Unlock the Power of Digital Signature Legitimateness for Warranty Deed in the European Union

How to eSign a document: digital signature legitimateness for Warranty Deed in European Union

okay well good morning everyone and before I introduce our distinguished lecturer this morning I just want to remind you that we have this added session in in the program this afternoon at 2:15 from 2:15 to 3:45 on brexit it'll be a an informal forum discussion panel discussion with Neil Walker myself Claire Kilpatrick do note of its host George or Monte Deirdre curtains and I think Joanne Scott will join us as well so we thought it would be and youthful and interesting to share some thoughts with you but also particularly to hear what you have to what you have to say to hear your contributions well every year we have a distinguished lecture as part of this program and it's it's really great to have to welcome back Neil to give the lecture this year Neil is is currently the and I have to have to look at this because it's such a long title but it's such a great title that I have to I have to read it out the readers chair of public law and the law of nature and nations in the University of Edinburgh I think that must be the best chair title anywhere in the world before he joined Edinboro went back to Edinburgh as as Regius professor he was here as a professor of European law between the year 2000 and 2008 and he was Dean of studies among among other things while he was here at the Institute and before that he he taught in fact at the University of Edinburgh and also at the University of Aberdeen in Scotland as you will I'm sure all of you have know Neil Walker's work if you don't know him personally he works very much on constitutional theory the constitutional dimension of the way that legal orders are interconnected the state a sub state regional and international legal orders he's written on the EU Constitution on the nature of sovereignty on the role of the state in the inner in a post Westphalian World Order the mosaic of transnational power structures and constitutional authorities he's been one of the leading thinkers on in the field of all thinking about theories of constitutional pluralism and in in one of his recent papers I just found this little quotation which I thought in a way sums up the work that that you do Neil you said it is difficult and as the European supranational experiment enters the turbulent seventh decade it becomes ever more difficult to imagine the EU as a legitimate legal and political construction other than by invoking the structures and values of constitutionalism and I think that's a good summary of the work that you've been doing over the years since going back to Edinburgh in 2008 Neil walk has been contributing also to - very much to the public debate over Scottish independence the constitutional position of Scotland within the European Union and most recently of course - the black suit to date so the title of Neil's lecture for us today is is a suggestive one I think he calls it the European Union experiment and I'm really looking forward to hearing what you have to say Neil over to you thanks Maurice for that very very kind and generous introduction by the way I hadn't realized until you said it that I'm always in the wrong side of these public debates you know I was in the wrong side of Independence to be and that was on the wrong side of the plate of debates also I hope for success in the future it's great to be back here as Professor Kamala said I spent many years here as a professor the most enjoyable intellectual times of my of my life I've been back many times since but it's a particular pleasure to be back here and very honored to have received this this this invitation as I said said I've had some of my most interesting and stimulating intellectual times in this room when I was here as a professor it was the time of the the Constitutional Convention between 2003 and 2005 eveness it's hard not to see that as a very very different time than one we're living in now it seemed to be a a hopeful time a time where the European Union had an embarassment of choices about the way in which it went forward and in these days some people actually said that the time was not ripe for a constitutional innovation for a written constitution because written constitutions only ever again traction in times of crisis you know to reach our response that they should be be careful what you wish for because perhaps that did not seem to be any crisis in 2003 or 2005 but with the financial crisis the migration crisis the security crisis the brexit crisis etc etc then we have many many different forms of crisis with which to deal with today anyway that's just an aside and delighted to be here let me say two things by way of introduction one is that it's hard not to talk about Gregson the moment especially if you come from the source of the evil it's hard not just to talk about it but I'll try my best this this paper was not written in the context of brexit but brexit is a shadow which looms over it and over many other things and I will come back to the the brexit dimension towards the end and certainly I'll be part of the discussion this afternoon the second thing I would say by way of introduction is that as is often in the digital age I got my inspiration for this lecture through doing a very basic Google search ok I started coming across all these references to the ego as an experiment so I googled I spoke to mr. Google and said ok what do you have to say about this and waited for the deluge and indeed there was a deluge of different ways of expressing the European Union as an experiment and I'll say something about these at the end except what I want to say at the beginning is that two things one is the way in which the language of the experiment is used is very very diverse there are very very positive uses of the idea of an experiment a noble experiment and audacious experiment an experiment without precedent a wonderful experiment an experiment in civilization etc etc there's also very lots and lots of negative connotations a disappointing experiment a Frankenstein spiral experiment I spent an experiment which was burned to go wrong exactly cetera I would come back to some of these different themes and these different ways of talking about it in due course but they are very very diverse and one thing I would say in which was already on my mind when I developed this lecture is that the the narrative of experimentalism the narrative of the EU as an experiment has become increasingly negative increasingly pejorative in recent years so in the earlier period the experimental discourse tended to be more affirmative and more positive in more recent years that's not been the and certainly in the context of the brexit debate the use of the language of experiment was something which was used almost exclusively on the site of the levers the Euroskeptics those who wanted to criticise the European project so what I'm trying to do in this lecture and then our broader project that I'm trying to develop at the moment is to see what traction we can get from this idea of the EU as an experiment what does it tell us about the deep meaning of the European Union and what does it tell us about the trajectory of the Europe engine in the direction in which it's going today ok it's a it's probably an over-ambitious project and the various parts I can tell you in advance don't don't that there are various open-ended elements in this in this discussion and I very much look forward to your questions at the end because it might help me firm up on some of the ideas I'm trying to develop here so it's not a polished lectures a very open-ended lecture you probably tell the read is not polished lecture but is it's very open-ended so let me start with just a basic idea of the experimental method what do we mean by the idea of the European Union as an experiment the experiment of European Union so obviously when we talk about the experimental method we talk about the testing of our hypothesis control over variables careful measurement establishment of cause and effect