eurealist.co.uk

Thanks to a tip by email from Josephine White, apparently there was big flare up involving the Europhile blogging MEP Richard Corbett ( I won`t link to his blog because he does not allow comments thus ensuring he can put across is own warped view without fear of contradiction)

Roger Helmer reports on his blog that

In a meeting of the Constitutional Affairs Committee yesterday, they were debating the poor turnout in Euro-elections, and the apparent voter disengagement from the European project. Apperent Mr Helmer?

When Irish MEP Kathy Sinnott pointed out that they could hardly expect Irish voters to engage with the EU when the EU parliament had just voted against respecting the result of the Irish Referendum. (an amendment that simply said “This house will recognise the outcome of the Irish Referendum”)

At which point Corbett became apoplectic, shouting

“No we didn’t”

His hole digging explanation was the Parliament was not voting to reject the outcome of the Irish referendum, he said.

Not at all. It was merely voting not to put that wording into the text of the report.

And why he continued “with his hole” did we not want to put those words in the report? Why, said Corbett, because

“It is self-evident that this parliament would respect the outcome of any national referendum — not just Ireland”.

“Self evident” and “respect” seem to have morphed into new meanings like a lot of words once in the hands of the EU demophiles.

As Roger Helemer points out the EU parliament was quite happy to reject

the Danish referendum on Maastricht (1992);

the Irish Referendum on the Nice Treaty (2000);

and most spectacularly the French and Dutch referendum results on the EU Constitution in 2005.

Roger Helmer also apologises in the post about abstaining on the Irish vote and claims a mistake.

Technorati Tags:
Democracy, EU Constitution, Eu Propaganda, Political Elites, Richard Corbett, Rogger Helmer, Irish Referendum,
Add to: | Technorati | Digg | del.icio.us | Yahoo | BlinkList | Spurl | reddit | Furl |

AH Ha! just as I wrote that NM (please excuse the initials but I simply cannot take seriously someone who calls himself Nose Monkey, and I believe that the issues he raises are serious) was convinced that the reform of the EU was a possibility, he comes up with a post in which he explores this contention further.

But not of course without the usual put downs of we who rely on historic evidence to back our claim that the EU is far from being re-formable in the way we want.

NM invites us to answer the question:

How can hardcore anti-EU types maintain that reform is impossible yet simultaneously believe that the EU is heading towards a superstate - which would, in itself, be an immense reform?

Perhaps this is the wrong question a much better question would be how can someone continue to believe the EU can be reformed against all the historic evidence that it cannot?

The point is, as usual, the question is loaded, not only does Dr North EU Referendum not make the claim that the EU is heading towards a “super state” but rather a super overarching government. Further NM is misrepresenting our position, we do not believe the EU is incapable of reform, in fact it is continually reforming itself on its march toward its goal of a totally unified Europe. If that were not the case then there would not be the necessity for so many reforming treaties.

Monnet as NM mentioned is often misquoted, however not on the substance of his Method but on the words, and certainly not on his declaration that the direction of the “Project” was towards a United States of Europe. Thus whilst airily dismissing the quotes of modern superstatists! Such as “Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker” NM conveniently ignores all of the present evidence that the goal of a fully united Europe is still the driving force of the EU.

He would rather have us believe that the ideal of a fully united Europe is not now on the agenda and it is only diehard anti EU types who use old quotes of long dead EU autocrats to bolster an outmoded view of the EU.

Yet the Laeken declaration made it clear that the dream is still very much alive and still at the heart of the EU. That this remains the goal is made absolutely clear, and that clarity directly contradicts the notion that the dream is dead, with clauses such as “the dream of a strong, unified Europe” and “The unification of Europe is near.”

NM ask us to take a gander at the “failed compromises that are the Treaty of Nice and Lisbon Treaty” Yet each and every EU treaty including the Treaties of Nice and Lisbon, makes the claim that the people of the EU member states want the EU to work towards further integration. This confirmation of the Monnet message reaches forwards across the decades, in the treaties and in the actions of the EU. Showing us without a doubt, that the EU is not the least incapable of reform, it is just that it is always reforming and seeking reform in one direction only.

What the EU is incapable of, is letting go of the original dream of a united Europe.

Even the idea of a multi-tier, multi-speed EU on which NM relies as a basis for the future of the Project, is only a mechanism in the direction towards a fully united Europe, as the various tiers are only evidence of differing speeds towards the goal of a fully united Europe rather than differing objectives. The EU objectives are set out in the EU treaties, for all of us to read and they do not indicate the slightest intention that the ideal of a fully united Europe is not now the goal.

