challenge.
For Brussels, the question must arise, about the legal competence of a beleaguered government, accused of misrepresentation and cheating in delivering a firm and reliable decision for Brexit. If Brussels recognized any action of the Johnson government it would likely bring in huge economic costs to those on the Continent. It is up to anyone inside the EU to challenge whether a fully constitutional governmental decision has been taken. If not, why did the Brussels machine recognize it?
That challenge could go to the European Court in Luxembourg and deny or delay London recognition of its decision to leave.
In UK many people doubt whether the legal basis for the 2016 referendum will stand up to the light of day. The British voter never agreed to the Lisbon Treaty and that is the basis of Article 50! The totally separate Euratom treaty, designed to stop Atomic War that the Government says UK must now leave, never came into the pre-referendum debate or any publication or statement of the government.


Irish Backstop still needs a solution. So does the Customs Union and Euratom. Whatever happens to the Johnson government and its replacement, UK still needs to resolve the Irish Backstop and its relations with the Continent.
Robert Schuman designed Europe’s peace system based on a democratic Assembly and a Customs Union in a Community. Leaving these institutions is equivalent to rejecting the peace. A new war is something no one in Europe wants. Does the UK not want to have full democratic relations with the Continent? Leaving a Parliament means marching on the road to tyranny.
The core problem that needs to be resolved is Democracy in UK and in Europe.
Will the dispute last decades? It already has!
A quarter century already
Crises in Europe tend to last decades or more. The Brexit crisis started well before the 2016 Referendum. It was then just called the Democratic Deficit crisis. In the UK, Brexit crisis can be dated back to at least 1994 — a quarter of a century ago.
James Goldsmith, an Anglo-French businessman, founded the Referendum Party with this aim. It made a deal with other parties, especially the Conservatives, for elected parliamentarians to pledge themselves to demand a referendum. The only referendum on Europe had occurred two decades earlier in 1975.
Many in Britain thought the Brussels system was autocratic and needed urgent democratic reform or UK exit. It was high time another took place. Nothing happened for decades despite promises of both Conservatives and Labour parties and the formation of the United Kingdom Independence Part. UKIP was actually formed in 1991 and took over the mantle of a Referendum when the Referendum Party dissolved thinking its work was done.
Brexit has been a crisis, ringing alarm bells and firing democratic Very-light flares, for decades. Don’t be surprised if the present Brexit crisis lasts as long again.