it's very much a scientific method and also to some extent a social scientific method and often within the discourse of European Union you get this idea of the European Union as a kind of living experiment or live experiment it's an applied experiment as an experiment in which the practice and the experimentation take places and all taneous lee it's a laboratory experiment in that sense and one is the basic hypothesis well we all know what the basic hypothesis of the is the idea that we can achieve more effective than legitimate government in and across European states whatever these may be through the addition of a supranational regulatory framework then we can serve state-based regular regulatory frameworks alone a very very basic hypothesis and within that that covers a multitude of different possibilities and also covers a multitude of different hypotheses so there's a general hypothesis and within that there's a number of more specific hypotheses which we'll find okay and so the idea is that right from the beginning the European Union is predicated on the possibility that this this this this is a correct hypothesis and it's not a categorical hypothesis it's not a yes or no one it's a modern last one again that's also true from the beginning from the oh sale so what I want to talk about is the what is the significance of this experimental idea what I'm calling the experimental motifs and what what what I want to do is to say if you think about the European Union in terms of experiment that tells us tells us something both about the the it tells us something both about the causes of the European project the experimental dimension tells us something about causes it also tells us something about the manifestations the way in which the European project manifests itself and also tells us something about the consequences so when it starts off with the causes okay and I want to try to explain why the origins of the European Union and the notion of experimentalism are so closely tied together okay and basically what I'm saying is that there's those two or three underlying factors here which are important which I've just laid out here a little bit move dad's one is the it's really just a reiteration of what already said that the centrality of the pursuit and testing of various innovative normative institutional and cultural hypotheses about the making of a transnational urban community these are things which are being tested all the time within European Union but there's also another factor which I'm talking about the commitment to government a senator is to do with so angular biases the commitment to this interesting experimental advanced government which is another deep underlying factor have to explain these in far more dense okay now firstly the innovative claims and hypotheses so this is the right from the beginning the European Union has involved not just the hypothesis that supranational governance can work but also within a whole bunch of more specific hypotheses about the nature of law the nature of institutional design and the nature of cultural possibilities within the European Union okay so let me start with the legal and all of this is probably very very self-evident to more situate but fair let me say something about it because it is is something which is often forgotten there's a famous article which was written by actually it's written by both the present and the future President of the European University Institute by Joseph Weiser and ran with the hoods they didn't know that they were going to be the present and the future president when they wrote it 25 years ago where they actually say the use of phrase but that law is both the agent and object of integration it's one of these wonderfully suggestive phrases which you can't really tie down put it what it really means but it you know it's getting at something which is really really important about more within the European minutes so let let me try to surmise what demands at what a significant focus so if you think about how we all think about every day these important law actually is then we tend to think about more in one of two fundamentally different ways whether think of it as as a kind of instrument of political world okay but as an instrument of political will which is usually underpinned by the coercive authority of the state so the an instant instrumental view of law law as policy for Lords policy right by force fight by power in that sense so that's one view of law we have another view of law is what you might call it the kind of big alien view of log if you have log words in the German terms you think of it in terms of Sibley Frank the idea that law somehow represents and shadows a cultural way of life in its expression of a cultural way of life okay so most of the ways in which we think about law in the modern age are precisely about these two laws and instrument and law as an expression of an ethical way of life and many of the debates about law are debates about the relationship between these two different ways of thinking about what okay now what what law does in the European Union is something very very different from either of these things but also in a funny way a kind of combination of the two because law is both an important agent within the European Union in that instrumental sense there is also an important object an important expression of what you think in this but in either case in neither case is law in the European Union in some kind of secondary variable so if you think back to the instrumental view law is a settings available behind force and political policy within the European Union it doesn't have that same secondary meaning it's a far more primary idea but also in terms of the actual objects the member within this sickness time metaphor you already have a common way of a common culture a national culture or whatever and law is merely an expression as perhaps a reinforcement of that whereas many people when there's something off the objectives of the European Union would see these as irreducibly illegal objectives we wouldn't see these legal objectives are somehow responding through some common ethical way of life they would see these objectives of themselves part and parcel of a significant part and parts of what you need convenient is so what European Union does is it puts law very much so a front front and center within the European project is that better yeah listen twizzle yeah okay it's a mating with the air conditioning gear it puts law front and center within the European project and it gives us a very deep significance now I don't have time to go through all the other ways in which we have innovative hypotheses within European Union but certainly institutionally I've simply used this term of the cephalus political system essentialist means without a head it's a political system which unlike every other constitutional system we know doesn't have a driving force it doesn't have a single driving force it has a whole bunch of institutions which both vertically both horizontally at the European level and vertically in the relationship between the European and the national level has no obvious head has no obvious superior authority so it's very much I don't like using the term Network but it really is a networked institution in that sense as an institutional complex which has no obvious head also culturally I think it's important to try and find out again just just to remind ourselves of what is distinctive about the European Union and again maybe I can draw upon something which was there which Joseph Euler once said which I think was was insightful on this point which is that normally when we think about the relationship between a political project and a cultural identity then we honesty a relationship queer there's a kind of nesting of different identities so within the federal policy we understand that in many ways to be Texan somehow a lesser thing than to be American automat to be American as the frame is a framing idea or to be German is the framing political identity above being a member of a particular land or to be British perhaps is the