What Euratom really stands for

PUBLISHED: 17:35 21 July 2017

Cruas Nuclear Power Station, France

Cruas Nuclear Power Station, France


The Euratom row lays bare the innate flaws of Brexit. But it also gives pro-Europeans their biggest chance yet to regain the initiative

Our politicians have belatedly woken up to the fact that amongst the many complex implications of Brexit are some very serious issues to do with nuclear safety, nuclear waste and nuclear medicine. These arise because the government’s Hard Brexit plan entails leaving the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) which, in turn, arises because although Euratom is not part of the EU it falls within the jurisdiction of the ECJ.

Although the ECJ has in fact made very few judgments regarding Euratom, Theresa May has made leaving all forms of its jurisdiction a non-negotiable red line, and so leaving Euratom was included in both the Article 50 letter and the parliamentary Act which authorised her to send that letter.

This may now lead to a parliamentary rebellion amongst Tory MPs against, at least, this aspect of Brexit, meaning it is possible the government will not have a majority for it. But what is happening with Euratom points up very sharply a whole series of extremely significant questions about Brexit in general.

First off, Euratom is an issue of great complexity and great importance, but it did not feature in the Referendum campaign. Can anyone say that those who voted for Brexit knew that they were voting for something that would, amongst other things, impact on the availability of cancer treatments? How many other things were ignored or barely discussed during the campaign? What, then, of the idea that Brexit is ‘the will of the people’?

Even Dominic Cummings, campaign director of Vote Leave, has criticised leaving Euratom as “unacceptable bullshit”. But don’t Leave campaigners have to take responsibility and be held to account for the practical implications of their ‘take back control’ slogan from which exiting the agency directly flows?

Euratom also exemplifies the paucity of planning for Brexit. Lagging behind the EU by some weeks, the UK government has only very recently produced a position paper on it for the negotiations, and it is very short on detail. So did the government understand what they were doing by deciding to leave Euratom? They have admitted that they did not conduct a formal impact assessment. How many other aspects of Brexit is this true of? Where are the assessments of, for example, a ‘no deal’ Brexit? Or of the different ways of enacting Brexit? Or of the government’s preferred way as expressed in the White Paper?

Yet despite its lack of planning and expertise, the government is still resistant to accepting the advice of experts such as the Royal College of Radiologists, dismissing their concerns about leaving Euratom as “scaremongering”. This is all of a piece with widely reported stories that they are doing the same with any expert raising practical concerns around trade, customs, the Ireland border and so on. How can competent government proceed on an evidence-free basis, relying only on slogans and platitudes and listening only to hardcore Brexit ideologues?

Euratom is also revealing about what appears to be the central tenet of the government’s White Paper approach to Brexit, which is to create new bilateral UK-EU agencies to undertake the regulatory work formerly done by EU institutions. But what will this cost? Is it possible to create such bodies? And if it is possible then what’s the point anyway? Are we really to go through all the disruption and bureaucratic complexity of creating these new arrangements just because the existing ones gave some voters, as the White Paper puts it, the “feeling” that sovereignty had been lost to the EU?

Beyond all this, what is going on in terms of political process? Did parliament understand what it voted for in passing the Article 50 Bill? The Euratom exit was clearly identified in that Bill, but now MPs are not happy with it. They are right to be unhappy, but what does it say for the care they took in the Article 50 vote? Is the point here is that the changed landscape caused by the election has finally emboldened Remainer MPs to do their job? If so, what consequences follow?

In this regard, Euratom is an important case because it is not one that even hardline Brexiters attach great significance to in itself and so it might be a relatively easy argument for anti-Brexit MPs to win. But if they can revisit one part of the Article 50 Act, and if May’s ECJ red line can be breached once, then could the same happen for other issues such as citizens’ rights, air travel, security cooperation, pharmaceutical regulation and, indeed, single market membership or even Brexit itself?

But that begs still more questions. Even if the UK parliament were to decide it did not want to leave Euratom, what status does that have within the Brexit negotiations? Since exiting Euratom was in the Article 50 notification letter sent to the EU, does it any longer matter what the UK says? Sending the letter was not some trivial act, it was a formal declaration under the Lisbon Treaty. Can the UK unilaterally rescind one part of that letter? Or would it have to withdraw the whole notification? But is that legal? Article 50 does not provide any answers to these questions and they could ultimately only be decided by the ECJ! And if the letter could be amended, or withdrawn and re-submitted to exclude Euratom, would this require a fresh vote in the UK parliament?

Taken together, these issues arising from Euratom raise fundamental questions about the meaning of the referendum vote, the manner in which it has been interpreted, the incompetence with which that interpretation is being acted upon, and the processes at both national and European level through which Brexit is being pursued.

