An absolute must watch before you vote: Professor Michael Dougan analyses the EU referendum debate

[catchtheninkynonk]

www.facebook.com/UniversityofLiverpool/videos/1293361974024537/

I hope this link works.

This is the clearest fact-based assessment I've seen. And it's from someone who knows the field better than anyone, and whose entire academic credibility depends on his ability to objectively assess facts.

Wilmo - free movement of EU citizens is part of the Maastricht treaty. Cameron could have withdrawn the UK from that if he wished to achieve his manifesto pledge that way, at the cost of losing the benefits that the UK gets from the Maastricht treaty (and he still can).

If he tried to ask for an exclusion from the free movement part of the treaty and the other members said 'no' (not surprisingly), I suppose he gets some credit for having the cheek to ask but he was daft to have it in his manifesto in the first place, in my view.

bkgirl, he is very clear that he is talking about what would happen legally in the event of a Leave vote, not in the event of a Remain vote, so your questions fall outside of his topic.

I will tell you what would really hurt his next application for funding - being out in the public giving deliberately false or biased information. Academics are judged by their peers, and they value their reputation.

Anyone considering voting 'IN' tomorrow should be aware that they're effectively voting for TTIP:

www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/what-is-ttip-and-six-reasons-why-the-answer-should-scare-you-9779688.html

Of course, Cameron/Gove/Johnson/whoever's in charge after an 'OUT' vote could still sign up for it outside of the EU but at least we'd be able to kick them out if they did, and hopefully enough MPs would have the balls to stand up and vote against it anyway.

Wilmo:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11173369/This-trade-deal-with-America-would-have-Churchill-beaming.html

It's clear that an 'out' vote would result in TTIP too. You can argue that 'in' will give us a watered down TTIP given that the French public are now aware of it and generally opposed to the main thrust.

Chalalala - so I suppose he's calling these economists 'creationists' then:

www.economistsforbrexit.co.uk/the-economics-of-unskilled-immigration

Because they certainly disagree with what he said about immigration.

yes, "effectively" voting for TTIP, except that it's Britain pushing for it in the EU, and the other countries resisting it, so the odds are it'd be coming this way... the Tories are in power until at least 2020, and Boris is a big fan of the idea.

also, ask Australia and New Zealand how their big revolt against TPP went

theknackster - no, it's clear that Johnson believes in TTIP. If we're not in the EU, he'd have to get it through parliament. Cameron had to modify the Queen's Speech because of a rebellion so it's passage through parliament is far from certain:

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/20/david-cameron-support-ttip

Actually Wilmo that is not the case.

38 degrees who has campaigned very actively against TTIP has concluded that they simply can’t say for certain what voting ‘In’ or ‘Out’ will mean for TTIP.

See business.facebook.com/peoplepowerchange/videos/10157041558825788/

Wilmo. If you read the article you linked to, it indicates many EU members have turned hostile to TTIP/CETA. On balance I would say your 'vote in, get TTIP' statement is unjustifiable.

theknackster. That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion just as much as I am of course.

However, don't be surprised if the EU just bypass normal procedures to implement it: www.breitbart.com/london/2016/06/21/eu-bypass-democracy-trade-deals/

Actually GlassOfPort, I would respectfully disagree with 38 degrees.

TTIP hasn't been offered to the UK, only to the EU.

And if you believe Obama, we'll be at the back of the queue when it comes to negotiating deals if we leave the EU, so TTIP won't be on the cards for a while at least, no matter how much Cameron or Johnson want it.

Hi Maki79l

Part of the treaties we've signed up to as part of our membership of the EU recognise the supremacy of the EU courts with regard to EU laws. In the case you mention, Scotland was blocked because the EU courts decided the minimum price legislation breached the principles of free trade (after complaints from the drinks industry, of course). In practice, I suppose we could ignore the EU but then they could bring a claim against us in the European Courts because we've breached the treaties we've signed up to. And of course, we'd very likely lose. So the only real way would be to withdraw from the treaties we've signed, i.e. leave the EU.

Note this is only true with regards to EU law; national law that doesn't affect the EU is still in our own hands. In practice, many things fall under EU law (as per your seemingly national example)

Parliament can say what they like, however European Court of Justice are there to eforce EU law. The EU Judges have supremacy over our Judges, so it doesn't matter what we do or don't do the ECJ have overall authority on EU law - ie freedom of movement people is a fundamental principle of treaty.

EU Judges remit is to Internet in the spirit of the treaties. See marina wheeler article on confidence in EU judges' interpretations. Lawyers have opinions and Judges decide.

This is why the EU having supremacy in increasingly interfering laws - is frankly scary. There has been mo treaty change on UK not being involved "on ever closer union" . The agreement deal Cameron got is not enforceable (lawyers differ in opinion- the crucial part is will it get past Judges - on past e pertinence - no - as its not in spirit of treaties.

If we don't follow EU we are fined huge amounts of taxpayers money .

Interpret in the sprit of treaties and enforce EU laws

European Court of Justice is only to enforce EU law and to interpret in spirit of treaties. Easily confused with European Court of Human Rights by some - that is an entirely non EU entity - (think NATO).

All those sensible important institutions will still remai. - even if the EU disappeared off the planet overnight.

Our judges are considered the least corruptible in the world and we hold to account via our press etc

No average UK citizen has a clue who/what Judges are in EU Courts.