feminized entity above being part of one of the devolved states of Scotland or Northern Ireland or whatever so we either have a nested sense of political culture or we have a sense of political culture as just simply being only contingently attached so many people see themselves as being citizens of the world or Cosmopolitan's or this or that or they see themselves involved in a project like feminism or Disability Rights or whatever it might be but the relationship between that can a political project and any national political project is a contingent one one is not dependent upon up upon the other what we have within the European Union is this idea of unnecessary interdependence and necessary interdependence of the national political project and the supranational political project but also unnecessary ie a non-contingent interdependence which isn't nested it's not one which says but somehow the high Levant 'ti is the prior and the organizing identity and the other one is lesser that's not the claim which has been made within European Union the claim is being made as one of necessary interdependence without one identity necessarily being greater or higher than the other so what I'm saying is that if you think of these as hypothetical claims of deeply complex claims of course they are deeply complex claims and the ones which then have to be rolled out in terms of many many more specific hypotheses but there are audacious claims and there are experimental claims Norman's ever claimed out before and so the people who made the European Union are making really fundamental claims at the legal or the institutional under the cultural level okay now I also want to make the point that the not a part of the experimental motifs coming from the background is a combination of what I would say ideological and entity G and what I mean by that is that if you go if you go back to the the outset of the European Union the way I put it here is that the initial goals peace and prosperity and the stabilization of the supranational framework were treated as Manifest and unconventional I was out porter Joseph viola for one last one one last occasion here he he talks about the he talks about the Messianic nature of the European Union the sense in which at the beginning the European Union was seen as a savior the thing which saved the European continent from a half-century of war and from all the social and political pathologies associated with that half century of war there was this messianic sort of Savior complex associated with it I think that's somewhat overstated but what I do think is certainly clear is that in at the outside the European Union gained a lot of its initial traction from this idea that it had manifest public goods at its heart on contentious manifest public goods for or not these were imbued with a messianic spirit is a different question but it was certainly seen has been unkind and contentious a public goods and a lot of people say well how does this fit with the cool dispassionate bureaucratic sight of the European Union of course it fits perfectly if you actually have on contentious specified agreed public goods then all you're really concerned with if you're so sure of the public good is the kind of instrumental rationality the means associated with these ability to these ends so the idea of the European Union as a messianic project an idea of the European Union are some kind of hotbed of two dispassionate administers of rationality they're not opposites they actually goes together very very closely in the history of European Union and how we think about them so there's a sense there in which why is this related to experimentalism well again is related to experimentalism in the sense that as is often the case with a scientific worldview you know the aim the overall aim which you're trying to achieve is itself unconventional importance actually you know it's whatever you're really investigating are what are the ideal of what the best means in order to achieve that particular end so science is often predicated upon the unconventional of the deep policy goals which are associated with it but at the improving environment would it be building a spacecraft which can go to the moon whatever it might be the actual policy itself is treated as something which is unproblematic and all the hard work goes into the means and rationality in many cases that's also true of the history of European Union ok and what that also means I want to come back to this is that later goals and the means associated with these goals should also be the responses to the discernment of evident need in the policy environment I've combined two what I mean by that in due course because it's actually very important so there's an ideological dimension so it's not just it's not just the fact that the European Union is an experiment in some deep sense it's try to do something new it's also the fact that it's it's it it has located it's deep objectives in a way which then leaves it and actually forces it in a way or Courage's it to use a very very experimentalist methodology in order to achieve these ends there's also something though strategic about this because never rate from the outset the European Union's project has taken place within the shadow of nationalism within the shadow of the state within the shadow of state constitutional and other methods and the European Union has always had a kind of ambivalent relationship to that okay and so the part of the part of the investment in a kind of experimentalist scientistic world view has been precisely in order to distance itself from that kind of nationalist way of thinking both is a way of bringing to bear the arguments which concurrent national self-interest and also to avoid and it doesn't have an almost avoided this successfully but to avoid the sense that somehow the European Union is just some kind of pure imitation of the state it's a state my lesson means because what the European Union is saying of what the project of European Union is saying is that where the state-based project has often been about the commitment to an existing good the existing group of national unity the European project has always been about the commitment to form of looking project orientated government as a kind of antithesis as an antidote to that sort of nationalist idea okay right so the significance of the experimental motif now I want to say something more about the manifestations and consequences of this and again I'm just I'll just start with a list of what I want to talk about here first of all the EU s what I call a meta experiment experiment experimental governance finally work of explaining what it means in a moment okay but also experimental forms and structures experimentalism of purpose and also this idea of an ethics policy and rule of the wise what the cost of that are and then finally I want to do something about the fragility that the European Union is now experiencing as as I'm a truer form of experimental governments okay so let me go through each of these right okay so now I need to remain myself of the quote quite often I heard I've seen the the European Union compared people who are trying to you're trying to compare the eager to a national project or a national constitutional project often go back to the Federalist Papers which were written by some of the founders of the American Constitution and they're actually written in the late 1780s at the point where the American Constitution was founded and perhaps the most famous phrase the most famous sentence which we'll find here is in Federalist 1 by Alexander Hamilton where he says it has been frequently remarked that it seems to sorry I need my phone it's a I should know this off my heart I don't so it has it has been click on the remark that seems to have been reserved to the people of the country of this country by their conduct an example to decide the important question what are societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force now that's that's quite a claim it's you might say if you wanted to if you wanted to capture the essence of political modernity you