Britain has three options on the EU, says Rodney Leach, skulking behind The Times paywall (see above - click to read). There is "more Europe", exit or renegotiate. And since "more Europe" has become unthinkable, the effective option is exit or renegotiate.

This is clever – Rodney Leach, as the powerhouse behind the europhile Open Europe, is no fool. But he is also badly wrong. The effective option is not "exit or renegotiate". What Leach has done is attempt to frame the debate. By thus limiting the options, he sets the tone of the debate and steers it in the direction he favours.

In fact, though, there is another option: negotiate and exit – using Article 50 of the TFEU, one of which he is fully aware but somehow avoids mentioning.

Bearing this in mind, we move on to Leach's secondary assertion. It is not the eurozone that is the "core" of Europe, he writes, but the single market. Advocating a "new, flexible model for EU integration", he then asserts that "the UK would remain a full member of the customs union and single market and maintain its vote on making Europe's trading rules".

View full article here

Read the article earlier today, not much to say really, except that at best I can only aver - this piece is equivocal bollox.


All stiff sinew-ed secessionists have our blood summoned up with such claptrap, unctuous dribbling from blokes like this.

Men who deal in half truths, innuendo and legerdemain - all reasonableness. mellifluous tones and honeyed lies will not 'clarify' the relentless impulsion of the colleagues to drive us all into thraldom and servitude = which is what federal Europe would, does mean.

Out and then, maybe - set our terms, not dicker but absolutely dictate:




And from the beginning, there is no other way. Get out is the best option, trade with the Germans will remain and others if they so wish.

Edited by user 03 December 2012 20:05:28(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Yes I also read it. They are starting to frame a new argument ready for a referendum on some cobbled together “deal”.
Very dangerous ,but then did anyone think they would give up ---ever?

I’ve hesitated to post this, as I wanted to read back through the blog and think harder about it before doing so. But, I’m wondering whether the exit-via-Art. 50 agenda would benefit from a few bullet points, each with the explanatory paragraph, as was done at the start of the HA process? E.g.

1. what is wrong with sudden uncontrolled exit (a la UKIP)
2. how Art 50 works
3. what does proposed membership of EEA/EFTA mean
4. a refutation of rule-by-fax objection
5. what would immediately changed (for the good)
6. a proposed process for the subsequent national debate on what relationship the country wants with “Europe”

There are several EU Ref posts with knock-down arguments for those six points. Here are a couple for (4):

http://eureferendum.blog.../05/fax-machine-law.html
http://eureferendum2.blo...07/03/success-of-eu.html
http://www.eureferendum....ogview.aspx?blogno=74741


Here's an argument against (1), the "one bound and he was free" option:

http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=69759

I'll try to dig out posts for the other points when I have a bit more time.

Edited by user 04 December 2012 19:06:08(UTC)  | Reason: Adding stuff