DISCLOSURE STATEMENT - PROFESSOR MICHAEL DOUGAN Professor Dougan is an employee of the University of Liverpool. He does not work for, undertake paid consultancy for, or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article. Award of Jean Monnet Chair - Professor Michael Dougan: “In 2006, the University of Liverpool was awarded a Jean Monnet Chair - a form of EU grant - consisting of €36,000. Under the terms of the grant, part of the money was spent on a major academic conference, the outputs from which were published by the usual process of international peer review. The remaining funds were spent on general teaching costs. The Jean Monnet award itself has long since been closed. However, for so long as I remain an employee of the University of Liverpool, I am entitled to continue referring to the 2006 award among my own professional distinctions. I am very happy and proud to do so, since such awards carry considerable prestige within my academic discipline.”
Terribly interesting - I wonder if anyone has made any comparisons with regards to the US 'Internal market' It seems as if comparing the EU and the US internal markets could be quite interesting from an analytical perspective.
Give 36,000 Euros to me or any project I deem worthy and I’d declare unconditional admiration for anyone you tell me too. I’m sure Mike agrees with me on that, don’t you McProf? What were the wine and the dancing girls like at this “major academic conference”?
@ billiepipersteeth: So, where is he factually wrong? I mean, what is your factual criticism of his statements? Or can you only provide personal insults and unfounded allegations?
Those who promote a cause from which they are funded are intellectually comprimised. I do not trust them. Neither should you. If you want a pro-EU echo chamber, watch this video. If not, go somewhere more neutral.
Excellent and informative as always. Your consistent approach to this topic is hugely appreciated. Any anti EU comments about this video are clearly trolling, or have no interest in understanding how the UK is going to function after Brexit. This video is about the UK's position not the EU's.
The Northern Ireland Assembly is "being held hostage to the partisan demands of the DUP". Hmmm, I'm no lover of the DUP, but not even the most generous observer would consider Sinn Féin entirely blameless. Three months ago a casual observer might have said the opposite. The Northern Ireland Assembly is "currently being held hostage to the partisan demands of the DUP".
Thanks once again for your insights. Once again this gave views I'd not seen so calmly laid out before. While I would prefer to remain, and so agree with much of the sentiment expressed throughout these talks, I feel myself feeling that you made a jump from this statement: "It is unclear how far our political leaders in the UK Government are even aware of many of the underlying issues which should inform discussions and decisions about our “internal market”. Or at least: the UK Government is hardly communicating and debating these issues to and with the public in a transparent way." This turns into an assumption that out of the two possibilities stated there, the first one of incompetence is the true one, and you then use that as the basis of further discussion. As this is only evidenced by the lack of communication that you describe as a possible alternative, I felt that the argument being made was weakened. As I said, I am a "remainer" and so my confirmation bias is to take your word for it, but I can see how those with differing views would seek to find reason not to. I hope this perspective is helpful for you.
Glen: when you say that you are a remainer and therefore have a confirmation bias to take words in a particular way, do you have any idea what that might mean? What is it to ‘be’ a remainer? You have taken a neologism and mistaken it for a natural thing that has predictable behaviours or thought patterns. If it is not a thing, which it clearly is not, then the rest of your statement falls away.
Glen, The presenter ought not to say this,"It is unclear how far our political leaders in the UK Government are even aware of many of the underlying issues which should inform discussions and decisions about our “internal market”, if as the video's title suggests, the UK's internal market is going to be subject to EU rules and regs even after it has left. This is simply because while there may be discussions, there will be no decisions for the UK to make! True? Or is the title of the video "clickbait"?
Amongst the considered replies is the comment "bollox to the eu" which I must admit I found rather amusing, if only for its illumination of the anti remain position.
Terribly interesting - I wonder if anyone has made any comparisons with regards to the US 'Internal market' It seems as if comparing the EU and the US internal markets could be quite interesting from an analytical perspective.