captured it not clear you know do we live in a society of fate we were fated to do what we do if right by some metaphysical force we stand beyond us or do we make the world in our own terms and can we do so through a constitutional and other methods so often I've seen an analogy drawn between that and some of the founding statements of the European Union the Sherman declaration etc etcetera that same kind of commitment to rationalism so the famous line and the Sherman declaration you know Europe will be made not all at once are ing a single plan it will be a build step by step through concrete achievements which posture create and define some solid of solidarity excuse me now the point I would make here is that the there's actually a huge difference between the Philadelphia method of constitutionalism and let's call it the money method because it was a stir in Germany really that the the ideas of the the Sherman declaration were developed because what we have in a Philadelphia method is an experiment in government by prior design the whole idea is you set out the whole framework of government in advance and experiment is simply in Quiller the very idea of design the government actually works when as the money method is in point it's why we call it meta experimentalism is it's the experiment in government by open-ended experiment what it's saying is can we actually can we actually govern our own affairs in that controlled way but we first put to the test at Philadelphia but can we do it not through prior and final design but kindly do it through some open-ended notion of experimentation so it's an experiment in government by open-ended experiment and then but what I mean by that is simply the idea that we have a wish to govern super nationally there is a plan there's a project to govern super nationally but part of that plan is precisely an awareness of the the need to be open-ended in how we structure this over time to treat this as a continuous evolve incline so it's a different people get commitments a different type of gambit so gambit number one at Philadelphia is that we can run things if we have a plan gambit number two at the European Union is we can run things even if we don't have a final plan we can run things provided we are actually committed to the idea of running things experimentally and developing things step-by-step and finding a way of doing so in response to changing circumstances so this is why I think this is one of the really deep senses of the European Union as an experimental idea okay okay No let let me no see something about some of the more detailed aspects of experimentalism and I apologize aid what I'm doing here is very much just they're dealing with some very very basic ideas but just to what I'm trying to do here is that is to just reinforce that sense of innovation of experimentalism and how its accuses her informs every aspect of the European Union project we all have our parent ways or thinking about experimentalism and how it works in different parts of the European Union that hope works in different ways I'm making a broader claim I'm saying that some code is there is present in just about every aspect of thinking about European Union of course once you start looking for things you always find it so I'm aware of this but let me let me let indulge me for a moment here so part of this is actually to begin with normative the very idea of non hierarchical normative ordering right you know we we have we have so many examples of this within the European Union and their own level their own level ideas so the idea of a necessary form of jewell or additional citizenship which is which is introduced by the Treaty of Maastricht there's no other constitutional project in the world which demands dual citizenship so that would be one there are the idea of the splitting of the atom of sovereignty the way in which that is done not necessarily in the treaties but in a very early case law from Van Hendon laws onwards the very idea that some sort and rights are taken to are delegated to a required by the supranational level so this absolute indivisible indissoluble idea of sovereignty somehow the atom of that is split within the European Union or even take something like the article 4 of the treaty on European Union on sincere cooperation the very idea that you would constitutionalize the idea of sincere cooperation between two different qualities between the states and between the supranational level again if something which is very innovative which is very new and so what you have and all of these are and there's many many other techniques we could talk about proportionality we could talk about a problem there references many other ways in which we see non hierarchical bridging mechanisms normative bridging mechanisms within the EU and the way which has dole has no precedent people often try to argue that our precedence but there are never clear and direct precedence often there are sources inspirational ideas within national constitutions with this notion of non hierarchical normative ordering between different aspects of the same quality is something which is very vey new and very specific to the European Union secondly that's what I call non-uniform structural integrity and all I mean by that is that whole process of differentiated integration of a Europe which doesn't isn't predicated on a notion of a uniformity of application of a single rule of law to all aspects of it now as you know and certainly the context the brexit this has been reinforced there's a long-standing argument about a how far we can take this notion of non-uniform structural integrity how many octaves any country can have to what extent and approach from economic and monetary union can be permanent rather than temporary we also have opt outs and Schengen we have systems of enhance cooperation for those countries which want to go faster and different areas but regardless of all of that what is certainly clear is that there is no other quality which has experimented with the idea of non-uniform structural integrity in the way that the European Union has also two of what I call indeterminate territorial enlargement we have at the last current six waves of enlargement within European Union and the moment we have six candidate countries and the only apart from the specific sub style of normative criteria that new countries have to meet in terms of the rule of law etc etc the only other thing that they have to me is Europeana they have to be European states but as we know that is also a very very open-ended idea so the very notion of indeterminate territorial enlargement with the possible exception of the United States and we can argue about the ways in which this is different or similar there's no other entity which has historically being so open so experimentally open to the idea of the massive expansion of itself to a form and to a degree which should be unrecognizable from its initial form as a European Union clearly also institutional innovation and and here you know I could draw upon all sorts of examples such as the way in which the European Council was first introduced informally in 1975 and it wasn't given treaty status until 1982 common foreign policy was introduced again in 1992 but following many many years of informal European political cooperation justice and Home Affairs was introduced at the same time but following many years of the Travie informal organization these are all examples of experimental road testing of institutional projects in these cases interesting examples because the reality and the practice actually long preceded their reduction to a treaty terms so again what you get is a form of experimentalism there revisable organizational forms very fact you know that the European Union has itself even in this basic organizational form change over the years it starts off as a conglomerate of three entities the economic community the cones your community the atomic energy community it becomes the ICI is joined by the EU the EU then absorbs the EC but again we see with the introduction of new international treaties in recent years