This idea that the multi-tier, multi-speed is only a mechanism for further unification is made abundantly clear in one of his links; to the EU s own website

“Multi-speed” Europe is the term used to describe the idea of a method of differentiated integration whereby common objectives are pursued by a group of Member States both able and willing to advance, it being implied that the others will follow later.

and again Romano Prodi

At this point, a vanguard of countries could…be the best way to proceed towards a more integrated union, on condition that door remains always open to those countries willing to join later,”

No I am very much afraid that the ideal of a fully united Europe is still very much alive and still very much at the centre of the European project. And anything else is only evidence that some members feel their citizens do not want to proceed at this pace at this time rather than they do not want to proceed ever. The EU will advance a fast as it can and as slowly as it must, but it will advance, even if it means waiting for us to elected a unifying government.

If the pro EU “it wont happen” brigade want to offer us some convincing evidence then perhaps they could work towards an EU treaty that does not contain the dream of a fully unified Europe, a treaty that does not protect the Acquis, a treaty that returns power to the member states. Instead of the integrating unifying treaties that have historically been offered to us, and then forced through our parliaments on a three line whip, without the chance for us the people of this country to give or refuse our consent to the constant changes of the way we are governed.

Technorati Tags:
EU Constitution, Eu Propaganda, Founding Fathers, The EU, UK Government, reform of the EU
Add to: | Technorati | Digg | del.icio.us | Yahoo | BlinkList | Spurl | reddit | Furl |

In my previous post I remarked that I had recently been exchanging views with NM, the exchanges developed to include my challenge to NM assertion that renegotiations of treaties affect the man in the street not a jot (that he’d notice). And he also very much doubts we’ll notice any impact on our day to day existence nce the Lisbon Treaty is ratified.

Of course this is the pro EU line, by downplaying the effects of our membership they believe we little people will not become overly fractious about the ongoing integration.

Mark Leonard the Europhile or perhaps a better term would be Demophobe1. writer Executive Director European Council on Foreign Relations and previously Director of Foreign Policy at the Centre for European Reform (both unmitigated Europhile organisations), explained

Europe’s power is easy to miss. Like an ‘invisible hand’, it operates through the shell of traditional political structures. The British House of Commons, British

law courts, and British civil servants are still here, but they have all become agents of the European Union implementing European law. This is no accident.

By creating common standards that are implemented through national institutions, Europe can take over countries without necessarily becoming a

target for hostility… Europe’s invisibility allows it to spread its influence without provocation.

Leonard made those comments in 2005 so one might wonder why mention it now? the answer is because those words are the foreword to Open Europe latest information pamphlet

The EU and You How the EU affects everyday life in the UK

Open Europe points out that

“The EU now has powerful influence on our everyday lives. But as a result of the way EU legislation operates, it is often not clear to either voters or even journalists when a particular decision or policy originates in the EU.

Domestic legislation often is actually a “shell” for the purpose of implementing

European law. And often, even if EU legislation has not wholly determined a particular decision, EU law has had important influence on policy-makers and officials.”

They could have also made the point that it undermines our democratic traditions by influencing the policies offered to us by our political parties so much so that it hardly makes any difference which party holds power in Westminster. Next time your local MP comes knocking at your door begging for your vote just inquire of them which of their policies do not coincide directly with EU laws.

Back to the pamphlet, it explains so many of the influences the EU policy rules and regulations have on our day to day life that it would have be easer to point to those one or two things the EU does not affect, but that of course is not the point of phamphlet.

Most people would be surprised to learn that the EU affects things as diverse as:

Fortnightly bin collections

Higher household electricity bills

more wind turbines

Soaring water bills

Higher council tax

New Royal Mail pricing rules

Bureaucracy at the bank

High price of energy saving products

Banning vitamins and minerals

Fewer and more expensive fish

Extinction of swathes of vegetable varieties

Creation of Railtrack (yes the conservatives were only following an EU directive)

Transport and motoring

Government’s inability to expel EU criminals from the UK.

Media, sport and entertainment

Abolition of the 192 inquiries service

Higher costs for the NHS

This is to name just a few areas where the EU presently affects our daily lives, and the Lisbon Treaty will effectively pass many more areas of power to the EU.

Demophobe: One who is fearful of the democratic process and democracy in general.

Technorati Tags:
EU Law, Elephant in the room, Eu Propaganda, the EU affects us all
Add to: | Technorati | Digg | del.icio.us | Yahoo | BlinkList | Spurl | reddit | Furl |