Eideric Even though the public wasn't consulted until a referndum in 1975. So by handing power over to the eec at the time before, the consent of the public makes it illegal.
COMMON LAW is the real immutable law of England. See The English Bill of Rights 1689. No wonder it is not tught in schools. Statuute law can be revoked, rescinded or repealed by a new govt. at the stroke of a pen. It is shit law.
I received a book today saying, "Edward Heath set up a conspiracy to subvert our ancient constitution, the major crime of sedition. Sedition at this is level is High Treason. Heath also conspired with others to hand over this country to a foreign power, the EEC/EU - the major crime of high treason. Every succeeding government has signed treaties with the EU surrendering our rights to govern ourselves under laws passed by the Queen in Parliment. in doing so, every government since the Heath government has committed the major crime of treason."
I haven't watched the presentation but I know that presently the UK's internal market is wholly subject to EU regs and rules and that it's very likely that our trade with the EU after exit will continue to be so. However after exit our internal market does not need to be subject to their regs and neither does any of our trading with countries outside the EU need to be. Whether this is an advantage or not remains to be seen.
The U.K. internal Market is regulated by the Treaty of Union 1707 creating a de jure (in law) and de facto (in fact): An internal market (to cover the four previous independent markets: * Kingdom of Scotland * Kingdom of England * Principality of Wales * Kingdom of Ireland (till 1922 then replaced by Northern Ireland) (The default status, as without the Treaty of Union 1707 there would be no joint UK market.) A customs union eliminating checks, tariffs etc. (there is now a joint customs union with the Crown Dependencies) a single currency (The Pound Sterling that replaced the old currencies in Scotland, Wales and Ireland (till 1922) then replaced by Northern Ireland) Laws have being passed to update the UK Internal Market over the years and when we joined the EU Single market it only overlayed the EU one on top of the UK one giving it supremacy over the UK Internal Market.
? One sided view from professor is a bit poor effort. Okay I understand he supported remain, and set out what he believe would happen if we left and why he believe Leave would fail before the vote. But now he appears to just be falling into a little name calling game and complaining because Leave is not working out as he believes it should, but then that would be to a path to failure. But real world when faced with a path to failure, people will take a new path, play hard ball, break rules etc. Only those with a vested interest in failure would continue to promote, work towards and support it!
Yeh Yeh Yh, blah blah blah. Perhaps he should declare where all of the funding comes from.Academics, especially ones majoring in European Law have form. He makes ill founded presumptions and is an obvious Remoaner. No need to get into polemics. It walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck and it looks like a duck -because it is a duck.
Translation for what you've said: I hate what he says but since I can't argue anything or process it I'll say he's biased. For my own comfort, he should be unbiased and say things like: "They need us more than we need them", "Germany will never allow the EU not to grand us a free trade agreement because their car industry will never allow that to happen", and "This country has had enough of experts", etc.
So the tentacles of EU law run far deeper than we were ever led to believe then. View point from a hard core remainer. Laws can be changed. For a viewpoint from inside EU see link below. ruclips.net/video/NtGDuy672ak/видео.html
You clearly didn't even watch this video, since none of that is what this video is about. It's about the UK's internal market after we leave the EU and what we should do about it. But of course don't let that stop you posting the usual leave propaganda anyway.
Excellent as ever. A voice of sanity in a country gone mad.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT - PROFESSOR MICHAEL DOUGAN
Professor Dougan is an employee of the University of Liverpool. He does not work for, undertake paid consultancy for, or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article.
Award of Jean Monnet Chair - Professor Michael Dougan:
“In 2006, the University of Liverpool was awarded a Jean Monnet Chair - a form of EU grant - consisting of €36,000. Under the terms of the grant, part of the money was spent on a major academic conference, the outputs from which were published by the usual process of international peer review. The remaining funds were spent on general teaching costs. The Jean Monnet award itself has long since been closed. However, for so long as I remain an employee of the University of Liverpool, I am entitled to continue referring to the 2006 award among my own professional distinctions. I am very happy and proud to do so, since such awards carry considerable prestige within my academic discipline.”