dealing specifically with the euro countries just as we got the absorption of the EU into something which looked like a single institutional legal entity it begins to fall apart again in different sorts of ways so again there's a constant renewal of the I what the ideal organisational form of the European Union is which in some ways is a puzzle because no matter what I said but if the European Union is anything it's a legal entity and the very idea that the very legal substructure the legal foundations of that entity are in constant change and constant movement itself interesting is the self indicative of this experimental dimension also evolving what we might call sectoral methodologies for many years we had those three pillars you know we had the internal market and community pillar we had the pillar of justice and Home Affairs and common defence and foreign policy completely different institutional methodologies in terms of how you make norms how you develop them how you apply them how you are judicata problem if you adjudicative one so again a constant Europe of bits and pieces from many years ago a constant evolution so we have this innovative forms and structures now moving on we also have experimentalism of purpose again this is this is this is very very significant so we have a general functional extension there's a recent book by a Finnish scholar a Cala Tory who talks about the sectoral constitutions of Europe it's actually a very interesting book because what he says is the round thinking of Europe necessarily us as one project one brand abstract project which is gradually filled in if we think of it in terms of its functional extensions and what we actually do is we moved from what he calls the original micro economic Constitution which is a constitution of the Four Freedoms competition law etcetera to a social Constitution which is the counterpart to that extent to which the European Union gets involved in positive integration and Social Policy employment policy etc etc as a counterpoint to that the Security Constitution both pre and after 9/11 and now of course after the fiscal crisis and with the maturity of economic and monetary union the idea of a macroeconomic Constitution where Europe begins to struggle with the equation of whether it can be seen as a supranational physical Authority as well so what we have the year there is a general question of functional extension but at every point there is something experimental about this these things are not done confidently they're done incrementally that done cautiously they're done in a way where the the parameters and the limits of what's been done is always being tested then of course and this is of course an area where experimentalism is very very much used within the discourse and there there are so many experts on this in this room that nobody talked very much about it but the within village sectors we've had over the years new methods of governance which are often imagined precisely an experimental Talent so if you move to this sort of micro area as you move away from the broad purposes and I shall look within each of the sectors themselves then what we've seen almost from the outset of the European Union is a movement away from the classic community method of the Commission proposing on the council and the Parliament disposing to all sorts of different ways and more experimental more open-ended more reflexive ways of making law so we know that historically through notions such as what someone once called was it new old governance the things like comet ology there other ways in which we used structures below the lawmaker to actually develop more making bit in a way which was more consultative which was more open-ended but increasingly with new methods of governance such as partnerships and such as the open method of coordination and areas of economic policies social inclusion policy Pensions etc etc we actually have the development of an explicitly experimentalist method of making policy at the micro level we are the very idea of policy making and policy application as being different aspects different things is lost policy is something which is cyclical and iterative run something which is linear and final that's something again which is fundamental to the European Union and always has been right from the beginning we often overstate the extent to which new methods of governments or new right from the beginning there has been a restless movement away from this linear model of lawmaking or policymaking within the European Union so okay now what I want to say and there I will only detain you from our few minutes to speak about half past that will take me up okay well what having said all of these things having given akin a brief picture of all of these different sort of experimental dimensions I also want to say something about this this idea of a aristocracy which a which say which keeps coming up in in the discussions which I've been looking at this issue now what we what we what we mean by a post office is simply this idea of the real rule of the knowledgeable the rule of the wise rule of law serene or so if we go back to ancient Greeks Plato of course had the the most ideal form of this the philosopher king Aristotle are the lesser notion of it he came closer to this notion that in certain dimensions of policy there was room for a pistol to say that is rule not in the basis of military might or dynastic Authority or even democracy but rule on the basis of knowledge this notion of Epis conferencing okay now one of the points that I'm trying to make here is that everything in the background to the European Union all of these background factors and all of these manifestations they're not innocent they create a certain sort of cultural effect and that cultural effect is something we have to be aware of and so one of the terms are yours here is if scientism which is often often often within ethical thoughts a distinction is made between science and beliefs you know either you do things out of a conviction of belief of faith which isn't grounded in evidence or you do things on the basis of knowledge information which is based upon two calculated evidence the experimental method okay and often that's treated as a kind of dichotomy but of course is not a dichotomy but the whole notion of scientism is one which says that it's often the case that people who believe in science become in a sense over committed to the scientific ideal you know you only need to look at the way in which discussions between discussions over faith between certain types of anti faith-based scientists i'm faith-based questions and follow the borrow faith you'll need to look at these debates to see the extent to which there's a symmetry of dogma on either side or the candy asymmetry of dogma either side so the point is that site scientism itself can lead to an unselfish based upon the idea that we create value in the world simply to looking at the evidence to the experimental method nothing which cannot be measured nothing which cannot be reducible to an experiment is a worthwhile idea or a worthwhile project okay so is that sense in which scientism can become locked into its own kind of dogma okay so that's something which we have to be aware of if we're looking at any process and certainly a process such as the European Union there's also an elitism associated with that that again if you look at the ways in which different political projects are developed there's almost a self-reinforcing element if a political project is based upon a military might then if people disagree with you then you impose a military might upon them if a political project is based upon if it's based upon its based upon democracy then if people disagree then you ask them again there's always something reinforcing about the basis upon a basis upon which a particular political project takes place or if a political process is based upon some sort of dynastic notion of authority then you reinforce it by trying to reinforce a sense of the leader as being some kind of charismatic leader well if a political project is based upon knowledge then