Very good point. Sorry it's just must of my sources are bonds so I felt weird posting them. For example Simon Isherwood is pro EU yet has stated in his into to the EU from Oxford university press that he wants to acknowledge the problems and one of them was how "opaque" and the comitology system was. Which now has been turned into the implementing acts. He's very critical. Also the oxford university press has a book "how does the EU work" I think it's called and that has many criticisms as well. Please don't misunderstand me in not saying they hate the EU but they have acknowledged something like the implementing acts are terrible. It just weighs more on my values.
I think we misunderstand each other on referendums. I'm not saying it was illegal. I'm saying it was bad. Admittedly sorry of a natural law view than a legal positivist view but still. Heck I would be better about it if the EU waited 10 to 15 years before repackaging the Constitutional treaty and making it so people can't vote. Dictators often use the law to go against people they don't like. They find a tax issue and run with it. They work within the law. Please: I'm not saying the EU is a dictator but highlighting you can be in the law but not good.
Also my issue is less with the laws and the fact that the system is giving up control. For example, labor was against joining the EU but Tory pulled them in. Now you're in. Tory took on Maastricht under strict conditions of no social chapter but once labor gets in they force it. Then you can't change anything you have to accept it is out of your control. It's too volatile. This is not normal for international law it just became that way in the important cases in 63 and 64. I forget names and am on phone but I'm sure you can find it with just the year, that are really famous.
Don't give me too much credit. I started getting hate PM's so I delete thread.