Terribly interesting - I wonder if anyone has made any comparisons with regards to the US 'Internal market' It seems as if comparing the EU and the US internal markets could be quite interesting from an analytical perspective.
Give 36,000 Euros to me or any project I deem worthy and I’d declare unconditional admiration for anyone you tell me too.
I’m sure Mike agrees with me on that, don’t you McProf? What were the wine and the dancing girls like at this “major academic conference”?
@ billiepipersteeth: So, where is he factually wrong? I mean, what is your factual criticism of his statements?
Or can you only provide personal insults and unfounded allegations?
But these are not unfounded allegations, did you not even notice they have been openly admitted to in the original post? Do try to pay attention.
Those who promote a cause from which they are funded are intellectually comprimised. I do not trust them. Neither should you. If you want a pro-EU echo chamber, watch this video. If not, go somewhere more neutral.
Professor Dougan is a beacon of sense and rationality in a sea of Brexit confusion.
Very interesting. I've been following this series since the beginning and appreciate the objective insights and comments.
If you have been following this channel, then Theresa May's speech today was not a surprise.
Excellent analysis once again. You are doing much-needed work with a calm and sober head in the face of so much emotion-laden nationalist idiocy.
Thank you. Interesting as always.
Excellent and informative as always. Your consistent approach to this topic is hugely appreciated.
Any anti EU comments about this video are clearly trolling, or have no interest in understanding how the UK is going to function after Brexit. This video is about the UK's position not the EU's.
The Northern Ireland Assembly is "being held hostage to the partisan demands of the DUP". Hmmm, I'm no lover of the DUP, but not even the most generous observer would consider Sinn Féin entirely blameless. Three months ago a casual observer might have said the opposite. The Northern Ireland Assembly is "currently being held hostage to the partisan demands of the DUP".
Thanks once again for your insights. Once again this gave views I'd not seen so calmly laid out before.
While I would prefer to remain, and so agree with much of the sentiment expressed throughout these talks, I feel myself feeling that you made a jump from this statement:
"It is unclear how far our political leaders in the UK Government are even aware of many of the underlying issues which should inform discussions and decisions about our “internal market”. Or at least: the UK Government is hardly communicating and debating these issues to and with the public in a transparent way."
This turns into an assumption that out of the two possibilities stated there, the first one of incompetence is the true one, and you then use that as the basis of further discussion. As this is only evidenced by the lack of communication that you describe as a possible alternative, I felt that the argument being made was weakened. As I said, I am a "remainer" and so my confirmation bias is to take your word for it, but I can see how those with differing views would seek to find reason not to. I hope this perspective is helpful for you.
Glen: when you say that you are a remainer and therefore have a confirmation bias to take words in a particular way, do you have any idea what that might mean? What is it to ‘be’ a remainer? You have taken a neologism and mistaken it for a natural thing that has predictable behaviours or thought patterns. If it is not a thing, which it clearly is not, then the rest of your statement falls away.
Glen, The presenter ought not to say this,"It is unclear how far our political leaders in the UK Government are even aware of many of the underlying issues which should inform discussions and decisions about our “internal market”, if as the video's title suggests, the UK's internal market is going to be subject to EU rules and regs even after it has left. This is simply because while there may be discussions, there will be no decisions for the UK to make! True? Or is the title of the video "clickbait"?
Amongst the considered replies is the comment "bollox to the eu" which I must admit I found rather amusing, if only for its illumination of the anti remain position.
I bet he didn’t get 35,000 Euros of UK Taxpayer’s money for that “bollocks to the EU comment”.
Terribly interesting - I wonder if anyone has made any comparisons with regards to the US 'Internal market' It seems as if comparing the EU and the US internal markets could be quite interesting from an analytical perspective.
thank you
Isn't joining the EU breach the British constitution under common law?
Eideric Even though the public wasn't consulted until a referndum in 1975. So by handing power over to the eec at the time before, the consent of the public makes it illegal.