I would argue there is something arguably just as sinister something just as dangerous here because it's based upon knowledge then you always start from the cases basis that the knowledgeable people know better and there are the people that you can rely on for that particular political project so there is something about an elitism scientism I can add dogmatism or experimentalism which is associated with the European Union as well now again and I'm going too fast here just to make it very very crude terms some points that you know in more detail one of the costs of this kind of approach is those two sorts of costs one is a sort of national instrumental ISM one of the things that was very very clear say within the brexit debate was how how little anyone could actually make an argument for the European Union in other than means end instrumental terms in terms of very very specific forms of interest a quite sometimes people who were on the European side saying why can't someone make a more passionate case for the European Union for the European project but the problem is the European project has often justified itself not in terms of general passionate commitment to any specific goals but just in terms of its rational capacity to deal with particular problems in ways which serve the interests of a variety of different distances so when you're faced with a question which is asking you to look at the European Union holistically learn terms of assets of specific interests it can be very very difficult to meet now argument so as a kind of national instrumental ISM please very very obvious in the blazes debate there is also obvious in the other national debates across European Union as well there's also I think again a disengagement objectification and passive consumerism at the individual level many people have you know be more in the fight that the way in which we think about rights within the European Union is one which is very very individual centers it doesn't speak to passion it doesn't speak to collective beliefs etc etc but again I would say that if you have an elite evidence-based experimental project if you have something which is based upon rationality upon means and instrumentalism then it's very very easy perhaps too easy for people to begin to think of that in objects of alienated terms what has the European Union ever done for me the European Union is something which takes place elsewhere it's not something that people are powerful so that kind of alienation that people have from a European Union which is often measured in Euro barometers are some sort of measure of failure to me in some ways actually just it just crystallizes the existential condition of the European Union the people people are encouraged to think of the European Union as as an output machine some with something which produces certain results which they can measure against their particular satisfaction needs etc etc okay so let me come to some conclusions right so basically and this is a very very tentative conclusion if you if you buy into my argument at all okay it'll happen if you buy into my item at all then this idea of the centrality of the experimental idea ascent an experimental notion to the European Union if it tells us something interesting but also to some extent worrying about the European Union okay so we have this original pioneering momentum you know the manifest goals the messianic dimension if it is that but certainly the certainty the certainty that are certain basic objectives which are to be pursued so that original experimentalism is an experimental ism about how do we achieve how do we how do we find the promised land between order is there we just don't know how to get there it's bloody difficult I mean after work I have to do funny things with law with institutions with culture but there are things they're audacious that was doing because the objective is worthwhile then that whole experimental philosophy moves on to a second wave where the European Union develops beyond that it takes on often in response to problems with this first wave project it takes on other projects in the security area in the social area etc etcetera in the macroeconomic area and it tries to use that same experimental philosophy it tries to treat itself in that second wave as simply responding to problems as they arrive and having this open-ended experimental approach to answering these sorts of problems now let me see in a woman what can maybe go wrong with that but part of the problem is that if you use this experimental idea then it does make you vulnerable and here I bring back some of the comments I see within the brexit debate and within other debates not just the backseat debate all of the bids over the last five or six years about the EU economic crisis etc and these are ways of thinking about the experiment okay so one is one of the cause it kind of categorically negative judgment this is an experiment which failed if you live by the sword right and you say this is about an experiment well you know something we think it failed it didn't actually work this idea of so much of the discussion that you get from the Euroskeptics is about the heuristic nature of this failed experiment this experiment which simply didn't work okay now the second idea is what I call the sense of an ending that somehow this is a redundant unexhausted experiment right so quite often in the brexit debate people would say you know something I have signed up for the European Union 20 or 30 years ago that was okay but it's about a single market that was the experiment that was a stage one experiment and that was achieved and that's fine but that's in a sense it loses its traction beyond them and related to that there's a notion of the exhausted priority an idea that some hope is still flailing around looking for new experimental objectives etc etc but actually it's lost our initial momentum and it can't regain it then there's a much more critical one I see the Frankenstein one so the esteemed maple gall for example I've managed to court he of Euroskeptic Fame in the UK I managed to find at least equals where he likened the European Union to a Frankenstein okay this idea of this malevolent this malevolent project which which which loses control of itself which does which is a failure we should consider itself abundant or exhaustive but some as bankers on the staggers on defines our way of staggering on because it has this is the classic arrogance at its center ok so you have this idea as well and that has a very very strong idea certainly in the Bish's to be a very very strong a very powerful idea not everyone uses the Frankenstein metaphor but that's that's what the thinking of then was actually just just that to either slightly more subtle approach there's a kind of dilution and fragmentation approach where a lot of people say well you know that's not that's that's all a little bit unfair but actually we've gone beyond the grand experiment of European Union if what we have what we're lesser known as a series of sacral experiments it'll maybe maybe we're moving towards a separate defense Union a separate security Union a separate economic Union and maybe pitched in a more modest way we can think of these as a series of ongoing experiments so the big experiment is over but there's a number of spillover spillover experiments and these can continue to take place within particular sectors so that's these are these are different ways of thinking about that so let me say something in the end about this and I think that this leaves us so I have this notion of of fragility and maturity right this notion that in it there's something paradoxical about the European Union is a polity it's become more fragile in its maturity and I think it's fragility in maturity has something quite a lot to do with this experimental idea which is at its center so the there's a sense in which the very unsettled nature of the European Union the various ways in which I talked about that as being constantly on the experimental move means that any effort at consolidation of the European Union tends not to include ok one of