Perhaps the most important question – the nuclear question, so to speak – is that given there are very strong and obvious reasons for avoiding the chaos, damage, cost and complexity of leaving Euratom then do these not apply even more strongly to the entire matter of leaving the EU? Could Euratom be the first major crack that will bring down the whole ill-conceived edifice of Brexit?

Chris Grey is professor of organization studies at Royal Holloway, University of London. Follow him @chrisgreybrexit

Support The New European's vital role as a voice for the 48%

The New European is proud of its journalism and we hope you are proud of it too. We believe our voice is important - both in representing the pro-EU perspective and also to help rebalance the right wing extremes of much of the UK national press. If you value what we are doing, you can help us by making a contribution to the cost of our journalism.

  • Become a friend of The New European for a contribution of £48. You will qualify for a mention in our newspaper (should you wish)
  • Become a partner of The New European for a contribution of £240. You will qualify for a mention in our newspaper (should you wish) and receive a New European Branded Pen and Notebook
  • Become a patron of The New European for a contribution of £480. You will qualify for a mention in our newspaper (should you wish) and receive a New European Branded Pen and Notebook and an A3 print of The New European front cover of your choice, signed by Editor Matt Kelly

By proceeding, you agree to the New Europeans supporters club Terms & Conditions which can be found here.

Supporter Options

Mention Me in The New European

If Yes, Name to appear in The New European

Latest articles

video Al Gore: No lie can live forever

Former US vice president talks Trump, Brexit and climate change denial.

This was neither up-to-date nor a poll. And not a single participant voiced their support for Hard Brexit

A recent poll by well-regarded academics suggested the vast majority of the British public now backed an extreme form of Brexit. Here‘s why that is not the case.

Parliament is filled with “spineless lemmings”

Brexit may not happen at all – when what we need are leaders, not followers, to win this battle

Leave.EU launch deselection bid in hope of dumping soft Brexit ministers out of their jobs

Leave.EU have launched a broadside on cabinet Remainers Chancellor Philip Hammond and Home Secretary Amber Rudd in a bid to get the pair deselected.

Edward Enninful brings a new way of fashion thinking to Vogue

Fashion can be considered frivolous and in some ways it is.

My sense of humour failure over Brexit has helped clear Scotch mist

I don’t blame the Scots if Brexit leads them to want another shot at independence

The extraordinary story of how the humble spud created the modern world

The rise of capitalism and individualism in the West, and even the current reforms in China, can all be explained by the rise of the potato

Putin is just waiting for the right moment to spear Trump

Vlad the Lad is the supreme master of the macho man holiday snap...

The lesson of Singapore is not one Brexiteers want to hear

Long considered a lodestar of go-it-alone globalisation, Singapore now needs its neighbours more than ever

Truman vs. Macarthur brought the world to the brink as war raged over Korea

The dispute was an ominous warning of problems for our time over where ultimate power lies in the US

EU funding: Brexit’s other looming cliff edge

The loss of EU funding used to help poorer parts of the UK has had far less attention than other ill effects of Brexit. But it will soon be hard to ignore the problem.

Brexiteers, Trump America and the corruption of nostalgia

Manufactured nostalgia always has a political end. Its aim is to create new foot soldiers for The New Vision.

Generation Brexit: Why the young should fear the old

As the realities of Brexit and its economic impact become clearer, alarming generational splits are emerging

Thunder run to Seoul: North Korea’s war plan

As tensions in the Korean peninsula have risen, various apocalyptic scenarios for how a potential conflict might unfold have emerged.

There is no such thing as ‘fake news’

The news industry has a trust problem.

The Brexit vote has created a united Ireland, at least when it comes to the border

New Irish premier Leo Varadkar will play a defining role

Hamburg is the heartbeat of modern Germany

A seamy, subversive, self confident city, Hamburg is also a symbol of an outward-looking Germany

British industry: Brexit fiddles while the economy burns

Even without the complications of Brexit, Britain’s economy is in serious peril. But with attention elsewhere, is anyone in power actually listening?

Unis have grown fat on fees - what happens when the money stops?

The architect of the Labour’s introduction of student fees says the money charged is now nothing more than vice-chancellors profiteering

Enter the Senex: Leader of the Age of Anxiety

An idea for a movie that once upon a time no one would buy – because it was too improbable.


Watch us on YouTube

6 excellent reasons to go out and buy The New European this week

Views: 169

The rollercoaster ride of Theresa May's plummeting approval ratings

Views: 592

A year of failure and fiasco in May’s Number 10

Views: 406


Newsletter Sign Up

Sign up to receive our regular email newsletter