COMMON LAW is the real immutable law of England. See The English Bill of Rights 1689. No wonder it is not tught in schools.
Statuute law can be revoked, rescinded or repealed by a new govt. at the stroke of a pen. It is shit law.
I received a book today saying, "Edward Heath set up a conspiracy to subvert our ancient constitution, the major crime of sedition. Sedition at this is level is High Treason. Heath also conspired with others to hand over this country to a foreign power, the EEC/EU - the major crime of high treason. Every succeeding government has signed treaties with the EU surrendering our rights to govern ourselves under laws passed by the Queen in Parliment. in doing so, every government since the Heath government has committed the major crime of treason."
For point of reference, the book was "A Layman’s guide to the English Constitution" by PC Albert Burgess.
we dont have a constitution an have never had one
Any country we export to U K businesses must use their rules anyway.
Yeah, why should we listen to this guy, he's just an expert. I fix my own TV, I don't need experts, *I need flags and catchy phrases.*
I haven't watched the presentation but I know that presently the UK's internal market is wholly subject to EU regs and rules and that it's very likely that our trade with the EU after exit will continue to be so. However after exit our internal market does not need to be subject to their regs and neither does any of our trading with countries outside the EU need to be. Whether this is an advantage or not remains to be seen.
The U.K. internal Market is regulated by the Treaty of Union 1707 creating a de jure (in law) and de facto (in fact):
An internal market (to cover the four previous independent markets:
* Kingdom of Scotland
* Kingdom of England
* Principality of Wales
* Kingdom of Ireland (till 1922 then replaced by Northern Ireland)
(The default status, as without the Treaty of Union 1707 there would be no joint UK market.)
A customs union eliminating checks, tariffs etc. (there is now a joint customs union with the Crown Dependencies)
a single currency (The Pound Sterling that replaced the old currencies in Scotland, Wales and Ireland (till 1922) then replaced by Northern Ireland)
Laws have being passed to update the UK Internal Market over the years and when we joined the EU Single market it only overlayed the EU one on top of the UK one giving it supremacy over the UK Internal Market.
17:20 lol
? One sided view from professor is a bit poor effort. Okay I understand he supported remain, and set out what he believe would happen if we left and why he believe Leave would fail before the vote. But now he appears to just be falling into a little name calling game and complaining because Leave is not working out as he believes it should, but then that would be to a path to failure. But real world when faced with a path to failure, people will take a new path, play hard ball, break rules etc. Only those with a vested interest in failure would continue to promote, work towards and support it!
Exactly, Nick.
What a load of tosh. Name calling? Complaining?
Try watching the video and learning something.
This man is presenting a very partisan view pretending it to be an impartial academic analysis. "EU Law at Liverpool" says it all.
Yeh Yeh Yh, blah blah blah. Perhaps he should declare where all of the funding comes from.Academics, especially ones majoring in European Law have form. He makes ill founded presumptions and is an obvious Remoaner. No need to get into polemics. It walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck and it looks like a duck -because it is a duck.
He is an obvious Remoaner. And where his funding comes from is very relevant .
No their motive for saying something is important. You are wrong.
Peter, there is a disclosure statement on this video about about EU grant money.
I would read it.
Translation for what you've said: I hate what he says but since I can't argue anything or process it I'll say he's biased. For my own comfort, he should be unbiased and say things like: "They need us more than we need them", "Germany will never allow the EU not to grand us a free trade agreement because their car industry will never allow that to happen", and "This country has had enough of experts", etc.
So the tentacles of EU law run far deeper than we were ever led to believe then. View point from a hard core remainer. Laws can be changed. For a viewpoint from inside EU see link below.
ruclips.net/video/NtGDuy672ak/видео.html
You clearly didn't even watch this video, since none of that is what this video is about. It's about the UK's internal market after we leave the EU and what we should do about it. But of course don't let that stop you posting the usual leave propaganda anyway.