the reasons why the constitutional project failed identity for decade and a half ago node was that a lot of people who are behind that people let you ask official the German follows that foreign minister who talked about the finality of European project that said we're done we're a normal policy though in many ways it just stood against the evidence they stood against the evidence of a policy which had already remade itself in four treaties in the previous decade the idea somehow you could just call the end did not seem believable because there's something about people used to call it the basical theory of supranational ism there's something about that experimental project with it cannot stand still and consolidation actually isn't something which can be easily understood in these terms you know a consolidation is is a kind of clotting there's something negative it's not something which can be easily thought of but one of the options the options beyond that the problem is that the European Union know is kind of caught on a cleft state between two different elements of what I would see it is experimental its philosophy one is the continuation of a more expert centered output legitimacy where you continue to try to legitimate the European Union in terms of its relentless pursuit of new projects new problems cells a solving these problems in its own experimental way or a more democratic response of input legitimacy where you don't you don't give up on the experimental idea but you you link the experimental idea much more clearly as we already see in various micro areas of new governance etc you link it much more fully to a democratic project and the problem with these is that both of them so this time scale option doesn't work easily but both of these also put legitimacy and input the delivery project what are these revolt euro skeptic reactions either against further elitist presumption apisto practic arrogance or against federalist over ambition there was that sense in which if you look at the crude critiques from the brexit debate what you actually see our evidence or traces of a deeper sense of difficulty and a deeper sense of malaise associated with the European project and maybe it's just because I'm feeling depressed after the breaks of debate but you know today at least I don't see I'm not trying to be a Cassandra or an analyst I'm really not but in terms of any easy solution to the legitimacy problems of the European Union I don't see them very easily one of the things I say at the end is that we mean speed moving it means that involve more differentiation I can't imagine a European Union in 20 years time which doesn't look quite significantly different structurally from the one that we have today I think the renewal of a less Euroskeptic core Europe prospects it where people are still more enthused with the experimental idea which is a dissenter of the European Union or perhaps a more complex form of variable geometry with the partial fragmentation of the EU into a number of sectors Pacific projects what institutional form that will take it can be clear but what I'm saying is I think the original experimental idea of the European Union has unnecessarily come to an end but it's come to a point is come to a point of crisis which cannot be reduced to the brexit crisis or to any of the other crisis which we talked about it's really just a crisis of using that kind of experimental problem-solving methodology as such an increasing skill that is going to raise issues of the legitimacy of the overall project but I think are not some for as a mystic mode I'll leave it about the one thank you very much indeed meal well we have got about 20 minutes or so for for questions discussion so let me open the floor in the back you'll have to shout to make yourself heard of it yes the Pres good hope you're a liar and scientism or the other can now respond I think you have something that you try and it doesn't work we try something out for your convenience this is not open table with the treatise artists have to change in cannot have provisional meeting leader communion medals so an experiment on sugar this is a very intense experience allows you to change and adjust to the failures at the group in that sense in terms of sizing of it is probably even a more mobile unit right vice principal two factors and knowledge that our community and [Music] what's the first one time you tell not see recipe by okay - right - yep yes okay so when you talk about anything I know writing our very last big one little knowledge in the sense that you know - quiet knowledge I can't worry about my life as a monkey and I will always like what I prepare for my life was on and there is not a set knowledge which involve a certain level like use loud music on cotton science so what we are referring my is this black oxide ism it was only a primitive life they centralized knowledge of the way experience but what we didn't realize what we have initial space in which all the design your and one glass today is the entire experiment absolutely I think I'm just going to lay down but I think okay let very quickly very good points right - yeah I don't I don't want to take up all the time ing to these because other people will want ask questions whatever C is yeah I mean precisely there's something about European Union experimental that some quizzes only open-ended up to a point of course it is it is only open ended up to a point and that's part of what I was trying to argue that that the science science science always works on the basis of certain beliefs which are not tested now certain grounded beliefs that you know it would be a good thing if we could achieve this end so let us know trying to work out how we would achieve this end we don't question where it would be a good thing to achieve that end in the first place so part of my point was that kind of scientistic outlook is actually can be sometimes dangerous because it hides its own dogma right and that's there now you can see that in terms of the treaties but you can also see in terms of the the overall structure and overall culture of the European Union as well now in terms of the scientific method always that I had I didn't have time to go into this in more damage if I could into in most answer said to what extent does the scientific method actually roll over to social science okay we're not killing we're not dealing with hard science we're not dealing with a laboratory places out there in social science the laboratory is us okay and there's different ways in which we can do social science which involve observation with you then actually taking the results to a different context we can also have live experiments where the observation and the testing of the hypothesis take place at the same time now you may call that a corruption of science right but my point is it belongs at least it bears a family resemblance the science and it is trying to use some of the same scientific methods however Kirlian however much secure imitation over in back yeah thank you very much very interesting lectures I had a question about this idea of a less euro skeptic or Europe and I've seen the idea proposed of almost like concentric circles of having more European states at the center more deeper cooperation and then stay to a less engaged but I was wondering if there's any scope for that idea of a core Europe not to have to be predicated on certain states so I think we could argue now that you have citizens you may identify more as Europeans and they're not necessarily concentrated in particular States so if you think there's any scope for citizens who wish to have a core Europe to constitute themselves in some form of structure so what you really mean is can I keep my passport even if written as a very personal question like that look it's an interesting question at least in many ways but in one sense in that the it shows the the extent of creative thinking which actually goes on around the project of differentiated integration you know the the I mean core Europe ideas go back a long long way and what you find is it within that debate there's always a