15 Jan Брекзит / Brexit
Брекзит / Brexit
The UK government went into the renegotiation harbouring a legitimate concern that the Eurozone may act as a block within the EU, using its majority in the EU Council to pass laws, primarily for its own interests. As a result, financial regulations could be imposed on the City making it less globally competitive, thereby hurting a key UK economic interest. Lastly, there were the demands брексит дата surrounding individual rights. This is because the right of EU citizens to move to the UK became inherently politicized as part of a broader debate over immigration — a subject absent from the 1975 EEC referendum. The author reported that the Great Britain denied access to in-work benefits to recently arrived jobseekers from elsewhere in the EU, despite it was discriminatory.
Glencross examines similarities and differences between the 2016 and the 1975 referendums. He argues that the British position towards integration — something greater than the mainstream political trend (possibly, he means eurosceptics), was “not just nationalist populist as with the Front National in France”, it was a position in which “the possibility of withdrawal from the EU” was “openly discussed and real readiness was expressed «to actually devolve this decision to the public vote”16. A. Glenkross highlights concept of “British exceptionalism” and confirms his argument by the UK refusal from euro, the Schengen agreement as well as by the determination to leave from the European ideal “of ever closer union”12.
May. According to her, David Cameron’s negotiation was a “valiant final attempt to make it work for Britain” but “the blunt truth” was that “there was not enough flexibility on many important matters for a majority of British voters”19.
Serguey Braguinsky shows in his article published in The Journal of Legal Studies, that “the collapse of communism in the former Soviet Union occurred as a logical extension of a lengthy and largely spontaneous process that had been accumulating in the planned economy at least 30 years before Mikhail Gorbachev started the final stage that was destined to bring the system down” (Braguinsky). According to Braguinsky, in this process, property rights were gradually transferred “from the top political brexit новости leadership and bureaucrats to coalitions composed of the management of state-owned enterprises (SOEs), middle-rank nomenklatura officials, and black marketeers” (Braguinsky). However this fact itself is not enough to explain the inefficiency of outcome, as “an influential view stemming from Steven Cheung’s insight [Steven N.S. Cheng, The Theory of Share Tenancy. 1969] contends that formal titles to ownership are in fact irrelevant to the question of economic efficiency” (Braguinsky).
Thirdly, the growth of political influence of Euroscep-tics led to the vote on EU membership. Lack of reforms within EU which could be suited with the British played into the hands of Eurosceptics who claimed that the EU was unreformable and heading towards federal union. Fourthly, there was organized and well-funded opposition, namely, the Party of independence of the United Kingdom.
It was repeated in the speech of the new Prime Minister T. May, who replaced D. Cameron. “Unlike other European countries, we have no written constitution, but the principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty is https://www.maximarkets.org/ the basis of our unwritten constitutional settlement. We have only a recent history of devolved governance — though it has rapidly embedded itself — and we have little history of coalition government”.
Blair, who served as the British Prime Minister from 1997 to 2007, also hailed China’s growing global influence over the last few years, and believes the world now views China in a different way. Speaking ahead of current prime minister Theresa May’s upcoming visit to China, Blair was positive about the development of China-UK relations, and said that Brexit will not affect British leaders’ will to build closer ties with China.
The success on elections in European Parliament of populist Party of Independence of the United Kingdom was connected in the book with the general negative perception of EU and the requirement to restrict immigration from other EU countries. The author accuses T. Blair’s government of the scale of potential labour migration and chose not to impose transitional controls after the 2004 enlargement21. He mentions that even the Europhile wing in the Conservative Party recognized that enormous gains that the free movement of EU citizens offers, such as capital mobility and free labour movement, provides UK businesses with a vast pool of resources with which to innovate and grow, can be realized but only on the basis of accepting constrains on immigration policy. As it becomes known from the book, the Eurosceptics demanded unilateral concessions for the UK, such as parliamentary veto on European legislative procedure, as well as concessions on fundamental principles of EU, in particular, concerning free movement of EU citizens22.
- The author accuses T.
- A. Glencross states that on a strategic level, UK’s withdrawal from the EU has a number of important ramifications, many of them potentially favourable to French interests.
- This review essay focuses on the monograph of the British researcher A.
- It was repeated in the speech of the new Prime Minister T. May, who replaced D.
Cameron’s defeat were, firstly, the results of 2015 UK General Elections. The vote revealed disagreements among British citizens. According to D.
A. Glenkross aknowledges that the idea to hold a referendum on EU membership penetrated all political spectrum and covered not only Eurosceptics from Conservative party, but also Laborers and Liberal democrats. While analyzing a position of Eurosceptics, the author emphasizes two important aspects, firstly, “the nature of EU membership is somehow unfair or too restrictive for the more free-trade brexit новости and globally oriented UK”. As a result, the UK had an opt-out from the most constraining aspect of integration, European Monetary Union and its tight fiscal coordination, secondly, “there was no national consent to membership in the political union as on the 1975 referendum British voted for a common market and not a political union”17. As follows from the text of the book, A.
Brexit could in fact breathe new life into this stalled alliance by creating momentum for a new EU initiative as a show of defiance to British Euroscepticism. But reticence of the French President’s to discuss Brexit is not attributed to ideological hostility by the author. Rather, the cause lay in France’s twin economic and political weakness, which “hampers its ability to guide the future course of European integration”29.
Thirdly, the presence of the organized and well-funded political opposition in the form of the Party of independence of the United Kingdom so that there was a merge of nationalist Euroscepticism with anti-elites mood. The author of the book successfully emphasizes the fact of ever-present debate in Europe concerning the spectre of a federal superstate. According to Glencross, the claims of Eurosceptics were reduced to the arguments that EUs institutional structure and its policy effects had evolved beyond the control of British voters since 1975. Therefore, Europhiles across the major political parties believed that the only way to settle this argument was by resorting to the voice of people20.
Saving the Japan-South Korea Relationship
In 2017 the government stated its position in two White Papers and reports on the preliminary results of negotiations by the government members. British and would enable Eurosceptics to claim that EU was unreformed and was moving to a federative superstate. Secondly, severe criticism from mass media which not only drowned the statements of Europhiles, but also heated the anti-European moods due to manipulation by the facts.
In conclusion the author summarizes that David Cameron’s gamble proved a great miscalculation with bad consequences for the UK domestic as well as foreign policy in the near future. He claims that for the settlement of constitutional issues a referendum as an element of direct democracy is not suitable. In 2016, as part of Palgrave Pivot series — which allows for speedy dissemination of medium-size studies (around the length of three to six standard journal articles) a book on an important and sensitive topic, both for British and for world politics, was published in the UK. Its author, the British researcher, the senior lecturer of the chair of politics and international relations of Aston University, A. Glenkross prepared substantial, but not deprived of flaws the research within short limits of time.
Cameron, after improving the terms of membership the referendum was to reconcile two opposing camps by the results of vote to which the minority would be compelled to obey. Secondly, different political traditions of Britain and the EU that delivered discomfort for the British political tradition and for the way of life. As a result, Britain tried https://www.maximarkets.org/brexit/ to withdraw EU from closer integration towards federal union getting the nickname of «the strange partner». The author emphasizes that D. Cameron’s negotiations with EU prior to the referendum were “the valiant final attempt to make it work for Britain, but for the majority of the British voters EU has not proved sufficient flexibility”.