There is a masterful exposition on Article 50 over at The Boiling Frog. He covers the ground very thoroughly, including the oft' raised canard that Britain is excluded from the European Council and the Council for the duration of the negotiations.

This, of course, only relates to the times when discussions on the negotiations are being held. Otherwise, UK representation continues unchanged, with voting powers unchanged.

To understand Article 50 properly, though, we must go to Altiero Spinelli, father of the Maastricht Treaty and of the European Union. His concern was the Union should be seen to be a voluntary association of nations, which it could not be as long as there was no exit clause.

View full article here

I'm fast coming to the conclusion that, among the 'out' contingent, there is a race to the bottom. While it [EU exit] was a fantasy everyone and her dog had an opinion. Shock, horror ... it might now actually happen and they might actually have to deal with reality.

The parallels with the 'greens' are appropriate. Campaign to shut down power stations right up to the point where your district goes black and you can't access 'face-plant'. So much for that Electricity nonsense.

Jeez - just a look at comment #1 on the BF piece (very good piece BTW) would suggest that we are not just up against the Euro dreamers but also against the Muppet horde that complained about the EU as though it was the weather knowing full well that they could do nothing about it. Given an 'in' they have no idea what to do with it.

Edited by user 25 January 2013 19:19:35(UTC)  | Reason: a simple end quote 'face plant' <-

No, but it enables us to demonstrate to people that there is a way out and the transition can be managed.

Dr. North, I think that you might have to reconsider your 'FUD' definition. Here's the quote:-
Simply put, GoGirl is the way to stand up to crowded, disgusting, distant or non-existent bathrooms. It's a female urination device (sometimes called a FUD) that allows you to urinate while standing up. It's neat. It's discreet. It's hygienic.
And here's the site:-
http://www.go-girl.com/what-is-gogirl.asp

Edited by user 25 January 2013 22:29:26(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Brown was certainly no great lover of the "colleagues", especially after they humiliated him by not allowing him in Committee X as chancellor.

Food for thought, from this angle. In this light, one may feel that HM might also be forgiven for signing it.... That would be a relief for some of us!

I never saw Brown's actions as anything more than a turf war between Blair and Brown. Look at the other reckless things they did such as HoL reform (with no clear idea of what it should be reformed to and ample examples of cronyism), the HRA and the lopsided devolutional arrangements.

There and again, I suspect that in the eyes of most British politicians since Heath, the EU is there in the background as a constant complicated thing they don't know much about and don't want to know much about. It does involve larger issues and can be a nuisance, but it's just another thing to be played for electoral advantage. To take a rational position on it would involve a fundamental re-examination of what they were about - something other than managing the muddle and positioning themselves to continue managing the muddle. Note that the leaders of the outers in 1975 were Enoch Powell, Anthony Wedgewood-Benn and Ian Paisley - not exactly people without principles happy to muddle along with something safe. Getting out would involve a huge amount of risk and stating they wanted to get in and accept the whole deal would involve a rocky ride, so they drift along with it. I believe that had the Tories been in power when the LT was going through, the roles would have been reversed.

I can't see Brown as a hero. More like someone who fired a round in a fit of pique, which travelled three miles and happened to hit someone boarding an airliner, who happened to be suicide bomber.