Dominic Raab, writing a comment piece in today’s Sunday Telegraph, is once again writing about our ability to renegotiate our membership of the EU and thus repatriate powers and believes that Wm. Hague’s ‘EU Audit’ will provide a valuable cost/benefit analysis. This article has to be tempered with the realization that Raab is a politician who would not refuse a ministerial position were it to be offered, consequently his views can be taken with the proverbial pinch of salt.
I am presently ‘in conversation’, on John Redwood’s blog, with Denis Cooper who believes that Article 48 (in his words) allows for “negotiating treaty changes to take powers back from the EU is expressly admitted in that article”. As I have queried, where in Article 48 do the words ‘take powers back’ expressly appear? Yes, we may well ask to change the rules, but why would the EU agree to this when the preamble of the TFEU ‘expressly’ states “determined to lay the foundations for an ever closer union”?
It is maintained by politicians that ‘Parliament is sovereign’ and there is also calls in the comments on Redwood’s post for repeal of the ECA 1972 as the panacea to all our ills. I have to question whether Parliament is sovereign, especially the fact that one comment from Sean O’Hare mentions he has it in writing from a government authority that Parliament is sovereign (at least over EU law). Contrast that statement with that contained in a letter dated 10th November 2010 from the European Commission to Stefano Manservisi, Director General, DG Home, on data retention states:
And still our political class would have us believe they ‘govern’ us?