Why are we in the EU?
The Second World War devastated Europe. It cost millions of lives, it wrecked national economies, and there was more – the realisation that supposedly civilised nations could still behave in such barbaric ways. Some new thinking was badly needed, to stop this happening yet again.
The French, who had suffered so badly from German invasions in 1870,1914 and 1940, took the initiative. They saw it as an opportunity to lead in the new Europe. It started simply, as the European Iron and Steel Community: but from the first France had in mind a politically federated Europe, with the French and Germans at the helm.
In its way it was a brilliant conception. France would bind Germany so closely they could not make trouble again; Germany was happy to be restored to respectability, and be part of the leading duo.
It was sold at the time as an economic alliance, but this was deceptive. The Father of the E.U., the Frenchman Jean Monnet, wrote early on: “Europe’s nations should be guided towards the Superstate without the people realising what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to Federation.”
Thus the first structure, the EEC, was the European Economic Community. It was set up on the model favoured by the French ruling elite – a Parliament, but one without real powers, a Council of (Prime) Ministers to agree important decisions, and an unelected Commission with the power to issue directives and to run the EEC day to day. The French, whose idea the whole thing was, had their people in all the influential places and could steer it all.
It was this that the UK voted to join – a Common Market. Our industry was failing, torn by war but not renewed as the French and German had been. We had other problems – low productivity, waves of strikes, and an idea that British was best and it would all come right somehow. It was easy to sell the British voters the idea that we would be better off as part of a larger economic market, and our leaders told us that our laws would be unaffected and there was no question of any kind of political federation.
Of course, we joined late, after an initial rejection by France, and had to accept what terms we could. We had to become huge net contributors to the EEC, and even after Thatcher had negotiated the famous “British Rebate” we still paid in 5 times as much per person than the French – which went mainly to French and German farmers under the Common Agricultural Policy.
The next step, fatal to British laws and freedoms, was the Treaty of Maastricht. It was the Conservative Government of John Major that signed us up to this, but the other parties did not oppose it, and were equally responsible. At a stroke, we had joined a continental political alliance we could not get out of, and which acquired powers over our laws and powers to direct us in all sorts of areas.
The public were not asked to vote on this. We were told we had “opt outs” over important areas, and that our sovereignty would be unaffected. This was a nonsense to anyone who looked at it closely. It was inevitable that if:
a) the unelected European Commission can make any new directive it likes, which then has the force of law, and
b) the European Court of Justice has the ultimate say, and
c) unanimous agreement by all countries (now 25) is required to change anything
- then such a system will in time override our Parliament, our laws, our freedoms and our sovereignty.
Never in our long existence as a nation – the nation that since Magna Carta in 1215 has led in personal freedoms, parliamentary democracy, constitutional monarchy and universal suffrage – have the people been betrayed by their leaders in such a cynical fashion.
And now, with the new E.U. Constitution, the pigeons have come home to roost. This French led document has done us the service of making it quite clear that the E.U. will become a Sovereign State, with its own President, Diplomatic Service, Defence Ministry. The unelected and uncontrollable Brussels Commission will be the day to day rulers, backed up by the European Courts of Justice. In theory the 25 nations can change anything, but only if they all agree – a tall order.
Parliamentary Democracy – in the form that we pioneered - will be out of the window. Westminster will no doubt continue, but in reality more as a kind of European Local Council dressed up in fine clothes.
Fortunately for us, the French and Dutch have both decisively rejected the Constitution in Referendums. We, of course, are not allowed a referendum. Our Government knows all too well from the polls that the British people would reject it by at least two to one. But there is a pause in the onward march of the E.U., for the first time, and we need to take advantage of this.
But, unfortunately for us, the constitution has crawled back from the rubbish tip. It has been re-named 'The Lisbon Treaty' to deceive the people of Europe. What are the differences? Only four:
1) It is called a 'treaty' and not 'the Constitution'
2) It dropped the words 'National Anthem'
3) It dropped the words 'EU flag'
4) It changed the name 'Foreign Minister' to 'Commisioner for foreign affairs'.
But all the rest of it is still the same - it is the Constitution of the European Super State. And funnily enough, the words 'anthem' and 'flag' have been stuck back in again!
This has allowed Brown to lie about it: he tells us it is different, so no longer needs the referendum he and his party promised us. It allows the Liberal Democrats to repeat the same lie. Their deceit even fools themselves; the Lib Dems in the Commons refused a vote on the referendum, but demanded a referendum on continued membership. They felt so strongly about it that they marched out of the Commons debate. And then, when the Lib Dem Lords were offered the same alternative, they turned it down. No wonder nobody trusts politicians.
The Tory position is even more confused. They do say that they will have the referendum if the 'treaty' is not ratified by the time they next come to power, knowing that this is highly unlikely. What they refuse to say is that they will have the referendum if the treaty has been ratified, nor that they will abide by the results of that referendum.
The current situation is that Ireland, the only population to be given the choice, voted against. They will be pressured to vote again and again until they slip up. And the Czechs and the Poles have not ratified, and probably won't if Ireland does not - the only Government with any integrity in the whole EU.
DOES IT DO US ANY GOOD?
No. It is very costly – we pay millions each day to feed the E.U. machine. Outside the Euro, our economy is in much better shape than theirs, and we are the second highest recipient in the world (after the USA) of inward investment. In trade, the rest of the E.U. needs us more than we need them.
The E.U. reduces our democracy, introduces laws we do not want or need, has taken away our control of our own borders and our immigration policy, will change British Embassies to Tourist Information Offices, will take away in due course our seat on the UN Security Council and our influence in the world.
SO DO THEY NEED US?
No. And yet all 3 main UK Parties are in favour of membership. The Liberals would go all out for Euro membership and ratification of the Constitution. Labour are torn two ways between Blair’s eagerness to sign up, and Brown’s unwillingness to risk our economic gains. Nevertheless their policy is still full E.U. membership.
The Tories know full well which way the wind is blowing with the British public, so they pose as Eurosceptic and claim they would renegotiate our position. This is blatantly deceptive, as they know perfectly well that there is no forum for renegotiation and no way of achieving it short of full agreement by all 25 in the Council of Ministers –a practical impossibility.
There is only one vehicle to express the view of at least 60% of the British people, that we should get out of the EU – that is, UKIP.