cycle where some people believe in core Europe second-class Europe some people believe it's just about catch up is different speed Europe and some people believe in a more radical form of differentiated integration you know I'm the one of the one of the problems with Bragg said one of the really obvious problems with practices is is that in many areas of integration Britain are certainly right at the center of it the right at the center of it and the another it is clearly changing on the euro they're not the very very much to the side but there's no there's no there's no singular trend you know you find very very much you know it's much more complex than that it's one of the reasons why the idea of being in or out it's such a crudely dichotomous way of thinking about something which is such a I graduated set of possibilities where we can extend that graduate is possibilities further so that citizens can become decoupled from the state I actually think no and I think it has to do with what I said Ellen about the way in which European identity cannot be seen as an equivalent to a substitute or a larger form of a national identity is yin and yang you need both you need the supranational and the national identity together so someone has the the orphan of the European identity without the national identity I just don't that doesn't compute to me I don't know how that works or that makes sense thank you very much for the embarrassing lecture I would like to ask you two questions first of all they what are the similarities and the differences between the American consumption of federalism in the European one and the whether Europe can gain some things from the lessons of the history of American federalism because I think that in the notion of federalism like the one that secular views Federation of nation-state less idea of how to combine unity with diversity and with protecting the autonomy of the states and secondly whether they allow the role of the London European law in the you know pillow has what is its relation with perhaps and a notion of community of law like all the first language so news thank you thank you urs it's nice to see someone from my from my Edinburgh past as well as my flown space so the I think look federalism is just there's a whole bunch of political ideas out there which we relate to the state and federalism is clearly one of them right now clearly if you look at the the origins the etymology of the federal idea we this idea of faith unity relationship between different parts it predates the state and so those federal scholars who say federalism isn't about to say we can think of federalism in a non-state way of course it's some theoretical level they're correct and that's true but I do think that the tends to get slippage between that kind of claim and then I tend to say ergo therefore you can look at the American model and to some extent transposon to the European models I don't think you can I think that the the way in which we think about identity they identity or political communities it's very very different within federal state you know queer at the end of the day though the federal identity is the framing identity with the possible exception of Switzerland is the finger identity and the other identity is something which fits in and is constrained by that frame I don't think that's true within the European Union you know now if we talk about unity in diversity or very very broad term such as that then yes European Union is an example of federalism in a deeply question begging way it's implicit okay that's what we have we have that idea of of shared and separate power of unity and diversity but as a very very abstract notion of similarity and I think often people are too quick to see the analogies with the United States so I guess you know we we can't learn that much from the United States and I spend more of my time trying to argue against people who think we can then trying to advocate that we do so I think that's telling I think there's a lot a lot of people out there but in the American scholars who assume that's the case and who often quite impatiently assume that that's the case if sense Thank You Neil and this is really interesting and I think that the experimental approach makes and explain many things in the political evolution of the you your list of manifestations of experimental ideas is make sense of many other things that happens but it's also a metaphor experimentalism because once you you don't use it in a scientific context but apply to political phenomenon it becomes different and since it's a metaphor one has to be careful on transposing too many things from the origins no and and so I think one point where I was less convinced is where you say one of the manifestations of this is a stock receipt because it experimental is the scientist in the broad sense of the term are in charge is that really so so if you look at the other manifestations that you listed is no ongoing institutional variation indeterminate territorial extension experimentation with the organizational framework all these things have been that IDs political really it's still an elitist project you could say that in proper scientists and not the mystic rats who decided all these things each time it's been the political institutions and centrally the member states member state governments who made those choices on an ongoing basis so I'm not sure whether the the sort of metaphor of experimentalism can extend to the point of saying and therefore break because it's an experiment and therefore if the scientists who decide how things move forward so thank you Bruno for reminding me that I overstated my case no for the first time the I okay I don't think although this has been taped so it's a marker proof I don't think I've ever I said that the scientists are leading the project I think I used it and scientism I use the term technocratic rationality and I guess for work one can have a a culture of evidence led problem led project led government right which changes the political culture without necessarily giving all the power to the to the scientists so if we think about the enlargement project now I mean the really interesting thing about the enlargement project is that it speaks to two dimensions of what I understand to be the experimental life of the European Union one is the original messianic idea that this rescues Europe right so we all know that if we look at the main eastern enlargement over the last 15 years that that was something which was going to happen it was going to happen right we very very difficult to have a project which says European Union's for the whole of Europe then say you're not coming right it was going to happen it was going to take quite a long time but it was going to happen right so there's an element of that so it then becomes so that there's a dogma there's a silent dogma built into that that's going to happen but then of course what you also get is the other side of it you know which is it's going to happen in a way which is as methodical as evidence led as we can so you have that whole process that whole rigorous process of the a of the various chapters how many chapters is again that has to be agreed exactly etc before any country can can join you have many many countries of central Central Europe who's who politics are taken our ashamed for many years and it needs to conform with these various criteria so the idea that the political and the scientific in that sense or the political and the technocratic are different I think is wrong I think they actually overlap significantly and also again you see a kind of strange marriage between the dogmatism are the heart of European project and the way in which that leads towards the use of a certain type of administered rationality I take your point it is there is some overstated society's thankful thankful very interesting lecture I am fellated as a critical points about your second bullet point on the slide because Democrats on board democratical responsive implicit if you see it for me it feels like it implies that did you eat you is not Democratic enough but